Channel
@american_times
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
542subscribers
-2 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001476828205 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @american_times |
| Created | 11 November 2019 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/american_times |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Aug 2026, 17:53 | 542 | -2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 11:02 | 544 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 09:47 | 544 | first reading |
9 posts held, back to 4 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 9 (4 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 1,041 |
| Reactions total | 46 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 11:02 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
46 reactions across 9 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 87.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 40 | 87.0% | |
| 👍 | 3 | 6.52% | |
| 😢 | 2 | 4.35% | |
| 🤡 | 1 | 2.17% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 9 of the 9 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 46reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 9 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 7 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
Мой прогноз о том, что Тодд Бланш будет без проблем утверждён Сенатом после его прохождения через профильный комитет оказался слишком оптимистичным. Убедить Корнина и Тиллиса оказалось недостаточно. В условиях отсутствия Митча Макконнелла республиканцы могут потерять не больше 2 голосов; в противном случае голосование закончится 49-50, и Бланш не будет утверждён. Два республиканских голоса «против» уже есть: сначала…
❤2
Праймериз в 5 округе Теннесси закончились неожиданным поражением конгрессмена Энди Оглса, члена Кокуса свободы и одного из радикальных сторонников президента в Палате представителей. Несмотря на поддержку Трампа Оглс в результате проиграл бывшему местному чиновнику в сфере сельского хозяйства Чарли Хатчеру. Поражение можно объяснить двумя факторами. Во-первых, риторика Конгрессмена периодически выходила «за рамки» да…
❤1
Основные поля сенатского сражения С праймериз в Мичигане определились основные пары кандидатов в ключевых штатах, где решится контроль над Сенатом США в ноябре. Конечно, некоторые праймериз ещё впереди и точный список значимых гонок ещё скорректируется, но уже можно говорить о предварительных выводах. Сразу важно понимать: даже в нынешнем политическом климате, при непопулярном республиканском президенте, задача дем…
❤4👍2
Персонаж недели: Линдон Джонсон (1908–1973) Сегодняшний герой рубрики #персонаж_недели — по-настоящему трагическая фигура. Линдон Джонсон был одним из самых талантливых американских политиков XX века, фундаментально изменившим страну. Но его достижения навсегда оказались омрачены вьетнамской катастрофой, положившей конец его президентской карьере. В историю этот грубоватый и безгранично амбициозный политик вошёл чел…
❤8
Итак, Абдул Эль-Сайед — официальный победитель демократических праймериз и кандидат от партии в Сенат в ноябре. Наряду с поражением конгрессмена Танедара выходит, что прогрессивные кандидаты выиграли в 3 из 4 округах, в которых у демократов была классическая вилка «левый кандидат против центриста из истеблишмента». Звучит хорошо? (Если вы разделяете лево-прогрессивную платформу, конечно). Возвращаясь, однако, к дис…
❤6👍1
Прогрессивная волна не случилась Итоги прошедших этой ночью праймериз в Мичигане и Миссури пока не приносят левому крылу демократов тех новостей, на которые они надеялись. В ключевой гонке — выборах кандидата в Сенат —подсчитано 90% голосов, но победитель неясен: прогрессивный Эль-Сайед обходит умеренную центристку Стивенс всего на 1,8 процентных пункта, и маятник ещё может коснуться против него. В любом случае, да…
❤8😢2🤡1
Два лидирующих героя — кандидаты на президентских выборах 1964 года! Кто же выиграет? Голосуйте!
❤7
Завтрашний герой рубрики «Персонаж недели»
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
❤1
Выбираем завтрашнего персонажа недели! 🔴 Джеймс Монро — 5-й президент США, автор знаменитой доктрины, переизбранный на свой второй срок (почти) единогласно 🔵 Линдон Джонсон — 36-й президент США, успешно проведший одни из самых далеко идущих прогрессивных реформ, чья политическая карьера была уничтожена войной во Вьетнаме 🔴 Роджер Тани — председатель Верховного суда США, чьи расистские решения стали одной из главны…
❤3
Showing the 9 most recent of 9 posts we hold for @american_times. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Завтрашний герой рубрики «Персонаж недели»
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 9 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank — 707,311 of 1,481,243entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Named by 2 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 15 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“The American Times” (@american_times), 542 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/american_times.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.