I'm just going to respond to your first paragraph because that negates the second.
"Largest cable news audience" is a woefully outdated way to measure influence in the US. X views are better, but they still don't necessarily measure alignment. Finally, a person whose previous work has attracted views does not necessarily ensure that his s…
I'm just going to respond to your first paragraph because that negates the second.
"Largest cable news audience" is a woefully outdated way to measure influence in the US. X views are better, but they still don't necessarily measure alignment. Finally, a person whose previous work has attracted views does not necessarily ensure that his subsequent work will be loved by the same audience (heck, I subscribed to this substack because I liked its previous work, but here I am not liking this article!)
Here's where I've decided the problem is: I like your writing because you have an Eastern European perspective that American writers lack. The thing about perspective, though, is that more of one means less of another, and in this case, this article suffers from a comparatively poor understanding of America. Will you be able to find people who align with the messaging of Carlson's Moscow reporting? Sure. Are they nearly as significant as you imply? Highly unlikely.
Circulation, ratings, and views are perfectly reasonable measures of influence while likes and shares reliably indicate support or alignment. And though I do strive to persuade in every essay I write, I wouldn't want any reader to agree with everything I write, any more than I would want a friend to agree with everything I say.
I am happy that you appreciate my Eastern European perspective, but I must decline the suggestion that I have a poor understanding of America. I understand it better than most Americans. I've studied it more than most. And I'm as American as any. Born in Texas, teenage years in the Appalachia. I grew up wilding in the woods, cowboy boots and overalls, drinking moonshine, reading Faulkner and listening to bluegrass.
I appreciate your continued support. But I hope for your continued pushback.
I'm just going to respond to your first paragraph because that negates the second.
"Largest cable news audience" is a woefully outdated way to measure influence in the US. X views are better, but they still don't necessarily measure alignment. Finally, a person whose previous work has attracted views does not necessarily ensure that his subsequent work will be loved by the same audience (heck, I subscribed to this substack because I liked its previous work, but here I am not liking this article!)
Here's where I've decided the problem is: I like your writing because you have an Eastern European perspective that American writers lack. The thing about perspective, though, is that more of one means less of another, and in this case, this article suffers from a comparatively poor understanding of America. Will you be able to find people who align with the messaging of Carlson's Moscow reporting? Sure. Are they nearly as significant as you imply? Highly unlikely.
Keep writing, though, and I'll keep subscribing.
Circulation, ratings, and views are perfectly reasonable measures of influence while likes and shares reliably indicate support or alignment. And though I do strive to persuade in every essay I write, I wouldn't want any reader to agree with everything I write, any more than I would want a friend to agree with everything I say.
I am happy that you appreciate my Eastern European perspective, but I must decline the suggestion that I have a poor understanding of America. I understand it better than most Americans. I've studied it more than most. And I'm as American as any. Born in Texas, teenage years in the Appalachia. I grew up wilding in the woods, cowboy boots and overalls, drinking moonshine, reading Faulkner and listening to bluegrass.
I appreciate your continued support. But I hope for your continued pushback.