Tucker on Twitter

[Anti Federalist]

ADL Warns Twitter Against Working With ‘Obvious Antisemite’ Tucker Carlson

https://www.yahoo.com/news/adl-warns-twitter-against-working-200623981.html

I have the same response to them as Firearms Policy Coalition has to Gavin Gruesome.

https://twitter.com/JGreenblattADL/status/1666819935895687171

Hey, Greenblatt:

Fuck You.

No.

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

I have the same response to them as Firearms Policy Coalition has to Gavin Gruesome.

https://twitter.com/JGreenblattADL/status/1666819935895687171

Hey, Greenblatt:

$#@! You.

No.

Liberals should be elated that these agencies that spread a controversial narrative have lackluster advertisers.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Has anyone broken down the number of people who actually watched his video, as opposed to, what I believe these "views" represent: the number of times the static tweet is seen.

That difference is exactly what Chief Nerd's tweet was illustrating.

What Twitter calls "Views" is the number of times a tweet has been seen by users (for example, by appearing on their screens while they are scrolling their Twitter feeds). That is what Chief Nerd refers to as "impressions" (106 million, in this case). He distinguishes these "impressions" (or "Views" as Twitter labels them) from actual "video views" (i.e., the number of times a video was actually played - 23.5 million, in this case).

For some apps/browsers, metrics for both "video" views and "impression" views are displayed, like so:

​

See the following for details on what constitutes what kind of views: Media Studio Analytics

 

[ClaytonB]

Not me, I was laughing and cheering.

"They" need a mud hole stomped in their collective asses.

If I had my way it be a for real ass stomping.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Anti Federalist again."

There is a real ass-stomping coming... and it's going to go on forever and ever... Rev. 14:9-11...

 

[ClaytonB]

That difference is exactly what Chief Nerd's tweet was illustrating.

What Twitter calls "Views" is the number of times a tweet has been seen by users (for example, by appearing on their screens while they are scrolling their Twitter feeds). That is what Chief Nerd refers to as "impressions" (106 million, in this case). He distinguishes these "impressions" (or "Views" as Twitter labels them) from actual "video views" (i.e., the number of times a video was actually played - 23.5 million, in this case).

For some apps/browsers, metrics for both "video" views and "impression" views are displayed, like so:

​

See the following for details on what constitutes what kind of views: Media Studio Analytics

Still more than an order-of-magnitude more than the top-rated cable news shows... so...

 

[Occam's Banana]

Still more than an order-of-magnitude more than the top-rated cable news shows... so...

That was also part of Chief Nerd's point - and mine:

Hell, he could even lose 90% and still be a leading contender.

 

[nobody's_hero]

The memes are hilarious.

 

[donnay]

 

[Anti Federalist]

That difference is exactly what Chief Nerd's tweet was illustrating.

What Twitter calls "Views" is the number of times a tweet has been seen by users (for example, by appearing on their screens while they are scrolling their Twitter feeds). That is what Chief Nerd refers to as "impressions" (106 million, in this case). He distinguishes these "impressions" (or "Views" as Twitter labels them) from actual "video views" (i.e., the number of times a video was actually played - 23.5 million, in this case).

For some apps/browsers, metrics for both "video" views and "impression" views are displayed, like so:

​

See the following for details on what constitutes what kind of views: Media Studio Analytics

Thanks for that technical data, it is appreciated.

 

[Anti Federalist]

 

[XNavyNuke]

Yep. Standing O.
XNN

 

[Brian4Liberty]

https://twitter.com/DanielLMcAdams/status/1668828114405797889

 

[Occam's Banana]

That difference is exactly what Chief Nerd's tweet was illustrating.

What Twitter calls "Views" is the number of times a tweet has been seen by users (for example, by appearing on their screens while they are scrolling their Twitter feeds). That is what Chief Nerd refers to as "impressions" (106 million, in this case). He distinguishes these "impressions" (or "Views" as Twitter labels them) from actual "video views" (i.e., the number of times a video was actually played - 23.5 million, in this case).

For some apps/browsers, metrics for both "video" views and "impression" views are displayed, like so:

​

See the following for details on what constitutes what kind of views: Media Studio Analytics

Thanks for that technical data, it is appreciated.

Also of note:

I have to go to Twitter to see the number of "impressions" a tweet has, as that metric does not appear in embedded tweets - bur for some reason, I have to see the same tweet embedded somewhere else (outside of Twitter) in order to see the number of "video views". I don't know why (and I could swear that the "video views" number used to appear on tweets at Twitter). It might be due to the browser (or browser settings/security) being used, as the quoted matter above clearly shows both the "impressions" and "video views" metrics appearing in the same image. Is anyone else seeing that on their own browsers/devices, or is it just me?

For example, here are two images of the same tweet. The image on the left is of the tweet embedded in donnay's post, and the image on the right is of the same tweet as it appears to me on Twitter. Note that when the video is playing (or paused), the embedded tweet (on the left) indicates the video has 5.1 million "video views" at the moment, but the "impressions" metric is absent. On the other hand, the source tweet (on the right) indicates the tweet has 13.5 million "impressions", but the "video views" metric is absent (even when the video is playing/paused).

embedded in donnay's post

@ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1668747661028081664

 

[Anti Federalist]

[MENTION=28167]Occam's Banana[/MENTION]

Thanks again for the info.

So, bottom line, the most accurate metric to use, when comparing teevee ratings is "Views".

A "view" indicates a single, discrete user has clicked on the video and has at least watched some of it.

To compare:

 

[Occam's Banana]

@Occam's Banana

Thanks again for the info.

So, bottom line, the most accurate metric to use, when comparing teevee ratings is "Views".

A "view" indicates a single, discrete user has clicked on the video and has at least watched some of it.

Yes. The "views" number given inside the video frame is the one to use. The one for the tweet (under the video frame) is not. (However, the ratio of the former to the latter can give you an idea of how much "traction" the video is getting - the higher the ratio, the better the "traction". For example, with respect to the numbers from my previous post, this "traction" ratio would be 5.1 to 13.5, or about 37%.)

Also, IIRC, a "video view" just means the video was played for 2 seconds or more. More detailed analytics (such as completion rate - i.e., how much of the video was played across the distribution of views) is available only to the account owner or administrator.

 

[CaptUSA]

 

[Occam's Banana]

Fox News, Waving the Free Speech Banner, Launches a Flagrant Censorship Campaign Against Tucker | SYSTEM UPDATE #99
https://rumble.com/v2u72be-system-update-show-99.html

CLIP:

Fox News, Waving the Free Speech Banner, Launches a Flagrant Censorship Campaign Against Tucker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTOtcs8T7r4

​

 

[Anti Federalist]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1669472439472988161

 

[donnay]

 

[PAF]

First instinct correct again. I'm DONE with Tucker.