CNN'S RATINGS MISERY REMAINS (They still don't "get it")

AP ^ | 1/26/03 | David Bauder

[Elkiejg]

NEW YORK -- This week marks an anniversary the people at CNN would prefer is observed quietly -- very quietly.

It was one year ago that Fox News Channel first beat CNN in the ratings, toppling the network that invented cable news and had enjoyed a monopoly for most of its existence.

[Elkiejg]

CNN still doesn't "get it" -- they're losing viewers to FoxNews because we're tired of their liberal slant and lies. FoxNews provides (for the most part) what they advertise - fair and balanced news. CNN still thinks we're too dumb to know the difference.

[Bluntpoint]

"CNN's emphasis on establishing beachheads in its schedule with personalities has given birth to strong, informative programs helmed by Aaron Brown, Wolf Blitzer, Judy Woodruff and Paula Zahn. "

"Strong, informative programs"

REEAALLY

No bias here.

[syriacus]

Jim Walton, who will replace Isaacson (who leaves to join a think tank)

Other executives might get "golden parachutes," but at least Isaacson is lucky enough that he has the "think tank" as his safety net.

While he is at the think tank, maybe he will learn something about that mysterious exercise called "thinking."

[mwl1]

Someone might publicly ask CNN how they can claim to be objective and informative when 2/3 of elected representatives of the majority party of the United States House of Representatives continue to boycott appearing on the network due to its inherent and sustained bias.

[savedbygrace]

"If it were just about higher ratings, we would put Bill Hemmer in a tight, white T-shirt and our numbers will go up," Walton said. "But I'm not sure it would be good for the brand."

This is a silly statement. Everyone knows Walton is thinking Paula Zahn but couldn't say such a sexist thing, so he quickly changes it to Hemmer.

Most guys wouldn't care to see Hemmer in a tight tee, but many women would watch Zahn in one for any of several reasons (the fashion statement, comparison with themselves, hints on what men like to ogle, etc.) IOW, Zahn in the tight tee-shirt probably would do better, ratings-wise, than Hemmer in one.

[savedbygrace]

Most experts say CNN is still able to charge more for commercials than Fox, but that gap is narrowing rapidly.

And this makes sense how? More viewers at Fox, but they can't charge more for spots?

[savedbygrace]

It's early, so I'm slow on the uptake. CNN has more outlets, more stations. Therefore, it has more POTENTIAL eyeballs than Fox. That's why they can still charge more.

[GVnana]

"Fox ... a voice, a buzz and identity that is consistent throughout the day, lifted by strong personalities and magnified by a strong leader"

True. Brit Hume, Bill O'Reilly, Beltway Boys, etc. Excellent commentators like Mansoor Ijaz, Michelle Malkin. I see they have Ben Stein on the weekends. Nice pick. Even their early am show, "Fox and Friends" is good.

They went way over-the-top on the Beltway Sniper. And Geraldo is Geraldo.

But CNN still treats bus crashes in Bolivia on an equal par with the Bush tax cuts. I don't live in Bolivia. And I don't like pap-mouthing commentators speaking to me as if I were standing in a soup line when I really need a used coat.

[Tacis]

Why do we keep posting/talking about CNN? Let CNN die in peace. Every mention of CNN here is used in their debate to try to survive, as in, "Our ratings may be in the tank but we still have meaning in the market place of ideas; they talk about us every day over at FR and view us as a powerful voice for the non-normal people of the nation."

We lose nothing when, instead of "disputing" CNN, we simply "ignore" CNN. Ignore CNN and let it drown in it's own cesspool of begala. There is nothing worth watching and there is nothing worth talking about.

[jimt]

And Geraldo is Geraldo.

It's spelled "Whorealdo".

[Starboard]

inherent and sustained bias

You are absolutely correct IMO, but CNN is incapable of acknowledging it.

[SerfsUp]

"Bill Hemmer in a tight, white T-shirt"

???

So that's what's on Jim Walton's mind?

[anniegetyourgun]

Paula Zahn poses on the set of her CNN show, 'American Morning with Paula Zahn' in this undated publicity photo. CNN continues to lose its ratings battle with Fox News Channel in early 2003 despite new programs like Zahn's. (AP Photo/CNN)

[mewzilla]

There are none so blind...

[Cincinatus]

And this makes sense how?

CNN has a larger market penetration, being available on more cable systems and with its "1984"-ish, no-off-button versions, like "CNN Airport."

FNC started small, but has grown steadily. Within a year or two, it will have an availability equal to or larger than CNN. Then, watch its smoke.

[savedbygrace]

Not at all. See #5 & #13.

[Cincinatus]

CNN still doesn't "get it" -- they're losing viewers to FoxNews because we're tired of their liberal slant and lies.

Actually, in their heart of hearts, I think they "get it" just fine. They simply can't admit it.

[savedbygrace]

Thanks. I corrected myself in post #7. I'm trying to go cold-turkey off coffee, so give me a break. LOL.

[leftiesareloonie]

Most experts say CNN is still able to charge more for commercials than Fox, but that gap is narrowing rapidly.

And this makes sense how? More viewers at Fox, but they can't charge more for spots?

It's not just the number of viewers that matters to advertizers, it's the demographics of the viewers -- primarily age and income. Youngish folks with more disposable income are more desireable than old folks or poorer folks. Even rich old folks don't spend on the kinds of things marketed via TV ads like even moderately well to do younger folks (25-49).

There's a somewhat troublng thing in this report for FOX. CNN is half again more "believable" to people than FOX is. That suggests that some % of FOX' s audience is libs who are just checking out what they view as the enemy press and that comparatively less of CNN's audience is CONs checking out what they view as the enemy press.

[anniegetyourgun]

I agree....too much ideology standing in the way of success. They'd rather go down in flames than present the truth.