On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Mark J. <[email protected]> wrote:
> The AP's David Bauder paints a bleak portrait of the future of the
> late-night talk show as we know it (i.e., desk-and-sofa/band/sidekick/
> monologue), as Leno, Letterman, Fallon, Ferguson and Lopez are all
> down in the numbers and sinking:
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/13/latenight-tv-ratings-fadi_n_644167.html
>
> The hopeful signs come from ABC's Kimmel (traditional format) and E!'s
> Chelsea Handler (non-traditional format)--"Nightline"'s also up and
> the COM faux newsmen's numbers are flat.

Stories like this bug me because they are about the business of TV and
there's next to no relevant business information in them. Ratings are
public information and any reporter can write an article based on
following those numbers, but the article doesn't mean anything unless
we get an understanding of what those numbers mean to the networks and
the future of those shows. In the late '90s Paul Farhi of the
Washington Post wrote an article that was picked up and syndicated
nationwide. In it he said that the ratings for CBS's Late Show were
about the same as the ratings for The Pat Sajak Show when it was
canceled. I don't recall if he gave any weight to the changes in the
world between both shows. And he didn't spell out a conclusion, but it
was clear: Dave's in big trouble. Yet neither his article nor the
ratings changed anything (this was post the Rob Morton firing).

Bauder isn't coming to any conclusion in his article either. We know
that the late night shows are moneymakers, and just not the leader in
the time period, just by seeing CBS keep its hands off the Late Show
for so many years. We also know that the ratings have been in decline
for years. The decline of the first 3 months of the year might have
been sharper than the long term trend, but it's part of the long term
trend. The real question is what the red line is for ratings - where a
rating under the red line means the show is unsustainable. And the
ratings consider people watching later on DVR or watching snippets as
not watching at all which distorts the popularity of a show. The other
business question, after the ratings red line, is would a network
prefer to cut budgets or replace a host. I assume this information
never makes it into an article because networks don't want to share
it. Without it, though, articles about late night talk show ratings
are pretty worthless.

Tom

-- 
TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "TV or Not TV" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en

Reply via email to