Posted on 10/13/2005 2:24:53 PM PDT by new yorker 77
Audience
In the 1990s, cable news networks replaced network television for many Americans as the primary source for breaking news, just as in the 1960s television supplanted newspapers. In the new millennium, a broadband-enabled, always-on Internet threatens to usurp those cable news networks. The recent tsunami disaster, The New York Times noted, marked the first time significant numbers of Americans turned to blogs for breaking news.
Where does that leave network news? In 2004, the decline in evening news audience continued, as did declines in prime-time magazines. Morning news, in contrast, continued to see its audiences grow. And despite the decision to abdicate coverage of much of the prime-time proceedings at the nominating conventions, on election night November 2004, twice as many people still turned to the old commercial networks as did cable for the results.
Nightly Newscasts
The discussion of network news audience trends usually begins with the signature nightly newscasts.
They are the most famous news programs, and the audience declines here are the most dramatic in TV news. Between their peak in November 1969 and 2003, as we noted last year, ratings for those programs fell by 59%. Was there any sign in 2004 that the trend was abating?1
The answer appears to be no, though 2005 offers new possibilities.
Television audiences are counted in numerous ways. The most familiar is ratings, which count the number of all television sets in the U.S. tuned to a given program. Share is the percentage of just those sets in use at a given time tuned in to a program. Viewership is ratings converted into the number of people actually estimated to be watching, since two or more people are often watching a given set.
Between November 2003 and November 2004, ratings for nightly news fell 2% and share fell 5%.2
In absolute numbers, that means that in November 2004, 28.8 million viewers watched the three network evening newscasts, half a million less than in November the year before. That is a 45% decline from the 52.1 million people who watched the nightly newscasts in 1980, the year CNN began.3
The numbers translate into 2004 ratings of 20.2, down from 20.6 the year before. They represent a 38 share, down from 40 in 2003.4
It's worth noting that a rating point (1% of American homes with a TV set) implies many more people in 2004 than it did in 1969. With population increases and demographic trends like more single heads of households, there are many more homes than 35 years before. Thus the decline in viewership is not nearly as steep as the decline in ratings.
Evening News Viewership, All Networks November 1980 to November 2004
Source: Nielsen Media unpublished data, November - November
In 1980, the three commercial network nightly news broadcasts had a combined 37% rating, and a 75% share. And at their historic peak, in 1969, they had a 50% rating and an 85% share. The November 2004 figures mean that ratings have fallen almost 59.6 % since 1969, and 45.4% sinc1e 1980. Share has fallen 55.3% since 1969 and 49.3% since 1980.
Evening News Ratings November 1980 to November 2004
Source: Nielsen Media Research unpublished data, www.nielsenmedia.com Ratings taken for month of November.
.... Continued...
And why wouldn't a third to 50% of the population want to watch me cheer for Democratic candidates?
why pay to have garbage delivered to your living room
I get my news from talk radio, FR and Drudge, and an occasional newspaper. Not TV newscasts.
"on election night November 2004, twice as many people still turned to the old commercial networks as did cable for the results."
I watched CNN on election night as they were the last station in denial about GW's win. I hoped to see Wolf Blitzer hang himself.
They have football on those networks? I thought football games were all on Fox and ESPN.
The average age of viewers of Network Nightly News is something like 52. Who is going to pay to advertise to a 52-year-old audience?
Well, us 52 year olds have a few euros to spend on toys ya know!
23.5M is about what--one out of nine adults? Amazing to us who were weaned on "the Huntley-Brinkley Report."
But 52-year-olds already know what they want. Advertisers want to reach people when they are still young and stupid.
>>
I watched CNN on election night as they were the last station in denial about GW's win. I hoped to see Wolf Blitzer hang himself.
<<
It WAS hilarious, no? How many times did they formulate ways in which "Kerry could still win."
Schadenfreude.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.