Some good news in re: NBC. I’m fixin’ to put this up on a separate thread.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/entertainment/965873,6_5_NA23_NIELSENS_S1.article
NBC’s limping to a close in prime-time ratings
May 23, 2008
Recommend
By David Bauder The Associated Press
NEW YORK — NBC is limping to the close of the prime-time TV season.
Only one of the network’s shows, “Law & Order: SVU,” finished among the 25 most-watched shows last week, ranking No. 16, according to Nielsen Media Research. “Shark,” a drama that CBS is canceling, was seen by more people last week than any other NBC show but “SVU.”
The network’s prime-time average of 5.5 million viewers last week, was just more than half of first-place CBS’ average.
The showing during a ratings “sweeps” month points to the challenge NBC has in the next few months. One advantage is the network’s coverage of the Summer Olympics in China, which should give promoters the chance to remind people of upcoming shows.
The prime-time performance makes it all the more impressive that NBC has managed to stay in first place for its evening news, late-night lineup and early morning.
For the week, CBS averaged 10.3 million viewers (6.7 rating, 11 share), ABC had 9.6 million (6.2, 11), Fox 9.2 million (5.6, 9), NBC 5.5 million (3.6, 6), the CW 2.7 million (1.7, 3), My Network TV 1.2 million (0.8, 1) and ION Television 320,000 (0.2, 0).
Among the Spanish-language networks, Univision averaged 3.6 million (1.8, 3), Telemundo had 990,000 (0.6, 1), TeleFutura 820,000 (0.4, 1) and Azteca 160,000 (0.1, 0).
NBC’s “Nightly News” topped the evening newscasts with an average of 8.2 million viewers (5.6, 12). ABC’s “World News” was second with 7.9 million (5.5, 12) and the “CBS Evening News” had 5.7 million viewers (4, 8).
A ratings point represents 1,128,000 households, or 1 percent of the nation’s estimated 112.8 million TV homes. The share is the percentage of in-use televisions tuned to a given show.
It is surprising to me that GE has held on to these low-performing assets. I 'm inclined to believe that it is because they reflect the views of the Board/Managers of that company.
I'd like to see them taken down via a "trading with the enemy" charge.