Local Newscast Ratings

[drumsncode]

We haven't had any good information on how our local stations are doing in the ratings lately, so I'm posting in hopes that someone with that knowledge will step up and tell us how things went during March sweeps, and maybe tell us how May sweeps is going.

It's always interesting to see if the changes they make to a newscast have had any real impact on the ratings.

Of course I'm interested in the 5, 6, and 10pm ratings, but I'd also love to hear how the morning-show battles are going.

[Charlie40]

Morning shows channel 4 hands down and Rise N Shine following on channel 43

5,6 & 10 news in this order Channel 4 # 1 followed by channel 5 then channel 9

[Stinger]

My favorites at 6 & 10 are (in order): 5, 9, 4. Although I liked 5 better when they had Maggie Carlo and Tyler Suiters in addition to Jessica.

I've also been watching KAUT 43 in the mornings for something local. I get tired of the same ole stuff from the national broadcasts.

[TaoMaas]

Morning shows channel 4 hands down and Rise N Shine following on channel 43

5,6 & 10 news in this order Channel 4 # 1 followed by channel 5 then channel 9

Is that for March, May, or both?

[Charlie40]

Is that for March, May, or both?

All the time..

[drumsncode]

Morning shows channel 4 hands down and Rise N Shine following on channel 43

5,6 & 10 news in this order Channel 4 # 1 followed by channel 5 then channel 9

I could interpret your post two ways; which one is it?

Are you saying Channel 4 is number 1 at 5, Channel 5 is number 1 at 6, and Channel 9 is number 1 at 10?

OR

Are you saying Channel 4 is number one in all timeslots, with 5 and 9 trailing in that order? (If so, then I'm afraid the moon just fell out of the sky!)

[Charlie40]

I could interpret your post two ways; which one is it?

Are you saying Channel 4 is number 1 at 5, Channel 5 is number 1 at 6, and Channel 9 is number 1 at 10?

OR

Are you saying Channel 4 is number one in all timeslots, with 5 and 9 trailing in that order? (If so, then I'm afraid the moon just fell out of the sky!)

Your second answer is the correct one.

[kevinpate]

Wouldn't amazw me too much if 4 was on top. I'm not a fan of their news programs and I often find myself in a minority view of what's popular.

[stick47]

I would watch the one with the fewest commercials but they're all about the same, which is way too much. (so I read the paper instead)

[Of Sound Mind]

I would watch the one with the fewest commercials but they're all about the same, which is way too much. (so I read the paper instead)

Of course, because the paper has so few ads...

(newspapers have 60-70% advertising compared to 35-40% advertising in television)

[kevinpate]

yeah, but ad blindness in print works well, to the chagrin of retailers everywhere. on the telly, you have to escape audio and visual. That's why God led man to create bigger and better fridges with in door beverages and of course microwaves, so you could get what needs got and make it back in time for the program.

[stick47]

Of course, because the paper has so few ads...

(newspapers have 60-70% advertising compared to 35-40% advertising in television)

I'm sorry but that's really weak.

The difference is that you have a choice whether you take the time to read the ads in the paper.
And I'd much prefer having my arms worn out turning newspaper pages than my hearing ruined by Billy Mayes shouting about Might Putty. (and after all those TV ads I'd be afraid my brain might turn to Mighty Putty!)

[Of Sound Mind]

I'm sorry but that's really weak.

The difference is that you have a choice whether you take the time to read the ads in the paper.
And I'd much prefer having my arms worn out turning newspaper pages than my hearing ruined by Billy Mayes shouting about Might Putty. (and after all those TV ads I'd be afraid my brain might turn to Mighty Putty!)

You have a choice whether to watch the ads on TV as well... that is one of the benefits of a DVR or TiVo... and why I can easily and happily fast forward through those annoying ads, as opposed to having try follow a newspaper article weaving through the pyramid of ads on most pages (assuming, of course, that you make it past the front page).

The point is, there is more advertising annoyance in newspapers than on television. Turning off the local news because of their advertising and turning to a newspaper that has twice as much advertising is what's "really weak."

[stick47]

Well if you and everyone else is happy with the TV ads like they are now I might suggest that you prepare for even more of the same. As I remember when we got our first TV (in 1956) the ads were few. Now you get almost as many ads as programming. I watch mostly television from Korea as my Wife is from there and their programming quality and lack of ads has opened my eyes to the sorry state of US TV.

[dances with cameras]

Turning off the local news because of their advertising and turning to a newspaper that has twice as much advertising is what's "really weak."

Well played...

[TaoMaas]

Are you saying Channel 4 is number one in all timeslots, with 5 and 9 trailing in that order? (If so, then I'm afraid the moon just fell out of the sky!)

It's apparently personal opinion and has nothing to do with recent ratings.

[drumsncode]

It's apparently personal opinion and has nothing to do with recent ratings.

Do tell! I'd like to see some numbers, even if it's just how each station placed at 5, 6, and 10, and some indication of how close it was.

For me to believe that NEWS 9 suddenly lost its #1 10pm rating and fell all the way to third place, after building a virtual dynasty, is very hard for me to fathom.

It would be different if I had seen drastic changes in the stations, but I haven't. If anything, NEWS 9 at 10 is more enjoyable to watch than ever. We have enough people in newscasting that read this board, surely one of them will step up as they have in the past and give us some decent data.

[drumsncode]

Well, I can't believe it, but I actually heard a commercial for KFOR claiming they were #1 Morning, Noon, and Night! I guess that pretty much covers it! Since they are airing it now, that means they won May sweeps!

Now I know the moon has fallen from the sky.

Someone step up and explain this sudden reversal of fortune amongst the top three!

I wonder if this has anything to do with the early changeover to digital that KWTV did, and I also have to wonder if the same problem at Nielsen that miscounted the ratings might have crept into this ratings period.

It's so difficult to believe that viewers just decided to stop watching NEWS 9 at 10, putting them into last place. For me, the show has never been better.

[jsibelius]

You have a choice whether to watch the ads on TV as well... that is one of the benefits of a DVR or TiVo... and why I can easily and happily fast forward through those annoying ads, as opposed to having try follow a newspaper article weaving through the pyramid of ads on most pages (assuming, of course, that you make it past the front page).

The point is, there is more advertising annoyance in newspapers than on television. Turning off the local news because of their advertising and turning to a newspaper that has twice as much advertising is what's "really weak."

I completely disagree with that. I don't own a TiVo or a DVR. I watch the news when it comes on - live. The only way I'm going to miss the ads on TV is if I get up and walk away or change channels. And then I take the risk of missing part of the news if I don't come back in time. With the newspaper, I've been reading for so long that I'm really good at noticing only the stories and not even seeing the ads that are interspersed among the stories. In fact, if I'm in the market for something specific, I have to make myself look at the ads. But what I like about the paper is that there is often more room to give more details that the TV news can't cover in a sound bite. I do both. And I find it often takes both to get the whole story.

Newspapers may have far more advertising, but it is far more easily ignored by all readers.

[Steve]

Brad, you're forgetting something: you'll find news in the newspaper, while the television broadcasts are more infotainment at best. If you want to find out the latest slum apartment to be flooded by sewage or see fluff about mall shoppers getting makeovers, by all means, tv is your pick.
If you want to find out what's going on in your community, whether it be business, sports, government, etc., than I'd turn to the paper.
And yeah, I'm biased. But prove me wrong.

[Midtowner]

Brad, you're forgetting something: you'll find news in the newspaper, while the television broadcasts are more infotainment at best. If you want to find out the latest slum apartment to be flooded by sewage or see fluff about mall shoppers getting makeovers, by all means, tv is your pick.
If you want to find out what's going on in your community, whether it be business, sports, government, etc., than I'd turn to the paper.
And yeah, I'm biased. But prove me wrong.

To be fair, the networks do have small "news" segments where they do VOSOTs over video they've pulled down off of whatever wire they have access to.

[drumsncode]

Well, July sweeps are about over, so I'm hoping someone will step up and tell us how the local news stations did. I'm really curious to see if KFOR can continue to win "Morning, Noon, and Night" as they advertise. And what in the world happened to the 10pm ratings dominance of KWTV? Their show is more enjoyable from a content standpoint than it's ever been. Camera-work --- well, don't get me started. :-(

[Lindsay Architect]

If you look at overall programing, whether Jay Leno or Conan O'Brien, the "Tonight Show" probably gives KFOR more viewers. When Jay comes on at 9 and Conan at 10:30 in September it will probably increase 4's ratings even more - Jay appeals to the crowd that actually watches the local 10 o'clock news as a daiy event (and goes to bed). 9 seems to have gone overboard on the flashy scene changes, posing, and weather drama - seems to be all about the personalities and not the news. However, it would be nice if KFOR would stop saying ...News Channel 4 HD. That's just my thoughts on 10pm news, not sure about morning and noon.

[drumsncode]

If you look at overall programing, whether Jay Leno or Conan O'Brien, the "Tonight Show" probably gives KFOR more viewers. When Jay comes on at 9 and Conan at 10:30 in September it will probably increase 4's ratings even more - Jay appeals to the crowd that actually watches the local 10 o'clock news as a daiy event (and goes to bed). 9 seems to have gone overboard on the flashy scene changes, posing, and weather drama - seems to be all about the personalities and not the news. However, it would be nice if KFOR would stop saying ...News Channel 4 HD. That's just my thoughts on 10pm news, not sure about morning and noon.

Good points about Jay Leno and the lead-in. I hadn't given it that much thought lately, and a ton of news people believe that lead-in is the holy grail of ratings.

You mentioned "weather drama". I think KOCO is the absolute worst when it comes to that. I give credit to KWTV for not opening 80% of their shows by tossing to the weatherman and trying to create drama when there really is none. The shots we get from KOCO where they are standing in the weather center are the most unattractive shots on all of local news, and they are trying to create such a sense of urgency when none is warranted.

I think KWTV has everything it needs to dominate the ratings --- they have great on-air talent, excellent content, and a state of the art set, but the people directing the camera-work need to fired. Since they installed the new set a few years back, I have not seen one show that I'd be willing to call visually stunning.

Their directors seem to think that running the anchor around the set and shooting them from ridiculous distances and odd-angles constitutes great art. I don't know what kind of Kool-Aid these people drank in school, but they should be forced to watch their own shows and see how cold and distant they feel.

The female anchors knock themselves out to be as beautiful and vibrant as possible, even to the point of having dedicated "hair and makeup" teams at each station, then the directors come along the throw it all away by shooting them in distant shots. The anchors might as well just put their hair up in a ponytail each night, wear a sweatshirt, and just throw on a touch of makeup, because the directors are seeing to it that we can't see them anyway.

We need better camera-work from NEWS 9 long before we need Hi-Def from them. Maybe if KFOR continues to win the ratings NEWS 9 will wake up and stop feeding us meatloaf and calling it steak.

[TaoMaas]

... a ton of news people believe that lead-in is the holy grail of ratings.

There's a reason for that belief. It's because lead-in IS the holy grail of ratings. It's like a relay race. When you've been handed the baton with a big lead on the competition, all you have to do is not screw it up.

...the people directing the camera-work need to fired. Since they installed the new set a few years back, I have not seen one show that I'd be willing to call visually stunning.

Sorry, but nobody really watches one station over another based on the studio camera work. It's a non-factor, basically.