If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hollywood Reporter)   Rachel Maddow's ratings now lower than most cable access stations and third-tier cat meme videos on Youtube   (m.hollywoodreporter.com) divider line 111
    More: Fail, public-access television, Rachel Maddow, YouTube, Fox News, MSNBC, HLN, video cameras, CNN  
•       •       •

3617 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 30 May 2013 at 9:29 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



111 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-30 05:49:37 AM  
Who ?
 
2013-05-30 06:24:07 AM  
Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?
 
2013-05-30 06:30:20 AM  
I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.
 
2013-05-30 06:42:37 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.


True. If it weren't for ESPN and NFL Network, I'd have cancelled my cable TV entirely by now. I get all of my news online, as well as most of my entertainment.
 
2013-05-30 07:59:51 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.


So that's how Wheel of Fortune stays on the air.
 
2013-05-30 08:33:45 AM  

MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?


Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.
 
2013-05-30 08:35:52 AM  

Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.


True. She could add some likability to NPR, too. God, NPR is boring as shiate right now!
 
2013-05-30 08:44:11 AM  

MmmmBacon: Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.

True. She could add some likability to NPR, too. God, NPR is boring as shiate right now!


Yeah, I agree to a point. But if you watch some infotainment (such as MSNBC, Fox News and such), it can taint a lot of what one would expect news to be. So by comparison, NPR can be a bit boring. But one should listen to NPR to be stimulated by the facts and informed by what news media should be. Being entertained should be low on the priority list in this context.
 
2013-05-30 08:49:10 AM  
"We can picture any chick we want" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0Be8LnuG3U
 
2013-05-30 08:49:56 AM  

kimwim: "We can picture any chick we want" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0Be8LnuG3U


Well, I had it cued up, but, go to 2.04.
 
2013-05-30 08:59:25 AM  
I really couldn't give a rat's ass about the story, but Chrissy Teigen's underboob at the bottom of the article is just fantastic.
 
2013-05-30 09:31:29 AM  
And the greatest food item out there is the McRib.
 
2013-05-30 09:32:45 AM  
Newsgossip shows aren't really all the rage among liberals these days.
 
2013-05-30 09:35:10 AM  

MmmmBacon: Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.

True. She could add some likability to NPR, too. God, NPR is boring as shiate right now!


I would head up a fund drive for NPR if they promised never to put Ira Flatow on the air, again.  That man has set science back decades by being as boring as shiat.
 
2013-05-30 09:37:49 AM  
I was impressed by some of the things she wrote so I tried watching her show a time or two.  Her straight-up reporting and her use of facts and reason to call people on their BS was refreshing.  But then she'd get into her opinion segments and the smugness was overwhelming.  For me, the smug cancels out the intelligence.
 
2013-05-30 09:38:09 AM  
Fox News fans gloating in 3.... 2....
 
2013-05-30 09:41:32 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.


I remember a study done years ago, and every year new studies come out just backing up the original results, that Republicans/Conservatives tend to turn on Fox News and leave it on all day or for large chunks of the day and watch it. Inversely Democrats/Liberals tend to watch just an hour or so here and there before just turning the TV off and going about tasks they were doing or going to work. Basically it's the "White, old, angry people have nothing better to do than to watch Fox" study.
 
2013-05-30 09:43:37 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.


I have reasonably good taste in TV, and Nielson wanted to put a box on my TV, but their system is just so clunky and ugly my wife wanted so part of it. I wish they work with Tivo or the cable compnies so you coul opt in to them pulling viewing data off of your STB instead of hooking all of their equipment up. Hell, they would be PERFECT as an app for the Xbox One.
 
2013-05-30 09:43:49 AM  
IIRC, Comcast removed MSNBC from their expanded basic lineup. You'd need to subscribe to at least the digital preferred tier to get it, so maybe that affects ratings too.
 
2013-05-30 09:43:57 AM  

scottydoesntknow: I really couldn't give a rat's ass about the story, but Chrissy Teigen's underboob at the bottom of the article is just fantastic.

 
2013-05-30 09:45:46 AM  

Pants full of macaroni!!: Fox News fans gloating in 3.... 2....


Don't see what they, or any other cable news network has to gloat about. The Daily Show beats all of Fox News. Not just on a show per show basis, but on Daily Show all by its lonesome, beating the entire Fox News Network.

A thirty minute show making fun of cable news gets more viewers than the top rated cable news network does all day.
 
2013-05-30 09:51:48 AM  

CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.




Galactic sized THIS. My wife's parents, in their mid70s, get a Nielsen sheet about once a year. They don't really watch anything except some sports and the local evening and 10 pm news and Wheel of fortune and Qvc type hawkers. But they've gotten that Nielsen sheet annually, like clockwork, for years.
 
2013-05-30 09:54:32 AM  

Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.


She'd never fit at NPR. When a politician started bullshiatting her, she'd call them out on it, instead of just going on to the next question.
 
2013-05-30 09:59:57 AM  

xoxo: IIRC, Comcast removed MSNBC from their expanded basic lineup. You'd need to subscribe to at least the digital preferred tier to get it, so maybe that affects ratings too.


DISH did the same thing.
 
2013-05-30 10:03:03 AM  

Hebjamn: I was impressed by some of the things she wrote so I tried watching her show a time or two.  Her straight-up reporting and her use of facts and reason to call people on their BS was refreshing.  But then she'd get into her opinion segments and the smugness was overwhelming.  For me, the smug cancels out the intelligence.


I feel the same way about Matt Taibbi.  Every time he's on TV, you just want to smack him even if you agree with him.
 
2013-05-30 10:04:32 AM  

make me some tea: Newsgossip shows aren't really all the rage among liberals these days.


Well, you need newsgossip, and the only newsgossip out there are the "scandals" and the "outrage over the Republicans making them scandals".  No one cares about the scandals, let alone liberals.  And liberals are burned out on the "OMG Republicans bad."

Foxnews ratings are down too.

Until someone blows up another marathon, a white blonde chick goes missing, or Zimmerman testifies at his trial no one will care.
 
2013-05-30 10:06:57 AM  
I wonder if Naked News ratings go up during slow news times.
 
2013-05-30 10:09:10 AM  

Hebjamn: I was impressed by some of the things she wrote so I tried watching her show a time or two.  Her straight-up reporting and her use of facts and reason to call people on their BS was refreshing.  But then she'd get into her opinion segments and the smugness was overwhelming.  For me, the smug cancels out the intelligence.


This.  Anything where she is expressing her opinion makes me want to rage.  Maybe she should just stick to reading objective copy.

That being said her ratings are well deserved.
 
2013-05-30 10:10:29 AM  

Mad_Radhu: CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.

I have reasonably good taste in TV, and Nielson wanted to put a box on my TV, but their system is just so clunky and ugly my wife wanted so part of it. I wish they work with Tivo or the cable compnies so you coul opt in to them pulling viewing data off of your STB instead of hooking all of their equipment up. Hell, they would be PERFECT as an app for the Xbox One.


That would kind of defeat the purpose of having a representative sample and would skew the data.  And the "older and white" argument doesn't explain why MSNBC is still so low among adults 25-54.
 
2013-05-30 10:12:38 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.

She'd never fit at NPR. When a conservative politician started bullshiatting her, she'd call them out on it, instead of just going on to the next question like she would for a liberal.


FIFY
 
2013-05-30 10:15:46 AM  

rugman11: That would kind of defeat the purpose of having a representative sample and would skew the data. And the "older and white" argument doesn't explain why MSNBC is still so low among adults 25-54.


Probably because young people consume news differently. This group is more likely to be on the go or working so they read news on the internet and via their phones/tablets. When they watch TV it's for entertainment and not news because they've been getting it from other sources.
 
2013-05-30 10:20:29 AM  
Meh...  One of the things that bothered me most was how Fox News would incessantly hump their ratings as though that somehow implied legitimacy to the absolute dishonest sludge they were broadcasting.  It's as if they were telling people five or six times an hour that what they're saying was true in spite of reality simply because the number of people watching chose to believe it.

Add to that the simple fact that all the news networks are beholden to their sponsors and thus required to sensationalize the ever-living crap out of even the most drab and mundane stories out there so as to generate interest and viewers to sell junk to, and you have nothing even remotely approaching an honest source of information.  In fact, you have little more than a new version of a multi-product infomercial that uses sensationalized current events as a backdrop in order to keep people's eyes on the screen.
 
2013-05-30 10:21:26 AM  
I really like Chris Hayes' new show, much better than Ed Schultz.  Kinda disheartening to see if floundering in the ratings like that.
 
2013-05-30 10:21:30 AM  

rugman11: Mad_Radhu: CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.

I have reasonably good taste in TV, and Nielson wanted to put a box on my TV, but their system is just so clunky and ugly my wife wanted so part of it. I wish they work with Tivo or the cable compnies so you coul opt in to them pulling viewing data off of your STB instead of hooking all of their equipment up. Hell, they would be PERFECT as an app for the Xbox One.

That would kind of defeat the purpose of having a representative sample and would skew the data.  And the "older and white" argument doesn't explain why MSNBC is still so low among adults 25-54.


Does anyone under 30 even subscribe to cable tv anymore? My friends/coworkers are mostly 25-35 and only one of them has cable. I know it isn't a random sample but I'm curious what cable subscription rate for people 26-35 vs 36-45 look like.
 
2013-05-30 10:21:49 AM  

KatjaMouse: CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.

I remember a study done years ago, and every year new studies come out just backing up the original results, that Republicans/Conservatives tend to turn on Fox News and leave it on all day or for large chunks of the day and watch it. Inversely Democrats/Liberals tend to watch just an hour or so here and there before just turning the TV off and going about tasks they were doing or going to work. Basically it's the "White, old, angry people have nothing better to do than to watch Fox" study.


I think that's more due to the number of small businesses that leave Fox News on all day long in their lobbies.  It's annoying as hell.  Hell, I work in a state agency and even we have that crap going in the lobby all day.

Hebjamn: I was impressed by some of the things she wrote so I tried watching her show a time or two.  Her straight-up reporting and her use of facts and reason to call people on their BS was refreshing.  But then she'd get into her opinion segments and the smugness was overwhelming.  For me, the smug cancels out the intelligence.


Sounds like a great fit for NPR.  Just needs to learn to roll her R's.
 
2013-05-30 10:24:26 AM  

KatjaMouse: rugman11: That would kind of defeat the purpose of having a representative sample and would skew the data. And the "older and white" argument doesn't explain why MSNBC is still so low among adults 25-54.

Probably because young people consume news differently. This group is more likely to be on the go or working so they read news on the internet and via their phones/tablets. When they watch TV it's for entertainment and not news because they've been getting it from other sources.


Sorry, I phrased that poorly.  The "older and white" argument doesn't explain why MSNBC is still so low among adults 25-54 compared to Fox News and CNN.  Their primetime ratings are just over half what FNC gets in the demo and 3/4 of what CNN pulls.  They're basically the NBC to FNC's CBS and CNN's Fox.
 
2013-05-30 10:26:24 AM  

MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?


She's constrained now compared to when she was on radio.
 
2013-05-30 10:27:31 AM  
Carth:Does anyone under 30 even subscribe to cable tv anymore? My friends/coworkers are mostly 25-35 and only one of them has cable. I know it isn't a random sample but I'm curious what cable subscription rate for people 26-35 vs 36-45 look like.

I'm sure it's lower, but not that much lower.  I'm 36 and cut the cord back in 2004.  BTW - There was a lot more free shiat online back then, but not as much variety overall.

I live in a college town and almost all of my friends are younger than me and I'm still the only one I know who has done cut the cord.  Even my wife, who is 28, would probably go back to cable if I wouldn't biatch about it.  (Or volunteered to pay for it).   Which is sad.   I doubt anyone's gonna be on their deathbed wishing they'd watched one more Law & Order rerun.
 
2013-05-30 10:28:41 AM  

Vai1018: I really like Chris Hayes' new show, much better than Ed Schultz.  Kinda disheartening to see if floundering in the ratings like that.


I don't know if you've noticed, but MSNBC has been running a lot of Ed Schultz ad spots. I suspect they are floating a comeback to his old timeslot.
 
2013-05-30 10:30:27 AM  

EyeballKid: And the greatest food item out there is the McRib.


Definitely not. But they keep making McRibs. They stop making shiat people don't eat.

So better get all that Maddow you can before it's gone and you have to make up some more excuses about why no one watched her.
 
2013-05-30 10:32:51 AM  

FLMountainMan: Carth:Does anyone under 30 even subscribe to cable tv anymore? My friends/coworkers are mostly 25-35 and only one of them has cable. I know it isn't a random sample but I'm curious what cable subscription rate for people 26-35 vs 36-45 look like.

I'm sure it's lower, but not that much lower.  I'm 36 and cut the cord back in 2004.  BTW - There was a lot more free shiat online back then, but not as much variety overall.

I live in a college town and almost all of my friends are younger than me and I'm still the only one I know who has done cut the cord.  Even my wife, who is 28, would probably go back to cable if I wouldn't biatch about it.  (Or volunteered to pay for it).   Which is sad.   I doubt anyone's gonna be on their deathbed wishing they'd watched one more Law & Order rerun.


Do you live in a fairly urban area? I think being able to go without cable is a lot easier for people in cities. We get around 30 HD channels here with a crappy little antenna. Between OTA, amazon and netflix I've never been wanting for something to watch. I can't imagine ever spending $50 a month just to have accesses to 70 channels of reality tv.
 
2013-05-30 10:34:34 AM  

Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.

True. She could add some likability to NPR, too. God, NPR is boring as shiate right now!

Yeah, I agree to a point. But if you watch some infotainment (such as MSNBC, Fox News and such), it can taint a lot of what one would expect news to be. So by comparison, NPR can be a bit boring. But one should listen to NPR to be stimulated by the facts and informed by what news media should be. Being entertained should be low on the priority list in this context.


I have found NPR to be increasing in quality in the last 2-3 years.  When they rewrote their ethics guidelines and started calling out birthers and wingnuts when they made factually incorrect statements on the air, that was the tipping point.  I recommend NPR to literally anyone - if you think it's some libby lib lib lib paradise, then you haven't actually listened to it.  It is, hands down, the best source for broad information about what's going on in the country and the world (ie, NEWS, not infotainment).
 
2013-05-30 10:34:36 AM  

MFAWG: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

She's constrained now compared to when she was on radio.


She was on Air America. That network was impossible to listen to. They were obviously trying to be a shrill as the right-wing radio shows and it just doesn't work well for liberals. Franken was just as bad on the air, but as a Senator he is very restrained.
 
2013-05-30 10:36:31 AM  

Carth: Does anyone under 30 even subscribe to cable tv anymore? My friends/coworkers are mostly 25-35 and only one of them has cable. I know it isn't a random sample but I'm curious what cable subscription rate for people 26-35 vs 36-45 look like.



Hell, I'm almost 53 and I don't have cable. When I finally took a look at how my wife managed the family's finances a couple months before the marriage fell apart, I saw we were paying AT&T $500/month for cable/internet/landline/mobile phones. I'm probably going to resent cable providers (not to mention my ex-wife) a little for the rest of my life.
 
2013-05-30 10:38:30 AM  

TelemonianAjax: Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Cythraul: MmmmBacon: Maddow deserves better than being relegated to MSNBC. I could see her ably replacing any number of Anchors on the broadcast networks, but even then she would be constrained. Maybe a gig replacing "Meet the Press" host David Gregory?

Her career on MSNBC has probably damaged any possibility of her being thought of as unbiased enough to host Meet the Press. However, I could see her working for NPR.

She has a lot of talent in journalism, but just about anywhere she could go right now would be a step down in pay and in general popularity.

True. She could add some likability to NPR, too. God, NPR is boring as shiate right now!

Yeah, I agree to a point. But if you watch some infotainment (such as MSNBC, Fox News and such), it can taint a lot of what one would expect news to be. So by comparison, NPR can be a bit boring. But one should listen to NPR to be stimulated by the facts and informed by what news media should be. Being entertained should be low on the priority list in this context.

I have found NPR to be increasing in quality in the last 2-3 years.  When they rewrote their ethics guidelines and started calling out birthers and wingnuts when they made factually incorrect statements on the air, that was the tipping point.  I recommend NPR to literally anyone - if you think it's some libby lib lib lib paradise, then you haven't actually listened to it.  It is, hands down, the best source for broad information about what's going on in the country and the world (ie, NEWS, not infotainment).


NPR for domestic news Al-jazeera english for world coverage. You don't really need to watch anything else unless you really like an anchor for some reason.
 
2013-05-30 10:44:00 AM  

chewielouie: scottydoesntknow: I really couldn't give a rat's ass about the story, but Chrissy Teigen's underboob at the bottom of the article is just fantastic.


Technically, she is just wearing paint... so it is just boob.
 
2013-05-30 10:44:50 AM  
You know what these numbers say? It says loudly and clearly Sean Hannity is a sage, and Rachel Maddow is an ingnoramus. Sorry, Rach, enter into a traditional marriage and stop stabbing America in the back, and maybe then Mr. Ailes will give you a show. You already have Hannity's haircut, but that's not enough. You need his intellect also.
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-30 10:45:37 AM  
I watch her video podcast every. single. day. It's the best way to get news updates on my drive to work.
 
2013-05-30 10:47:14 AM  
So there are less than 3 million or so people watching the news networks daily by these numbers? I'm pretty sure there's more people than that on Steam daily.
 
2013-05-30 10:50:12 AM  

Carth: rugman11: Mad_Radhu: CPT Ethanolic: I wonder how much this has to do with how ratings are collected and how we get our news these days.  Seems that most people with Nielson boxes are older and white and that most younger people get news online.

I have reasonably good taste in TV, and Nielson wanted to put a box on my TV, but their system is just so clunky and ugly my wife wanted so part of it. I wish they work with Tivo or the cable compnies so you coul opt in to them pulling viewing data off of your STB instead of hooking all of their equipment up. Hell, they would be PERFECT as an app for the Xbox One.

That would kind of defeat the purpose of having a representative sample and would skew the data.  And the "older and white" argument doesn't explain why MSNBC is still so low among adults 25-54.

Does anyone under 30 even subscribe to cable tv anymore? My friends/coworkers are mostly 25-35 and only one of them has cable. I know it isn't a random sample but I'm curious what cable subscription rate for people 26-35 vs 36-45 look like.


I think you would be surprised.  I couldn't find any more current stats, but there was one study in 2006 that found Adults 18-34 subscribed to cable at a 56% rate (versus 59% overall).  That's probably down a bit now, but I would be surprised if total cable/satellite penetration for 20-30 households is less than 80% (it's 90% for the rest of the country).  I think the biggest thing is that the features that correlate highest with cable subscription (higher income, married, children) are at their lowest rates among young people, especially urban young people.

The question, then, is going to be what happens when the 20-somethings living without cable but with access to Netflix/Hulu/etc. enter their 30s and get married, have kids, move to the suburbs, and boost their incomes.  Will they, like their parents, start subscribing to cable?  Or will they continue to do without?
 
Displayed 50 of 111 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report