Eric Boehlert didn't buy the Washington Post's claim that Limbaugh's ratings have doubled since he became head of the GOP.
Usually a journalist would base the evidence on facts, but...
Yesterday I raised doubts about the claim in a Howard Kurtz article that Limbaugh's ratings have "nearly doubled" since January. The Post offered no hard evidence to back that up. And as I noted, even Limbaugh himself suggested he has no idea what his ratings are since he first announced in late January that he wanted Obama to fail.
Today, the Post's Paul Farhi writes more about Limbaugh's ratings in an article that only raises more doubts about Kurtz's claim that the talker's numbers have increased two-fold since January.
Specifically, I noted that it's basically impossible for reporters to get solid information about nationwide ratings for syndicated talk show hosts since those numbers are not released publicly.
There is no data available to make the claims that the Washington Post is talking about. I wouldn't doubt that more listeners are tuning in out of curiosity, but promoting the notion that he's doubled his audience without solid facts supporting that claim is irresponsible journalism.
