Carbonite CEO admits dropping Limbaugh hurt growth more than expected

[Rion]

Carbonite famously dropped Rush Limbaugh on a Saturday Night at the height of the Sandra Fluke controversy. Carbonite became the poster child for the Rush boycott movement organized by Media Matters, which coordinated the effort with so-called independent groups.

At the time I examined Carbonite’s SEC filings, and how Carbonite had built its business model based on high growth driven, in significant part, by the promotion of Carbonite by Limbaugh. I predicted that Carbonite had shot itself in the foot, and put political correctness before the interests of its shareholders.

» Carbonite CEO admits dropping Limbaugh hurt growth more than expected - Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

Just found it an interesting bit of epilogue to the whole drama.

 

[Viren]

Never underestimate Rush. Even I listen to him every once and a while for the laughs and remember the Caronite adversisements.

 

[NightHawkeye]

» Carbonite CEO admits dropping Limbaugh hurt growth more than expected - Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion

Just found it an interesting bit of epilogue to the whole drama.

Who knew?

There's just something about having the last laugh.

 

[Sistrin]

When you shoot yourself in the foot it is bound to hurt.

 

[blueapplepaste]

What isn't known is if they would have kept advertising if that would have hurt growth by turning people away.

 

[variant]

What isn't known is if they would have kept advertising if that would have hurt growth by turning people away.

Well, even if they did, it could be entirely possible that Rush's listeners are more comprised of their target audience.

 

[Illuminaughty]

I'm glad they made the right move even when it had the possibility of costing them money. I wish more places would put principles first.

I used to listen to Rush on a daily basis back in the day too. He can be entertaining. Just don't trust anything you hear come of out of his mouth.

 

[cow451]

I have been a happy Carbonite customer, well before the Rush flap. I rarely listen to his drivel, anyway, and would not buy or not buy a product based on where the ads appear.

The decision by Carbonite (or Chick-fil-up or any other company) to pull advertising based on some media flip-flap has only a short-term impact. If Carbonite continues a good service, it will do fine. If not, it won't. If I'd make more money advertising on FoxReublicanNews, I'd do it in a minute, even though I have a low regard for their product. Business is business. It ain't personal.

I remember when a bunch of radio stations stopped playing Beatles records over something John Lennon said. History shows how that turned out.

 

[stamperben]

I remember when a bunch of radio stations stopped playing Beatles records over something John Lennon said. History shows how that turned out.

Yeah, McCartney got bumped off.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I used to listen to Rush on a daily basis back in the day too. He can be entertaining. Just don't trust anything you hear come of out of his mouth.

Hi Illuminaughty.

I wish I had a dime for every time I've heard someone say that. It seems to be one of those leftist maxims which exists because the left can't win any reasoned debate involving the specifics of what Rush Limbaugh said.

When you can point out something of significance that Rush Limbaugh said wrong last week, then you'll have a more convincing argument. You said not to trust anything he says. If that's true then you should be able to find at least thirty things he said last week which were factually incorrect. That's only six per day for each day ... just two mis-statements per hour.

That's the challenge presented to you, Illuminaughty ... should you choose to accept it.

 

[Sistrin]

That's the challenge presented to you, Illuminaughty ... should you choose to accept it.

Don't hold your breath.

 

[cow451]

Yeah, McCartney got bumped off.

Paul McCartney's dead, again?

 

[BleedingHeart]

Hi Illuminaughty.

I wish I had a dime for every time I've heard someone say that. It seems to be one of those leftist maxims which exists because the left can't win any reasoned debate involving the specifics of what Rush Limbaugh said.

When you can point out something of significance that Rush Limbaugh said wrong last week, then you'll have a more convincing argument. You said not to trust anything he says. If that's true then you should be able to find at least thirty things he said last week which were factually incorrect. That's only six per day for each day ... just two mis-statements per hour.

That's the challenge presented to you, Illuminaughty ... should you choose to accept it.

I think Illum should spare himself the chance of a blowhard calling another woman a harlot for advocating insurance plans covered birth control.

 

[NightHawkeye]

I think Illum should spare himself the chance of a blowhard calling another woman a harlot for advocating insurance plans covered birth control.

Hi, BleedingHeart.

I'll grant that one ... but that was months ago already.

Illum indicated that nothing from Rush could be trusted. That implies constant falsehoods streaming forth. Where are all the ones from last week?

 

[cow451]

Hi, BleedingHeart.

I'll grant that one ... but that was months ago already.

Illum indicated that nothing from Rush could be trusted. That implies constant falsehoods streaming forth. Where are all the ones from last week?

Folks, Rush is an entertainer, a sit-down comic. He isn't successful because he has great insights, he's successful because his outrageous schtick works.

 

[Illuminaughty]

When you can point out something of significance that Rush Limbaugh said wrong last week, then you'll have a more convincing argument. You said not to trust anything he says. If that's true then you should be able to find at least thirty things he said last week which were factually incorrect. That's only six per day for each day ... just two mis-statements per hour.

Nope. Didn't listen to him last week. Back when I was high school ,and for a few more years after that, I listened to him on a daily basis though. I used to be a conservative. The "nothing out his mouth" thing is a common idiom. It implies that he often distorts the truth or outright lies.

 

[NightHawkeye]

The "nothing out his mouth" thing is a common idiom.

No. It is a deliberate attempt to exaggerate and vilify.

It implies that he often distorts the truth or outright lies.

Again, if that is true then you will have no problem providing examples from last week. A few liberal efforts have been hot on Rush's tail for years ... fervently documenting every single mis-step he makes ... turning even miniscule mis-statements into full-blown controversies.

You indicated that Rush is wrong on a continual basis ... all you need to do is to provide specific examples from last week.

How hard can that be? After all, "nothing out of his mouth" can be trusted ... according to you.

 

[BleedingHeart]

Hi, BleedingHeart.

I'll grant that one ... but that was months ago already.

So months from now, I shouldn't here anything about "You didn't build that."

Illum indicated that nothing from Rush could be trusted. That implies constant falsehoods streaming forth. Where are all the ones from last week?

You don't have to lie constantly for people to never trust you.
You only have to show that you are so wrapped up in your beliefs that you are willing to say whatever you want, and that's what Rush does. He lied when he suggested a link between Bane and Bain, and also lied when he said Bane was "actually like an OWS protester."

He lied when he said Obamacare was the largest tax increase in the history of the world.

He lied when he said that those who supported the repeal of DADT had only shown hatred towards the military. This coming from a guy who avoided Vietnam like the plague and I've seen plenty of this "liberals hate the military" garbage from Limbaugh followers on this site.


If Rush is perfectly willing to blatantly lie in order to prove his point, why should Illum waste his time this week? Next week? A year from now? Why should any of you guys? There are a good handful of conservatives on CF willing to lie in order to prove their point...and they do it for free.

 

[NightHawkeye]

So months from now, I shouldn't here anything about "You didn't build that."

You don't have to lie constantly for people to never trust you.
You only have to show that you are so wrapped up in your beliefs that you are willing to say whatever you want, and that's what Rush does. He lied when he suggested a link between Bane and Bain, and also lied when he said Bane was "actually like an OWS protester."

He lied when he said Obamacare was the largest tax increase in the history of the world.

He lied when he said that those who supported the repeal of DADT had only shown hatred towards the military. This coming from a guy who avoided Vietnam like the plague and I've seen plenty of this "liberals hate the military" garbage from Limbaugh followers on this site.


If Rush is perfectly willing to blatantly lie in order to prove his point, why should Illum waste his time this week? Next week? A year from now? Why should any of you guys? There are a good handful of conservatives on CF willing to lie in order to prove their point...and they do it for free.

So ... by your standards, Rush is not allowed hyperbole ... or any mis-statements. Does that standard apply to the mainstream media as well? Does it apply to Obama? Does it apply to the Congressional Black Caucus? Does it apply to CAIR?

Help me out here, BleedingHeart. Inquiring minds need to know.

We'll hold you to your own standard in the future, BTW. Just so ya know.

 

[Illuminaughty]

Last time I listened to Rush he was talking about Obamacare. He said we could see Republicans being denied services and getting second class treatment to Democrats. he laughed after saying that which made me think he was only half serious. Only problem is that his dittohead callers took him seriously and kept complaining about this outrage. He of course refused to tell them the whole idea was nonsense. This way he gets the conspiracy theory out there but still has plausible deniability because he can point to the fact that he laughed after having said it.