Trump's Pants on Fire claim that CNN ratings are 'way down' | PolitiFact

[Kondor3]

If Drumpf told me that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I'd get a second opinion.

 

[jon_berzerk]

If Drumpf told me that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I'd get a second opinion.

most haters would not accept an established fact from those they hate

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The most embarrassing thing is not just to be proven wrong, but to be proven to have said the exact opposite of the truth. In short, Donald Trump said that CNN's ratings are "way down" lately," when in fact they are "way up", according to the independent fact-checking website Politifact.com:

Trump is wrong. CNN's ratings are up.

Got another source than one funded by the DNC?

The ratings I have seen show otherwise.

 

[sartre play]

We have North Korea building bombs, we have some kind of climate weather pollution (call it what you like) company's keep sucking up other company's. you would be amazed if you look up parent company's & see who really owns your company. we are having problems all over the world 10 million dollars worth of bombs are dropped & it rates about a 5 day news cycle. there are fire& water problems states that can't put a budget together. and we talk about who lies or not about TV stations.

 

[whitehall]

It seems that CNN cable was crushed in the June-July ratings coming in at 10th behind Home and Garden Nick at Nite and the History channel.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Any ratings they enjoy are due to an interest in freak shows.

They are currently bottom-feeders.

You just admitted Trump lied.

No he didn't.
CNN's ratings plummet

 

[Kondor3]

If Drumpf told me that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I'd get a second opinion.

most haters would not accept an established fact from those they hate

A metaphor used to throw rocks at your boy's credibility.

Unfortunately for you-and-yours, all one need do is look at the climate change issue, to see a concrete real-world example of what you bemoan.

 

[jon_berzerk]

If Drumpf told me that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I'd get a second opinion.

most haters would not accept an established fact from those they hate

A metaphor used to throw rocks at your boy's credibility.

Unfortunately for you-and-yours, all one need do is look at the climate change issue, to see a concrete real-world example of what you bemoan.

here is the thing with you flat earthers the only thing that is concrete about man made climate change is that the numbers have been fudged

 

[Marion Morrison]

The most embarrassing thing is not just to be proven wrong, but to be proven to have said the exact opposite of the truth. In short, Donald Trump said that CNN's ratings are "way down" lately," when in fact they are "way up", according to the independent fact-checking website Politifact.com:

Trump is wrong. CNN's ratings are up.

Politifacts is not independent but ran by reporters and editors of the Tampa Bay Times

A wholly leftist organization.

 

[wjmacguffin]

Any ratings they enjoy are due to an interest in freak shows.

They are currently bottom-feeders.

You just admitted Trump lied.

No he didn't.
CNN's ratings plummet

Do you realize that your link shows CNN ratings for just a single week? Here, lemme show you how this works.
...
Guess what? FOX news is now #3 behind MSNBC and CNN! Fortune Magazine, which isn't some liberal rag, shows that FOX has lost viewers so badly that even liberal MSNBC is more popular. It also shows why Trump is a liar. How can CNN ratings be down when they beat Fox?
....
See what I did there? I took a story that looked at a very small sample of ratings and took it out of context. There's truth in there — FOX did fall to #3. But that was for just one demographic, just for primetime, and just in May. That makes my statement above untrue.

Which also makes your statement untrue. If you cherrypick the data, you can make lots of things look true that aren't. According to the Nielsen ratings, CNN has increased viewership over the past year. But yes, if you only look for a single week, I'm sure you can find ratings down, just like I did for FOX.

 

[wjmacguffin]

The most embarrassing thing is not just to be proven wrong, but to be proven to have said the exact opposite of the truth. In short, Donald Trump said that CNN's ratings are "way down" lately," when in fact they are "way up", according to the independent fact-checking website Politifact.com:

Trump is wrong. CNN's ratings are up.

Got another source than one funded by the DNC?

The ratings I have seen show otherwise.

Seriously, I've never heard y'all claim the DNC funds Politifact, and a quick Google search came up with nothing. Can you link to any credible source backing up your claim?

 

[wjmacguffin]

not gonna go back and read much of anything to be honest. i query on CNN RATINGS in google and headline after headline say DOWN.

CNN begins to reap what they sow as their ratings nose-dive to embarrassing levels

CNN Now Losing To Nick-At-Nite In Prime Time Ratings War

The Shows That Are Beating CNN in Primetime Ratings Spell Embarrassment for the Network

Scoreboard: Thursday, July 6

Death Spiral: Along With Its Credibility, CNN Ratings Collapse

CNN's ratings plummet to 10th in primetime

CNN's Ratings Collapse As Primetime Shows Draw Less Viewers Than Re-Runs Of "Yogi Bear" | Zero Hedge

in fact, the only one saying they're doing well on page 1 of that google search is - CNN.

go figure. the zerohedge is pretty unbiased and all i see are down arrows for CNN.

so if trump said their ratings are down and cites any of these sources, how he is lying?

I just did a Google search myself and found different results. Some were similar (like The Blaze, Federalist, and Daily Wire), but there were non-CNN stories that contradicted you (Politifact, Variety, Adweek) that never appeared on your list. Weird.

But how can we tell if one story is better than any other? Let's check some sources!

Politifact lists Nielsen ratings, a senior television reporter, a political science professor, director of a Syracuse University television center, CNN's press release (which is sourced by Nielsen ratings), and WaPo. That's 5 sources (since CNN's press release is really rehashing Nielsen data).

The Blaze? One source: A Scribd document showing one week of ratings.

The Federalist? The same Scribd doc.

Free Beacon? Same.

TV Newser? A TV Newser document, but just for one day: July 6.

Daily Wire? The same TV Newser document and another saying Rachel Maddow beat CNN in Q2 2017.

One News Now? The Federalist story based on that one Scribd doc.

Zerohedge? The same tired old Scribd document. But this includes a chart showing a downward trend in ratings — but only over 7 days for only one demographic.

so if trump said their ratings are down and cites any of these sources, how he is lying?

Because your sources are suspect at best, utter bullshit at worst. (And no, Zero Hedge is *not* anywhere near unbiased.) They're based mostly on one source, and in many cases, on just one week of ratings. Even the CNN press release has stronger data than any of the ones you listed above.

keep up son. oldlady and i have already talked about the differences we were seeing in the #'s.

you wanna prance around in some jacked up victory dance, have fun but leave me out.

Your last word from that exchange:

however, this doesn't make trump a liar. it doesn't tell the whole story but that's news today. tell what helps your side, hurts the other and hide the rest.

You act like there's still a question about the ratings. It's only "how you wish to view it" if you are looking at bullshit. It's not even a "festival of lies" as you put it. It's simply entertainment. At least in this case, the sites you linked to are bullshit. They say what you want to hear, and then you act like this proves there's something wrong with the Politifact ruling.

You need to take another gaslighting class, as you're not doing it right.

aw hell. i'm still trying to figure out what "the lie" is.

It's not hard to suss out. Trump said "Ratings way down!" They are not. Therefore, Trump lied. You can spin this so your Trump underoos don't get skid marks by calling the lie a misunderstanding or not intentional truth, but it's still a lie. He wanted to bash CNN (as he often does to any media not always friendly to him) so he lied about the ratings to make it look like CNN is failing.

Man, this ain't hard.

did their rank drop?

yes. / no

and we will go from there.

was it a stupid thing to say? yes. but the entire situation is bullshit.

you also think i care. nope.not into the sideshow bob on either side.

Yesterday, it was 87 F here. Today, it's going to be 79 F. OMG, the temperature is dropping rapidly! We're all gonna freeze!!!

If you want to argue over what sample size qualifies when determining a network's viability, I'm game. But the sources you quote and rely on are bullshit, not Politifact's sources. The water is not muddy, and it's simply incorrect for you to suggest both sides are equally wrong here.

And if you don't care, then why the fuck did you post a long-ass message with seven links supporting Trump?

 

[Marion Morrison]

The most embarrassing thing is not just to be proven wrong, but to be proven to have said the exact opposite of the truth. In short, Donald Trump said that CNN's ratings are "way down" lately," when in fact they are "way up", according to the independent fact-checking website Politifact.com:

Trump is wrong. CNN's ratings are up.

Got another source than one funded by the DNC?

The ratings I have seen show otherwise.

Seriously, I've never heard y'all claim the DNC funds Politifact, and a quick Google search came up with nothing. Can you link to any credible source backing up your claim?

PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores ‘Pants on Fire’ for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers

 

[ColonelAngus]

CNN loses to reruns of Full House on Nick at Nite.

 

[iceberg]

not gonna go back and read much of anything to be honest. i query on CNN RATINGS in google and headline after headline say DOWN.

CNN begins to reap what they sow as their ratings nose-dive to embarrassing levels

CNN Now Losing To Nick-At-Nite In Prime Time Ratings War

The Shows That Are Beating CNN in Primetime Ratings Spell Embarrassment for the Network

Scoreboard: Thursday, July 6

Death Spiral: Along With Its Credibility, CNN Ratings Collapse

CNN's ratings plummet to 10th in primetime

CNN's Ratings Collapse As Primetime Shows Draw Less Viewers Than Re-Runs Of "Yogi Bear" | Zero Hedge

in fact, the only one saying they're doing well on page 1 of that google search is - CNN.

go figure. the zerohedge is pretty unbiased and all i see are down arrows for CNN.

so if trump said their ratings are down and cites any of these sources, how he is lying?

I just did a Google search myself and found different results. Some were similar (like The Blaze, Federalist, and Daily Wire), but there were non-CNN stories that contradicted you (Politifact, Variety, Adweek) that never appeared on your list. Weird.

But how can we tell if one story is better than any other? Let's check some sources!

Politifact lists Nielsen ratings, a senior television reporter, a political science professor, director of a Syracuse University television center, CNN's press release (which is sourced by Nielsen ratings), and WaPo. That's 5 sources (since CNN's press release is really rehashing Nielsen data).

The Blaze? One source: A Scribd document showing one week of ratings.

The Federalist? The same Scribd doc.

Free Beacon? Same.

TV Newser? A TV Newser document, but just for one day: July 6.

Daily Wire? The same TV Newser document and another saying Rachel Maddow beat CNN in Q2 2017.

One News Now? The Federalist story based on that one Scribd doc.

Zerohedge? The same tired old Scribd document. But this includes a chart showing a downward trend in ratings — but only over 7 days for only one demographic.

so if trump said their ratings are down and cites any of these sources, how he is lying?

Because your sources are suspect at best, utter bullshit at worst. (And no, Zero Hedge is *not* anywhere near unbiased.) They're based mostly on one source, and in many cases, on just one week of ratings. Even the CNN press release has stronger data than any of the ones you listed above.

keep up son. oldlady and i have already talked about the differences we were seeing in the #'s.

you wanna prance around in some jacked up victory dance, have fun but leave me out.

Your last word from that exchange:

however, this doesn't make trump a liar. it doesn't tell the whole story but that's news today. tell what helps your side, hurts the other and hide the rest.

You act like there's still a question about the ratings. It's only "how you wish to view it" if you are looking at bullshit. It's not even a "festival of lies" as you put it. It's simply entertainment. At least in this case, the sites you linked to are bullshit. They say what you want to hear, and then you act like this proves there's something wrong with the Politifact ruling.

You need to take another gaslighting class, as you're not doing it right.

aw hell. i'm still trying to figure out what "the lie" is.

It's not hard to suss out. Trump said "Ratings way down!" They are not. Therefore, Trump lied. You can spin this so your Trump underoos don't get skid marks by calling the lie a misunderstanding or not intentional truth, but it's still a lie. He wanted to bash CNN (as he often does to any media not always friendly to him) so he lied about the ratings to make it look like CNN is failing.

Man, this ain't hard.

did their rank drop?

yes. / no

and we will go from there.

was it a stupid thing to say? yes. but the entire situation is bullshit.

you also think i care. nope.not into the sideshow bob on either side.

Yesterday, it was 87 F here. Today, it's going to be 79 F. OMG, the temperature is dropping rapidly! We're all gonna freeze!!!

If you want to argue over what sample size qualifies when determining a network's viability, I'm game. But the sources you quote and rely on are bullshit, not Politifact's sources. The water is not muddy, and it's simply incorrect for you to suggest both sides are equally wrong here.

And if you don't care, then why the fuck did you post a long-ass message with seven links supporting Trump?

first, i never said it was an in-depth analysis. it was a "man, 1st page seems to be a lot of..."

second - your weather analogy is ... stupid. i never argued over sample size. i argued 1st few pages of google returns on the search show at least potential for this to be "true".

third - i left politifact out cause they had already been posted and didn't see the need to do a comparison sure to make liberals happy cause i've long since determined that isn't possible really.

and finally - yea i do care when someone spouts something and goes LIAR LIAR when in fact it's not quite true. while more people may be watching the news, less are watching CNN - so what would you call that? a meteoric rise to the top of the "news-media-outlets" or are they falling behind the rest in overall audience pull?

man, correcting many liberals in why their anger doesn't follow through is about the same as taking their candy away and watching them get all upset.

 

[wjmacguffin]

The most embarrassing thing is not just to be proven wrong, but to be proven to have said the exact opposite of the truth. In short, Donald Trump said that CNN's ratings are "way down" lately," when in fact they are "way up", according to the independent fact-checking website Politifact.com:

Trump is wrong. CNN's ratings are up.

Got another source than one funded by the DNC?

The ratings I have seen show otherwise.

Seriously, I've never heard y'all claim the DNC funds Politifact, and a quick Google search came up with nothing. Can you link to any credible source backing up your claim?

PolitiFact Parent Tampa Bay Times Scores ‘Pants on Fire’ for Partisan Bias - Media Trackers

Huh, that article has literally no information on the DNC funding Politifact. Well, thanks for trying!

 

[wjmacguffin]

first, i never said it was an in-depth analysis. it was a "man, 1st page seems to be a lot of..."

And I never claimed you were making an in-depth analysis. As I noted, your 1st page results conveniently lacked the pro-CNN articles that I found. And even if you were correct, my point was that sources matter. All your 1st page articles are bullshit compared to the Politifact one.

second - your weather analogy is ... stupid. i never argued over sample size. i argued 1st few pages of google returns on the search show at least potential for this to be "true".

My analogy was showing how your sources are bullshit because they use a small sample size and only 1 source. You seem to conflate quantity with quality, and I was trying to show you why that's wrong. I think you're smart enough to know that, but you don't want to admit that.

third - i left politifact out cause they had already been posted and didn't see the need to do a comparison sure to make liberals happy cause i've long since determined that isn't possible really.

In other words, you left out the quality, properly sourced article because it didn't fit your narrative. Nice!

and finally - yea i do care when someone spouts something and goes LIAR LIAR when in fact it's not quite true. while more people may be watching the news, less are watching CNN - so what would you call that? a meteoric rise to the top of the "news-media-outlets" or are they falling behind the rest in overall audience pull?

It *is* true. Those articles are bullshit. CNN's ratings (as determined by the company that makes the ratings) are up over the past year. That means — and stick with me here 'cause this is the hard part — more people are watching CNN. Trump (and you) are saying ratings are down, which would mean fewer people are watching CNN. That is demonstrably and factually incorrect.

I would use an analogy of stock market dips versus overall trends, but as with the weather analogy, you'll just ignore it.

man, correcting many liberals in why their anger doesn't follow through is about the same as taking their candy away and watching them get all upset.

Sorry, but you completely lost me here. Sounds like you know you're wrong, you're not mature enough to admit it, and so you wander into some meaningless ramble about DUH LIBTURBS HUR DURR THEYZ STOOPID. Sad, really.

FYI, I made my point repeatedly. Feel free to reply to this, but at least with you, I'm done. This has just gotten boring and repetitive.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Any ratings they enjoy are due to an interest in freak shows.

They are currently bottom-feeders.

You just admitted Trump lied.

No he didn't.
CNN's ratings plummet

Do you realize that your link shows CNN ratings for just a single week? Here, lemme show you how this works.
...
Guess what? FOX news is now #3 behind MSNBC and CNN!

One reason being FOX News is in a period of transition. Several top stars are out, and some of the leads have dropped the masks and gone full Democrat nonsense, Shepard Smith and Chris Wallace being prime examples. They are bleeding viewers, and where FOX will end up is anyone's guess.

The other reason being that many viewers are attracted to the entertainment value of sideshow freak tents, which sums up the draw of CNN and MSNBC. I watch them quite often myself. They make me laugh a lot.

 

[wjmacguffin]

Any ratings they enjoy are due to an interest in freak shows.

They are currently bottom-feeders.

You just admitted Trump lied.

No he didn't.
CNN's ratings plummet

Do you realize that your link shows CNN ratings for just a single week? Here, lemme show you how this works.
...
Guess what? FOX news is now #3 behind MSNBC and CNN!

One reason being FOX News is in a period of transition. Several top stars are out, and some of the leads have dropped the masks and gone full Democrat nonsense, Shepard Smith and Chris Wallace being prime examples. They are bleeding viewers, and where FOX will end up is anyone's guess.

The other reason being that many viewers are attracted to the entertainment value of sideshow freak tents, which sums up the draw of CNN and MSNBC. I watch them quite often myself. They make me laugh a lot.

I agree. That story about FOX News used one small sample size. The same with the articles by Blaze, Daily Wire, Zero Hedge, and the rest. They are lying by picking one slice of data and making it sound like it's a year-by-year trend.

And if viewers are attracted to sideshow freak tents, does that explain why FOX News is the #1 news show consistently?

 

[jon_berzerk]

Any ratings they enjoy are due to an interest in freak shows.

They are currently bottom-feeders.

You just admitted Trump lied.

No he didn't.
CNN's ratings plummet

Do you realize that your link shows CNN ratings for just a single week? Here, lemme show you how this works.
...
Guess what? FOX news is now #3 behind MSNBC and CNN!

One reason being FOX News is in a period of transition. Several top stars are out, and some of the leads have dropped the masks and gone full Democrat nonsense, Shepard Smith and Chris Wallace being prime examples. They are bleeding viewers, and where FOX will end up is anyone's guess.

The other reason being that many viewers are attracted to the entertainment value of sideshow freak tents, which sums up the draw of CNN and MSNBC. I watch them quite often myself. They make me laugh a lot.

well actually i dropped fox long before their "transition period"

they have sucked for some time once the mask came off

in my line up i have al carted fox cnn and mslsd off my channels

so my service does not contribute to them one cent

--LOL