BOT Golden Globes - Ceremony Discussion Thread!

[Valonqar]

2 hours ago, BardCrank said:

 or give it to a good movie  is what I wanted to say but some bug happened 

Like Get Out. 

[misafeco]

On 2018. 01. 09. at 2:29 PM, FantasticBeasts said:

I don't understand what makes you so angry about what I said. Of cource I am in favour of equal rights and unless you missed it I told that right now "it is exact the opposite situation" which means that women need to work more to achieve as much as men nowadays.

What I just did was describing a certain example in which I believe that yes, reverse sexism exists. Do you know more about my sport than I do?

What was difficult to understand? A proffessional female chess player makes more than double the money of a male chess player of the same strength. If this is not reverse sexism then what is it?

That was what my comment was all about and I don't get whhy you generalised so much and put words in my mouth that I never said.

It's not like I care from my part. I actually think it is women that are undermined in that way. It is like you are being said "you cannot compete with men".

Judith Polgar was actually a hungarian chess player and she refused to play in ANY female tournament through her life and managed to even get in the all players Top 10 and challenge the world title (the only female in history). That's what a true feminist icon in my opinion is.

Yeah, chess is just not a girl's game for most of the population. Polgár Judit (and her older sisters) were trained from very early to be professional chess players. Back then the women standard was even lower than it is today, so it was obvious she had to play against men to improve.

What is your skill level, maybe we can play a game someday. 

[FantasticBeasts]

44 minutes ago, misafeco said:

Yeah, chess is just not a girl's game for most of the population. Polgár Judit (and her older sisters) were trained from very early to be professional chess players. Back then the women standard was even lower than it is today, so it was obvious she had to play against men to improve.

What is your skill level, maybe we can play a game someday. 

Do you have an account in any site like chess24 or chess.com

If so, send me your username in pm and we can arrange a game.

I am rated 1750 fide.

[Barnack]

On 1/9/2018 at 6:51 PM, Barnack said:

The title is a bit sensationnalist, in the demo is down, total vierwership was not.

 

That 2017 Jimmy Fallon-fronted affair of January 8 last year ended up a touch ahead of the 2015 Globes with a 5.6 rating among adults 18-49 and 20.0 million viewers – a rare rise in a year of award-show ratings declines. It’s a rare rise we might see repeated this year based on the MM results, which were the second best for the Globes in the past 11 years. Only the 2014 ceremony hosted by Tina Fey and Amy Poehler performed better than last night’s show popping a 14.1 rating for the Comcast-owned network.

 

Although small, a rise is a rise, with the Globes up incrementally for the third year in a row in metered market ratings.

 

Only 2014 had a better rating in the history of the show.... and all award show viewership are down.

 

-------

To add to this, the current rapid drop of tv ratings in general and even more for awards shows, need to be taken into account for judging the globes...

 

http://variety.com/2018/tv/news/grammy-awards-viewership-ratings-down-bruno-mars-1202680032/#article-comments

 

In addition, the three and a half hour awards show is averaged a 5.9 rating in adults 18-49 and 19.8 million viewers, according to time zone adjusted numbers. Last year’s show drew a 7.8 and 26.1 million, meaning the 2018 Grammys are down approximately 24 percent in both measures.

 

The 2018 Golden globes 13.4% of households:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/289834/tv-ratings-golden-globes/

 

And 19 million viewers more than the 18.7 million of 2016 and just 5% less than the 20m of 2017 look really good in contrast.