Cable’s Summer Heating Up!!!
Ad-supported networks hope to ride momentum into fall
By Anne Becker -- Broadcasting & Cable, 8/22/2005

With just two weeks left in its high season, basic cable is on track to notch its fifth straight summer ratings triumph over broadcast, winning by its largest margin ever. From the beginning of summer through Aug. 15, cable averaged a 60.9 share to broadcast’s 32.4. That’s compared with a 58.1/34.6 split last year.

Cable’s summer task, beyond producing new hits, is to use those shows to create viewer loyalty. That way, viewers keep tuning in when the big boys in broadcast come out swinging with new fall series. Turner’s TNT, for example, has laid out plans to ride its summer ratings wave into fall. The network grew 16% over last summer in prime, averaging 2.9 million total viewers through Aug. 15 (and 1.21 million in 18-49)—the most of any basic-cable network.

That was due to a record-breaking ratings draw in The Closer and a second original hit in Wanted, along with successful Friday-Sunday scheduling of its $100 million limited series Into the West. TNT also buffeted its originals with acquired series and movies, such as Saving Private Ryan and Jurassic Park III, that fit into the drama niche it has carved out over the past few years.

“Cable Made a Lot of Fans”

The network will keep its summer characters top of mind by weaving them into promotional spots that will run throughout the year. It will also run Wanted into the fall, luring viewers into the premieres of three new acquired dramas: Alias, Cold Case and Las Vegas.
“Cable made a lot of fans this summer, not only eyeballs,” says TNT/TBS Executive VP/COO Steve Koonin. “We’re not only open three months a year.”

Lifetime also triumphed this summer, notching a 9% increase in total viewership over last summer with an average 1.81 million viewers in prime, 723,000 of those 18-49. Because the women’s network scored largely through Monday-night original movies (including Murder in the Hamptons and The Dive From Clausen’s Pier), Lifetime aims to hold viewers through the fall season with more flicks. It will pack early September with not only more Monday movies but some Sunday ones, too, sometimes preempting original dramas.

“We’re delivering on a promise we’ve made as a network to deliver a certain type of genre,” says Tim Brooks, executive VP of research at Lifetime. “You come back to the network, not the programming.”

Finding a Branding Niche

But not all basic-cable networks saw gains. USA, summer’s second-most-viewed, dipped 10% in prime from last year, averaging 2.3 million total viewers (1.07 million 18-49). Although the network brought back hit dramas Monk, The Dead Zone and The 4400, it still seems to be finding its branding niche. In July, USA introduced a new logo and slogan “Characters Welcome,” and it will drive home the catchphrase going into fall, with promos for U.S. Open tennis running in August and September, and WWE’s Monday Night Raw, which returns to USA in October after a five-year absence.

FX also dropped in the ratings, losing 8% of total viewers from last year, with an average 1.17 million in prime (681,000 in 18-49) this summer. Returning favorite Rescue Me performed well, but new comedies Starved and It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, as well as Iraq-war drama Over There, saw dwindling audiences each week. FX will promote Nip/Tuck’s September return with promos that will run in three of the five commercial breaks during each hour-long episode of Over There, and graphics bugs for Nip during the credits.

Summer: TNT triumphed in the ratings with originals, including The Closer.
Fall: Turner’s drama network begins running a trio of new acquired shows, including Alias.
Summer: Lifetime scored with original movies, including Murder in the Hamptons.
Fall: The women’s network keeps flicks going with Human Trafficking Oct. 24.
Summer: USA’s originals, including Monk, performed, but the network dipped 10% in prime.
Fall: Newly rebranded, the network brings back WWE on Oct. 3.

(Click on images to make larger)

WEEKLY TELEVISION AUDIENCE MEASURES

Week 46 of the 2004/05 Season (8/1-8/7/05)

Primetime:

During Week 46 of the 2004/05 Broadcast Season, Ad-Supported Cable's HH rating increased by 2.2 points to end at 34.3. Cable captured 62.0% of total TV viewing and outperformed the Broadcast 7-nets by 30.9 share points. Ad-Supported Cable’s delivery grew by 2.7 million homes. Broadcast experienced a decrease in all audience measures. CBS, NBC, UPN and WB had rating decreases.

Ad-Supported Cable is off to a great start in the Third Quarter of 2005. It is currently averaging a 33.7 rating, up 1.7 points from same time last year. Cable is also commanding 61.5% of total TV viewing. Broadcast on the other hand only captured 31.3% of total TV viewing.
Ad-Supported cable is performing strongly during the 2004/05 Broadcast Season. Delivery is averaging 35.5 million homes, up 2.2 million from last year and ratings have increased 1.7 to end at 32.4. Cable is demanding more than half of total TV viewing to date this season, with Broadcast falling 11.0 share points behind Cable.

Total Day:

Ad-Supported Cable delivered 21.3 million homes in the 46th week of the 04/05 Season, representing an increase of 1.6 million viewers from last year on a Total Day basis. Cable’s household ratings were up by 1.3 points from last year to end at 19.5 and the share increased by 2.6 points to end at 59.7. Cable’s share was once again greater than that of the Broadcast Networks (4 Net.), with the difference being a solid 30.4 points. The Broadcast Networks saw a decrease in all audience measures. Cable, to date, in the third quarter, has a very strong lead over the broadcast networks. It ended with a 59.9 share, 30.5 points above Broadcast’s level. Ratings increased by 1.5 to end at 19.8, and share increased 2.5 points from last year.

The Broadcast Networks have experienced decreases in all audience measures. For this season, Cable rose to 20.8 million homes, up 1.7 million homes from last year. Cable’s ratings increased by 1.3 points to end at 18.9 and its share rose to 55.5, an increase of 2.7 points from last year. The Broadcast Networks experienced losses across all audience measures.

Source: Nielsen Galaxy.

Can Newspapers Reverse Their Decline?
Michael SocolowThe Baltimore Sun August 14, 2005

THOSE OF YOU who paid for this newspaper, turned to this page and are reading these words are a dwindling breed. The newspaper industry is in trouble. Its future is precarious, and the social, political and cultural ramifications of the decline of this uniquely positioned business will affect everybody - not simply you and your colleagues who are reading this op-ed, but the entire public sphere.

How did daily newspapers reach this point? Those who work for them - journalists and those on the business side - point primarily to the impact of new communications technology. The Internet, cable TV news and cell phones that provide headlines have irretrievably altered news consumption habits.

Other arguments include the idea that the average American news consumer now favors celebrity news and gossip over the kind of robust public interest reporting that was once a hallmark of the daily press. American youths, in particular, are blamed for this trend. Demanding news at their convenience, they insist it conform to their interests.
These trends unquestionably factor into the widespread circulation declines. But something important is missing from this analysis: what the newspapers themselves contribute to the problem.

Newspapers sell you their credibility. That is the single most important value of any newspaper brand in the marketplace.

Newspapers compete in a market that is not solely limited to their product category; thus, recent changes in the media landscape have intensified the importance of credibility.

Several severely damaging ethical lapses over the past four years not only have hurt the specific newspapers involved but have created a widespread feeling that reporters are less accurate and ethical than they once were. This may or may not be true. But the veracity of the statement is less important than the fact that a large proportion of the industry's consumer base believes it.
Improving reporting and editing at daily newspapers is a key component of several initiatives within the business. So is being more honest - called "transparency" - with the audience.

Newspapers should be applauded for their attempts to repair the self-inflicted damage done to their product.

Yet other key, but too often ignored, issues in the history of the newspaper business have played a role in the industry's problems. Very few Americans - or even journalists - realize that Congress passed, and President Richard M. Nixon in 1970 signed into law, the Orwellian-titled Newspaper Preservation Act. That law (essentially) allowed local newspaper monopolies to flourish throughout the country. In all but a handful of markets, dominant newspapers would employ tactics that in other industries would be considered restraint of trade in order to corner their local markets for newspaper advertising.

Joint operating agreements between newspapers that otherwise would have been competitors became legal. The cost certainty of operating in a noncompetitive environment allowed these "hometown" newspapers to grow fat with advertising revenue. New sections were added. Newspaper chains such as Gannett and Knight-Ridder scooped up these profitable properties around America. The chains grew accustomed to profit margins that would have been impossible to achieve in a truly competitive environment.

By the early 1990s, newspaper companies and their corporate owners believed double-digit profit returns were normal for the business. They forgot the competitive - almost cutthroat - atmosphere of the newspaper business before the 1970 legislation. Worse, they took their monopoly for granted and assumed news consumers were satisfied.

As soon as the marketplace opened, and the news audience had new options, those consumers started going elsewhere. First cable news in the 1980s and then the Internet in the late 1990s revealed a hunger for new news sources. Many alternative weeklies, including the most influential, began offering their product for free. The very product that comprised the bedrock of this monopoly business - news - began to be seriously devalued.
How did newspapers react?

They brought in consultants, armed with MBAs and experience in other troubled industries, to evaluate their operations. Recommendations were simple: Cut staff, cooperate more closely with advertisers (i.e., create "partnerships") and offer the public more of what it wants to read - not what experienced editors believe the public needs to read.

Demographic studies are used to identify a core readership and to serve it by providing more "news you can use." This has meant an increase in medical, travel and lifestyle news, often at the cost of international reporting and investigative pieces.

The reinvented newspaper has failed to stem the readership losses. The consultants' reports are useless so long as the leadership of the industry clings to profit margin goals that are unrealistic and were originally an artificial creation of antitrust exemption.

By desperately trying to serve its core - but dwindling - audience, the newspaper business is shortchanging that audience. Most newspapers are offering little more than a comfortable rehash of events that their consumers are already aware of. Instead, newspapers should be challenging their readers by providing difficult-to-obtain firsthand reports from around the world that are unavailable anywhere else. They should combine that reporting with bracing, counterintuitive commentary that would provoke thought and discussion in the civic arena.
In other words, daily newspapers should drop the consultants, lower their unrealistic earnings targets and do what they do best. If they fail to do this, they will have nobody to blame for their demise but themselves.

Michael Socolow is an assistant professor of American studies at Brandeis University in Massachusetts, where he directs the journalism program.

TV viewing is actually rising Americans spend more
hours in front the tube
By Kevin Downey

Everyone knows that TV viewership has taken a big hit because of other media competing for viewers’ attention, especially the internet. Too bad it's not true. TV viewership is actually up over the past four years, according to new research from Turner Broadcasting, and it’s been climbing over the very same years that internet penetration has grown. People may be using the internet more, but they’re also turning on their TVs more. And they’re watching more broadcast as well as more cable. Indeed, while the presumption has long been that broadcast is suffering at the hands of cable, the reality is that they’re both doing well. “People are watching more television than ever before,” says Jack Wakshlag, chief research officer at Turner. He notes that while his analysis focuses on a comparison of viewing this year to 2001, the average amount of time people spend watching TV has steadily been increasing. “What’s happening is that the total amount of television viewing keeps going up, despite what other media types say or what people believe or what people tell you when you ask them in a survey.” In the just-concluded broadcast season the networks halted audience erosion in the 18-49 demographic on a season-to-season basis for the first time in as long as most people can remember. Among households broadcast's share stayed the same while cable rose. According to Turner, the average person watched 30.7 hours of television each week in second quarter through June 19, up 10 percent from 27.9 hours four years earlier. Viewing in the highly sought-after 18-34 demographic in that timeframe increased to 26.3 hours, up from 24.3 hours. Adults 35-49 watched 31.8 hours compared to 28.3 hours in second quarter 2001. Viewing among people 50 years or older jumped to nearly 40 hours in an average week, from 36.3 hours. Within the growing television audience, the networks this past season, on the strength of programs such as ABC’s “Desperate Housewives,” CBS’s “CSI” and Fox’s “American Idol,” lost a scant 264,000 primetime viewers in the 18-49 demographic. That was essentially flat at down only 1 percent, compared to a 6 percent loss of 1.33 million viewers a season earlier. At the same time, cable TV’s 18-49 audience was up 1.2 million people over last season. That came on top of an increase of 580,000 adults 18-49 the previous season. Wakshlag attributes cable’s growth and the broadcast networks’ relatively good performance to more and better programming to keep viewers tuning in. “It’s because there are more choices, more options, more [television sets] and people are simply turning on the television more than ever before,” he says. “There has been an aggressive campaign to try to get advertisers to move money away from television. Other media are claiming there are losses. But the only data they’ve ever been able to show is that people think they are watching less television, but we know they’re not.” This summer, in the first three weeks since the regular broadcast season ended in late May, cable TV has averaged about 60 percent share of the primetime household audience, up from roughly 57 percent the same time last year. The network share has slightly dipped to about 34 percent from nearly 35 percent. Wakshlag says cable TV is off to a strong summer because of original programs like FX’s “The Shield” and TNT’s “The Closer.” “This is an ongoing trend,” he says. “You have larger cable networks investing the money they’ve been making in big-time original programming. And there has been a pretty good batting average for cable hits in the past few years.”

June 28, 2005 © 2005 Media Life
-Kevin Downey is a staff writer for Media Life.