Media Bistro broke it Tuesday morning, and gave us all of the details shortly after noon. The news: CBS and ABC's evening newscasts both came in with record low viewerships during the week of June 15.
ABC's fall to less than 6.5 million total viewers is probably more of a surprise than CBS's plunge below 5 million. Is there a health care propaganda backlash?
But the biggest news, as usual, is the combined audience drop, this time to barely 19 million. As usual, Media Bistro didn't note that.
Here's a chart comparing the overall and 25-54 demographic audiences during the week of June 15, 2009 to those of the previous week, January 26, 2009 (a combined high-water mark during the first week after Barack Obama's inauguration) and June 16, 2008:
Media Bistro charitably notes that Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric were on vacation, and that the transition to digital TV may have been a factor. The digital TV claim actually makes a bit of sense, because the previous week-over-week percentage drops in the 25-54 demo have usually been larger than the overall audience declines. This time, the overall drop was larger than the 25-54 demo drop. But if some older folks have lost the use of their TVs, how sure can anyone be as to the percentage that are going to come back? The next few weeks will determine whether the two excuses just named are valid.
CBS's fall may be a bit of a milestone, in that its June 15 weekly average audience was less than the 8 PM combined cable news channel audiences of Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and CNN Headline on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of that same week. That may very well be a first-time-ever occurrence.
There are plenty more hazy, lazy, crazy weeks of summer remaining. All-praise-Dear-Leader, all-the-time doesn't seem to be working out very well at the Big 3 Networks.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Still 19 million Americans
June 23, 2009 - 23:32 ET by snaggletoothieStill 19 million Americans nightly exposed to all of Obama's big lies is distressing to think about.
Yeah, but I bet a few
June 24, 2009 - 03:10 ET by RR GOPYeah, but I bet a few million of them are conservatives who watch out of habit or don't have cable. If they do have cable, they probably don't want to sit through an hour-long harangue by even guys they might agree with like Beck or Hannity.
CNN certainly has hurt them as has just plain old more choices through the cable networks. Another thing to consider is that a lot of them are probably burned out hearing about George Bush and Iraq for 8 years, and now have to hear about Obama every damn night.
The networks tell them everything's getting better, but most of them aren't stupid...they know that's not true.
Another thing to consider is that many of the generation that watched guys like Cronkite and were the same age as he are getting quite old...death, senility, being forced into retirement facilities and the like. The alphabet networks loyal base is evaporating. Young guys and gals aren't interested...they just want to get high, surf the internet and 'hook up' with each other...they aren't going to sit in front of a TV and watch Couric, et al.
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
Digital TV Transition
June 24, 2009 - 07:20 ET by allanfI would expect the digital television transition to hurt these broadcasts. The audience is an elderly, residual audience left over from those halcyon days when the 70 million Americans watched the evening newscasts. These elderly are among the more likely to have missed the conversion to digital televsion.
TV News Viewing . . .
June 24, 2009 - 07:51 ET by 1611LilacLady. . . by this 62 year old Conservative lady:
Zero, Zilch . . Both non-cable (local & national) and cable. Yep that includes FNC. Stopped watching them a long time ago.
As for the 'young guys & gals' . . that's a rather broad stroke accusation. My son is 26, working, getting married in 2 weeks. Two guys (in his friends circle) and age bracket, are married. Others are working.
My son doesn't watch the news because he knows it's all lies. He listens to the radio in his vehicle. Conservative radio at that!
As for the others (say 20 & under) . . tell me what 8-16 year olds care about the news. They're busy with school (aka Government Schools) and growing up, going through adolescence and arguing with their parents. About normal for that age . .
From 16 - 20 . . they're finishing up high school, possibly going to college and/or looking for a job.
I can't believe you made such a comment about the youth. Some are like what you said, but to include all, it makes you sound like an alarmist liberal.
C'mon . .
I grew up in the 50's and watched the news only a little - - I do remember 'Good Night Chet, Good Night David', and 'Uncle' Walter (And You Were There) . . only to find out many years later that he was (oops - - no death announcement yet) is a globalist and a traitor (he belittles those of us who enjoy our independence as a country).
The alphabet news outlets are dying for 2 reasons:
(1) People are tired of their lies
(2) There are many many Conservative websites where you can actually read the truth. Who needs TV news?
Isaiah 5:20a Woe unto them who call evil good, and good evil. . . KJV
Actually,
June 24, 2009 - 10:43 ET by XJ.Jonbeing a social 27 year old, I can attest that most of the people I know in their 20's couldn't give a damn what's on the news if they tried. which actually makes me respect those who do, and aren't caught up in MSM lies and Liberal propaganda. I know way too many young adults who go through life everyday with out a thought about what is happening to our country, OUR America. If more people were watching what is going on, things would be very different. Fact is, things are only going to get worse in the next 3 years. If Obama is re-elected, he's got nothing to lose. We must make sure that does not happen.
Taxed Enough Already
Trying to Attribute This to the Transition or Other Excuses
June 24, 2009 - 10:59 ET by farstar99Trying to attribute this to the digital transition or other excuses is truly pathetic.
The numbers have gone steadily down right up to the transition and before anybody went on vacation.
How bout Fox?
June 24, 2009 - 03:07 ET by JimmeI'd like to see what Fox's numbers were during this that week. Its time that they stop pretending there are only 3 major networks, especialy when the one they like to exclude has the biggest show on TV (American Idol).
I know that O'rielly has beaten Katie Couric a few times, A cable show beating a network broadcast is just unheard of.
Give us some numbers!
June 24, 2009 - 05:34 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsI would also like to see FNC's numbers, and I would like to see NewsBusters put the 6PM numbers as a compairison, not the 8PM numbers. 6PM on Fox is news with a dash of analysis, 8PM is pure opinion.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
You could follow the daily links provided ....
June 24, 2009 - 06:40 ET by Tom Blumer.... which would tell you that Special report at 6PM drew:
- 1,647,000 on Monday, June 15 (out of 3,290,000 for all 4 cable news channels)
- 1,700,000 on Tuesday, June 16 (out of 3,221,000)
- 1,821,000 on Wednesday, June 17 (out of 3,191,000)
- 1,922,000 on Thursday, June 18 (out of 3,434,000)
As to degree of interest, it would be interesting to see how many TVs tuned into the Big 3 are being watched, vs. left on and ignored after viewers actually watched the local news that preceded it.
This demographic is not very religious
June 24, 2009 - 04:19 ET by VinnsterLets face it folks, this demographic is not a religious group, therefor they do not watch the big 3 as they worship The One.
If I were a TV manufacturer... If I were an advertiser on TV...
June 24, 2009 - 07:15 ET by Red JeepWith those 24-54 numbers, I would be rethinking my future involvement with TV.
Not much different than polls.
June 24, 2009 - 08:03 ET by AnkharanConsidering the way they gather the who is watching what, which is an outdated uner powered and inaccurate modality these numbers mean... squat.. except to those that think these polls are accurate and reflect that accuracy without bias and confirmatory numbers.
There is a HUGE capability to tell you who is watching. Getting those numbers broken down and translated into raw data... just as simple.
Getting someone to honestly tell you that data... next to impossible.
It's the weatherman's fault
June 24, 2009 - 08:20 ET by EddieWalkerIn my house, we chose which news channel to watch based on the weatherman. We only watch the local news, and depending on what night of the week it is, pretty much decides what channel we watch. Our favorite weather guy has an odd schedule, so we go to plan B when he's off. Then if there is something going on in the world, we'll turn in to Fox to see what is happening and maybe watch one of their shows to get more information. Most of it is the same old thing that I hear on the radio, so it's not a big deal to see it on TV too. As for the networks, we quit watching them years and years ago when it became obvious that it was all about pushing a liberal agenda without basis on reality or the truth. I thank Clinton for that, if he hadn't been such a scum bag and the media didn't do such a pathetic job of trying to lie for him, we still might be watching some of those shows.
Interesting way to pick a channel
June 24, 2009 - 08:31 ET by BlondeI don't even watch the local news, and haven't in at least ten years. For my weather, I go to my local paper on-line, which links to Weather Underground.
Here in South Florida, the weather this time of year is dominated by "hurricane watch" coverage, it's nerve wracking every time there's a germ of a storm three thousand miles away to listen to these weather guessers get all hysterical.
As for ABC, NBC, and CBS....and their sinking ratings, GREAT! I'd really like to see the year over year numbers to see how far they've fallen promoting an agenda rather than reporting the news.
I hope he fails, too.
Who watches network news?
June 24, 2009 - 11:06 ET by slickwillie2001I don't really understand who watches weekday network-wide news. In most major markets it appears to me that the local broadcast stations don't take the network feed, and instead put on their own local news shows, because they are big money-makers. I haven't made an honest effort to look for it in my TV guide (Atlanta, GA); it may be available somewhere, but I have honestly never watched ABC, NBC, or CBS network weekday news, either at 6pm or 11pm.
Maybe in smaller towns where local stations don't have the resources to put on their own news programs they take the network feed?
ABC - All Barrack Channel
June 24, 2009 - 08:59 ET by Free StinkerToday, it is officially "The Big Two". ABC has ceased reporting news, and has chosen to become the agitprop team for the Obama adminitration.
"Gov. Palin has been subjected to one of the most massive and dishonest pile-on smear attacks in the history of liberal media." -- Lowell Ponte
Summertime: viewers are leaving...
June 24, 2009 - 09:02 ET by wnaegeleAutumn: viewers are leaving. Winter: viewers are leaving;. Spring: viewers are leaving. Viewers are leaving -- period.
Thanks for that thought, wnaegele
June 24, 2009 - 09:14 ET by BlondeThe words brought to mind a change in lyrics to the classic Summertime, by Janis. A great way to start the day.
Summertime.....and the viewers are leaving.
I hope he fails, too.
This is why FOX should get
June 24, 2009 - 10:10 ET by mattmThis is why FOX should get in the over-the-air market, but they never listen to me.
the nets
June 24, 2009 - 10:52 ET by jessieHjessieH A lot of people tune in just to see the circus. I sometimes watch to see the monkeys on CBS.
Network news makes me snooze...
June 24, 2009 - 11:56 ET by not_lima_HI remember watching heavyweight boxing on ABC – for free. Then cable came along selling us on the commercial-free angle. But soon there were plenty of commercials (unless you paid even more for movie channels) and a 30 second Mike Tyson fight cost an extra $90.00. And now even channels like Discovery bombard us with INFOMERCIALS!
It’s all too much for me. I no longer have cable and rarely turn the television on period. If it weren’t for radio and internet I wouldn’t know who Charlie and Katie were. They just don’t matter.