It was interesting to me that CNN still would retain some sort of ad rate premium based on "brand".
After losing its ratings lead and falling to last in primetime, the once-dominant CNN stands to lose the last piece of top-shelf value still attached to its business side: premium pricing.
Time Warner-owned CNN, while getting beaten handily in the ratings race and having fallen to fourth place in rankings, still commands higher ad rates than rivals -- in some cases double those of Fox News and MSNBC.
But perhaps not for long.
While advertisers have been willing to shell out more for CNN's venerable brand, broad audience reach and less-opinionated programming, media buyers said the network's ratings slide is likely to bring down pricing.
CNN’s long, steady ratings decline now has some Madison Avenue executives wondering how much longer it will command an advertising premium — the last advantage it holds over rivals.
"They will maintain a premium, but will it stay this high?" asked one ad buyer. "I think it will probably go down."
via NY Post.
I hate that this site is conservative bending from its creators or runners,whatever to people who talk down others with a dfifferent opinion.I am sure people come here for ratings not opinions that are always bent to forward a right wing kind of approach,be neutral so that we can all enjoy what you present on your website.
Um…how does pointing out the fact that CNN has fallen to fourth among news networks and may forced to slash their premium pricing count as “right wing” or “conservative”? I think the article is presented as neutrally as an article could be. Just the facts, as Joe Friday would say.
This site is about ratings, and they only report about ratings and what’s happening with ratings and cable news, you clicked on cable news to get here.
This post is about CNN falling to fourth place and how it could affect their advertising. It’s significant, because CNN has always been the cable news people tuned into. Not so much anymore.
Sorry the truth hurts, it’s not always pleasant. I know this firsthand myself.
Shocking….the *NY POST* “thinks” that *CNN* will lose their ad premium to *FOX NEWS* – with unnamed media ad buyers
Anyone else wanna connect the dots?
I think the first poster has a point,there are lots of conservative tendencies with whoever posts the topics especially when it comes to cable news ratings.It is shocking when someone presenting a topic straight away tells you how fox news won the ratings and how Olberman or Campbell could never get these numbers or those in a while.There is clearly a conservative slant in the way these posts are presented.
Actually this shows that CNN is no longer the cable network that people go to to get their news . Timothy must have taken too much of that medical marijuana to see anything else in the rating report.
Yeah, I notice the conservative slant here too, from the webmasters.
It ruins the whole site.
Conservative slant? C’mon. This is a news item about anticipated ad rates. Get some perspective.
Bill, be honest. You’re a conservative. We all know it. And trutfully….we shouldn’t know it, right?
But we do.
Bill, while I’m inclined to agree with you that there is no conservative slant in the news item itself… it is worth considering that the NY Post talking about CNN in relation to Fox may not be a reliable source.
Jesse, oh please. I haven’t voted for a Republican or a Democrat in a generation. If you think wondering about how CNN maintains an ad rate premium reveals some sort of bias, you’re the one with the bias.
Baroness, you can judge the veracity of the source yourself. I’ll often point out when the TV media is wrong, or being spun by PR, but this is a question of fact (right or wrong) that I have no specific knowledge of myself.
Bill, it’s also the tone you set here with your comments. I’ve never seen another legitimate website where the webmasters actually post in the comments with a confrontational attitude, and a dismissive attitude. Even Nikki Finke doesn’t do that, lol. But here? I don’t know….you guys seem awfully thin-skinned.
Jesse, you’re right. Nikki Finke simply deletes comments she doesn’t like, she doesn’t post responses.
Is Bill a conservative? Lets look at the evidence. Bill often posts about the stupidity of the mainstream TV media. The liberally biased mainstream TV media! Bill is pro buisness. He never talks down a decision to cancel a show unless he thinks its a bad buisness decision. Conservatives are pro buisness! He often points out how conservative commentators on Fox News regularly beat liberal ones on MSNBC. If he weren’t conservative, he would report that MSNBC wins the ratings race!
“CNN’s long, steady ratings decline now has some Madison Avenue executives wondering how much longer it will command an advertising premium — the last advantage it holds over rivals.”
And the only advantage that matters when it comes to revenue. This article makes it seem that CNN is on the verge of bankruptcy because the only advantage they have over their rivals is that they make more money than them. In sports terms, I’d love to be in a game where the only advantage I hold over my opponent is that I’m winning. Does the NY Post forget that revenue is the endgame in the TV buisness not ratings.
I see potential here for a contest: how can this headline be re-written to look pleasing to left-leaning readers?
—–
Advertisers on CNN have reason to be concerned. It was a long time after FNC that CNN started live coverage of Obama’s Q&A session with students in China last night. CNN probably didn’t want to stop showing Al Gore. MSNBC kept on doing its predator stuff. CNBC was showing a rerun of the ratings-magnet “Joy Behar Show”. Recently, CNN didn’t cover the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall in Germany. International coverage is supposed to be CNN’s strength. The “legitimate” news channels are just not delivering the goods.
Dave,perhaps if he wasn’t conservative,he would present the facts and let the numbers talk for themselves,instead what we get is a biased interpretation of the numbers that could soon read.”FOX NEWS KICKS ***”
Jean, Fox News is crushing CNN and MSNBC in the ratings. That’s not a biased interpretation of the numbers. It’s plain, simple fact.
Jesse, if you’ve never seen webmasters of other legitimate entertainment sites post in the comments section in a confrontational and dismissive manner then your knowledge of entertainment sites is obviously limited. David Poland and Jeff Wells, for example, have a long history of being confrontational and dismissive in their comments sections, and both are notably thin-skinned, more so than the webmasters here.
You know what? If the webmasters here ARE more Conservative than anything, then good. There is definitely an overabundance of liberal slant in media, and if there is some Conservative slant it is to be looked at like it’s a bad thing. Liberal slant, good, Conservative slant, bad. Gimme a break.
Bill’s original-content contribution to this post was the headline:
“CNN’s Ratings Slide Threatens Ad Rates”
and the note “It was interesting to me that CNN still would retain some sort of ad rate premium based on “brand”.”
The remainder of the content was from the NY Post.
With absolutely no sarcasm implied, would either Jesse or Baroness explain to me how these two sentences are biased? Could I impose on you to rewrite them in a non-biased way as an example?
The content is relevant to cable news, contains undisputed facts (i.e. CNN is, in fact, in a ratings slide), and then what most business 101 graduates would agree is pretty simple analysis of the implication of the facts (i.e. that their ad rates are likely to suffer).
Biased? Really?