19 votes

Ron Paul Channel working? Who is the audience?

Hi everyone,

I just subscribed to the Ron Paul Channel, and I've been going through all of the episodes. I was curious, who was the audience for this show?

As someone who has been supporting Dr. Paul for a very long time and someone who is quite educated on economics, philosophy, etc., I find myself basically knowing everything he's going to say on basically every topic. I would imagine many of you guys are probably the same way.

I was curious - who is the channel really for? Is it a dose of reason and sanity for people who supported Dr. Paul and the cause of liberty, or is to educate new people who are still not aware of the message of liberty?

If it is the latter, I am curious why there is a subscription fee. I don't mind paying it, even if I know the information... but I suspect some socialist/obama supporting people I know would likely never pay it - not when the can just turn into The Young Turks, which is on YouTube for free. And they clain to be telling the truth too, and it's free truth, so I'm afraid their business model is going to keep the progressives/socialists over there.

Has the channel been successful at attracting new people? Is it going to be yet another community site for people who already support him? Do you think the business model is consistent with these goals?

Interested to hear your thoughts.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I agree..it's a flawed/business strategic model


The RPC is a whole month old...

Did you expect a miracle with the sky opening up and a parting of the sea... 5 seconds after it went on the air.

Give Dr Paul a chance... Maybe, try sitting back, watching and seeing where he takes it... Has he done you wrong yet?

Personally, I believe it's the best $10 I spend each month. I share it with my family and they actually watch!

It's a good show

Ron has had some excellent conversations with guests such as Julian Assange, Judge Napolitano, and Glenn Greenwald.

So far, it has been worth the $$$. I'm enjoying it.

2 Chron 7:13-14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

I can assure you the only

I can assure you the only opposition paying the subscription are using it to keep an eye on Liberty and researching ways to discredit it. Is it winning new minds with the message? I highly doubt it. Most don't care to hear his message when it is free and surly are not going to pay to hear it. Those willing to pay have already accepted the message.

I guess the Doc knows what he is doing and this will grow the number of people seeking liberty or somehow give us liberty. The last time I felt he made a huge mistake was when he gave up right before the nomination and didn't even get to speak at the convention.

I have the solution

He allows our subscriptions to link to the video using a key(unique to each video) which is tied to our account and allows up to X additional non-member views, differentiated uniquely by IP address.

This way we can watch it, then pass it out to a few not-quite-on-board-with-Ron-Paul-friends.

The Ron Paul channel could then do what's in the best interest of our money; wake more people up to Ron Paul and promote the cause of Liberty!

For all the hubbub

He could have just gone with a donation model and mentioned every once in a while that he appreciates donations and I bet you just as much money or more rolls in... And he gets to keep on lookin like a saint.

Because all of the people that are willing to pay are doing it because they supported Ron in the first place. So those same people surely would have donated anyways. Also, some people that would not have paid the subscription fee would be listening, and those new listeners could have been extra funding contributors. So I don't know if going with the subscription model actually had any benefit financially.

I agree

Those who would pay for it are the same as those who would donate.

The only additional cost of more views is bandwidth. Bandwidth is cheap, but if it's still a problem...

Why not leverage YouTube, which is free, with a watermarked version linked to the site, and eliminate the additional bandwidth costs?

I don't know about y'all, but I want to promote the cause of Liberty, not preach to the choir.

they should do it like Alex

they should do it like Alex Jones. Make a lot of free content, then have a pay service for the people who want even more information which are usually just patriots anyways and that makes the show profitable, but are also new patriots. There HAS to be a free section to gain viewers.

I've been sending Dr. Paul more than $120 a year

So I'll just shuffle things around a bit and it's free for me. If new people are interested in Dr. Paul there are a ton of videos out there already for them to watch for free. If they watch those and don't get the message, or feel it's not worth 33 cents a day, they probably never will.

After having watched a lot of

After having watched a lot of his videos, I am not sure the content itself is worth it. For most of the episodes, he talks in generics, and it's stuff right out of his campaign speeches and points he has made during debates. If the issue is new, the solution is still generic, so he ends up making the exact same points. It is very easy to know what he's going to say.

On top of this, he did promise 30 minute shows, but for the last week or more, they've been 8 or 16 minutes long. If he's having trouble producing content and his channel is only a few weeks old, how does that give new viewers confidence that it will be worth future subscription money? It actually sends the wrong message.

And when compared to other sources altogether, like Stefan or TYT or any other type of show that covers similar material - whether you agree with their views or not - he's doing much less and is charging more.

I think he really needs to look at his business model and make some changes if he wants it to be successful and have the impact he says he wants it to have.

Its for people who want to hear Paul.

I guess no one offered him a show (CNN/MSNBC/FOX) on terms he liked. This is building his TV announcer skills, maybe he will be able to guest host a show.. First show was a little sketchy but by the second show they cleaned up their presentation and defined their roles. Diana is the reporter (if radio would be news lady sidekick /guest introduction). Dr. Paul does the interview/commmentary. Plus I 'listen' to youtube and I need more programming. My weekly programs: Alex jones, Max Keiser, Gerald Celente. Now I can add Ron Paul. I guess Ben Swann puts out an episode per week. Otherwise I have to listen to WBUR (Boston's NPR is pretty good, only moderate democrat) or search for interviews with Peter Schiff, Nassim Taleb, Mark Faber, Jim Rogers. So more programming is welcome.

Add Stefan Molyneux and Peter Schiff to your list.

I don't know how often Peter's show is, but he is good. And Stefan does a lot of content, he is anarchist and less about politics, just goes with the issues though.

I will tell you what to do....

For all you complaining that you can't afford $9.95 a month to watch the Ron Paul Channel, go buy a six pack, or a couple of packs of cigarettes if you smoke, or a hamburger and fries somewhere, etc. and cotemplate and enjoy whatever it is you bought.

I am supporting the Ron Paul Channel because I want to see the bigger picture of what it can lead to if successful. A much larger production and expansion into other media areas is possible with this early support of what Ron is trying to do.

You really didn't understand

You really didn't understand the point of this post.

What he doesn't understand is...

how much a pack of cigarettes costs.

I just pay for it. Not

I just pay for it. Not really watching too many episodes. But it's my way of supporting the liberty movement.

Personally I think he needs to get advertisers and make it free so average people that don't know can watch..

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

I don't think it moves

I don't think it moves forward the liberty movement forward at all. It is extremely likely that almost everyone watching already agrees with him, and people that already agree with him watching him 12 minutes a day will have no effect on anything. Listening to people doesn't change anything if you already agree with them. In fact, it just makes you stuck and nothing changes, but perhaps you get disillusioned that you're doing something to help, even though you're just watching someone on a computer screen for 12 minutes a day.

Sorry if this comes off a bit rude, but I think its important to expose these sorts of things that we hear all of the time for what they are. We don't want to believe this is true if it really isn't.

Ron could have used Kickstarter...

Even thought it is trendy right now...

If Ron needed say $70k - $100k to get the ball rolling, to pay for the studio, anchor, cameras, cameramen...

He could have done a quick crowd sourcing and been done with it. And avoided this controversy.

He would have probably gotten 10 TIMES the funding he needed.

Teach the teachers

It may be that the idea is simply to build a larger core of a more deeply informed public/following. Then let that spread organically to the whole. In the end it is Ron Paul's business and he has proven to know quite a bit and I'm not going to second guess him. If it fails it fails.
I would suspect he either has a deeper plan or will adjust accordingly. Maybe he did this just to see what the climate is. Of course I would prefer free and yes it seems you know what his response is going to be and may not be worth it to you. Simply don't join if it is that big of a disappointment and see no value.

it's 100 percent Ron Paul Inc

First, naming it after himself was a poor and egocentric decision. If it's going to be a news service based on a philosophical movement give it name. Calling it the rp camfor Stefanel gives it a cult of personality feel. .. you know like making a place "Jonestown". Beck and Gore didn't even name their channels after themselves.
Secondly, to say subscriptions are the only way to generate revenue while not being beholden to advertisers is a serious cop out. Just look at Alex Jones. He's done byquite well financially by providing free content to the world to spread his message and grow his base while having a strong pro-liberty minded list of businesses that advertise with him. Really I don't care that he wants 10 bucks a month, it's just evident too me that this is all about being an easy money making venture by preaching to the choir and nothing about "spreading the message of liberty. " I can't even send an episode to a friend or family member due to copyright infringement. How does that help the cause of educating the masses? For me it's been a huge turn off.
Lastly, does Ron not have faith enough to have it purely donation based after seeing the dough he got during the campaigns? Another method that has seemed to work just fine for Stefan.molyneaux and adam kokesh. My ultimate gear is that son in law Jesse and Tate are somehow"invested"I'm this little enterprise.

The Big Picture

I'm paying $10 with the hope that many of you ---let's say 1/2 mil to start--will follow through and help build the Paul media empire which would rival and surpass Beck's Blaze and then expand programs/shows that feature Judge Napalitano, Tom Woods, etc ..,and to ultimately dominate all news competition thus securing the trust and loyalty of current and future generations to come.

I have no doubt that RP has young people in mind—why would he start the Ron Paul homeschool?

Excellent Point

Thanks for that reminder of the bigger picture!!

tasmlab's picture

Is part of the magic gone?

I feel the same as you; I don't I can expand my personal learning much more from the good doctor. It's time to go to the sources and other teachers for new or deeper ideas. I don't throw this off lightly; after you read all of his books and watch 2,000 videos you get the point.

I'm tempted to pay anyways like I do for FDR, Daily Paul and Schiff Show. I've been meaning to sign up for Tom Woods deal too. I can't consume all of this content but want to support it.

I'm wondering if some of the magic of Paul is gone now that he doesn't hold office or even carry the thin threat of becoming POTUS.

There was something brave and hazardous and brazen when he was sitting on the edge of Mount Doom itself (i.e., in office, pursuing office) talking libertarian ideas. As if anybody actually heard him there you'd suddenly hear the assassin's sniper fire ring off lest he pulled the world from of the brink of destruction.

Now retired, he's merely a very well read, knowledgable and beloved figure.

Could he elicit chills amongst a new audience? Will someone hearing him now want to run out and get a revolution tattoo? Or do something truly masochistic and disgusting and register as a Republican and attend a caucus?

I'm not sure.

Currently consuming: Morehouse's "Better off free", FDR; Wii U; NEP Football


Go to tomwoods.com and sign up for the news letter.

He just had a special going on where TWLibertyClassroom was %50 off. Dunno if that's still going on but there's sure to be something else soon to sweeten the deal again.

When I joined I got a free signed copy of Nullification.

The courses have been great. Really enjoyed them. Some are pretty dry, but interesting nonetheless.

Mises Academy also has really great courses. Can't recommend those enough. Taken 3 so far and they've been an absolute pleasure. Benefit being you get to address your professor real time as opposed to TWLC where you have to address them through a forum. Mises has their own certificate program as well.

Id use a different business model

Since the focus of Ron Paul has been to reach out with his message to as many as possible, Id use a kickstarter like model of financing.

One where you have targets like if x money is reached episode will be free x days after airing or main interview free. If you pay say 10$ you will get a small reward besides the episode maybe access to a forum where dr answeres questions, 100$ a larger reward and so on. Maybe when you donate/subscribe you get to pick a person you want Dr Paul to have an interview with.

I'm not saying the current model doesnt work I am just brainstorming ideas I personally would have liked to see.

I'm Enjoying It

So far I have been enjoying it. To be seen if he will really push the buttom on some major issues in terms of revalations, but so far has been informational.

Just another money making device...

This will have no impact whatsoever.....as part of any so-called "grassroots" movement, or educating new people. Ron Paul has badly handled the concept behind this to that effect, or to be more accurate, it is all just another money making device.

The audience is rich people, who are already well aware of Ron Paul, and who have enough economic security and disposable wealth to just toss away some extra money.

If Ron Paul wanted to actually bring about a Revolution of the mind, he would create a structure where people could go to and freely access information and content. He could have created a site like MOXNews, or The Real News Network, Crooks and Liars, or The Drudge Report -- where you pay nothing to view Videos, and access content.

That would make it available and accessible for ordinary people, the "grassroots", college kids, and have the potential to create a movement. He could have also included links to Aaron Russo's documentary, and other educational tools.

But much like his 2012 campaign, Ron Paul is mostly interested in going just half way with anything that he does, and then charging the bill to his fan base.

This is no breakthough....

I think it's subscription

to keep him OUT of the mainstream - where he might possibly interfere with Rand's future plans. Just like the early campaign pull-out. So it's preaching to the choir by design.

While I can see how it helps

While I can see how it helps protect Rand, if Ron does say something that would hurt Rand, it's going to get out either way.

I just don't see the point to preaching to the choir. I am so well-versed in his positions and ideas that I can actually predict what he's going to say before he says it. The people that really need to hear his message won't subscribe, which is a shame.

I agree with you.

And I feel the same way.