When I played college football 50 years ago, it was corrupt, but hidden from public view.  Now with NIL payments moving into the millions, greater corruption will follow.  Betting is just one more way to add that much more corruption. 

It's interesting that your staff keeps bringing up how much money Bezos has.  Like floating a dying news organization doesn't matter because he "can afford" to lose money.  The Graham family specificially stated that a major reason for selling the WP is because layoffs were unavoidable and they didn't know how to best navigate the digital landscape.  I'm curious what solutions the staff at WashPo have presented to Bezos to turn things around?

And for specificity, the fact checking database was dismantled in 2021 because we all know Uncle Joe and his fellow democrats never tell a lie.

Obama also mocked Trump publicly saying he'd never be POTUS. Funny how that worked out.

Both parties lie constantly. Bezos floating the Washington Post doesn't change that.

I've been in the media industry for 30 years.  I've been laid off 4 times due to mergers and aquisitions and incompetent management.  Not once did anyone ever come into my office, hug me, tell me how wonderful I am, and take me to lunch first. 

I didn't expect them to. It's business. 

Bezos' fortune has nothing to do with it.  He's not running a charity and if these journalists were so awesome, then why does their readership continue to decline?  The Washington Post is also not the only newspaper that has struggled to remain relevant.

You have to ask yourself why so many independent journalists are able to build their own, profitable platforms, but a brand like the Washington Post can't seem to figure it out.

Layoffs in this business are nothing new and Bezos didn't become rich buying companies that continually lose $100 million a year.  This "venerable institution" had declining revenue for 7 years straight before Bezos bought it with personal funds.  If you look at the bumps and declines in traffic, it has everything to do wtih politics and nothing to do with news reporting. 

Remind yourself that Graham family feared that if they stayed in control, they would eventually have to cut the newsroom so deeply to stay profitable that the paper would lose its journalistic soul. They chose to sell to Bezos who promised to fund the mission without the immediate pressure of quarterly earnings.  

Like him or hate him, WAPO has fared better and longer under Bezos than it would have under the Graham family.  These jobs would have been axed a long time ago.

 
 

I always say the house always wins when it comes to gambling. And I don't like to lose money why I don't gamble all that much and bet as little as well. And I suck at spreads as well why I always have a losing record on Yahoo College Pick'em  game.

I watched a doc on Vice about the sports betting boom in the US last week pretty good doc. The sports books don't want winners and if your good in a sport and win they set limits on how much you can win say bet $25 will say you can only bet $14, but in a different sport you can bet say $200 as they know a person isn't good at the NBA and is very good at tennis bets. I always thought that the sports books ads are too good to be true with first bet of $5 you can win up to $250 you have to win the first bet to get $250 there is always a catch.

Josh, in the last two years we have already seen several scandals with one player banned for life in baseball and another guy--in the NBA--accused of leavng games early which would affect the score who was working to that end for the gamblers. I n my vew, this is just the beginning--unless very strict controls are imposed by the leagues.

To be concise ... you bet !

I'm just going to say the same thing I say every time this topic comes up.

If organized gambling is now a part of the rich tapestry of the sporting experience, as opposed to a dark taboo like when I was a kid, can we at least please Pete Rose in the freaking Hall of Fame?

Dave, I have commented on this several subject several times. I think that its only  a matter of time before we will witness major betting/gambling scandals involving game outcome fixing by greedy players and/or coaches--who just have to have more money despite the handsome salaries and other perks they are now getting. The leagues----and players--- have chosen to dance with the devil---and eventually, they may pay a steep price for that decision.

The article mentions the CREATIVE agency only. What agency placed/bought the time to palce the superbowl ad?  For me, this is only hslf the story.

I knew that Kelly Clarkson was going to end her talk show as rumors for about a year that it was ending from Page Six articles and family comes fisrt all the best to Kelly. I wonder if WWMT will go with news at 4PM or will take Tamron Hall or Jennifer Hudson for 4PM and take Kelly's slot which was 1 and done as DR. Phil had that for years after Lady O finally ended her talker.

As for Wood TV who will take over Sherri's timeslot which took over for Rachael Ray in 2023 at 2PM either Tamron Hall or J-Hud which Tamron will be on a main channel as it has always been on DT2 on Nexstar & Sinclair which was CW7/ARC-WMI for 5 seasons and CW-WMI the last 2 seasons always been on in the mornings which CW7/ARC-WMI put her in a better timeslot 11AM & 10AM than CW-WMI at 8AM. Or someone could go with Adam's Law.

It looks to me like attentiveness/eyes-on/Resonance will be a separate measurement, integrated with the counting. Services like TVision, Adelaide, RMT, MediaProbe and others provide attentiveness/impression quality mesurement. When I was at VideoAmp, I advocated for open source atentiveness-- i.e., let the user decide which attentiveness provider they wanted to use in tandem with VideoAmp meaaurement. And Adelaide has an integration with Nielsen, I beloieve they have an integration with RealEyes as well.

Josh, it's likely to produce different numbers than we get from the people meter, though the button pressing system is, itself, highly questionable when extended to particular portions of a telecast and commercials, in particular. The new system's main weakness is it's lack of any indication of attentiveness--a fault it shares with the outmoded people meter system.

A comment, and a question.

THe comment: I get that the industry refers to this as co-viewing, but really it's personification, which includes conversion of sets/HHs to persons counts, AND demographic assignmentd of these persons. It is the creation of demographic VPVH, inclusive of both co-viewing and demographic assignment (i.e., not just "2 viewers", but "2 viewers, one a 35 year-old male, the other a 28 year-old female.")

THe question: what happens if the co-viewing collected in this fadshion is materially different from people meter-based co-viewing? (Spoiler alert: 100%, it will be.) In fact, perhapps more to the point, what happens if the Nielsen demographic skews from this new co-viewing methodology begin to resemble the demo skews of other bog data-based currencies? Does the improvement in Nielsen demopgraphic assignment potentially end up validating demo skews of competitors? 

CBS is in a rock in a hard place and will remain the dog station when it comes to news as conseratives aren't going to watch and the few liberals that watched are leaving in droves. CBS News is just changing chairs on the deck and never changes and always in last place and way behind ABC & NBC in the ratings when it comes to news.

A note: the "funnels" are very much simplistic constructs that some marketers need to understand how people make decisions. "Funnels" don't apply at all to massive B2C products. Seriously... do you go through all the stages every time you buy toothpaste? Shampoo? Even Athletic shoes?

If anything, this article should make you stop for a moment and consider: how the hell does my buyer decide? How do I break the try>purchase>repeat cycle to get my brand into the mix?

Anderson Cooper? Most trusted? Really? 

Ooops .. tariff.

Ronald ... surely Amazon should add a 25% traff!

As an Amazon shareholder, I would like Bezos to personally refund to the company all the money it has wasted on this obviously futile project.

"We'll have more on this fast-breaking story after a word from FanDuel!"

Interesting 

Ed, CTV and streaming may only be a modest extension today for TV companies, but indepdent streamers and CTV platforms are becoming massive ad businesses. The TV ad business is no longer about the TV companies. Amazon, Google YouTube, Netflix, LG Ads, Roku etc  are not directly accessing "TV budgets," not just winning from strategic reallocations of linear spend to permium digital video and streaming platforms. Linear TV has plenty of audience and there are plenty of tools, platforms and data that can "re-aggregate" their audienes in more efficient, more targetable packages that would dramatically improve thier ad revenue yield. But, time is running short. Not fully embracing this future will only accelerate falling profits and inability to meet debt service.

Or the AI overview could include linked citations to references.