-18 votes

Does Ron Pauls subscription TV channel leave a bad taste in your mouth?

I think he's burning the good faith and credit earned with his fans during the election by asking for subscriptions.

I keep getting calls to action, and the only action is to subscribe. I hate to be rude and unsubscribe from his mailing, but I think that's tacky.

Can't believe he's asking for subscriptions when, a) he's got more money than most his supporters, and b) in today's world who subscribes for anything? Time Magazine - not!

It's probably a dead-end concept in today's facebook, youtube, advertising driven world.

What do you think?

Comment viewing options

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

No it doesnt because I dont

No it doesnt because I dont watch it.

Ventura 2012


That is all.

Bad content. Bad business model.

Dr. Paul is a true hero, but he has always made extremely bad choices when choosing business partners.

It's like the newsletter fiasco all over again.

I just don't get it.


The homeschool curriculum idea is great and I hope his business partners in that venture are good enough to make that a success.

The Ron Paul Channel jumped the shark before there was a shark to jump.

God Bless.

It should run on donations like PBS

I think he would reach way more people if it was free. He would get the word out to more people. Sell a few ad slots to American companies producing things in America. Once or twice a year do a fund raising to pick up the slack. More viewers mean more pockets able to contribute. Many hands make light work.

Tin Pan

ummm ...

pbs gets government funding as well....I don't think ron paul will be getting any of that!

Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves...the land of liberty needs a regime change!

How would he deal with the

How would he deal with the freeloader effect?

The fact is, is that most of Ron Paul's demographic is on the extreme ends of the spectrum (young or old), meaning they typically tend to be lower-income. Which, usually, is a big reason WHY they are frustrated with the current system. Moreover, they already KNOW what RP is about....why would they want to pay to learn something they already know?

A lot of those people cannot afford to pay out of the goodness of their hearts. Ron Paul has to "force" it out of them.

Over the long-term, RP could grow his base, spread his message, and then donations would start coming, IMO. But that is the long game...

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a


yea it would reach more people if it was free or even allowed to be posted else where so people can at least hear it. But PBS isn't fully donations, it's federally assisted too.



stupid thread

Just down-voted this stupid thread and ridiculous question.

it's not stupid

look, how can we watch stuff of Ron Paul off CNN FOXS MSNBC but can't seem to get anything off of RP Channel? I thought the point of the show was to be educational and outreaching... How is it going to reach people if the only people paying for it are those that know of Liberty already? I didn't subscribe cause I knew most of the stuff already. And why isn't anyone posting anything from the show like 1 or 2 days later so we can see it too? This is like going backward for Liberty.

why don't you...

go out and talk to people about liberty if you already know about it? Why do you need to cry over the fact that you don't want to pay for information? Everything costs. Information costs.

I don't think

Dr. Paul is making all decisions for the Ron Paul Channel. He says when he left congress he was approached about the idea, so I'm guessing somebody else is weighing in on how to model/market the site.

I personally think the subscription is a good idea, but that the content should become available after a delay. I also think they should welcome advertisers (to offset/decrease subscription cost) because people find targeted advertising helpful sometimes.

kinda like the Peter Schiff Show

you can subscribe and get it live...or you can wait and hear/see it in a day or two.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy

Your hatred of the Muslim World

is enough for me to just say:

Good luck to you and yours.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Let the market decide.

If you don't want it, don't get it. When his costs are projected to exceed his revenues, he'll change his business model or his business model will perish.

As libertarians, I would expect people to know that. I'm suprised by all the whining about it, particularly the "he has more money than me" whine. Is that his responsibility?

No one's saying the market

No one's saying the market shouldn't decide. Nobody's saying that he should be forced to give out content for free.


If you don't want to watch, then don't subscribe. OMG that was so hard!

can't stand control freaks like you

This newspaper editor discusses current state of advertising...

Imagine this is Ron Paul speaking:


9-11 was a panda job.

I know something you don't know...


9-11 was a panda job.

what are you a commie

You do know bandwidth is not free ?

I don't really get why people

I don't really get why people are downvoting this thread. It is a question: Does it leave a bad taste in your mouth?

Why don't people just participate in that discussion, taking whichever side they choose or something inbetween?

I believe the downvotes

are people taking a side.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy

When i downvote a thread it is generally just because i disagree

I am not mean spirited about it. I dont downvote folks to.spite them, just to indicate that I dont share the sentiment.


A silver half dollar and 3 silver dimes.

National Geographic was One Silver Dollar back in the day.

A feature movie was a silver dime in the 1930s.

Subscribers get Breaking news.

Would a 3-4 month delay be beneficial? It would get the word out.

Silver priced in $FRN

Free includes debt-free!

I was excited when I first

I was excited when I first heard about the channel, but then disappointed when I heard it was a subscription, because then the message will really only get to the choir.

It will not proliferate when it can't be easily shared with those not in the choir.

(Note: I'm making an assumption about the ability to easily share)

I think the split

I think the split subscription model works like Info Wars, O'Reilly and The Blaze.

That way if people want to escalate they can.

I would like to see a Hybrid of the Daily Paul highly interactive and a Ron Paul channel.

Interesting idea



Slightly related question; does anyone know if he minds that subscribers share the content elsewhere? Because if not, then I don't really see an issue. In that case, I'd see it as more of a way to help fund the message he puts out rather than just a cash grab.

A signature used to be here!

Oh no $10 for a voluntary

Oh no $10 for a voluntary subscription?!?! Someone call the POLICE!

Southern Agrarian

Right on!

How hard is it to come up with $10? I spend cash and I always have more than ten dollars in change at the end of the month. Now that paypal is linked to those coinstar machines in the grocery store, I make it a routine to make a deposit.