Posted on 03/01/2010 9:10:08 AM PST by george76
As part of the deep cuts announced this week at ABC News, the network plans to close all of its physical bureaus around the country except Washington and halve the number of its domestic correspondents.
ABC News President David Westin confirmed in an interview Friday that the network's ranks of bureau correspondents, which currently number several dozen, would be cut in half and be replaced with "digital" journalists who would be expected to shoot and edit their own stories.
Although the network will keep a minimal staff presence in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Miami and Boston, it will shut down its bricks-and-mortar bureaus there and ask its remaining employees to work from the local affiliates. The Washington bureau will remain open, but its size will be substantially reduced.
The mood was grim in Los Angeles, the largest bureau outside of Washington. The 40-plus staffers were told this week that only a few producers would remain and only two correspondents would be assigned to cover the West, down from a total of six
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
No, that doesn't give us a massive 14,656,000 as those are not unique viewers. The industry has a way of measuring this statistic, and they call it a cumulative rating or net reach. This rating is difficult to come by because Nielson only distributes that proprietary piece of data to it's paying clients. IOW, it doesn't allow it to be published, anywhere. Having said that, there's been substantial reporting on it, and it's clear that there's more parity between the cable news channels when measuring cumulative rating.
Even still, Neilsen does publish their "Total Day" average numbers. It's was published on the same page that you used, but you glossed over. It was...
P2+ Total Day
FNC – 1,658,000 viewers
CNN – 719,000 viewers
MSNBC –755,000 viewers
CNBC – 273,000 viewers
HLN – 327,000 viewers
I'm fairly confident that 1,658,000 is a whole lot less than the combined viewers for the network evening news.
My point is .... you want the FBI to go after craigslist, so people that are stupid enough to make dates with complete strangers can be stopped? .....”wonders why this is an issue for you”
Exactly.
Yes they are.
You seem to be forgetting that Fox news reaches 98 million unique homes, all with differing schedules and viewing habits.
“The industry has a way of measuring this statistic, and they call it a cumulative rating or net reach”
If 4 million people watch O’Reilley at 8pm, that is 4 million unique viwers for O'Reilley. There is nothing that I see at TV By The Numbers that says that it's the exact same 3 million viewers that watched Beck at 5 pm, that are also watching O'Reilley 8 pm, plus 1 million.
Going by my own household, different members watch different programs on different TV’s, at different times. Commone sense tells us that someone is not going to sit in front of his TV all prime time, watching just FOX news, starting with Beck at 5 pm, and still sitting there watching O’Reilley at 8 pm through Hannity to O'Reeilly again at 11 pm. People have a life, do other stuff, go out to restaurants for dinners, cook, take a shower, go out and watch movies, watch other TV programs like sports etc etc. People have different schedules. Someone hat comes ome late, will probably not see O'Reilley at 8 pm, but then watch O'Reilley at 11 pm.
“Even still, Neilsen does publish their “Total Day” average numbers. It's was published on the same page that you used, but you glossed over.”
Yeah?
Would that perhaps have something to do with the fact that my “total” numbers were for total prime time, not total day?
There's nothing that says that they are not, either. What part of cumulative don't you understand? I can see that you didn't read the other link. Given your track record of ignoring facts that don't support your argument, I'm not surprised.
In the absence of any evidence that its the same exact people watching Beck at 5pm, that watch O’Reilley at 8 pm, the default remains that they are different people. Unless you lock people up in their houses and force them to watch Fox news all night at gun point, it's virtually impossible for the exact same people watching Beck at 5 pm to be watching O’Reilley at 8pm as well.
“What part of cumulative don't you understand? “
There is nothing cumulative about O’Reilley’s high numbers at 8 pm. Those are the TV sets, that are tuned in to O’Reilley between 8 pm and 9 m. Period. Nothing cumulative about it.
“Given your track record of ignoring facts that don't support your argument, I'm not surprised.”
Chortle!
That's mighty big talk, coming from a guy that I only just yesterday, clobbered on the Pelosi leading the Democrats off a cliff thread.
Now, I see where the problem is between us. No, I don’t want the FBI investigating.
If I wasn’t clear, I mean newspapers should have fought back against Craigslist, reporting every incident in which a buyer got a bad product or raped or murdered.
The newspaper biz should have subjected Craigslist to a nationwide daily pounding. Should have been questioning police chiefs and mayors daily about shutting down the prostitution on Craigslist.
I realize they might have spent “a lot of roses” but it was in their self-interest.
Do you know what a “rose” is?
It’s a euphemism for dollars on the Craigslist prostitution offerings.
Have a great day. Sorry for the confusion.
You're inserting your own preconceptions in place of empirical evidence. CNN's cumulative rating and FNC's cumulative rating are very, very close. But, FNC has a higher rating. How is that possible? Because while CNN is drawing fewer people to it's network, it's drawing more unique viewers throughout the day than is FNC. IOW, the same people are watching FNC throughout the day, including during primetime, whereas CNN is drawing a more diverse and fluid audience. It's also another reason why CNN and FNC have similar ad revenues.
"That's mighty big talk, coming from a guy that I only just yesterday, clobbered on the Pelosi leading the Democrats off a cliff thread."
Only in your mind.
It’s not like they’re an actual news outlet.
Naaaah.
What I am not doing though, is proposing the ridiculous theory that the exact same people who with Beck at 5 pm, are also the ones watching O’Reilley at 8 pm, like you are. That simply doesn't make any sense, nor is it supported by the evidence.
“CNN’s cumulative rating and FNC’s cumulative rating are very, very close”
CNN’s ratings for every single program, are trumped by Fox's ratings for the equivalent program.
As a matter of fact, Beck at 5 pm, is getting up to three times as many viewers as every single CNN prime time program.
That is why Fox is making more money than CNN, MSNBC, NBC, ABC and CBS news combined:
FOX NEWS Makes More Money Than CNN, MSNBC, And NBC-ABC-And-CBS News Combined”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2425399/posts
High ratings count.
Seriously, are you learning disabled? Does the concept of a cumulative rating completely escape you? Do you understand the difference between "ad revenue" and "profit"? Do you understand the difference between "share" and "rating"?
From the NY Post (a Newscorp publication)...
" Time Warner-owned CNN, while getting beaten handily in the ratings race and having fallen to fourth place in rankings, still commands higher ad rates than rivals -- in some cases double those of Fox News and MSNBC.But perhaps not for long.
While advertisers have been willing to shell out more for CNN's venerable brand, broad audience reach and less-opinionated programming, media buyers said the network's ratings slide is likely to bring down pricing.
"They will maintain a premium, but will it stay this high?" asked one ad buyer. "I think it will probably go down." And that could cost them millions of dollars in advertising revenue.
In the world of television advertising, a big audience doesn't necessarily translate into the highest ad rates. Media buyers said CNN has the benefit of 30 years in the business and a trusted name that still resonates with advertisers.
If you think that the 4 million people that watch Beck, or Hannity or O'Reilly are all different people, I really can't help you. While FNC dominates the ratings, CNN still commands a premium for its ad time. Aren't you at all curious why that is? If you're not, then I can see why a concept as remedial as cumulative rating escapes you.
Do not project your own peanut brain onto others.
The fact that you were born retarded, doesn't mean everyone else is like you, ok?
“oes the concept of a cumulative rating completely escape you? “
here is nothing cumulative about the total clobbering that Fox is giving CN and MSNBC in the ratings.
There is is total annihilation by Fox of every other cable TV news network.
That is why Fox makes more money than MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS and NC news combined:
FOX NEWS Makes More Money Than CNN, MSNBC, And NBC-ABC-And-CBS News Combined
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2425399/posts
And there is nothing cumulative about their profits either. Currently the cable TV companies are paying a heck of a lot more per subscriber for Fox news than for CNN or MSNBC, and ad ratings are much higherfor Fox news as well.
There is a like a wide chasm between Fox and everyone else by any measure you'd care to bring up.
Get used to it.
/sarc Yeah..thats why Fox is making $700 million this year, and making more money than MSNBC and CNN combined, as well as the three network news.
“Henry Blodget
Jan. 9, 2010, 7:54 PM
When Roger Ailes started FOX News in 1996, people said he'd have no chance against CNN.
This year, FOX News will likely make $700 million of profit—more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined.
Ailes rules not only the news business but politics: If Ailes were a Democrat, James Carville says, the Democrats would control 67 seats in the Senate.
David Carr and Tim Arango of the NYT provide a snapshot of News Corp’s most valuable asset. Here's the money shot:
Mr. Ailes, the son of a foreman at the Packard Electric plant in Warren, Ohio, described his upbringing with three words: “God, country, family” and said that credo was responsible for the success of Fox News
[snip]”
http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-fox-newss-700-million-man-2010-1
New York Times:
“Mr. Ailes is certainly making money. At a time when the broadcast networks are struggling with diminishing audiences and profits in news, he has built Fox News into the profit engine of the News Corporation. Fox News is believed to make more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined. The division is on track to achieve $700 million in operating profit this year, according to analyst estimates that Mr. Ailes does not dispute”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/business/media/10ailes.html?hp
What more ya got?
The only thing you've proved is that you are a very simple-minded person who can't grasp even the simplest of concepts. You're embarrassing yourself, and you're not even bright enough to know it.
Again, you don’t understand the difference between revenue and profit. You’re a product of our public school system, no doubt.
Yeah?
Read this..and weep:
New York Times, Published: January 9, 2010 :
“Mr. Ailes is certainly making money. At a time when the broadcast networks are struggling with diminishing audiences and profits in news, he has built Fox News into the profit engine of the News Corporation. Fox News is believed to make more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined. The division is on track to achieve $700 million in operating profit this year, according to analyst estimates that Mr. Ailes does not dispute”
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/business/media/10ailes.html?hp
Opps! You lose. Again!
And, you continue to prove my point.
Oh no!
Chortle!
You can still read I take it?
Here...Lemme help you out
New York Times, January 9, 2010
"Fox News is believed to make more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined. The division is on track to achieve $700 million in operating profit this year, according to analyst estimates that Mr. Ailes does not dispute”"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/business/media/10ailes.html?hp
What does the bolded word say?
Again
New York Times, January 9, 2010
“Fox News is believed to make more money than CNN, MSNBC and the evening newscasts of NBC, ABC and CBS combined. The division is on track to achieve $700 million in operating profit this year, according to analyst estimates that Mr. Ailes does not dispute””
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/business/media/10ailes.html?hp
It says you've been sentenced to an intellect born of the public school system. I'm sorry.
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.