https://x.com/AdameMedia/status/1881731178539200521Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
:cosby
https://x.com/AdameMedia/status/1881731178539200521Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
:cosby
Brett Cooper was on Jesse Watters last night:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afU4...IHdhdHRlcnM%3D
So the results are in, and...
The winner is................
BRETT COOPER, BY NEARLY THE ENTIRE TRACK!!
It's a complete blowout. Cooper is currently averaging 350k-500k views per video, whereas Reagan is flailing with 18-30k views. What a beatdown. And Reagan had the established channel!
BUT...
The shine has fallen off Cooper a bit. She got approximately 3.5 MILLION views for her first two episodes, which blew away anything she got on Daily Wire. However, since then, it's been a steep decline. As recently as 4 weeks ago, she was still getting over a million. Her last 6 videos have failed to reach 650k, and some of them failed to reach 500k, including her last one which sits at 337k. Some of the views come later, so it's not a completely fair comparison, but it seems Cooper is now settling into the numbers she got at Daily Wire -- around 300-500k per video, give or take, aside from a few big hits.
That's very respectable, and now she's also able to keep all the revenue herself, rather than be an underpaid Daily Wire employee.
She also gets the satisfaction of having ruined Jeremy Boreing's plans for his idiotic Snow White film, as that has now been scrapped. This may have actually done Boreing a favor, but he doesn't see it that way. He's really fuming about the whole thing.
On a bigger scale, this probably fucked Daily Wire for at least the medium term, and maybe the long term, as they probably lost a shitload of younger viewers who are bitter about the way this whole thing was handled. Finding a conservative host who appeals to the under-30 crowd isn't easy, and Cooper was definitely it.
I think she's ok. I never found her all that compelling though. I watch everyone else there with regularity and have been a subscriber. As an alternative to the others, she's much easier on the eyes obviously... and she's novel in a way similar to what Candace was. Without a foil (not in ideology, but in demographic) perhaps she's not quite as compelling and the luster will tarnish A BIT.... over time. But obviously, she'll have plenty of eyeballs on her new stuff now and be popular in the same way that Kayleigh Mcenany/Emily Compagno are, as an example. But, at the same time, putting her next to those two (especially someone like Mcenany) won't do Brett any favors. So it'll be interesting to see how they actually utilize her and what the outcome/lifespan looks like for her in a mainstream channel with contributors who don't just mirror but outshine her demographically and are more (in some cases way more) knowledgeable than she is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I agree. That's why I don't watch her. She does not engage in any deep or interesting discussions. Not a terrible show, but just not interesting to me. Maybe I'm too old to appreciate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by VegasSpiderI think she's ok. I never found her all that compelling though. I watch everyone else there with regularity and have been a subscriber. As an alternative to the others, she's much easier on the eyes obviously... and she's novel in a way similar to what Candace was. Without a foil (not in ideology, but in demographic) perhaps she's not quite as compelling and the luster will tarnish A BIT.... over time. But obviously, she'll have plenty of eyeballs on her new stuff now and be popular in the same way that Kayleigh Mcenany/Emily Compagno are, as an example. But, at the same time, putting her next to those two (especially someone like Mcenany) won't do Brett any favors. So it'll be interesting to see how they actually utilize her and what the outcome/lifespan looks like for her in a mainstream channel with contributors who don't just mirror but outshine her demographically and are more (in some cases way more) knowledgeable than she is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
She's purely there to appeal to the under-30 crowd, and maybe horny middle aged dudes who like how she looks.
If she were a 40-year-old guy, zero chance she would have any prominence in the space. Sad but true. But I don't hold that against her. I would be doing the same thing if I were an attractive 20-something female.
I agree with all of that.... and yeah, i don't begrudge HER one bit.... it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me if im casting for Fox News.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I mean Mcenany is a fucking superstar. She's a hall of famer and Brett is still playing tee ball... One of em is a legit assasin who actually played a role in national politics and the other one ran a tik tok channel. I'd just be concerned if I were the network that... that contrast becomes too apparent over time.
I don't think it's your age. I'm about your age and Brett doesn't appeal to me, but then again young boys don't appeal to me lol.... and there's no intellectual component. It's not that i wouldn't watch someone just for their level of attractiveness. I like Hannah Baron and I have no interest in catching Catfish.
Kayleigh or Emily could speak total jibberish, and i'd probably still at least not change the channel for a couple minutes.
That being said, if I'm Daily Wire, i never get rid of her in the first place, but clearly there's something afoot over there after the whole Candace debacle. It's like they're looking for all the monsters under the bed or something. No idea... cause it seems strange to me that Brett was ANY threat to them whatsoever... and now you're just a boys club with no waitresses? Just pay her the money and go about your business. All seems strange to me.
The Candace situation and Brett situation are often conflated, and it's understandable because both were high-profile female hosts at Daily Wire, and both were fired/pushed out within a relatively short period of time.
However, their two separations from Daily Wire appear to have been wildly different.
Candace Owens was a bad fit from the start. I said so when they signed her. She's more outrageous, conspiratorial, and appeals to the hard right. Daily Wire has never been hard right, and never will be. Not surprisingly, she got caught up in all the anti-Israel crap, which offended Ben Shapiro, and he could no longer stand to have someone on his network spewing that stuff. I actually understand why they fired her, and if I were Ben, I probably would have done the same. HOWEVER, if I were Ben, I would never have allowed her to be hired in the first place. It was a ticking time bomb.
Brett Cooper appears to have been a matter of money. She was not offending or pissing off Ben Shapiro, nor was she saying anything on her show which was particularly controversial to the viewers. However, unlike Candace, Brett joined Daily Wire when she was basically a nobody, and they got her dirt cheap. They locked her into a years-long contract where she was working for peanuts compared to what her channel and presence were generating. Steven Crowder even made cryptic reference to this, when he had his little spat with Daily Wire.
At the time, Crowder's assertion was mostly ignored, because he was in full meltdown mode, and he had already told some lies and half-truths about Daily Wire. However, that claim about a "young star" (obviously Brett) being stuck in a low-paid contract always stuck with me, as it seemed like a weird claim to fabricate. Indeed, Brett's departure appears to have been mostly about money. Her contract was coming to an end, she wanted a huge raise (especially because of her participation in Jeremy Boreing's vanity movie projects), and they probably lowballed her. This likely created some bad blood between her and Boreing, and that was that.
The common denominator here? Bad business decisions.
You don't hire a Candace Owens if you're trying to run a mainstream conservative network which stays away from conspiracy theories and alt-right talking points.
You don't lowball a Brett Cooper just because your network originally made her famous. Appreciate what she's done for you, pay her well on her next contract (especially if the previous contract was super stingy), and be happy that she's getting engagement.
I don't think Daily Wire really knows what they're doing. I think they semi-lucked into success at the beginning with Shapiro's show (because Shapiro is good at what he does), and they have also struck gold with Matt Walsh's comedy documentaries. But I think they're biting off way more than they can chew, and Boreing does not seem like a competent co-CEO. The entire Bentkey "children's programming" has been a fail, as has their attempts to make movies. Seriously... the movies they've released have been embarrassingly bad. They also embarrassed themselves by selling low quality, third-party-manufactured razors as "Jeremy's Razors", shortly after losing Harry's Razors as a sponsor.
I'm just seeing a lot of dumb things from them. Keep in mind that they have backing from a billionaire who might be asking for this weird stuff (like the children's programming), so maybe it's not as dumb as we think. Still, I don't know how long they wll remain dominant in the space.
I am sure Ben watched her and had the same opinion as I did and you did from the few segments I watched. There is nothing wrong with her. But this is a conversation that is vapid and for high school girls. Why would I pay her that much?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
He’s a true conservative who wants to put his world view forth and doesn’t realize that’s a shrinking space.
He also fails to realize the religion of MAGA is “owning the libs” mixed with conspiracy. It’s also heavily male and a mixture of desperate middle aged guys and young incels and the random splitthis seeking attention in a room full of dumb men.
This is why Candace Owens is interviewing Andrew Tate and kissing his ass on the night of the SOTU. He’s not really any better than a frequent visitor to Epstein Island. Not as bad as Epstein but worse than a frequent visitor. Fucking 17 year olds is fucking 17 year olds and he made a career out of it.
That Candace is a fake Christian interviewing, at minimum, a very disturbed guy doesn’t matter to her audience. Pettiness and owning the libs is all that matters to them. The religion talk is just nonsense to make themselves feel better about being such low class losers. I hate them and that they exist, but Trump is way less irritating than they are. I respect the con. I hate the marks who fall for it.
That your average Democrat thinks nothing of MAGA other than they are basically the people of Wal Mart and dumb is lost on them. They really think anyone who didn’t vote for Trump is sitting around seething. You see it among the idiot fringe here. Like when Biden was president did you do anything besides live your life normally? It’s so dumb, but so are these people who gravitate to this shit.
A bad basketball score bothers me more than anything some MAGA person can ever think on any subject.
That girl artfully mocked modern culture. I agreed with her mostly from what little I watched. She was snarky but likable. But I wouldn’t spend 5 minutes on it, but then I’m not an incel or lonely. His audience is like MAGA itself. Largely male, not bright, and he underestimated what a draw a somewhat attractive girl “owning libs” is to a million people.
It’s really that simple. There is a reason MTG and Matt Gaetz and Boebert are more popular and are bigger household names than pretty much any GOP member who hasn’t been around 20 years. They are perfect examples of what the MAGA movement is about. Ben will have some loyal niche audience full of people MAGA would refer to as rhinos and the idiots will continue to thrive. He made a bad business move to not recognize he’s the minority in a party of majority white trash and needs to thread that needle better to remain as lucrative as he’s been.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok0WlfnVO5A
She covers the Reagan Conrad issue at 4 minute mark.
She's trying to be diplomatic, but you can tell she's pissed at Reagan and feels betrayed.