NYT shills for leftist MSNBC’s “ratings wave”
posted at 1:14 pm on November 6, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
MSNBC has taken off the mask and revealed itself as a lefty network. The NYT dutifully reports this and touts the channel’s ratings results.
Riding a ratings wave from “Countdown With Keith Olbermann,” a program that takes strong issue with the Bush administration, MSNBC is increasingly seeking to showcase its nighttime lineup as a welcome haven for viewers of a similar mind.
Lest there be any doubt that the cable channel believes there is ratings gold in shows that criticize the administration with the same vigor with which Fox News’s hosts often champion it, two NBC executives acknowledged yesterday that they were talking to Rosie O’Donnell about a prime-time show on MSNBC.
Oddly, for a story centered on TV ratings gold, there’s only one mention of any actual ratings. And even that’s vague at best.
The channel has done so much as Fox News did beginning in 1996, when the president was Bill Clinton, a Democrat. On some nights recently, Mr. Olbermann has even come tantalizingly close to surpassing the ratings of the host he describes as his nemesis, Bill O’Reilly on Fox News, at least among viewers ages 25 to 54, which is the demographic cable news advertisers prefer. Most of the time, though, Mr. O’Reilly outdraws Mr. Olbermann by about 1.5 million viewers over all at the same hour, according to Nielsen Media Research.
So that’s what the NYT says. What does the TV Newser scoreboard say?
Olbermann is a distant second in a four-way race in the prized demo. And check the total viewers number — O’Reilly still more than doubles Olbermann’s viewership number. Check out previous scoreboards and it’s tough to detect a ratings wave. The very occassional ripple, maybe, but a wave? Hardly. Olbermann is soaring to stay right where he’s been for eons.
Now, that’s not to say that MSNBC isn’t eating into Fox or that Fox isn’t losing its ratings dominance on the edges. That is happening, but that can just as easily be explained by Fox’s increasing focus on tabloid stories and sensationalism as on anything MSNBC is or isn’t doing.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
They’re just laying the groundwork for a story about how their readership has soared by 4%.
They’ll just leave out the “down” part.
Veeshir on November 6, 2007 at 1:17 PM
I bet the NYT’s threw a party over their soaring circ numbers too.
Topsecretk9 on November 6, 2007 at 1:20 PM
Get out of my head Veeshir!
Topsecretk9 on November 6, 2007 at 1:20 PM
They took Michelle off Of O Reilly and look what happens to the ratings
William Amos on November 6, 2007 at 1:21 PM
I saw this at Michelle’s and focused in on the remark about how Rosie criticized “unabated” casualties in Iraq.
For an article written this month, that’s inaccurate. Casualties have declined; they have–abated. The Times didn’t need an adjective there.
see-dubya on November 6, 2007 at 1:22 PM
One thing that should be noted…..
“Hardball” should be changed to “Hardly”. As in “Hardly” anyone is watching the bloated piece of crap Matthews. He is being destroyed almost 4 to 1 compared with Fox. Even Glenn Beck is beating him. How can MSNBC justify keeping him on?
If I were Krazy Keith (and I’m glad I’m actually sane), I would want a stronger lead in.
Dr.Cwac.Cwac on November 6, 2007 at 1:23 PM
That’s why I watch less of Fox News now. They are going down hill to meet the other cruddy MSM outlets.
LeeSmith on November 6, 2007 at 1:23 PM
Goodness effing gracious - what was that slobberfest on H&C over Oprah last night?
Editor on November 6, 2007 at 1:29 PM
MSNBC and their goofy gaggle of goons will never appeal to anyone other than the loony left viewers. Matthews, Scarborough, Olbermann, and perhaps Rosie are of a common mold and fit in quite well together at NBC.
rplat on November 6, 2007 at 1:29 PM
I think Michelle needs to start a campaign to warn any potential advertiser supporting a Rosie MSNBC show that they will be boycotted.
GoodBoy on November 6, 2007 at 1:32 PM
People with good taste will take care of that
William Amos on November 6, 2007 at 1:34 PM
Dude, I rarely watch H&C anymore, its unbearable, Hannity’s a dunce and Colmesy is too.
Bad Candy on November 6, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Olbermann has got himself a nice little niche viewership, MSNBC is just glad any time they can beat out CNN for second place, so he should be around a while. Meanwhile, even among the “coveted demographic” of 25-54, O’Reilly is still beating Olbmerman with the 11 pm replay.
What’s more telling is that the NYT seems to regard basically everyting on FNC as blatantly partisan as Olbermann’s show. I guess they missed that recent Harvard study:
Fox News: The programming studied on Fox News offered a somewhat more positive picture of Republicans and more negative one of Democrats compared with other media outlets. Fox News stories about a Republican candidate were most likely to be neutral (47%), with the remainder more positive than negative (32% vs. 21% negative). The bulk of that positive coverage went to Giuliani (44% positive), while McCain still suffered from unflattering coverage (20% positive vs. 35% negative).
When it came to Democratic candidates, the picture was more negative. Again, neutral stories had a slight edge (39%), followed by 37% negative and 24% positive. And, in marked contrast from the rest of the media, coverage of Obama was twice as negative as positive: 32% negative vs. 16% positive and 52% neutral.
But any sense here that the news channel was uniformly positive about Republicans or negative about Democrats is not manifest in the data.
Dudley Smith on November 6, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Is than an opinion piece or a news piece?
It reads like opinion… is it supposed to be?
RightWinged on November 6, 2007 at 1:38 PM
Fox is definitely resting on it’s lorels and spitting out the aforementioned slobberfests. That’s the difference. That and no one around to rebuke the always dependable propaganda forwarded by none other than Miss Powers.
Griz on November 6, 2007 at 1:39 PM
The Leprechaun is reading his bill to impeach Dick Cheney right now. Olby’s reaction tonight is going to be comedy gold.
Laura on November 6, 2007 at 1:40 PM
To be fair, Michelle took herself off. Not the other way around.
I understand her reasons for doing it, and wish daily that I never have to see or hear Geraldo again.
But let’s be accurate here.
I’d be interested to see if O’Reilly gets a bump from Laura Ingraham’s new weekly segment, as well as her newly minted status as his guest host.
I know I’m sure excited about that.
Hawkins1701 on November 6, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Well since Keith has been getting prime exposure on NBC’s other properties, and cushy advertisements like this one, it is no wonder that he is doing ‘better’.
However, O’R’s show is not doing nearly as well, but the total number of viewers is down over that time frame.
Anyway, I wonder how much Olberman paid for this advertisement in the NYT. I also wonder how much he paid for his advertisements as a guest host on NBC’s football games. What’s that? Nothing? You mean to tell me that advertising in the NYT and on NBC is worth NOTHING and his ratings have everything to do with the content of his show?
Interesting way to look at advertisements in both the NYT and on NBC - worthless. Executives must be thrilled with the characterization.
ThackerAgency on November 6, 2007 at 1:46 PM
this whole thing makes me wonder…just how can a high paid TV exec possibly come to the conclusion that rosie odonell is an acceptable candidate for news anchor/host/anything related to even fake journalism. they should pay me 1/2 what they pay the guy who made that call, and they’d get more for their money.
ernesto on November 6, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Yep, riding that wave, just before it circles around a few times, then goes strait down the toilet.
4shoes on November 6, 2007 at 2:00 PM
I don’t care about any of NBC’s networks, etc.; however, I am an avid NFL fan - thus, I’m very disappointed that NBC has opted to show the NFL again, with Olbermann as one of their hosts. Last Sunday night’s joke of a (green) show, when my beloved Cowboys were on, was enough to drive me crazy. Couldn’t they just leave the leftist rhetoric to MSNBC?
Rick on November 6, 2007 at 2:03 PM
Only examples are the aforementioned stories on H & C. Sean hardly mentions these same stories on his radio show, so they’re probably doing it to appease Alan.
RMCS_USN on November 6, 2007 at 2:08 PM
I think that the term “soar” should be read in the context of how high a peacock can “soar.”
Re: Fox News, I watch it in the morning and avoid it at night. O’Reilly is a pompous ass, who thinks he’s some kind of oracle, above the fray of politics. Hannity is a whiner, who always acts like he’s going to take his ball home if he doesn’t get his way. Colmes, well, I’ll move on. And Greta. Oh, Greta - tabloid crap.
Oh, and for the record - Megyn Kelly is hot. She’s gold, Jerry! Gold!
OhEssYouCowboys on November 6, 2007 at 2:09 PM
If they want to broadcast tabloid crap and maintain ratings all they have to do is move RedEye into Greta’s timeslot. The only way I can tolerate more stories about Britney is if Greg G. is “analyzing” them.
NTWR on November 6, 2007 at 2:23 PM
That wave is the toilet swirling.
The NYT will do for MessNBC what they did for Dead Air America.
JammieWearingFool on November 6, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Not even close to the same vigor, but who’s counting?
I admit I stopped watching Fox a while back, one too many Britney/Paris story, too many car chases… When O.J. popped up again, I cancelled cable. I was never around for their primetime line-up, I used to catch Fox and Friends in the morning, but that has gone down hill some. I just don’t like the new girl.
reaganaut on November 6, 2007 at 2:49 PM
Fox, sad to say, has decided to go tabloid in a big way. There are endless hours devoted to Scott and Lacey Peterson, now Stacy Peterson, Anna Nicole Smith and Natalie Holloway and yes Fox is still covering the death of Princess Diana and Dodi Fayad. To be perfectly honest, I only turn on Fox to watch glimpses of the many beautiful ladies who populate Fox News. From Laurie Dhue to Juliet Huddy to Megan Kelly to the exquisite Kimberly Guilfoyle, Fox does give the viewers a reason to watch Fox. But I stopped watching O’Reilly when Michelle Malkin decided to dump the program. Michelle has the best analysis and hands down, the best smile in the biz.
Larraby on November 6, 2007 at 3:06 PM
Wait, Michelle took herself off of O’Rielly?
I haven’t been paying attention to cable lately so….huh?
CTDeLude on November 6, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Nice.
mikeyboss on November 6, 2007 at 3:18 PM
A welcome haven for moonbats and conspiracy nuts! If that is the niche market that MSNBC wants, they also should hire renowned metalurgist Rosie O’Donnell, geostrategist Jack Murtha, document expert Dan Rather, and lifestyle correspondent Cindy Sheehan.
highhopes on November 6, 2007 at 3:47 PM
Nail/head.
I actually had to watch CNN last night to get the skinny on Pakistan. Fox was to busy blubbering over Oprah and the writers strike.
Sammy316 on November 6, 2007 at 3:52 PM
So my question is, when is Michelle going to return to cable news? I saw that Fox signed Laura Ingraham to take Michelle’s place as substitute host for O’Reilly… and let’s face it, I think Michelle has been on a Fox show only twice since September, compared to twice a week beforehand… So it looks like Michelle’s days at FNC are over (at least for now). Is she going to sign on with CNN or CNBC? Plans in the works? I for one miss seeing her on TV and thought she provided regular insightful commentary.
Outlander on November 6, 2007 at 4:17 PM
I was thinking that’s what HotAir.com was designed for, but there hasn’t been a Vent in months.
Shame.
ScottMcC on November 6, 2007 at 4:40 PM
It’s like a drowning man who manages to break the surface gasping for air and is then is hit by another wave.
CloneTrooper on November 6, 2007 at 5:01 PM
Olby close to O’Reilly? 219 is not close to 568.
- The Cat
P.S. That’s 39%. Olby get’s a fail.
MirCat on November 6, 2007 at 5:16 PM
Olby=Rosie IMO—And as others have said, I too have dropped watching H&C significantly because more and more of the Tabloid stuff…
captbill98 on November 6, 2007 at 5:46 PM
I miss how Fox was the grinding leader, but now they are losing control of what made them great.
Black Adam on November 7, 2007 at 7:15 AM
I totally agree. My other problem w/ cable news is the “Crossfire” format, like H&C. I would like to see level-headed news shows, not extreme-right vs. extreme-left grudge matches.
budorob on November 7, 2007 at 11:51 AM