TV news rating for May 19th. Who is on top?

James

DTVUSA Member
#1
[TABLE="width: 553"]

[TD="width: 300, colspan: 2"]

Total Day

[/TD]
[TD="width: 77"]

P2+ (000s)

[/TD]
[TD="width: 88"]

25-54 (000s)

[/TD]
[TD="width: 88"]

35-64 (000s)

[/TD]


FOXN

 

[TD="align: right"] 1,059[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 234[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 426[/TD]


CNN

 

[TD="align: right"] 252[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 65[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 94[/TD]


MSNBC

 

[TD="align: right"] 342[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 84[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 140
[/TD]


CNBC

 

[TD="align: right"] 120[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 36[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 48[/TD]


FBN

 

[TD="align: right"] 40[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 5[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 21[/TD]


HLN

 

[TD="align: right"] 211[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 92[/TD]
[TD="align: right"] 129[/TD]


[/TABLE]

P2+ = viewers over the age of 2
(25-54) = Adults 25-54 viewing
(35-64) = Adults 35-64 viewing
Prime Time = 8-11pm

Sorry for the sloppy chart. Nielsen data
 
#3
Thanks for the interesting data! I love how Fox News' audience drops when people grow up! Surprised that MSNBC doesn't have a better audience share in the 25-54 range but perhaps they are targeting old, disillusioned liberals. I'm glad no age group is that fussed about CNN.
 

Tim58hsv

DTVUSA Member
#4
Fox News always gets high ratings because they're the only right wing television news media on the air. The left wing viewers are more fragmented because they have a plethora of news sources to choose from.
 
#5
How did I miss this discussion!

I love how Fox News' audience drops when people grow up!
The numbers say the exact opposite!
Code:
         FOX    OTHER
25-54    239     277
35-64    447     411
Unless you want to go by the 2 year old kids... Children aren't watching on account of political convictions. They just like the pretty blond FNC ladies. (Also the reason I watch. :becky:)

R.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#6
How did I miss this discussion!



The numbers say the exact opposite!
Code:
         FOX    OTHER
25-54    239     277
35-64    447     411
Unless you want to go by the 2 year old kids... Children aren't watching on account of political convictions. They just like the pretty blond FNC ladies. (Also the reason I watch. :becky:)

R.
I think the pretty ladies skew the numbers. I can only watch them on Fox News with audio on "mute". If I listen to what they are saying, they suddenly become much less attractive.
 

James

DTVUSA Member
#8
Haha. You guys. I occasionally watch several news stations I do find that they all seem to have a lot of "opinion" mixed into the "news". I suppose this is called analysis.
 
#9
Haha. You guys. I occasionally watch several news stations I do find that they all seem to have a lot of "opinion" mixed into the "news". I suppose this is called analysis.
.
You don't get straight news anymore in prime time. From 7 to 10 PM CT it's all opinion programming on FNC. Then they rinse, repeat the same three shows from 10 to 1 AM. Greta and Bret Baier are really superb, unbiased reporters, but they don't get the ratings.

R.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#11
Okay, it isn't that you get more liberal as you get older. It is that the baby boomer generation, by large part, are a bunch of non-thinking morally evil morons. The modern liberal/progressive movement (which encompasses most of the modern Democratic party) is simply evil! Sorry folks, the truth may hurt, but it doesn't stop it from being true!!! I'm not endorsing FOX News, which is a rating driven fake run by a statist establishment (Bilderberger, CFR, etc.) propagandist. ( A perpetual war with an undefeatable enemy is the perfect cash cow for the military industrial complex.)
 
#12
Okay, it isn't that you get more liberal as you get older. It is that the baby boomer generation, by large part, are a bunch of non-thinking morally evil morons.
Right. It isn't that you get more liberal as you get older. You get more conservative as you get older, as I already pointed out. That includes baby boomers.

But people don't equate liberals with democrats and conservatives with republicans. W. Bush was far more liberal than B. Clinton. The problem isn't with the voters. The entire system is rigged in favor of the two liberal party system, and in favor of MORE government not less.

Consider how we got stuck with Obamacare. The house and the senate baaaaarely passed it, in the dead of night, without reading it, and the president signed it. It is now about a thousand times more difficult to get rid of it. Why should the legislation continue to have force of law if any of the prerequisites for passing fail? I.e. if either house of Congress, or the president change their minds, WHY can't we go back in time?? Do legislators, by definition, get STUPIDER as time goes by?? THINK ABOUT IT!!!

But no. In order to repeal this bad law, we will need super majorities in both houses of Congress, plus the president's signature. Here is one part of one of Harry Reid's amendments to the ACA: “it shall not be in order in the Senate or the House of Representatives to consider any bill, resolution, amendment, or conference report that would repeal or otherwise change this subsection.” This passed without a super majority, yet it's apparently binding on future majorities. If you can't repeal one subsection of a bill, obviously you can never repeal the entire bill. The Supreme Court has made it clear it will not meddle in "the internal operations" of the house and senate. Proof, once again, that the coequal branches of this government are a joke, and our Constitution no longer works of the people, by the people, or for the people.

Rick
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Top