Big Three Nets' Evening News Dives Deepen (Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™)

NewsBusters ^ | May 11, 2010 | Tom Blumer

[Zakeet]

Five weeks ago (covered at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), the Big Three Networks' combined evening news audiences dropped to below 20 million -- an audience about 5% less than what Matt Drudge in the summer of 2006 headlined as “TV’s Lowest Week.”

Three weeks ago (at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), their combined audience came in at 19.61 million, down over 12% from the previous year.

For the week of May 3, the combined total fell further, to the point where they're one more really bad week away from hitting an all-time low -- a low that was "achieved" in mid-June of last year (Source -- Media Bistro, week of May 3, 2010; week of May 4, 2009):

The May 3, 2010 combined total audience is less than 2% higher than the 19.06 million of June 15, 2009. The 25-54 demo audience is less than 200,000 above that same week.

Those who properly point out that the audience figures cited here are much larger than seen on cable news networks can take some comfort and solace in the following:

• Just 10 years ago, the nets' evening news audience was about 12 million larger in a country with a population that was about 9% smaller.

• At this point, it's likely that many people who continue to watch these shows, other than the brave souls at the Media Research Center who do it so the rest of us don't have to, are lost causes to conservatism. Otherwise, they couldn't bear sitting through what Brian, Diane, and Katie constantly feed them. The fact that their numbers are shrinking may mean that more people are open to sensible conservative arguments.

• Though it's difficult to gauge, it seems that right and center-right new media outlets are gathering a bit of a head of steam compared to the leftist counterparts.

Anyway, the regularly scheduled summer viewing slump is only a month away. Two words: Faster please.

[Zakeet]

Reports like this make me want to ... to ... never mind!

[albie]

Good news! Time for a bailout! We don’t know what’s good for us so the gummit will support and dictate what to watch! These 3 networks are the only ones that know what’s best for us!~sarc

[Zakeet]

Matt Drudge is presently out drawing the top three alphabet nitwork news shows combined by more than 50 percent ping.

[VRW Conspirator]

•Just 10 years ago, the nets' evening news audience was about 12 million larger in a country with a population that was about 9% smaller.

Yes, faster please.

[Red Badger]

I wonder what COMEDY CENTRAL NUMBERS ARE in this time slot?...............

[jazminerose]

That’s exactly what they will try to do. Imagine the crap they will pull during the lame duck season from November to January.

http://joytiz.com/2010/when-lame-ducks-attack/

[Rummyfan]

With choice of Katie Couric, Brian Williams and I-don’t-know, it’s no wonder.

[GonzoGOP]

While the news about the drop in alphabet network viewership is good news it is hardly an indication of a battle won.

In comparison here are the Neilson ratings for the cable news stations.
May 10 P2+Prime Time
FNC – 2,164,000 viewers
CNN – 511,000 viewers
MSNBC –872,000 viewers
CNBC – a scratch w/100,000 viewers
HLN –413,000 viewers

So while Fox crushes the competition with 2,164,000 viewers they aren't even on the radar of the big 3 alphabet networks with a combined 19,410,000 viewers. Heck the the drop in viewers is 77% of what Fox has in total. And if the lost big three viewers are going from NBC to MSNBC we aren't gaining anything.

[tubebender]

Media Death Watch...

[abb]

ping

[FLCowboy,]

And poor Katie still makes $15 million a year. Wonder how the president of CBS answers that to his stockholders.

[relictele]

The MSM’s list of transgressions would wear out a server farm so I’ll not repeat them here. However, I have occasionally been trapped in situations where the nightly newscasts are being viewed. The approach they take has not changed but it is an anachronism. Among their most curious failings:

1) They pretend that no other sources of information exist

2) They pretend that repeating White House talking points (often verbatim) constitutes news, insider access or the ‘fairness’ they claim to practice

3) Every story is chock full of howevers, buts, Dems say/Repubs say, critics say, etc. Again, this is meant to convey fairness but images, voice inflection etc. make it clear who they really side with

4) They simply get facts wrong. As anyone who is familiar with a local story can attest, when the national media sail in they invariably err (purposely or otherwise) in providing the details and/or context of a story. In 90% of cases it is fodder for advancing an agenda. Therefore oil slicks are not just a threat to fishing and tourism but must be a springboard to environmental restrictions. Nashville flooding is, well, just Nashville flooding and they have been shamefully ignored simply because there is no advantage in highlighting their plight.

5) ‘Other voices’ are invariably even further left than the anchors/reporters. Katie Couric interviews Tom Friedman and we are supposed to believe it will be productive?

[madinmadtown]

It is amazing that there is any company willing to advertise on the CBS news. Since I haven't watched in decades, I would guess that only pharmaceutical companies that promote antidepressants would be the only logical option.

[bert]

CBS News + CNN = Death

Comcast + NBC = NBC/MSNBC Death

Fox News + Wall Street Journal = Fox Business news + Vibrant life

[albie]

Unfortuately, lots of people get their start with “Good Morning America”, Matt Lauer etc.

[B4Ranch]

The 9% growth has been almost entirely illegal aliens. They don’t speak English so they don’t watch the news.

[Tex-Con-Man]

And poor Katie still makes $15 million a year. Wonder how the president of CBS answers that to his stockholders.

I'm sure he tells them how difficult it is to find a moderately attractive woman who can read a teleprompter and...er..uh...

[Tribune7]

And if the lost big three viewers are going from NBC to MSNBC

I think they are going to the graveyard.

Anyway, if you want to feel better, Rush with 20 million plus listeners beats all three combined now.

Laura Ingraham, by herself, now clobbers CBS

[Texas resident]

Does CBS still have stockholders?
If there are any left, they are idiots.

[nathanbedford]

Good observation and analysis.

So Fox has about 10% of the mainstream media's evening news broadcast but Fox carries on 24/7. In addition, talk radio has more listeners than the mainstream media evening newscast garners. Rush Limbaugh alone has millions of listeners. And, again, talk radio goes 24/7.

The evening newscasts have what about 17-23 minutes of news and of that at least half is magazine feature fillers which they think maintains viewership. So the mainstream media can expect to propagandize with one or two stories on average per night.

The problem with the network newscasts is that the people who watch them are, well, unsuspecting and vulnerable to manipulation because they're not political junkies or they would be tuned in to Fox, MSNBC, or public television news broadcasts.