According to Media Life Magazine, the three big network evening news broadcasts have slipped badly in the key 18 to 34 age bracket. At the same time, though, the Cable news nets have picked up among that same demographic. All three network newscasts have lost numbers since last year, with Katie Couric having the worst slide of the three.
According to Media Life, the main reason the evening news shows have been losing so steadily is because the Internet and Cable can give news at any time the viewer is ready to take their news whereas the evening news must be specifically scheduled into the viewer's lives. Media Life claims that the 18 to 34 age group just "never got into the evening news habit" -- a pretty plausible point.
The Internet is a big factor for this age group:
Much of it takes place on the internet. A recent Zogby poll found that 55 percent of 18-29s cite the internet as their primary news source... By the time 6:30 rolls around, they've gotten the story, and there's little Gibson or Williams or Couric have to add.
So what are the numbers? Here is what Media Life reported as the latest numbers through the beginning of March.
Season to date, the “CBS Evening News with Katie Couric” is down the most among 18-34s, off 21 percent from a 0.86 rating last year, to a 0.68, according to Nielsen data analyzed by Carat. In the same span, Couric has fallen 14.6 percent in 25-54s and 16 percent among 35-64s.
ABC’s “World News with Charles Gibson” has slipped 13.5 percent among 18-34s, from a 0.96 to a 0.83, while falling 5.6 percent with 25-54s and 3.3 percent with 35-64s.
NBC’s “Nightly News with Brian Williams” has dipped the least in 18-34s, where it also leads, off 10.1 percent, from a 1.09 to a 0.98. That’s compared to dips of 7.7 percent among 25-54s and 5 percent with 35-64s.
This is good news for those who would love to see TV network news gone the way of the dinosaurs. I'd say that once the Baby Boomers begin to fade into history, they will take the regular network news with them because the generations after the Boomers have little need or interest in the big three news outlets.
These falling ratings are really bad news for network news, though. They have no where to go but down unless they can figure a way to re-ignite viewership among younger viewers.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Baby Boomer
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 13:06 ET by dvdaughtryI'd say that once the Baby Boomers begin to fade into history, they will take the regular network news with them because the generations after the Boomers have little need or interest in the big three news outlets.
And we have no need or interest in the baby boomers themselves...
(at least the ones in political office =)
WTH... Wow, at least
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 13:13 ET by bigtimerWTH...
Wow, at least there is some good news here today.
This info. all makes me smile.
But WAIT!.... I watch a ton
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 14:17 ET by MrShyBut WAIT!.... I watch a TON of TV..... (oh.... wait.......)
:p
* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change
Must NOT See TV
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 14:17 ET by thoridflyI stopped watching the alphabet networks WHEN I WAS TWELVE ... that's more than FIFTEEN years ago.
How stupid can 30% (or is it 10% ... what's the percentage of liberals in the U.S., anyway) of Americans be ... I was TWELVE and I FIGURED IT OUT ... BACK IN 1993!!
Ratings Up?
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 14:33 ET by allanfI checked the ratings at Media Bistro. The figures they tracked looked like:
Total viewers: NBC: 8,650,000 / ABC: 8,450,000 / CBS: 7,560,000 for Oct 16 2006
Last weeks ratings were
Total viewers: NBC: 9,540,000 / ABC: 8,990,000 / CBS: 6,960,000
which means viewship has risen from 23,660,000 to 25,490,000.
I find it hard to believe that viewship is rising. I also find it incredible that 8% of all Americans would be tuned to an evening newscast.
I do too
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 17:30 ET by celatorI also find it diffficult to believe that viewership has risen. This is a case where one needs to know more about how their poll was constructed.
As a percentage of the population, the number of eyeballs focused on MSM television, magazines and newspapers has dropped continuously for many years. That's why ad revenues are falling, (NYT revenues dropped by something like 25% last year). MSM's are reducing the number of reporters and other staff, or shutting down altogether.
Last year, I was part of a year long citizens' advisory group for our state's largest newspaper. We discussed most the issues we talk about here. I can tell you MSM newspapers and networks are terrified about the impact of Web-sourced news, blogs and other similar sites on their ad sales and readership. And they don't have a clue about how to counter the trend. They are flailing, at best, though some (Wall St Journal etc) are doing OK.
If you look at sites like TVNewser you can see that the number of TV viewers as a percentage of the total population is shockingly low. MSM credibility among the most important demographic of all--citizen opinion shapers--is below 10%.
When the MSM decided to politicize their "news", a movement which began in the late '60's, they signed their own death warrant. And to this very day, most MSM outlets deny they have a political point of view in their news reporting, a position which only accelerates the decline of their credibility. Astounding.
Although maybe a factor...
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 14:45 ET by Mark_for_Senatethe internet/blogs may be a factor, but what is delicious is that apparently none of the 'executives' of these fraudulent 'news' programs even consider the fact that they lose market share simply because they produce a useless agenda driven propaganda product that only ignorant liberals consume (or tolerate).
To know and not do, is to not yet know
Defective Product
Thu, 03/13/2008 - 16:35 ET by allanfJournalism is the only area of American commerce which produces a demonstrably defective product.