hat happened.

Somebody said — I'm looking in the comments. Oh, okay, well never mind. I thought it was a different comment. Question. Well before we get to that, I love watching Fox News and CNN fight. I don't know, it's one of the most amusing things. I think I was probably an outlier in the sense that I liked watching Chris Cuomo and his brother do their little show on CNN. If you don't take it seriously, and you shouldn't because obviously that's not real news, but just watching the two successful brothers banter, I liked it. I know you didn't. I'm not telling you you should like what I like. I'm just telling you I liked it from an entertainment perspective. I didn't take any of the news part of it seriously.

But here's some more of that little back and forth between Fox News and CNN. So apparently Chris Cuomo's show is just hemorrhaging female viewers, which is no surprise since he supported his brother and his brother was accused of a lot of Me Too stuff. So Cuomo Prime Time I guess averaged 86,000 female viewers in the age group that they want the most. And last week it was down 33 percent compared to the second quarter totals. Wow. A key demographic was down 33 percent because of what his brother did. Wow. And down a stunning, as Fox says, a stunning 56 percent compared to last year. Now mostly compared to last year because Trump was in the news. That's not anything to do with CNN per se.

But here's what I like about this. Fox News refers to Chris Cuomo as quote the troubled CNN's troubled anchor. Troubled anchor. Now here's my question. Do you ever see CNN use "disgraced"? They'll throw in "disgraced" in front of somebody's name or title as if it's just the fact that they're disgraced. What is the dividing line between being troubled, being a troubled anchor, and being a disgraced anchor? What's the dividing line where it is troubled turned into disgrace? Because you know if this had been reversed I feel like CNN would have called, you know, let's say if