Cable News Ratings for Wednesday, January 9, 2013

Categories: '

Written By

January 10th, 2013


Live + Same Day Cable News Daily Ratings for Wednesday, January 9, 2013

P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
Total Day
FNC        1,178        242         486
CNN           356        100         152
MSNBC           521        166         249
CNBC           174         51           86
FBN             52         15           28
HLN           183         74         100
Primetime P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC        2,263        385         797
CNN           499        133         232
MSNBC           989        242         431
CNBC           227         77         116
FBN             52         17           27
HLN           311        119         170
Net Morning programs (6-9 AM) P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC FOX & Friends        1,095        248         503
CNN Early Start/Starting Point           270         85         141
MSNBC Morning Joe           496        207         280
CNBC Squawk Box           127         45           59
HLN Morning Express w/ Meade           172         90         116
Net 5PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC FIVE, THE        1,916        361         707
CNN SITUATION ROOM           477        104         174
MSNBC HARDBALL WITH C. MATTHEWS           885        242         397
CNBC FAST MONEY           195         27           88
HLN EVENING EXPRESS           171         55           57
Net 6PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC SPECIAL RPT W/BRET BAIER        1,831        321         700
CNN SITUATION ROOM           376         93         154
MSNBC POLITICS NATION           856        227         351
CNBC MAD MONEY           229         55         101
HLN EVENING EXPRESS           199         60           79
Net 7PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC THE FOX REPORT W/S.SMITH        1,684        306         731
CNN ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT           382        134         156
MSNBC HARDBALL WITH C. MATTHEWS           854        190         359
CNBC KUDLOW REPORT           166         51           49
HLN JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL           231         90         108
Net 8PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC THE OREILLY FACTOR        3,152        492       1,139
CNN ANDERSON COOPER 360           441        111         208
MSNBC ED SHOW           972        208         378
CNBC FILTHY RICH           228         66           96
HLN NANCY GRACE           415        180         240
Net 9PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC HANNITY        2,057        388         714
CNN PIERS MORGAN TONIGHT           614        134         277
MSNBC RACHEL MADDOW SHOW        1,028        268         477
CNBC AMER GREED THE FUGITIVES           214         82         113
HLN DR. DREW ON CALL           303        119         156
Net 10PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
CNN ANDERSON COOPER 360 443 153 211
HLN NANCY GRACE 215 59 114
Net 11PM P2+ (000s) 25-54 (000s) 35-64 (000s)
FNC THE OREILLY FACTOR        1,127        325         495
CNN ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT           343        128         158
MSNBC ED SHOW           372        124         205
CNBC MAD MONEY           103         42           61
HLN SHOWBIZ TONIGHT           228         90         116

For other days cable news ratings click here.P2+ = viewers over the age of 2 (25-54) = Adults 25-54 viewing (35-64) = Adults 35-64 viewingPrime Time = 8-11pmLIVE+SD: The number that watched a program either while it was broadcast OR watched via DVR on the same day [through 3AM the next day] the program was broadcast. For more information see Numbers 101.Scratch = when a show's audience fails to meet minimum Nielsen reporting levels. For more information go here.Nielsen Cable Network Coverage Estimates (as of July, 2012)CNN/HLN: 99.727 million HHsCNBC: 97.497 million HHsFNC: 97.981 million HHsMSNBC: 95.526 million HHsFox Business: 68.407 million HHsNielsen TV Ratings Data: ©2012 The Nielsen Company. All Rights Reserved.

  • Doug Z


    Demos are the Ringling brothers. John Ringling had his hand in every-bodies pocket but his.

  • Doug Z

    Ratboy you are a rookie

  • cathy

    People don’t ask for Usa48 until after 5pm. He’s in school.

    Love liberal spin. We don’t have anyone that has a news related talk show that can beat O’Reilly. So, we call O’Reilly an entertainment show and compare it to Colbert and Stewart’s satire news (comedy) and say we are winning. Comedy beats news talk what a surprise.

  • Hoppy

    Barack: How’s Hillary’s head?
    Bill: Well, she’s no Monica.

  • Mark2


    If you have a problem with that chart, take that up with TVBTN and the Nielsen Ratings, not me.

    By the way, the left column displays the total viewership in millions, the right column displays the 18-49 demo rating.

    Again, this something Hillbilly and I look at on a daily basis and why you and StanT are still ‘wet behind the ears’ on this subject. But I’m glad I was able to enlighten you on the matter.

  • AppleStinx


    Hoppy!?!?! :shock: :smile:

  • cathy

    Hoppy……. That was bad… bad… bad… But oh so funny.

  • Matthew

    I like how you have a 5 year trend & have repeatedly used a decade trend in your defense/support of the GW theory, yet disregard a decade or more as a trend when it cuts the other way.

    When did it ‘cut the other way?’ 2000 – 2009 had a positive trend anomaly, 0.5 degrees Celsius above the 20th Century average. I don’t know how many times you need to be told this, but the only way you can claim a ‘flatline’ is by comparing the anomaly for the 2000s to the anomaly from 1998 alone, which is statistically dishonest, and irrelevant. The trend for 2000s was above the trend for the 90s, even by the most modest of measurements.


    You nor anybody else can say the drought, Sandy, lack of hurricanes making land fall in the USA etc are tied to global warming. There’s always been weather extremes & I’m guessing there always will be.

    I didn’t blame it for Sandy, but it absolutely does tie into how pervasive droughts are. There has always been droughts, and there will always be droughts, but frequency and severity do tie into; 2012 wasn’t just a U.S. drought year, it was a global drought year, and particularly harsh on Eastern Europe. The location of arable land also has a big relationship with climate. Particularly, the viability of agriculture will shift northward, and eventually become untenable in the Southwest.

  • Matthew

    Doug Z, I disagree. To date I believe Andrew Jackson was the worst President.

    Are you confusing Andrew Johnson with Andrew Jackson? I thought conservatives were Jackson fans.

  • Matthew


    You need to check into the legal differences, silly boy. Shows have to classify themselves because they can be broadcast. Stewart and Colbert shows are satirical television program, you can call them news satire if you like. Because they call themselves satire they can pretty much say anything and not be sued or removed from the air. They have no legal obligation to support the statements made on their shows.

    Could you cite a source for this? I know FNC considers O’Reilly, Hannity, etc. to be editorial programs, but is that really a legally binding classification, especially in cable television (which has no official obligation to meet federal regulations)? Even in programs that are officially considered ‘news,’ I’m pretty sure misinformation is more of an ethical violation that’s handled in house, rather than an legal matter, unless someone decides to sue you for slander. I’m pretty sure neither O’Reilly nor Stewart have any legal obligation (outside of the aforementioned slander possibility) to be factual; if objectivity was necessary for journalism, Hunter S. Thompson would have been sued into the poor house.

  • Doug Z


    All I was pointing out is the people of the past are not like those today. He was great, he was bad. What do you think of Alexander the Great or other so called great, considered to be great? I am trying to say one has to look at people through the eyes of their time.

  • Doug Z

    Matthew, I think Johnson got a bad rap.

  • Doug Z


    This county would run home and cry if it lost 50,000 people or more in one day. It happened more that 5 times, maybe more, would have to look. Romans would just fix the problem. Just a different time.

  • Doug Z

    Oh, I should proof read, oh well.

  • Matthew

    @Doug: I don’t agree at all that Johnson got a ‘bad rap.’ On the scale of badness, he’s not as bad as Buchanan, but he’s right up there. He, and the Democratic Congress, were far too lenient on states that committed treason; you can at least excuse that under the guise of ‘healing our wounds,’ or reunification, but there’s no excuse for dismantling the Freedman’s Bureau, or failure to right the wrongs committed by prior generations toward the freedmen.

    Since you like to reference history, and peasants, you should know better than most that men who have no property or resources cannot rightly be called ‘independent,’ which is why land grabs British royalty committed against the peasant class were so egregious. By choosing to dismantle the Freedman’s Bureau, he set the clock back on African American economic independence by several decades. This, after hundreds of thousands of lives lost.

  • cathy

    No, I don’t have them mixed up. Why would conservative be Jackson fans? Jackson was a great example of saying one thing and doing the opposite. He helped the two party system take root. He used political favor to buy votes. He strengthened the role of the President. He said he was against the closed undemocratic aristocracy but he looked down on everyone how wasn’t a rich white male. How viewed black and Indians as sub-human. He said he was for states rights but declared that states do not have the right to nullify federal laws.
    He ran the Presidency as if you was a King. By passing congress as much as he could. (Sound like another President?!)
    He perpetuate the lie that he won the war. When in fact the war was won before the battle of New Orleans.
    I could go on. But I’d like to here why you think conservatives were a fan of Jackson’s.

  • Letmethink

    Afternoon All,
    Beautiful day here today. Supposed to get up into the 70’s then cold again next week.
    Electricity has been out all morning so read early posts on cell phone but can’t type well enough on cell to respond on cell.
    Hillbilly, Cathy, Matthew so glad to see that there are 4 of us that are AGW enthusiast–enjoyed all the earlier posts.
    Hillbilly,on AGW–your responses to Matthew were exactly what I was thinking as I read his posts so glad you posted. Also glad there can be a civil discussion about a very controversial topic–just the facts pro and con and back them up with data. It is easy to get lost for hours on sites discussing AGW. I never post on those sites but read them religiously. I even google and follow some of the posters I admire most.
    There is one poster that intrigues me. He is an atheist, left of center psychology major at Bard College named Ian Weiss. He is a skeptic and always has such sane and reasonable arguments. He is called every name in the book. He remains calm and carries on. He posts on a lot of different topics but here is one I found on conservatives vs liberals. He was pounded in the comment section. I thought it would be fodder for a good conversation.

  • Letmethink

    Here is another link to James Hansen’s talk on climate change that sparked some controversy. Skip from the talk to the comments. There were a few commenters that made comments not in support of the ideas Hansen’s presented in the speech. Most of them dropped out quickly as they were ridiculed mercilessly. Weiss just continued to answer in a calm, respectful and intellectual manner. Some of the post were so vile. One even posted something close to a threat. It was deleted shortly there after.

  • Matthew

    @Cathy: My mistake, it’s just that it’s really uncommon to see Jackson make people’s (regardless of ideology) list for worst presidents, much less for him to take first place. My comment on conservatives liking Jackson was mostly in relation to my own family’s comments on their favorite presidents, as well as what I can recall of the Murray-Blessing survey of favorite presidents, broken down by ideology. I agree with everything you said, there’s a lot to despise about Jackson, it’s just rare to see people actually rank him low, since he gets quite a lot of whitewashing.

  • Letmethink

    @MatthewI agree with everything you said, there’s a lot to despise about Jackson, it’s just rare to see people actually rank him low, since he gets quite a lot of whitewashing.

    We agree again Matthew–

© 2015 Tribune Digital Ventures