Cable News Ratings for Friday, January 11, 2013

Categories: '

(147) Comments - Add Yours!

1. Ratboy

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:34 PM

   So the Hannity special smokes Maddow and his specials on fridays do not normaly do that well so does that mean that Rachel is TANKING???? Is she on her way out??? Is the management ready to let her go??? Is the fire OUT????? oooooor does it mean that FOX has gotten back to the normal numbers handily beating MSDNC like normal and Hannity is back where he was doing what he does for the huge amount they pay him under his new contract?

2. Doug

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:35 PM

   Wow, slow day in cable news…and FBN just literally fell off the map on Friday.

3. marvin

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:41 PM

   CNBC’s ratings were absolutely ABYSMAL! Any chance they’ll finally wise up and realize that their viewers don’t want another political coverage network?

4. cathy

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:47 PM

   Ok, Mark, Mark2 What are Stewart number?
   Here is a clip of the Steward’s show.. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/jon-stewart-al-gore-al-jazeera-fox-boner-alert_n_2455801.html
   Now, Matthew, Mark, and Mark2 explain to me again how Stewart has really changed his format and he’s more about delivering news then getting a laugh?!

5. Ratboy

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:51 PM

   Hey Cathy, did you happen to see what was at the top of the Huff and Puff page that the aticle was posted on??? The page is titled C O M E D Y!!! Do you think that Mark2 will be able to grasp the meaning???

6. Matthew

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:52 PM

   Now, Matthew, Mark, and Mark2 explain to me again how Stewart has really changed his format and he’s more about delivering news then getting a laugh?!

   Are the two mutually exclusive? And it’s not about ‘delivering the news,’ at least in the way that say, a 24/h network delivers breaking news, or nightly news shows deliver news, it’s about editorializing, in the same way that the evening shows on the cable news networks do. I’m not even sure what you’re trying to argue here, honestly.

7. Laurence Glavin

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:52 PM

   Friday night’s programming on MSNBC was a little odd: there was no “The Last Word” with either Lawrence O’Donnell or a guest host. Instead, they ran a repeat of Al Sharpton’s show. I don’t know if that was a last-minute substitute of some kind, or if it will become a Friday night staple. One thing that this highlights: AL SHARPTON NEVER TAKES A NIGHT OFF! It appears that he’s there every weeknight, holidays, you name it. Unless MSNBC goes to a prison-doc schedule for a holiday, even if EVERY OTHER host is off, Al is there!

8. Ratboy

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:54 PM

   OOOOOPSY Tingles! Maybe you should see what your boss is up to before you open your pie hole!!!!

   Don’t Tell Rabidly Anti-Gun Hardball Host Chris Matthews, But His Employer Sponsors a Gun Show

   On his January 10 program, pro-gun control Hardball host Chris Matthews was utterly perplexed at the very notion of gun shows themselves, going further than the call to close the so-called gun show loophole regarding background checks. ” I’m a suburbanite city mouse. I generally have lived in urban — suburban areas, but I don`t know why you need a gun show. I mean, if you want to buy a gun, you buy a car, you go to a dealer. Why do you have to have a show?” Matthews griped.

   Well, now it turns out that Matthews’s employer, NBC Universal, is actually sponsoring a massive three-day-long gun show in Las Vegas.

9. Matthew

   Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:55 PM

   Note: For purposes of ratings, yes comparing the Daily Show to FNC shows is stupid, particularly in the demo, since the Daily Show is entertaining, it will draw a larger, and younger audience. In that regard, I would agree that Mark2′s “heres how Colbert did, here’s how O’Reilly did!” posts are stupid.

   However, as a matter of relevance in policy discourse, and current events, the Daily Show’s impact and importance is comparable to other cable editorial programs. Just because it’s highlighting hypocrisy, policy failures, and Congressional incompetence in a humorous manner, that doesn’t somehow mean the points it’s raising are invalid, or that it’s ‘fake news.’

10. Pete S

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 1:59 PM

    Besides Greta’s slightly low total viewership, Fox’s numbers are looking pretty good. MSNBC’s numbers seem to be in a downward trend. Did maddow ever even top Hannity in the demo last week? i think Larry OD topped Greta once last week in the demo but otherwise Fox is pretty much back to wiping out the..competition…or whatever you wanna call it.

11. cathy

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 2:35 PM

    Matthew, I believe a couple of days ago you, Mark and Mark2 were telling me that Steward’s “The Daily Show” had become more about news then getting laughs. I posted the link to show how he is still about laughs. May Steward deliver some news, yes. Are Steward’s points invalid, no more then O’Reillys are. But you can’t count on anything being news on Steward’s show.
    Political satirist are always going to get higher ratings then talk news or opinion news shows. And it can be 100% fake news. Steward can get away with saying the Utah senators each have four wives. But shows on CNN, MSNBC, FOX News and other news channels can’t. People on news channels are held to a higher standard then Steward.

12. Ralph Hahn

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 3:11 PM

    Who brought up that nutty idea of bringing Jon Stewart into the cable news debate? He doesn’t have a cable news show and people here who don’t know better probably also buy into the same dumba*s reasoning that the Daily Show is a news show. BTW, I’ve seen several different ways of spelling Jon Stewart. Mine is the correct one. You don’t have to be a loyal viewer to know how to correctly spell a famous person’s name.

13. Mark

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 3:26 PM

    @cathy

    My argument is both Stewart and O’reilly(and most people on FOX and MSNBC for that matter) have entertainment programs biased heavily on news. I wasn’t trying to elevate Stewart to a level of O’Reilly, more the opposite(bring the talking head shows on cable news down to a level it’s better suited to be(which is not “news”))

14. RedBarSoup

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 4:10 PM

    I find it hilarious that people think Oreilly is a “news” show yet The Daily Show isn’t. That’s “special” people thinking right there.

15. cathy

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 5:19 PM

    @redbarsoup, From an interview with Steward and the writers of the show. The Daily show’s writers reject the idea that The Daily Show has become a source of news for young people. Stewart argues that Americans are living in an “age of information osmosis” in which it is close to impossible to gain one’s news from any single source, and says that his show succeeds comedically because the viewers already have some knowledge about current events. “Our show would not be valuable to people who didn’t understand the news because it wouldn’t make sense,” he argues. “We make assumptions about your level of knowledge that… if we were your only source of news, you would just watch our show and think, ‘I don’t know what’s happening.’”

    From Steward’s own mouth. Looks like you are the “special” person.

    But don’t feel alone, alot of people are in the boat with you.

    Sadly there is no “true news” shows these days. We are always subjected to the reporters beliefs.

16. TZCA

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 5:29 PM

    If anyone sees usa8888, let him/her know that I FINALLY got around to buying some tumbling bullets before they’re banned. There, in Wal-Mart, right before my very eyes in a nearly empty case, were two boxes of bullets labeled Tumbling Bullets.

    *sneeze*joke*cough*

17. TZCA

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 5:38 PM

    RedBarSoup
    Posted January 14, 2013 at 4:10 PM
    I find it hilarious that people think Oreilly is a “news” show yet The Daily Show isn’t. That’s “special” people thinking right there.

    Yeah, I don’t understand how anyone could not see that any show following an hour and a half of Southpark is real news catered to a truely news-worthy audience.

18. RedBarSoup

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 5:47 PM

    Yeah, I don’t understand how anyone could not see that Oreilly hardly pertains to news. He even has a “game show” where he asks his guests questions and they compete against each other. Yet perceive The Daily Show as only comedy and not “news” WHAT WAS I THINKING!!?

19. TZCA

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 5:52 PM

    yeah, what were you thinking?

20. TZCA

    Posted January 14, 2013 at 5:53 PM

    maybe if I watch the episode following Tosh.O, I might see the real news value of Jimmy.