Hold up bruh, he really said this?!
The FBI just raided Mar-A-Lago
- Thread starter ugk
- Start date
Hold up bruh, he really said this?!
Man that nigga is the guy who keeps getting scammed playing the shell game. Nigga swears the ball is under the middle cap. FOHAnd ya boy steadily holdin' out hope that he'll get his comeuppance.
Teflon
At this point, if they don't hold him accountable for this, it's over. If Trump doesn't retake the White House, some other dictator will. And the people who were too weak to hold the blatantly unstable madman accountable will be as equally unwilling or unable to hold the next person accountable either.
This shit is really simple. The metrics don't matter. They're going to accuse people of being part of a conspiracy or being unjust no matter what, so you might as well do your job and bury Trump like the law says you should.
Although I also believe that they may have more evidence that they haven't released. If the files from those empty folders are out there, it's possible they recovered them from foreign agents (or even set up a sting operation that no one knows about yet). That would explain why the DOJ has been slow but steady: they know their case is solid.
As a Figured I was looking around on Twitter this morning and non-Trump Republicans see the writing on the wall what is the upcoming midterms this decision this Judge did yesterday has activated more Democrats to get out and vote and some not Trump Republicans will see what happens but yeah this was not the best thing for Republicans. It is still a little early but the real damage to the republicans from Trump will be seen in purple areas of this midterm.
I think it is hard for non-lawyers to understand just how distressing Judge Cannon’s rulings and arguments are. I’m going to set aside more technical aspects and try to explain accessibly. 1/
The key point to remember is that Donald Trump is under criminal investigation for breaking federal criminal laws. He’s not been indicted yet and may never be. Right now federal law enforcement is gathering evidence. 2/
As the subject of a criminal investigation, Trump has no more and no less Constitutional protection than any other ordinary person in America. 3/
All have rights not to be subject to unreasonable searches of their residences and seizures of property from them, per the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. When the DOJ (prosecutors) and FBI (police) decided to search Mar-A-Lago, they had to get to a search warrant. 4/
DOJ gave the magistrate judge evidence of their reasonable grounds for searching Mar-a-Lago for evidence of crimes committed by Trump. They had to name the possible crimes and explain specifically what they thought they would find that would show Trump committed them. 5/
The FBI did the search and got boxes of evidence relevant to the question of whether Trump had illegally taken possession of and otherwise mishandled government government documents. Basically, the relevant evidence is, of course, the documents in the boxes. 6/
If the documents are government records Trump retaining them is illegal; if the records are classified in various ways Trump taking them and storing them improperly is illegal in other, additional ways. 7/
To bring Trump to trial, DOJ would have to convince a grand jury the government has reasonable grounds to charge him with specific crimes. So, DOJ would want to show a grand jury documents that are government records, including classified records, taken from Mar-a-Lago. 8/
Trump, like any subject of a criminal investigation, wants to discourage the prosecutor, DOJ, from going before a grand jury and to make it hard for prosecutor to convince grand jury to vote to charge him with crimes. This averts a criminal trial. 9/
Since seized documents are the possible evidence DOJ would present to grand jury, Trump wants to prevent DOJ from even examining them to ascertain if they are government records. He wants to argue that DOJ cannot look at them. So he’s arguing they are “privileged.” 10/
Privileged means shielded from examination and use by the DoJ as part of building a case against Trump. If documents seized from Mar-a-lago are privileged, DOJ can’t use them. 11/
If enough documents are privileged, DOJ might not feel confident going to a grand jury or it might not have strong evidence that Trump had illegally taken/kept/stored government records, including classified ones. 12/
Different types of privilege protect different documents. For example, if some of the documents seized from Mar-a-lago memorialize legal advice Trump received from his personal attorneys, it is likely protected by “attorney-client privilege.” 13/
Attorney-client privilege exists to promote open communication between people and their lawyers, to ensure that people, especially those potentially likely to charged with crimes, get good legal representation. 14/
Another possible privilege, another possible way to shield documents from examination/use by DOJ in criminal investigation is “executive privilege.” Unlike attorney-client privilege, this one doesn’t cover too many people. 15/
Executive privilege pertains to the President, the head of the executive branch. It allows the President to withhold information from courts and Congress when releasing it would jeopardize the public interest. 16/
Executive privilege asserted in good faith makes sense: sometimes government records held by the president contain information that should be private to the president, not available to other branches of government, bc revealing the info would hurt the country. 17/
But, a president might not have the public interest in mind when she asserts executive privilege. She might want to keep records private bc they contain embarrassing info; or info that would show she committed crimes. 18/
While a president is in office, DOJ policy has been not to charge him with crime in any event, because that would be distracting and could be dangerous for the country. 19/
But now Trump is out of office, and so, just like all of us, potentially chargeable. This makes asserting executive privilege especially attractive to him. 20/
If a former president can assert executive privilege however he has a tool almost no other ordinary American has to shield himself from grand jury review, indictment, trial. Executive privilege could render him de facto above the law. 21/
Part of keeping presidents legally accountable, then, is not making it too easy for them to shield evidence of criminal wrongdoing from DOJ. 22/
In today’s decision, Judge Cannon permitted Trump to use assertion of executive privilege to at least delay DOJ examination of documents seized from Mar-a-Lago. 23/
Cannon ruled that DOJ cannot look at the documents until a special master, an appointed judicial advisor, examines them and decides which, if any, are covered by executive privilege. 24/
There are all sorts of problems with this. First, how is a special magistrate supposed to decide what information is executively privileged? Obviously, can’t just rely on Trump’s assertions. Cannon gives no clues. 25/
Law governing presidential records says former president claiming executive privilege over records from her term should work with current president to ascertain if public interest requires keeping the records from courts and Congress. Ultimately, call is current president’s. 26/
Seemingly, current president via National Archives has already decided that public interest does not require that Mar-a-lago documents be kept under wraps. So, why is Cannon letting a special magistrate second-guess? 27/
Moreover, many legal experts, in and out of government, question whether a former president can ever be the one to assert executive privilege, on ground that only the current head of executive branch can. 28/
Trump is asserting executive privilege when he is out of office, subject of criminal investigation and his premises searched under warrant upon showing of reasonable grounds to believe evidence of crimes were there. Not a compelling situation to recognize the privilege. 29/
Instead Judge Cannon assumed Trump can assert the privilege and appointed a special master to decide which seized documents it covers, if any. She had many other options, including simply declining to decide the case. (I’m not explaining technicalities of jurisdiction here.) 30/
If DOJ pursued case to grand jury or trial, Trump could have raised executive privilege and exclusion of documents at those junctures. Instead Cannon has given his questionable assertion bite at a very early stage in a criminal investigation. 31/
Whether Cannon’s decision delays DOJ review of documents for long is an open question. It isn’t clear that the decision and its arguments will survive appeal, if DOJ chooses to appeal. But these uncertainties don’t affect the horror many lawyers have in reaction to decision. 32/
We are horrified that a Trump-appointed judge repeatedly went out of her way to give Trump unprecedented and extraordinary protection from ongoing criminal investigation. 33/33
If the documents are government records Trump retaining them is illegal; if the records are classified in various ways Trump taking them and storing them improperly is illegal in other, additional ways. 7/
To bring Trump to trial, DOJ would have to convince a grand jury the government has reasonable grounds to charge him with specific crimes. So, DOJ would want to show a grand jury documents that are government records, including classified records, taken from Mar-a-Lago. 8/
Trump, like any subject of a criminal investigation, wants to discourage the prosecutor, DOJ, from going before a grand jury and to make it hard for prosecutor to convince grand jury to vote to charge him with crimes. This averts a criminal trial. 9/
Since seized documents are the possible evidence DOJ would present to grand jury, Trump wants to prevent DOJ from even examining them to ascertain if they are government records. He wants to argue that DOJ cannot look at them. So he’s arguing they are “privileged.” 10/
Privileged means shielded from examination and use by the DoJ as part of building a case against Trump. If documents seized from Mar-a-lago are privileged, DOJ can’t use them. 11/
If enough documents are privileged, DOJ might not feel confident going to a grand jury or it might not have strong evidence that Trump had illegally taken/kept/stored government records, including classified ones. 12/
Different types of privilege protect different documents. For example, if some of the documents seized from Mar-a-lago memorialize legal advice Trump received from his personal attorneys, it is likely protected by “attorney-client privilege.” 13/
Attorney-client privilege exists to promote open communication between people and their lawyers, to ensure that people, especially those potentially likely to charged with crimes, get good legal representation. 14/
Another possible privilege, another possible way to shield documents from examination/use by DOJ in criminal investigation is “executive privilege.” Unlike attorney-client privilege, this one doesn’t cover too many people. 15/
Executive privilege pertains to the President, the head of the executive branch. It allows the President to withhold information from courts and Congress when releasing it would jeopardize the public interest. 16/
Executive privilege asserted in good faith makes sense: sometimes government records held by the president contain information that should be private to the president, not available to other branches of government, bc revealing the info would hurt the country. 17/
But, a president might not have the public interest in mind when she asserts executive privilege. She might want to keep records private bc they contain embarrassing info; or info that would show she committed crimes. 18/
While a president is in office, DOJ policy has been not to charge him with crime in any event, because that would be distracting and could be dangerous for the country. 19/
But now Trump is out of office, and so, just like all of us, potentially chargeable. This makes asserting executive privilege especially attractive to him. 20/
If a former president can assert executive privilege however he has a tool almost no other ordinary American has to shield himself from grand jury review, indictment, trial. Executive privilege could render him de facto above the law. 21/
Part of keeping presidents legally accountable, then, is not making it too easy for them to shield evidence of criminal wrongdoing from DOJ. 22/
In today’s decision, Judge Cannon permitted Trump to use assertion of executive privilege to at least delay DOJ examination of documents seized from Mar-a-Lago. 23/
Cannon ruled that DOJ cannot look at the documents until a special master, an appointed judicial advisor, examines them and decides which, if any, are covered by executive privilege. 24/
There are all sorts of problems with this. First, how is a special magistrate supposed to decide what information is executively privileged? Obviously, can’t just rely on Trump’s assertions. Cannon gives no clues. 25/
Law governing presidential records says former president claiming executive privilege over records from her term should work with current president to ascertain if public interest requires keeping the records from courts and Congress. Ultimately, call is current president’s. 26/
Seemingly, current president via National Archives has already decided that public interest does not require that Mar-a-lago documents be kept under wraps. So, why is Cannon letting a special magistrate second-guess? 27/
Moreover, many legal experts, in and out of government, question whether a former president can ever be the one to assert executive privilege, on ground that only the current head of executive branch can. 28/
Trump is asserting executive privilege when he is out of office, subject of criminal investigation and his premises searched under warrant upon showing of reasonable grounds to believe evidence of crimes were there. Not a compelling situation to recognize the privilege. 29/
Instead Judge Cannon assumed Trump can assert the privilege and appointed a special master to decide which seized documents it covers, if any. She had many other options, including simply declining to decide the case. (I’m not explaining technicalities of jurisdiction here.) 30/
If DOJ pursued case to grand jury or trial, Trump could have raised executive privilege and exclusion of documents at those junctures. Instead Cannon has given his questionable assertion bite at a very early stage in a criminal investigation. 31/
Whether Cannon’s decision delays DOJ review of documents for long is an open question. It isn’t clear that the decision and its arguments will survive appeal, if DOJ chooses to appeal. But these uncertainties don’t affect the horror many lawyers have in reaction to decision. 32/
We are horrified that a Trump-appointed judge repeatedly went out of her way to give Trump unprecedented and extraordinary protection from ongoing criminal investigation. 33/33
Yep this is why that judge stepped into a big pile of crap remember the judge that granted the DOJ authority to raid Trump house was put in by Trump.
Biden is paying a role or rollBiden on a role.
Good catch lol.
The reason why
Here's a hint
Thread.
1/
What happened to CNN?
I worked there for 18 years.
This is what happened.
Everyone wants to know why CNN is shifting.
Let me explain why.
What Fox News gets that MSNBC and CNN don’t get…
Each quarter, the Cable Operators release their subscriber base.
2/
For seven consecutive years, the cable operators have seen subscriber declines for 84 months
It’s called in the TV biz, “Cord Cutters”
97% of the “Cord Cutters” are under the age of 50
The majority of what is left watching cable like we have known, are very very old people
3/
As demographics for TV rapidly has changed to a very old age group, the networks remaining with any traction (ESPN, News Nets, etc.) have - HAVE TO - appeal to who is sitting on their couch watching news 24/7
Again, they are very very old people relative to the US population
4/
In the ratings war, the scorecard is usually based on A18-49 demographic.
But not for News.
No one buys news networks going after A18-49. No one.
All advertisers on these nets buy them for A50+.
MSNBC went left.
Fox News went right.
CNN tried to play the middle.
5/
The problem with CNN was they built a powerhouse in the 90’s. We printed money.
Cash. Hand over fist.
Then MSNBC and Fox News came along. The race was on.
MSNBC went velvet rope.
Fox News went diner.
CNN got caught in no man’s land.
6/
But the money kept coming in.
Then, technology changed the game.
CNN.com became THE defacto news source for America for a good 10 years.
Bernard Shaw hiding under the desk when Baghdad got bombed.
Aaron Brown broadcasting for 20 hours straight during 9.11.
CNN - Breaking News, Latest News and VideosView the latest news and breaking news today for U.S., world, weather, entertainment, politics and health at CNN.com.http://CNN.com
7/
We loved the accolades.
We sold on it.
But what we didn’t do was take a look at what was happening.
The viewership started to splinter to MSNBC cause some folks wanted a left bent
But a lot went to Fox News
In fact between 2008 and 2016, CNN lost 60% of its 50+ audience.
8/
Fox News, saw a 70% increase in the same demo during the same period (mostly men)
Fox News gave the audience what they want, an aggrieved white man perspective
While we chased the “next shiny object”
not arguing Fox News is right. Absolutely not. They are evil to the core
9/
“Fish where the fish are.”
In 2010, the team at CNN got the Fox News Strategy for sales and that was their strategy (they got ours too and MSNBC, happens all the time)
Some of us, said “uh oh, they’re right”. The audience is no longer A18-49
others laughed and mocked it
10/
Trump came and CNN started to make a shitload of money again by being the “counter” to Fox News but it was based on perception not reality.
No one was still watching.
Why?
While rest of America is out there cutting the cord, Fox News doubled down on old people.
And won.
11/
CNN saw that CNN+ will NOT bring in new audiences.
What 65 year old is going download and subscribe to a news streaming service with a basketball star, Rex Chapman- no offense Rex and I love ya - but the 65 year old living in The Villages is not your fan.
News Networks are not here to defend democracy.
There is only one goal and one goal only.
Higher CPM’s.
CPM is the currency used in TV to reflect the value of the programming.
The higher the CPM, the higher the margin on that commercial being sold.
The most valuable programming on TV is the championship game of the NCAA March Madness Tournament.
Super Bowl gets higher ratings, but the value ratio between CPM and audience is significantly much larger for March Madness Championship game vs. Super Bowl.
You pay $4 To $5 Million for a Super Bowl ad but you get 100 Million people watching.
You pay $1 MM for a March Madness spot but only get, at most in these day, 15 Million people watching.
See the ratio premium difference?
It’s the same with Fox News vs. CNN vs. MSNBC.
The ratio for Fox News CPM’s are much higher relative to their audience they attract, which means their margins are higher which also means the “value” to who they are selling to is more profitable.
Chris Litcht was given one edict.
Raise CPM’s.
That’s it.
That’s all he has to do.
And he believes this is how.
Fin.
P.S ppl want to know what CPM stands for
Cost Per Thousand
In Latin, Thousand starts with an “M”
I’ve been in the biz for 30+ years and it makes zero sense to me why the C and the P are listed in English but the M is Latin
It makes as much sense as electing Trump President
Ok, people want more.
Why did CNN remove field reporters from war zones and sub-contract coverage to local affiliates?
The market cap was saturated.
News networks, and us at CNN, saw only single digits increases once we all reached the threshold of in being in 70 Million homes
Then the game changed in 2010 with Citizen United’s
We all were killing it before the Citizen United ruling.
But that ruling opened up the flood gates exponentially.
Every 2 years. $1 Billion would pour into the networks during election cycles.
It changed how we did business.
News Networks make more money during the 3 months leading up to mid-terms than they do all year.
Imagine candy manufacturers during October leading up to Halloween.
Now multiple that by 10x.
And a Presidential Year: Fuggetaboutit. Ch-Ching!
What made PACs and campaigns spend money?
Was it the coverage in war zones?
No way.
We saw once we put people like Santorum on the air, liberal groups would pour money into our pockets.
But liberal groups took a decade to understand Citizen United.
Not the people down the street on 6th avenue.
They knew.
Combined with a black president, my god they took us all to the cleaners.
For every general market dollar Fox News made they made $2 on every political campaigns.
They doubled the revenue vs. regular advertisers.
MSNBC didn’t care.
They packaged MSNBC with NBC and then eventually their cable networks like USA and Bravo.
MSNBC was just a line item for a advertisers they had to buy
You want a spot in Sunday Night Football on NBC? You had to spend on MSNBC to get it
That’s how this works
I know for a fact, cause I was in the room, when we told talent on CNN to NOT lean in on Citizen United.
In retrospect, I stayed 5 years too long cause I’m disgusted of what happened to the company Ted built.
Ted was fucking crazy! CRAZY with a capital C.
But when the AOL Time Warner merger happened, he lost all control and the separation between Church and State was obliterated.
It was Ted that kept business and content apart from each other.
This is ‘THE’ singular reason why no one in news talks about Citizen United.
We made the decision in 2012 when $770 Million was poured into News by CPACs.
After that, we told the anchors to stop talking about it.
*don’t know why wrote CPACs (cringe), just PACs lol
Close your eyes and imagine CNN, MSNBC FOX NEWS without PAC spending
You can’t
They can’t
If they lived in a world where PACs couldn’t spend money at will they’d all be out of jobs. Simple as that
They’ll never want it gone.
I’ve seen the books.
The business would shut down
The biggest hypocritical media story of the 2020 election was the cable networks shaming the social media giants not to accept political ads leading up to the election while they ran Trump/Biden and Citizen United protected Ads up to midnight on election night.
lol.
+ It was greatest sales job ever.
Do you understand that these Campaigns MUST SPEND THE MONEY by election night or they’ll get in big trouble.
So shit, Tech is eating our lunch. Let’s shame them to stop taking the money, thus THEY HAVE TO COME TO US.
brilliant if you ask me.
A few have not understood the dynamic of the CPM and why it’s the only value that counts.
Best way to understand our business is to compare to something more tangible.
This is how it was presented to me in 1993 when I entered the business with Turner Broadcasting.
Imagine the network is an airplane.
The airplane is taking off no matter what at 10am.
Regardless if there is 1 person or 200 people, the plane is taking off.
Each seat on the plane represents a :30 second commercial.
Our job is to make sure $100 worth of seats is sold.
Doesn’t matter how many we sell and at what price, but if you want to keep your job, $100 worth of seats has to be sold on that flight.
One more thing, you have to guarantee that every single item that they get on that plane with they get off the plane with.
Does an airplane want to sell 2x tickets at $50 or 50x tickets at $2.
Remember, the plane is taking off no matter what. Once the plane leaves, the unsold seats become irrelevant. Now all you have to do is guarantee everything arrives and delivers.
The CPS. (Cost-per-seat) is $50 vs. $2 for a plane taking off regardless.
The Risk Management decision of delivering 2x people with 100% of their items to their destination vs 50x people reduces the liability by the airline thus increasing the value of each seat sold.
With PACS guess what?
There’s no guarantee provided by the airlines/networks to get their message to their destination = no liability
If the spot is seen by 1 person or 100, who cares. with PACS unlike product advertisers, we don’t owe them any delivery.
It’s just cash for us
It’s the same with networks.
A spot is going to run at 10am, no matter what.
Our job is to sell that spot, not at the highest price, but at the highest price with the least amount of liability exposed to the network.
The higher the CPM, less liability we carry on the books.
You are leasing our satellites, :30 at a time, and instead of products, now they want to sell you un-auditable money because there is no guarantee of delivery of services.
PACs ruined The TV News business.
Curious if there is an anchor out there willing to put their name on it and say “I won’t accept PAC advertisements in my hour.”
Who?
Cash. Hand over fist.
Then MSNBC and Fox News came along. The race was on.
MSNBC went velvet rope.
Fox News went diner.
CNN got caught in no man’s land.
6/
But the money kept coming in.
Then, technology changed the game.
CNN.com became THE defacto news source for America for a good 10 years.
Bernard Shaw hiding under the desk when Baghdad got bombed.
Aaron Brown broadcasting for 20 hours straight during 9.11.
CNN - Breaking News, Latest News and VideosView the latest news and breaking news today for U.S., world, weather, entertainment, politics and health at CNN.com.http://CNN.com
7/
We loved the accolades.
We sold on it.
But what we didn’t do was take a look at what was happening.
The viewership started to splinter to MSNBC cause some folks wanted a left bent
But a lot went to Fox News
In fact between 2008 and 2016, CNN lost 60% of its 50+ audience.
8/
Fox News, saw a 70% increase in the same demo during the same period (mostly men)
Fox News gave the audience what they want, an aggrieved white man perspective
While we chased the “next shiny object”
not arguing Fox News is right. Absolutely not. They are evil to the core
9/
“Fish where the fish are.”
In 2010, the team at CNN got the Fox News Strategy for sales and that was their strategy (they got ours too and MSNBC, happens all the time)
Some of us, said “uh oh, they’re right”. The audience is no longer A18-49
others laughed and mocked it
10/
Trump came and CNN started to make a shitload of money again by being the “counter” to Fox News but it was based on perception not reality.
No one was still watching.
Why?
While rest of America is out there cutting the cord, Fox News doubled down on old people.
And won.
11/
CNN saw that CNN+ will NOT bring in new audiences.
What 65 year old is going download and subscribe to a news streaming service with a basketball star, Rex Chapman- no offense Rex and I love ya - but the 65 year old living in The Villages is not your fan.
News Networks are not here to defend democracy.
There is only one goal and one goal only.
Higher CPM’s.
CPM is the currency used in TV to reflect the value of the programming.
The higher the CPM, the higher the margin on that commercial being sold.
The most valuable programming on TV is the championship game of the NCAA March Madness Tournament.
Super Bowl gets higher ratings, but the value ratio between CPM and audience is significantly much larger for March Madness Championship game vs. Super Bowl.
You pay $4 To $5 Million for a Super Bowl ad but you get 100 Million people watching.
You pay $1 MM for a March Madness spot but only get, at most in these day, 15 Million people watching.
See the ratio premium difference?
It’s the same with Fox News vs. CNN vs. MSNBC.
The ratio for Fox News CPM’s are much higher relative to their audience they attract, which means their margins are higher which also means the “value” to who they are selling to is more profitable.
Chris Litcht was given one edict.
Raise CPM’s.
That’s it.
That’s all he has to do.
And he believes this is how.
Fin.
P.S ppl want to know what CPM stands for
Cost Per Thousand
In Latin, Thousand starts with an “M”
I’ve been in the biz for 30+ years and it makes zero sense to me why the C and the P are listed in English but the M is Latin
It makes as much sense as electing Trump President
Ok, people want more.
Why did CNN remove field reporters from war zones and sub-contract coverage to local affiliates?
The market cap was saturated.
News networks, and us at CNN, saw only single digits increases once we all reached the threshold of in being in 70 Million homes
Then the game changed in 2010 with Citizen United’s
We all were killing it before the Citizen United ruling.
But that ruling opened up the flood gates exponentially.
Every 2 years. $1 Billion would pour into the networks during election cycles.
It changed how we did business.
News Networks make more money during the 3 months leading up to mid-terms than they do all year.
Imagine candy manufacturers during October leading up to Halloween.
Now multiple that by 10x.
And a Presidential Year: Fuggetaboutit. Ch-Ching!
What made PACs and campaigns spend money?
Was it the coverage in war zones?
No way.
We saw once we put people like Santorum on the air, liberal groups would pour money into our pockets.
But liberal groups took a decade to understand Citizen United.
Not the people down the street on 6th avenue.
They knew.
Combined with a black president, my god they took us all to the cleaners.
For every general market dollar Fox News made they made $2 on every political campaigns.
They doubled the revenue vs. regular advertisers.
MSNBC didn’t care.
They packaged MSNBC with NBC and then eventually their cable networks like USA and Bravo.
MSNBC was just a line item for a advertisers they had to buy
You want a spot in Sunday Night Football on NBC? You had to spend on MSNBC to get it
That’s how this works
I know for a fact, cause I was in the room, when we told talent on CNN to NOT lean in on Citizen United.
In retrospect, I stayed 5 years too long cause I’m disgusted of what happened to the company Ted built.
Ted was fucking crazy! CRAZY with a capital C.
But when the AOL Time Warner merger happened, he lost all control and the separation between Church and State was obliterated.
It was Ted that kept business and content apart from each other.
This is ‘THE’ singular reason why no one in news talks about Citizen United.
We made the decision in 2012 when $770 Million was poured into News by CPACs.
After that, we told the anchors to stop talking about it.
*don’t know why wrote CPACs (cringe), just PACs lol
Close your eyes and imagine CNN, MSNBC FOX NEWS without PAC spending
You can’t
They can’t
If they lived in a world where PACs couldn’t spend money at will they’d all be out of jobs. Simple as that
They’ll never want it gone.
I’ve seen the books.
The business would shut down
The biggest hypocritical media story of the 2020 election was the cable networks shaming the social media giants not to accept political ads leading up to the election while they ran Trump/Biden and Citizen United protected Ads up to midnight on election night.
lol.
+ It was greatest sales job ever.
Do you understand that these Campaigns MUST SPEND THE MONEY by election night or they’ll get in big trouble.
So shit, Tech is eating our lunch. Let’s shame them to stop taking the money, thus THEY HAVE TO COME TO US.
brilliant if you ask me.
A few have not understood the dynamic of the CPM and why it’s the only value that counts.
Best way to understand our business is to compare to something more tangible.
This is how it was presented to me in 1993 when I entered the business with Turner Broadcasting.
Imagine the network is an airplane.
The airplane is taking off no matter what at 10am.
Regardless if there is 1 person or 200 people, the plane is taking off.
Each seat on the plane represents a :30 second commercial.
Our job is to make sure $100 worth of seats is sold.
Doesn’t matter how many we sell and at what price, but if you want to keep your job, $100 worth of seats has to be sold on that flight.
One more thing, you have to guarantee that every single item that they get on that plane with they get off the plane with.
Does an airplane want to sell 2x tickets at $50 or 50x tickets at $2.
Remember, the plane is taking off no matter what. Once the plane leaves, the unsold seats become irrelevant. Now all you have to do is guarantee everything arrives and delivers.
The CPS. (Cost-per-seat) is $50 vs. $2 for a plane taking off regardless.
The Risk Management decision of delivering 2x people with 100% of their items to their destination vs 50x people reduces the liability by the airline thus increasing the value of each seat sold.
With PACS guess what?
There’s no guarantee provided by the airlines/networks to get their message to their destination = no liability
If the spot is seen by 1 person or 100, who cares. with PACS unlike product advertisers, we don’t owe them any delivery.
It’s just cash for us
It’s the same with networks.
A spot is going to run at 10am, no matter what.
Our job is to sell that spot, not at the highest price, but at the highest price with the least amount of liability exposed to the network.
The higher the CPM, less liability we carry on the books.
You are leasing our satellites, :30 at a time, and instead of products, now they want to sell you un-auditable money because there is no guarantee of delivery of services.
PACs ruined The TV News business.
Curious if there is an anchor out there willing to put their name on it and say “I won’t accept PAC advertisements in my hour.”
Who?
Thank god. If the DOJ is playing chess and not checkers, this ruling will give them precedent, they will appeal Cannon's ruling about the special master and hopefully, the endgame is to prevent that mothafucka from ever running for/holding office again
Nobody in jail...
Similar threads
