[Spoonman]

[Spoonman]

To paraphrase a certain newspaper from nearly 30 years ago, "Will the last person watching Piers Morgan please turn out the lights"!

[satnav]

What I don't understand about Morgan is that he claims to have 7 million followers on Twitter yet when he left GMB a bout 200,000 of his fans could be arsed to sign a petition to get him his job back and now he is at TalkTV less than 50,000 of his followers can be bothered to tune in. Anybody would think that most of his Twitter followers have been recruited via some dodgy site on the dark web.

[MisterMuncher]

I follow a lot of folks on Twitter out of inertia. It's the nature of the beast, you click once and can promptly forget your ever did.

He's noticeably coy about his actual engagement numbers or the obligatory "ratio".

[Youngian]

I follow a lot of folks on Twitter out of inertia. It's the nature of the beast, you click once and can promptly forget your ever did.

7.9m though? Jon Stewart has 1.3m

[Andy McDandy]

Follow =/= like. Morbid curiosity accounts for a fair few, I'd guess.

[mattomac]

He was on the old Apprentice and America’s got talent, probably drove some of his fan count

[AOB]

I follow a lot of folks on Twitter out of inertia. It's the nature of the beast, you click once and can promptly forget your ever did.

He's noticeably coy about his actual engagement numbers or the obligatory "ratio".

I believe that engagement is the money driver on YouTube. Sponsors and advertisers look at the proportion of likes and comments in relation to a channel's subscribers. This is why you'll often hear " Let me know what you think in the comments". I know the amount of comments particularly was a massive factor for potential sponsors on Instagram a few years ago (not from direct personal experience), it probably still is.

[Andy McDandy]

On another level, it's the most reliable metric. You don't know why any particular person is following you, but you can track the numbers. X million people can't all be wrong etc.

[Spoonman]

Variety magazine has an article on how the Americanised style of blow-hard news pundits giving their opinions isn't exactly a ratings success in the UK...

Who Cares About Your Opinion? Why the Foxification of British News Isn’t Working (Column)

https://variety.com/2022/tv/global/pier ... 235266461/

Some nice bits from it...

“Piers Morgan Uncensored” has consistently shed viewers, from 317,000 overnight viewers on launch day, to less than 60,000 just over two weeks later. Wednesday’s episode received an average of 44,000 viewers, according to ratings body BARB. In comparison, a repeat of digital channel Quest’s “Salvage Hunters,” where people discover rusty old objects, received on average three times more viewers.

Piers has downplayed the importance of these ratings, saying that “linear TV is increasingly irrelevant to the total eyeball potential for a global show like this.” His show is also distributed far and wide, simulcast on its sister radio station talkRADIO and also broadcast on Sky News Australia. It is also available on the streaming network FOX Nation in the U.S., which means that the show’s true success (or failure) is relatively opaque like many shows on streaming services. Yet, you only need to head to the show’s YouTube to see that clips and entire episodes rarely rise above 10,000 viewers. He’s got an uphill battle to climb.

Oh, and KGB News gets a mention...

GB News has since widened its reach to a radio station and on-demand. It has relied on clips being spliced up to be shared on social media and has touted “billions” of digital views. In an interview with Press Gazette, the news network claimed that TikTok was one of their most popular platforms, where it has more than 200,000 followers. Yet in comparison, a TikTok account of a British man feeding his pet seagull currently has 3.2 million. You can’t help but wonder whether, as the channel is reaching its first anniversary, it is matching its expectations.