I’m probably gonna regret posting this. Somebody’s bound to come in screeching about how “their” wholly biased “news” network is the best, but here goes anyway.
It seems that CNN has fallen to third in the news network ratings, at least during prime-time.
NEW YORK – CNN is poised to finish March third in the prime-time weeknight ratings behind Fox News Channel and MSNBC, the first time this has ever happened for the channel that pioneered the cable news genre nearly three decades ago.
CNN says its overall business is healthy and it is not straying from its straight news path. But it is suffering more audience erosion than its rivals since the peak days of the presidential election, further proof that the opinionated prime-time shows on Fox and MSNBC have greater audience loyalty.
Well… duh! Fox and MSNBC have greater audience loyalty because they’re feeding red meat to the carnivorous, unwashed masses. They lead willing people around by their emotional noses.
MSNBC chief executive Phil Griffin said the prime-time ratings are an affirmation of the network’s decision to go liberal with Olbermann and Maddow. But he also said it pointed to problems at his rival. [Snip]
“What do they stand for?” he said. “That’s their biggest challenge. CNN ain’t what it used to be, and that has given us an opening because we stand for something and they don’t.”
“What do they stand for??!? They’re supposed to be a news organization, you nitwit!
**sigh**
Folks, we, as a nation, are in serious trouble when the “new” #2 is proud that they’re filtering and framing and skewing fast and furious — just like #1 does.
Ideology R Us. Slant it baby!
I guess my only real comment here is … … It doesn’t really matter what news is presented to you, you’re going to view and then receive and process it from your own individual and yes, biased, points of view. Personally? Who the devil CARES who is rated #1? #2? #3? Not I !
I should probably add that I have never watched CNN. I don’t have cable. But, for that matter, neither do I watch MSNBC or FOX. Aren’t they both cable networks?
Therefore, I cannot possibly be included amongst the “carnivorous unwashed masses” who are voraciously chomping on thrown red meat, I wouldn’t think. However, I’ve got a bunch of pretty good redneck jokes I could sent you!
Meant to say “send”, not “sent”.
What I’d really like to know and understand is what do the “ratings” really mean? By that I’m asking, if Fox is in the no. 1 slot then what proportion of the population is actually watching Fox for their news. By all of this what I’m trying to get to is the fact that I strongly suspect that while their rating may be no. 1, that their proportion of the overall population seeking news on a daily basis is slowly sinking because the rating system is sampling only the pool of people who turn on the T.V. for their news everyday. A second, collateral issue is, and I don’t really know how to frame this, is are they counting people who surf daily, but then settle on one station? If not then maybe the numbers are horribly skewed. If my life is anything like “average”, I surf through CNN, (until a commercial), check Fox for the leg show (until a commercial), check channel 13 for weather and traffic (until a commercial), then on to CNBC where I settle in for 30 minutes to watch the market news (until a commercial) at which time I check Fox again for the leg show and then press “last” on the remote to return to CNBC. And Polimom, that’s all in the early a.m. hours BEFORE, I leave for work. For serious news coverage I listen to NPR on the radio on the drive to work. In the evening………….I never turn on the tube except to watch re-runs of Becker or Law and Order.
If the death of the print media is any indication, I stronly suspect an ever decreasing percentage of the population is even watching T.V. for news. Look at this example; it’s 6:00 a.m. on a Sunday morning and I’m reading the Chronicle on-line; the t.v. isn’t even on! Gotta go now; on to the Washington Post, Times Picayune and the Wall Street Journal.
Hi Glide —
Had to go looking to see what the actual numbers are for these things. Found a site that actually tracks it: Link
Sure enough, it’s the frothingly inflammatory shows that get the biggest view audience — which says at least as much about the viewers.
But you’re right, it’s hard to know these days who gets their news online vs. watches tv. I myself haven’t watched tv (other than American Idol — LOL!) much at all for years. And goldenrod wrote just above you that she hasn’t got cable television at all.
OTOH, right after I posted this last night, we went to dinner with some friends, where the conversation (bizarrely) turned to tv and news networks…. where I was told that Fox is the only news worth watching, and that CNN is the “Communist News Network”.
So I don’t know how to extrapolate either — other than that in spite of this blog post’s small sample (which I suspect to be atypical), there are still millions who get their news and opinions fed to them from the same source.
I would say this is an effect of the need for the news media to turn a profit – which means they have to draw in a crowd. Combining op/ed with news will have that effect (as MSNBC and FOX have discovered.) I would say that the TV news media is changing, just as the print media is. Don’t know for sure if there will be a market for “straight” news down the road (in some areas, such as newspapers, this was probably never the case), though the genre may survive in a niche market somewhere (for those people who still get broadcast TV only, for example.)
I’ve learned to always try and understand reporting in the context of where it is being sourced from.
Oh, and btw, I *love* steak tartare. And sushi. And, if anyone has a mudbug or 100 to spare, I’ll eat them, as well.
~EdT.
Hahaha! That’s exactly what we had for supper last night!
:>
I was just having this discussion with a (VERY) conservative friend of mine the other day. He was gloating that Fox was still #1 despite the climbing that MSNBC has been doing in the ratings — no doubt as a result of the ‘red meat’ flinging of which you speak.
He was bragging (yes, bragging) that Fox is still waaaaay ahead of PMS-NBC (as he calls it — classy) and that CNN and MSNBC are both still very liberal.
To me, CNN is usually down the middle (mostly) and MSNBC caters to the liberal audience after 6pm or so. My guess is that if liberals are indeed watching CNN and MSNBC, the two networks could unite and thump Fox in the ratings.
Then again, like Goldenrod (C-3PO?), I do not have cable… so the importance of all of this is somewhat lost on me.
Oh Interwebs, what would I do without you?