Fox News topped its cable news competition during Obama’s address to the nation on Iraq on Tuesday evening, beating the other cable news channels combined. Fox News averaged nearly 3 million viewers during the speech and increased to 3.38 million viewers during the post- address analysis moderated by Bret Baier.
Note: We don't have ratings for the broadcast networks coverage of the address yet, will post them when we do. We'll also have our regular cable news ratings post later today.
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS (8:00-8:19PM)
FNC: 2,888,000 in total viewers (694,000 in 25-54)
MSNBC: 1,311,000 in total viewers (373,000 in 25-54)
CNN: 988,000 in total viewers (300,000 in 25-54)
POST-ADDRESS ANALYSIS ON FNC (8:19-8:24PM)
3,376,000 viewers (888,000 in 25-54)
PRIMETIME (8-11PM)
FNC: 2,631,000 in total viewers (649,000 in 25-54)
MSNBC: 1,093,000 in total viewers (296,000 in 25-54)
CNN: 731,000 in total viewers (196,000 in 25-54)
Nielsen TV Ratings: ©2010 The Nielsen Company. All Rights Reserved.
I’m more interested on the Fox vs Fox stats.
Did Obama speaking boost Fox’s normal ratings or was it a pretty normal night for them?
It was such a boring speech. I wonder if their ratings declined.
I considered changing the radio station that shoved it down my throat last night.
I hate to break it to the libs out there GOP has taken an historic lead among registered voters and Obama has hit a new low you won’t see this on MSNBC or CNN. I feel a change in the air.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142634/Obama-Weekly-Job-Approval-Average-New-Low.aspx
I hate to break it to the libs out there GOP has taken an historic lead among registered voters and Obama has hit a new low you won’t see this on MSNBC or CNN. I feel a change in the air.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142718/GOP-Unprecedented-Lead-Generic-Ballot.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142634/Obama-Weekly-Job-Approval-Average-New-Low.aspx
Notice that the Post-Address Analysis ratings jumped by 400,000 people. I presume that people who cared enough to hear the speech wanted to stay for news analysis too. But the numbers look as if 400,000 people (almost the exact amount of CNN and MSNBC’s decline from the speech to primetime) switched to FNC for the analysis, making the analysis’ ratings higher than the speech itself. It’s too bad Nielsen doesn’t have “changing the channel from this one to that one” data to know how many of the other two networks’ viewers switched as soon the speech was over. I have to say I’m curious.
The regular cable news ratings post is up, so you can compare the 8pm hour on the cable news nets with recent days, but the Presidential address and analysis were less than an hour, so drawing a clear conclusion is a bit tricky.
” It’s too bad Nielsen doesn’t have “changing the channel from this one to that one” data”
My understanding is that Nielsen *does* collect this sort of data, although it may not be available the next day.
*We* never have seen it though.
More bad news for libs Joe Miller AK as officially won his seat. Palin power, she backed him. A shock for the libs. MSNBC must be pulling out the hair what they have left.
Very tricky, I’d say. FCN averaging 2,631,000 in P2+ primetime when both Hannity and Greta fell below 2 million (Greta, way below) is incomprehensible.
Not good news at all for CNN who used to be the staple for these kinds of broadcasts (outside of Nets.) Did any ratings come in for CNBC viewers (essentially a simulcast version of MSNBC/NBC)?
Didn’t get a breakdown for CNBC during the Presidential Address, but you can see their entire 8pm hour in the regular cable news post for Tuesday.
So Fox News drew around 2.9 million viewers for last night’s Presidential address compared to the combine 2.3 million for MSNBC and CNN. That still leaves over 24 million viewers watching the Presidential address elsewhere, most likely on network TV.
More bad news for libs Joe Miller AK as officially won his seat. Palin power, she backed him. A shock for the libs. MSNBC must be pulling out the hair what they have left.
Why would that be a shock for liberals? Lisa Murkowski was a Republican senator who was pretty hard right yet was beaten by an even more hard right candidate. Granted, he’s most likely going to win the general election since Alaska is a solidly GOP state to begin with, but I doubt he will be as an effective statesman for the people of Alaska as Ms. Murkowski was. And I wonder how many Alaskans want to see their Social Security benefits privatised and sent off to Wall Street as Joe Miller has advocated.
Here is an article that explains it all.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/25/AR2010082504137.html
I’m surprised that many watched it, or watched the whole thing. Between the mediocre delivery, adequate content, and the drab new decor in the Oval Office, I had to fight to keep awake. Fewer people did tune in to this than past addresses/news conferences, so the trend is not so good for the President
It is interesting that Fox got the post-speech bump, while everyone else dropped.
Actually, Keith covered this.
It just goes to show that liberals don’t care about the news, no matter what happens.
Murkowski was as hard right as John McCain!
Keith who? The guy who only knows how to call people tea bagging racists?
He and congress should take more vacations their ratting go up when they are on vacation.
Rachel Maddow is terrible.