The LA Times gives Diane Sawyer's World News a big puffy PR smooch up in an article with the sub-head of "The evening newscast's ratings have spiked 8% since she took over as anchor four weeks ago."
In her first four weeks as anchor, "World News" averaged 8.8 million viewers, a spike of 8% over its season-to-date average, though it still trails the top-rated "NBC Nightly News."
via latimes.com.
Looks like ABC PR has spun its magic spell, because while World News 4 week viewership vs. its season average increased by 8% (7.6% to a second digit), NBC's increased by 9% (8.7%), and even laggard Katie Couric's CBS newscast increased by 7% (7.3%).
And it's also nonsense to attribute those recent increases to Sawyer (or Couric, or Williams), they're primarily Haiti earthquake induced.
Of course, along with all the PR puffery in the piece, it might make a bit less impact if the sub-head had been "Her ratings are about the same compared to NBC and CBS as the last guy".
Pucker up!
Update: Thanks to Robert, via USA Today, comes a far more straightforward way of presenting the World News ratings numbers:
Though World News' ratings are up 8% for Sawyer's first four weeks as anchor vs. the season average, NBC's Brian Williams has widened his lead over second-ranked ABC as all three newscasts have gained viewers from recent news events.
your anti PR jihad and focus on how the media gets spun is often misplaced. You have an agenda, and your slavishness to it makes you report this kind of thing with a bias that is, from my perspective, just as distasteful as the media getting spun.
You and the LA Times might be on two different ends of the spectrum, but the truth lies somewhere in between.
While there is some truth to what you’re saying, Sawyer had the best numbers for World News Tonight in her first full week than it had in TWO YEARS. That was pre-Haiti. Still beaten badly by NBC Nightly news that week, but best #s in two years lends at least some credence to Sawyer look-in. Of course, GMA had some of its best numbers in recent history once she departed, so I’d chalk more of that up “something new”, but it’s not pure PR puffery.
Realizing that few people even read these, I now do them primarily to get reactions from Robert!
lol @ Bill. I’m interested because I love Diane Sawyer and not to sound sexist, but can I say I take some pride in the fact that now 2 out of the 3 daily Broadcast Network newcasts are fronted by women. Granted Katie Couric IMO is a disaster and no I don’t find her a credible journalist but at least she’s not as bad as Connie Chung or Deborah Norville, not that that really makes it better. Diane Sawyer on the other hand is a respected journalist(yes and former beauty queen). But I do have to LOL at ABC and their press releases and spin. I think they are by far the best.
LOL at both of you! Of more interest is why does the LA Times feel compelled to comment on this? Seems like the network news business is a much more east coast concern than a west coast/hollywood issue.
The LA Times should leave this sort of stuff to you guys.
I think news covering news is a major pastime in big media markets, and LA is the #2 market. I’d suppose it is inspired more by what Sawyer has covered in her first month (Afghanistan, Haiti, and now a sit down with Obama) than the ratings, but I could be wrong. I think others — including the LA Times — should definitely be covering that stuff more than us. We don’t even watch evening news!
AZTop, A couple reasons. ABC PR certainly has significant assets in LA (they’re Disney after all), and as much as anything is in LA, entertainment is the “town business”.
diana, no question it’s a big deal that 2/3 broadcast news anchors are women, and I have no opinion on her journalism, and I do suppose that her holding even in the ratings on a relative basis is somewhat of a story, just not as PR smoochy.
Because Diane is still new to this role, it is important that her ratings rise like the others. It demonstrates that viewers have accepted her in the position thus far. If they went down or remained flat in a big news week, that would indicate the opposite. So, it is important at this point to note Diane’s gains/losses until she has had at least 3-6 mos on the job. To have viewers accept 2 changes (GMA and World News) is pretty impressive, no PR spin needed.
Byline on article is “Reporting from New York”
Remember, this is the LA Times that can have almost as many entertainment stories in “Business” as in the “Calendar” section.
I agree about covering it in the LA Times, the story just didn’t seem that timely – as noted above it’s only been four weeks. It was a big PR smootch.
I guess the LA Times needed something since the Jay Conan stuff is now on the back burner.
To be fair, I think the 8% increase IS notable only because of the fact that Diane is new to the chair (unlike Brian or Katie). So the ratings could have easily dropped as people checked out alternatives.
The fact that ABC is growing in line with the competition, and hasn’t hemorrhaged any viewers despite the change in personalities (i.e. Katie Couric) is a big deal IMO.
The LA Times covering it? Why? Broadcast news is entertainment. I suppose it’s a credible source for news items also but that’s really secondary.
I think Diane Sawyer was in a better position than Couric. She’s been a beat reporter, was on 60 minutes for several years, and has filled in on news broadcasts on both CBS and ABC. SHe did Frontline and 20/20 and then this GMA gig. I tend to believe more of the audience finds her more credible.
Diane will fail.
Any reason for that stmt Oh Hi Mark or is it just you wanting to be different.
Katie is far more better than Sawyer… with 5 years on NBC and years on local TV… plus she’s a better interviewer.. let me note that Couric doesn’t have Oprah as lead ins unlike Sawyer
Where is the post-praising USA Today!? Still sort o’ smoochy towards Sawyer, but not so smoochy on the ratings:
Though World News’ ratings are up 8% for Sawyer’s first four weeks as anchor vs. the season average, NBC’s Brian Williams has widened his lead over second-ranked ABC as all three newscasts have gained viewers from recent news events.
“Job 1 was for us to hold our audience, which was a big concern,” Banner says, adding that Sawyer brings a new “curiosity and energy” to the broadcast. “We never wanted (the) artificial bump” Couric got in her first week, followed by a ratings freefall. “The bigger goal for us is to grow our audience” over time.
And the headline is that Sawyer is “Quietly” making her mark:
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2010-01-25-sawyer25_ST_N.htm?
USA Today, not in my RSS reader, but maybe it should be!
100% better treatment of the ratings situation. In fact, scarily close to what I wrote above. Am going to edit that quote into the post to show how a publication could present the same numbers in a far more straightforward way.
Although based on recent events, applying the term “quiet” to anything on ABC may give those involved a bit of a scare.
This is the adult equivalent of watching my parents fight. And here I thought Bill and Bob loved each other and lived together in a Big Brother style house with Julia, Holly and Joss Whedon’s Biggest Fan.
The story that you told on 1/26/10 of upstate New Yprk Dairy farmers was FALSE!!! How long ago was that footage taped? I grew up in NY dairy area. I know for a FACT that farmers DO not treat thier aninals that way. What a scare sensationalism story that was. Lies all the way. Maybe in the old days of stanchion (do you know what that is?) milking they got the cows to stand up. As for docking the tails…they did that so manure did not get into the milk. Maybe they shouldn’t have done that, What would you have said aboout that??? Go and get TRUE info on how efficient confinement dairy’s are un. The cows are not truly confined. ABC= Already Barak’s Company. IT sure shows on the garbage that is spewed out! Get your crap right before you spew it out!!
Couric is better than her!