Evening Newscasts Saw Viewership Decline With Daylight Saving Time's Arrival, But Were Also Down From Last Year
During the week of March 12, after the arrival of Daylight Saving Time, the audience for the evenings newscasts at the Big Three networks dropped precipitously compared to the previous week (by 7.7%) and the same week last year (by 9.0%).
Perhaps the year-over-year metric is an unfair comparison, because during the same week in 2011 the Japanese tsunami drew in ordinarily uninterested viewers. Compared to two years ago, the combined audience was slightly higher (by 2.1%). NBC and ABC were both down slightly, while CBS, recovering from the Katie Couric era and still in a distant third place, showed a double-digit gain. But the three networks were down in the advertiser-prized 25-54 demographic, with CBS eking out a much smaller gain which did not offset losses at NBC and ABC. Here are the numbers:
All three networks have seen the 25-54 component of their viewership shrink compared to two years ago.
The post-Daylight Saving Time total audience drop-offs in 2011 and 2010 were 4.4% and 11.5%, respectively. The respective changes in the 25-54 demographic were +0.7% and -12.7%.
Perhaps it's isolated, because NBC and ABC have generally increased their audiences by modest percentages since last fall, while CBS has done even better. But given that this is a presidential election year, one might expect year-over-year improvement, despite the tsunami's impact on last year. The prospects for improvement going forward seem dim. Frequent instances of sub-20 million combined audiences seem more than a little likely. If they come, some of the reason will be that audiences have learned that they won't get fair and balanced reporting from Brian Williams, Diane Sawyer, and Scott Pelley, especially about those electoral contests.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
- Tom Blumer's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Huh?
Submitted by Guapo Diablo on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 12:20pm.
Did Helen Keller write the headline for this story?
"Evening Newscasts Saw Viewership Decline Daylight With Savings Time's Arrival, But Were Also Down From Last Year"
Maybe it should be:
"Evening Newscasts Saw Viewership Decline With Daylight Savings Time's Arrival, But Were Also Down From Last Year"
Just sayin'.
Fixed ...
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 12:49pm.
I was missing the "with," and put it in the wrong place. Just caught it before seeing your comment (but after you posted it).
An error between the operator and the keyboard ....
Cool
Submitted by Guapo Diablo on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 1:01pm.
Just tryin' to help a brutha out.
i do that a lot. Fingers
Submitted by ricklail on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 1:15pm.
i do that a lot. Fingers going faster than the brain. I took a typing test online a few years back. I typed 50 words per mintue but after the mistakes it came down to about 10.
"Perhaps the year-over-year
Submitted by forest on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 1:28pm.
"Perhaps the year-over-year metric is an unfair comparison"
It pains me to extend them such a courtesy.
forest
Submitted by Jerry Mack on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 2:21pm.
"Perhaps the year-over-year metric is an unfair comparison"
Really? Why would you say that it is Perhaps unfair?
As I noted ...
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 2:32pm.
... last year had the Japanese tsunami, so a drop-off would be to an extent understandable. Whether it's enough to make the 7.7% drop cited understandable is why the work "perhaps" is there -- and it's why I went back to 2010 for more data.
Daylight Saving Time
Submitted by billrowe on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 2:28pm.
Tom, Another nitpick. It's Daylight Saving Time not Daylight Savings Time. It is not a savings and loan, and we do not accumulate the hour saved.
Fixed ...
Submitted by Tom Blumer on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 2:38pm.
... added a link in the opening sentence for those who don't know that, which included me. Thx.
Here's something funny: the URL for the link has "savings" in it (but then again, obviously, so does mine). Zheesh.
bill
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 6:33pm.
I'd never paid attention to the "s" before so went to look around. It does appear that Saving is the more used spelling, but Savings is in many articles about the topic. As Tom pointed out in his reply, sometimes the link has one spelling and the article another. And in some cases the Search Title or Headline of the article have a different spelling.
What I've concluded from this:
1. People who write online articles don't necessarily write the headline or search entry.
2. People who write online articles don't pay attention to what they've already written.
3. I have too much time on my hands.
Tom
Submitted by ncstevem on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 5:17pm.
I have a question for you or others who may post here.
The four branches of the MSM have been experiencing contraction among audience and ad revenue.
The news magazines (TIME, NW & US N & WR) are almost gone and are no longer a factor. Their print versions will be gone in three years.
The newspapers have lost about 75% of their ad revenue (display & classified) since 2006 and about 50% of their subscribers since 2006. They will no longer exist in print form in the next 5 - 7 years. Assumng they continue their online versions after the print version ceases publishing, they will just be another website among many news websites.
My question is (are):
What about the network news divisions? They've lost 60% of their audience since 1980. How much audience do they need to remain viable for their parent companies. Best guess, how long before they disappear?
How about the cable news channels (MSNBC, CNN etc?). Are they profitable and do you see them disappearing?
If the Democrats no longer have these channels to run cover for them, how does their disappearence affect politics in this country if at all?
Thanks
Good !
Submitted by snowwwizard on Sun, 03/25/2012 - 11:20pm.
Good !