Comments on: Palin’s TV Audience Over Biden’s, Clinton’s, Just Below Obama’s

By: Jamie

Jamie — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:17:54 +0000

You know, I KNEW that the Republican convention wasn’t getting the same amount of time! That really pisses me off. It’s not right, and it’s not fair. But I find it amusing that they got tons of viewers, despite the fact that they were cut short.

By: Phil McKann

Phil McKann — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 01:50:26 +0000

Hey, I am stil curious how four channels were able to broadcast the DNC but not the RNC. Is it because of what Paul wrote, that cable channels are not under that same rule as broadcast channels?

By: Bobby

Bobby — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 00:28:20 +0000

I’ve got bad news for “Robert” and most of the left leaning rabid mainstream media, Sarah Palin is an enormously appealing and refreshing candidate that is now hugely popular. This “reality” star as you put it, got rid of decades of entrenched corruption and good ole boy politics as governor of Alaska. She has also forgotten more than most people know about the energy challenges that we face in America.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 07:52:09 +0000

Palin is nothing more than a reality star, so the ratings are fully understandable. Hopefully the americans will have more judgment before casting the vote, or not casting it (abstention is far better than going for family drama on TV)

By: dave

dave — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 04:46:59 +0000

BET is not a news channel therefore they have no ethical obligation to give fair coverage.They also no commerical interest to cover the RNC. lets face it; Not alot of black republicans. No black candidate.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 02:36:40 +0000

oh yeah, come to think of it, BET is a cable network. So they can get away with thier shameless coverage of the Democratic convention and not the Republican. BET is not considered a broadcast station.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:39:27 +0000

bpjam,
Although all true, I still long for the days when everyone in news pretened they were not biased. Now they clearly are, and we are stuck with the idea that people’s minds are more shaped by the channel they watch than what is being said.
With that said, I did enjoy watching Keith Olbermann attempt to butt in with rude comments last night on MSNBC only to have the producer jerk him off the air. It happened in the middle of rudy giuliani’s speech. Tonight everyone from MSNBC is much more polite. Anyone else notice the same?

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:32:30 +0000

Doug, I think that’s a reasonable theory for the audience increase on Wednesday.

By: Doug

Doug — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:20:28 +0000

The numbers for Palin were clearly a “who the hell is she?” phenomenon. It’s not that the Republican base is suddenly more fired up than the Democrats or that millions have fallen in love with her, it’s that this was really their first look at this candidate, a relative nobody only a week ago. So there’s the curiosity factor, and there’s your explanation for the numbers. After the bitter tone of her speech, I highly doubt Americans are suddenly in love with her, except those who belong to the Republican base.

Speaking of bitter, what the hell do the republicans have to be bitter about? THEY’RE IN CHARGE! As for mocking the media, the media has been McCain’s best friend for several years, and he knows it. He’s admitted it. The media loved (or rather loved McCain). To suddenly trash the media? WTF?

By: Jason

Jason — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:26:41 +0000

Sarah Palin’s speech was frelling brilliant. She bit clear to the bone when she mocked Obama over his remarks about her “lack of experience” and successfully thumbed her nose at the news organizations that have been trying to demonize her. She was refreshingly candid and absolutely fearless. She came off as composed, confident, intelligent and principled. I am a fence-sitter no longer. My vote goes to McCain/Palin.

By: Bill Gorman

Bill Gorman — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 23:14:06 +0000

Outlander, you are correct sir!

I thought 8 million viewers for Fox News was unlikely http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/09/01/cable-beats-broadcast-man-bites-dog/4873#comment-21424

However, I did predict they’d beat all the broadcast networks, which they did!

By: bpjam

bpjam — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:53:00 +0000

Paul, BET was a network jewel sold for $3.1B (I hope I’m remembering that number correctly) which made Robert Johnson richer than Midas. But it was only worth money because it cornered the black market on TV and not because it had some great ratings. It was the Univision of the black community so it was worth a lot (not $3.1B though) in advertising revenue.

But while they advertise their political coverage as being bipartisan they are really only talking about covering the speeches from both candidates. The DNC convention got nightly coverage on BET because it featured the Clintons and others promoting the black guy. If Hillary was the nominee, they wouldn’t be wasting prime time with politicians in Aug-Sept. Even if the GOP put a black guy on the ticket they couldn’t get more coverage because the GOP is dead to the virtual monolith of that audience.

Its sad but TV basically makes it obvious. White people and black people live in separate countries within the US. They don’t consume the same news, watch the same shows or read the same newspaper or websites.

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:28:21 +0000

Rick is correct. I am in radio and have been for the last 24 years. The FCC requires that you offer equal air time to all candidates. Along with the EAS system it is what will most likely get you a fine for being in violation.
You may sell the air time, but you must offer the same price to all candidates. In that case it would be up to the candidate or party to accept or reject the offer.
Perhaps the Democrats paid for air time on BET,…..unlikely.
More likely is that they are willing to pay the price. Afterall, if conservative values are given such an important female voice, they may feel as if most of the videos they air will be in jeopardy.

By: bpjam

bpjam — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:57:18 +0000

First, take some Thorazine Joe. You are foaming at the mouth again. Can you save your partisan hatred for some website where it matters? This is a website about TV RATINGS. Good, bad, indifferent – just ratings.

I’m stunned that Obama got 38-39M last week. And I think it might even be more stunning that a TV rookie just ripped off a number like this. This is American Idol-Survivor territory.

Separately it has been reported that BET, Univision AND Telemundo did not cover the RNC speech. It’s kinda obvious why BET didn’t cover the Republicans since they are going to do anything to step on an Obama presidency but McCain was a hero of the Amnesty movement and there could have been a lot of viewers lost there. But even without those other channels, something is obviously going on politically that the news crowd is underestimating and undoubtedly under-charging advertisers for.

I’m really interested to see the cable news breakdowns. How does Fox News not go over 10M if the 37M+ is correct? It was already bewildering that FNC beat out all three Nets on Tues night. Zucker and Moonves had better get wake up.

Any links to an hour by hour breakdown of the cable ratings last week and this week during both conventions?

By: Robert Seidman

Robert Seidman — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:48:58 +0000

Outlander: I don’t know that I cared enough to have an opinion, but if I did (I don’t remember honestly) I’m *sure* I would have forecasted under 9 million. Last week at this time I didn’t know what a media force Palin would be, and I wouldn’t have guessed those sorts of numbers even on Friday when she was announced as the VP nominee. She is a force and I’m sure it has the Obama camp more worried than McCain, but it will indeed be interesting to see how McCain’s ratings stack up.

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:47:24 +0000

I watched that crap called the RNC last night and I just had to laugh at all the BS flowing from their mouths here are the facts Rudy last night should have had the KKK around him the way he was talking about Obama it sounded that bad and the inexperienced but a hottie Sarah Palin saying Obama wants to raise taxes HAHAHA the taxes are raised as we speak due to the Republicans and I honestly believe President McCain would just be another 4 more years of Bush because he he agree’s with damn near everything Bush says and does and let’s be honest do we really want McCain to win because that will make him the oldest president to take his first term and if something was to happen to him we would then have President Palin………nobody wants that right???

Just my opinion

By: Outlander

Outlander — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:35:41 +0000

I asked about this earlier. I believe Gorman and Seidman both didn’t believe Fox News would top 8 million viewers. My suspicions were correct that Fox News would beat CNN for coverage of the Republican convention, although I admit I am surprised that the Republican convention is getting very similar ratings to the Democrats’ convention.

Very, very interesting! It will be interesting to see how McCain’s ratings stack up tonight.

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:11:14 +0000

Shut up Rick…

By: RICK

RICK — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:08:57 +0000

Sooo…if the other 3 networks that didn’t cover the Republican party actually covered it…they may have beaten Obama’s nite…I find that interesting…mmmm…isn’t there some TV/Radio ethics or rule or law that both parties get equal time on air? …if one party is on the network – that network has to give equal time to the OTHER party…? I was in radio so we gave both sides no on-air time, so we wouldn’t have to promote the party we didn’t agree with … but if we put one side on – we had to put the other view on too…