Trump Inauguration Crowd Size, a Media Deception

What you say may be true...but I have to say I am taken back by the clarity of this giga pic when you zoom in from any angle. Truly Amazing!

 

Trump inauguration ratings second biggest in 36 years

Donald Trump’s inauguration ratings were the second-highest in 36 years, according to Nielsen.

The swearing-in of the 45th president was seen by 30.6 million viewers across 12 networks.

The only inauguration over the last three decades that tops Trump’s number in the linear ratings? Barack Obama’s first inauguration back in 2009, which had a record-setting 37.8 million viewers. So Trump was down from the last new president to take office.

But before that, to get an Inauguration Day number this high, you’d have to go all the way back to Ronald Reagan in 1981, who was seen by 41.8 million viewers (Nielsen released tracking for inauguration ratings back to 1969).

Trump’s numbers are all the more remarkable considering he’s entering into office with rather low approval ratings compared to past presidents and sparked protests worldwide along with vows to not watch his inauguration.

And actually, Trump could have been seen by more viewers than either Obama or Reagan. Nielsen ratings do not account for online viewing, which has grown sharply in recent years and is far more commonplace than even four years ago. CNN.com, for example, clocked 16.9 million live streams, tying with its Election Day coverage for the site’s top event (live stream tallies are typically not apples-to-apples with Nielsen’s strict methodology of counting average viewers, but are still additive). Plus, portals like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter offered live streams as well.

In terms of linear coverage, Fox News topped all networks, averaging 8.8 million viewers for the day and peaking with 11 million viewers from noon to 1 p.m. This was the highest-rated inauguration coverage in the network’s history. While on broadcast, NBC was top ranked with 5.8 million viewers for the day.

Here’s a chart from Nielsen of Inauguration Day coverage ratings over the years. The column on the far right, “Persons 2+,” represents Total Viewers in millions, which is the most commonly used metric when measuring an event’s audience (in addition to the advertiser target demo of adults 18-49, which is not included here).

http://ew.com/tv/2017/01/21/trump-inauguration-ratings/

 

So the collective Left-Allied Mainstream Media did lie about Trumps inauguration numbers? What a shock!

 

He better firm up a deal for Mexico to pay first, otherwise he is a liar on that too.......Lola
I love being an independent, I will hold him to his word, will you?

 

Looks like a lot of people to me, rain and all.

 

Not one Mexican flag can be seen as far as the eye can see.

 

After you watch this aerial timelapse of the inaugural crowd arriving and leaving, you'll see it actually matches up pretty well with the photos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdantUf5tXg

The Gigapixel uses perspective very well to hide the empty space. It is not a lie, and neither is the timelapse or any of those pictures, but they represent different perspectives.

 

As much as I don't trust the media the angle from CNN is not the same as the aerial shot. We really need some definitive evidence that the picture was either taken at a different time or photoshopped.

 

The press secretary did not use the word "including" which you claim he did which changes the context. His argument was not of a grand total of those in attendance in person and globally through media sources, it was a claim that it was the highest attendance "both" in person and global viewship. Either way he made an unsubstantiated claim, something that Trump has taken issue with the media thus the hypocrisy.

If Trump and his spokespeople continue to feed us misinformation then I and others will continue to point out the Trump Administration's lies or as Kellyanne Conway called them, "alternative facts".

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=492734&page=4&p=1067026200#post1067026200

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-tell-the-whole-truth/?utm_term=.7cabfd89268e

 

Uh try again? The time lapse video in your own link shows how sparse it was. Try reviewing your sources before making false claims that your own sources then prove inaccurate.

 

The timelapse is definitive evidence of the opposite.

 

I think you've fallen for fake news. The pics weren't photoshopped.

 

The time lapse video is the easiest thing to fake, and it doesn't match up with the pics in post 55.

 

I case you have missed the posted in this thread, he's not the only one...

 

What I'm saying is, that after reviewing those pics in 55 and the CNN gigapixel, you can make out the empty spaces if you compare hard enough with the aerial timelapse.
You don't need any photoshop or editing skills when you use very specific camera angles, using bodies to hide the white spaces.
I am a camera operator. I have ample experience making do when producers fail to get enough extras and we have to fake a big crowd or party scene.

 

I'll concede the grammatical argument of his statement although I believe that was the point he was trying to make as did his spokesperson today on the shows and is being reported as I have already cited.

 

You could not measure, frame or count the size of my relief that Obama is gone. However, if the size of the disturbed feeling of liberals regarding Trumps ascension to the Presidency is greater than my relief, then I will gladly concede the contest.

 

The comparisons and goal post the MSM and the usual suspects are attempting to make are between Obama's first inaugural and Trumps as some measure of support or approval or whatever. And it is attempting base solely on the shear, unconfirmed, numbers without any weighing of the data. As if all else is equal so just count heads.

But let's consider DC vote 90%+ Democrat and those federal workers get the day off. What percent of those federal workers attended Obama's inauguration versus Trumps. DC is a high poverty/minority. The immediate surrounding areas of Maryland and Virginia also support heavily the Democrat candidate. For private workforce workers it was not a holiday and Trump doesn't get much support until you travel out of the area.

Is it reasonable to assume that alone could heavily affect the difference in live attendance?

 

Take a look at the pics in 55 again and look how far back you can see people, then look at the time lapse and it hardly shows anyone. Also, notice the sudden change in light, I believe a big part of the middle of the time lapse was cut out.

 

I respect the concession on the grammatical point as such is a rare commodity here in the forums.

Perhaps we are making different arguments as mine is the hypocrisy of having a press conference where the press secretary takes issue with unsubstantiated claims made by the media then makes an unsubstantiated claim of his own. Do you only take issue with unsubstantiated claims on the left or are you like I and oppose unsubstantiated claims especially when presented as fact no matter the source or side?

 

Anything to try and marginalize him. He's President time to move on to the issues at hand and Democrats stop attempting to prevent us getting on with the People's business. There was ABSOLUTELY no reason to hold of the vote on the Director of the CIA NONE, even Chuck Todd was all over Schumer today and Schumer couldn't give an answer because the fact is they did not in order to prevent Trump from swearing him yesterday when he visited the CIA. That is the typical petty act of the petulant Congressional Democrats.

 

An excellent post. A voice of reason. There is also undeniable truth that many white federal employees and others had to attend Obama's ceremony simply because they were afraid of being branded a racist. That bad it was during Obama's years.

 

Oh God yes! For the first two years the average leftist was ready to shriek "Racist!" over anything that might even conceivably put a frown on Barack's noble brow. The only reason that they finally slacked off on that was that first it became obvious that Barack was an inherently lousy president and a freaking racist to boot and because they massively overplayed the Race Card to such an extent that people began just tuning them out. So yes, I could see the average D.C. employee terrified of having some lunatic leftist point the trembling finger of "Racist!" in his or her direction. So . . . lots of people went who otherwise wouldn't have bothered.

 

There was no deception. The time lapse, which covers the entire event until the crowd disperse, shows the mall was never full...
[video]https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PdantUf5tXg[/video]

 

This has been reported as his first press conference, it was his first press announcement the first press conference I believe is still scheduled for Tuesday.

I am SURE he will be hit on Tuesday about that basis of the claim, it should be interesting. As I cited in another thread reports this may be the largest audience ever with all the streaming added into the Neilsen ratings. LOTS of people watched and that cannot be denied.

All that being said the audience size is being overblown by the MSM and the Trump administration is going to respond, we better get used to it when they highly disagree with press reporting.