Oscars Ratings Drop 10 Percent From 2005

AP via Forbes.com ^ | 3/6/2006 | Lynn Elber

[Maceman]

I've been watching the Sopranos on demand (4th and 5th seasons) in preparation of this Sunday's 6th season premier.

[Hildy]

How do they figure people who are Tivoing while watching another channel?

[Brilliant]

Actually, that is pretty good considering how badly the box office has bombed in the last year.

[3catsanadog]

People can see this for what it is - Hollywood nominating films about transexuals and homosexuals and nominating best actor and actress awards to those who play those parts to tick off conservatives, Christians and Republicans. They've been doing this mean crap almost all through the Bush administration.

When they get back to awarding movies and actors and actresses for their talent and a dang fine movie, we'll get back to watching the awards. Until then, as far as I'm concerned, they can play their petty little games all they want - I enjoyed the Law & Order marathons on USA and TNT yesterday.

[3catsanadog]

I did too!

[Malacoda]

Well, who would want to watch a bunch of ignorant, self-important twits break their arms clapping themselves on the back, anyway?

[princess leah]

My husband, son and I watched National Treasure and really enjoyed that movie! It came on after dinner and we never missed the Oscars.

[goldstategop]

Who would? They realized no one cared to be insulted as homophobic so they went along with sliming America as racist. Real brave of the Hollywood jet set. They are so principled.

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[Conservababe]

I watched some of it and actually enjoyed Stewart putting down the dems. But, I don't think the audience really got it. LOL

Oh, by the way, what is the movie Crash about? I heard nothing about it in all the pre hype.

[wardaddy]

How much does a 10% drop matter in ad rates?

any pros here?

[Robert A Cook PE]

Total homosexual pop. is just under 2%.

Number who have tried it is about 3% maybe?

[monday]

"They probably should have nominated some movies that were entertaining and that people saw."

Exactly. All five of the films nominated for best picture combined made less than the last Star Wars film. The Oscars are designed to reward people in the industry who don't have enough talent to make a movie that people actually want to see. It is put on by losers for losers.

[PogySailor]

No way! How could this happen?

Do I need a sarcasm tag?

[Billthedrill]

'03 was a disaster primarily because Chicago had been out the bare minimum of time for the nomination and nobody outside the critics had seen it yet. Awful weak field that year but I thought The Two Towers had a chance. Gangs Of New York was up as well.

It was actually quite a bit stronger a field this year I thought, but the insistent drumbeat that you will watch Bareback Mountin' and you will enjoy it, you homophobic swine, detracted from the Oscars as a whole. The artistes want to turn Hollywood into the Sundance Festival writ large but they don't want to take the corresponding cut in paycheck. And so we get a coterie of pretenders who own private jets and show up at the big show in Priuses. And so it goes.

[Dr. Zzyzx]

Oh, by the way, what is the movie Crash about?

Don't know what it's about, but a couple of weeks ago I think that Drudge reported the F-bombs in it upwards of 90.

[Prokopton]

It must not be to hard to attract mainstream viewers-29 million viewers and 40% of all TVs. That, by any measure, is a huge audience! Hollywood is still a very powerful propaganda machine.

[goldstategop]

Oscars: A Show No One Watches That Hands Out Awards For Movies No One Saw. Brilliant!

(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")

[x5452]

(Yeah but Nelsen doesn't actually monitor 29 million tvs)

Its been dropping every year...

Someone has to post that declining red chart...

[Range Rover]

Well, in general, the amount an agency pays for a spot is predicated on a guarantee of a certain audience level. Failure to achieve that rating triggers a situation where the seller must make up for the shortcoming in some way - either refunding some of the price paid or by providing for the airing of additional spots gratis - A.K.A. "make-goods".

The longer lasting effect is that the estimate for future audience goes down. Technically, that would mean that the entity buying airtime has more leverage in cost negotiations and the seller has to justify a higher cost (like taxes, the rates never go down year-to-year). To counter all of that, the network negotiating a fee to air future award telecasts - ANY award telecasts - will bargain harder.

Big Picture - Large advertisers - The GM's, P&G's, Airlines, Banks, Credit Card companies of this world have more and more reasons to put less of their ad dollars into Award shows. Makes it harder on the networks and all of this effects the Network's bottom line.

[cubreporter]

Going, going....GONE! And...good riddance