This guys videos were popping up on my youtube feed and I watched several of them (they were on Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos) and I don’t know what it is about him, but I really enjoy his analysis. He’s German and he actually has a pretty great sense of humor. I subscribed to his site, but this is a kind of interesting analysis of CNN that doesn’t have a political slant on it.
Lol … CNN is the propaganda wing of the DNC, it’s 100% politics no matter how anyone spins it.
They almost lasted a month, but the reason they failed is viewers can get the same biased news and left leaning information from over 90% of the media, why pay for it?
He also said that with CNN+ you could get up any time and see the Morning news.
Obviously he never heard of Youtube TV and the unlimited DVR.
Why would you pay extra for Left wing propaganda when you get it for free from the MSM and MSNBC and CNN already on a daily basis ?!?!?!
I guess the reason I posted this in humor is becasue his was an analysis that did not have political bent to it.
It is a joke, the guy posts a 27 minute video trying to make excuses why politics wasn’t the reason CNN+ failed. The market is saturated with biased left wing media outlets pushing the dems agenda, people aren’t going to pay when they can get the same crap for free.
That comment kind of indcates that you didn’t watch the video, other than to see how long it was. But please, since you are good at spotting numbers in a video., could you cite for me the times where he was “making excuses”? If anything, he ridiculed the whole thing. How many times in the video did he comment about Anthony Bourdain (was he liberal??) being dead? In fact -at 4:02 he says I am not from the US, except from what I hear from some podcasts and I’m not following politics. He talked about subscriptions and content, but I am having a helluva time finding the parts where he spent 27 minutes saying it wasn’t liberal politics that sunk it. Maybe you could help me. Hell…I’d accept even ONE citation where he did that. Hell, at 7:10 he said something about “informed” and in his comments, just above his head, said “or misinformed”, which is pretty damned close to “fake news”. And he’s talking about CNN. Helluva way to “excuse” their failure. Or, for a “defender of the liberal agenda”, how about what he added at the 8:58 mark? Helluva defense there as well. And THEN…right after that - he mentions politics. He points out that “you have to choose a flavor”, and even THAT had an aside (typed at the top) that said all flavors are juicy fruit today. But that you had to pick a side. And THEN he said I actually have a negative opinion of ALL news.
So I’m confused…and you always do such a damned good job of proving me wrong - I’d be really curious for you to cite the parts where he was “making excuses”. Surely there must be many for an observant guy like you to make a statement like that, but I’ll be happy with just one…so I can see how your thought process works.
From what I gathered, he said that it was not offering anything that isn’t or hasn’t been offered before, that they rushed to get it out just before a merger, and that after the merger, the powers that be just cut their losses. But he said nothing of politics. Just an analysis of content, timing and business model. OR at least, that’s what I heard. But I’m always up for learning, so please - cite those spots so I can be proven wrong yet again.
Lol …like the YouTube video you posted you take all day to say nothing.
The YouTuber can give his analysis why CNN+ failed, but it’s only his opinion.
Definitely not making time for a 27-minute video, but the initial critique was pretty biting.
Huge merger going on, CEO shakedown, and somebody thought it would be a good idea to press forward with this huge, risky project.
That reveals a severe cultural rot & high degree of incompetence, as there was evidently nobody in the upper ranks at CNN that was smart enough to pump the brakes.
Here’s a short response for you…you might try watching a video before commenting.
I thought the same thing, but the guy is good…informative and funny, in a German sort of way. He has longer videos of Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes that is really interesting/entertaining. I subscribed to his youtube page and have watched several of his videos. It’s refreshing to hear analysis that isn’t polluted with politics.
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.