Difference between revisions of "User talk:Aschlafly"
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
:The issue is little different than the Bud Lite/Dylan Mulvaney controversy. Consumers may boycott a movie here and there (Sorcese's ''Passion of Christ'', for example), but the whole industry, or at least one major production and distribution company (like Budweiser; perhaps Netflix) to start with to send the industry a message. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']]</sup> 18:00, November 6, 2023 (EST) | :The issue is little different than the Bud Lite/Dylan Mulvaney controversy. Consumers may boycott a movie here and there (Sorcese's ''Passion of Christ'', for example), but the whole industry, or at least one major production and distribution company (like Budweiser; perhaps Netflix) to start with to send the industry a message. [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']]</sup> 18:00, November 6, 2023 (EST) | ||
| − | :As to conservative movies being "more successful", they are so rare, conservatives flock to see it. Again, market demand and market efficiency is at work: the industry has it figured out that they would | + | :As to conservative movies being "more successful", they are so rare, conservatives flock to see it. Again, market demand and market efficiency is at work: the industry has it figured out that they would gross as much money making 1 conservative movie per year (to "fill a niche") vs. making 12 per year over 12 months. And it's more cost efficient (the reduction in operating costs and pent-up demand also leaves more money for higher quality in script writing and production value than usual. Hollywood producers recognize the "conservative market" is not an extinct market, so they give them what they want and take away conservative consumers money once a year or so). [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|''Give Peace a Chance!'']]</sup> 18:15, November 6, 2023 (EST) |
===Do I detect a pattern here?=== | ===Do I detect a pattern here?=== | ||
Revision as of 19:02, November 7, 2023
Hollywood values
If memory serves, Conservapedia used to rank #1 at Google for the term Hollywood values and as a result it has over 500,000 views. Conservapedia now has its short article Hollywood ranking in the Google top 10 for this term which is kind of strange.
Regardless, a ton of work has gone into Conservapedia's article Hollywood values, but somehow it got filled with red links which unfortunately makes an article look unsightly so people are more apt to click off the article faster which reduces an articles search engine ranking. I removed the articles red links so hopefully that pops it back into the Google top 10 ranking.
Also, one of the things that makes the Hollywood values crowd stand out is their multiple divorces. People kind of scratch their heads why they go through so many spouses. I just created the articles Psychological and sociological research about individuals with multiple divorces and Narcissism and individuals who have had multiple divorces and posted links to those articles in a relevant section of the Hollywood values article.
I will do some analysis later this year and see if there is anything Conservapedia could do to have its Hollywood values article rank in the Google top 10 again. Conservative (talk) 06:31, November 6, 2023 (EST)
- By the way, Bing ranks Conservapedia's article Hollywood values in the Bing top 5 search results.
- I may give you a quick call this week about something that Conservapedia could do to pop its article into the Google top 10 search results again. Conservative (talk) 06:59, November 6, 2023 (EST)
- Thanks so much for cleaning up Hollywood values (#43 among our most popular entries). If only we could clean up Hollywood industry, then that would be great too!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:22, November 6, 2023 (EST)
- Your welcome. I created some additional divorce related articles so I was able to expand the article Psychological and sociological research about individuals with multiple divorces. The deeper they dive into Conservapedia by clicking on internal links related to the Hollywood values article, the higher the Hollywood values article will potentially rank. Conservative (talk) 14:33, November 6, 2023 (EST)
- It's market demand. The industry is just giving the public what they demand. RobSGive Peace a Chance! 14:37, November 6, 2023 (EST)
Hollwood is not giving many people in the public what they very much want.
- Study: "An annual box office study shows that in 2015 American moviegoers still preferred movies with strong conservative content or values over movies with strong liberal or leftist values, by more than 12-to-one. The impact was felt overseas and on home video as well."[1]
Steve Turley just cited a 2015 study that conservative movies consistently outperform liberal movies.[2]
Older studies:
I trust this clarifies matters. Conservative (talk) 17:52, November 6, 2023 (EST)
- The issue is little different than the Bud Lite/Dylan Mulvaney controversy. Consumers may boycott a movie here and there (Sorcese's Passion of Christ, for example), but the whole industry, or at least one major production and distribution company (like Budweiser; perhaps Netflix) to start with to send the industry a message. RobSGive Peace a Chance! 18:00, November 6, 2023 (EST)
- As to conservative movies being "more successful", they are so rare, conservatives flock to see it. Again, market demand and market efficiency is at work: the industry has it figured out that they would gross as much money making 1 conservative movie per year (to "fill a niche") vs. making 12 per year over 12 months. And it's more cost efficient (the reduction in operating costs and pent-up demand also leaves more money for higher quality in script writing and production value than usual. Hollywood producers recognize the "conservative market" is not an extinct market, so they give them what they want and take away conservative consumers money once a year or so). RobSGive Peace a Chance! 18:15, November 6, 2023 (EST)
Do I detect a pattern here?
| RobS: This month will determine the future of global politics for the next 30 years.
User:Conservative: This month will not determine the future of global politics for the next 30 years. |
Maybe User:Conservative should examine his instinctive debate technique so he doesn't have to waste 2 years of his life writing neo-Nazi hate screeds to cover up an intellectual gaffe. RobSGive Peace a Chance! 13:29, November 7, 2023 (EST)