Can we have reality in the reason that the networks will not show the President tonight?

[yeoman6987]

I have read all the threads about how awful the networks are to not show the President tonight and some have some good reasons to be upset and others are right to approve not to show the President. Well I decided to do some research to see if it is mistake for the networks to skip the speech. Here are the ratings of the State of the Union Address that was shown in January....the most important speech the President can make and here the the results:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/01/29/tv-ratings-tuesday-the-biggest-loser-hits-low-dads-flat-supernatural-rises-against-the-state-of-the-union-address/232914/

9:00 PM NBC State of the Union Address/ Analysis (9-11PM) 1.4 4 5.57
CBS State of the Union Address (9-10:30) 1.3 3 7.43
CW Supernatural 1.2 3 2.79
ABC State of the Union Address (9-10:30) 1.1 3 4.89
FOX State of the Union Address (9-10:30) 1.0 3 2.83


Now let's look at the numbers for a typical Thursday night:

http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2014/11/14/thursday-final-ratings-bones-adjusted-up-mom-two-and-a-half-men-the-mccarthys-elementary-adjusted-down/327800/

8:00 CBS The Big Bang Theory (8-8:31PM) 4.5/15 16.90
ABC Grey's Anatomy 2.4/7 8.36
FOX Bones 1.3/4 5.50
NBC The Biggest Loser 1.2/4 4.52
CW The Vampire Diaries 0.7/2 1.54


Can we really blame the networks for this decision. It appears that viewers did not want to watch on the networks and chose to watch it on non networks. Those numbers are dismal for the State of the Union. This is the most important day for any President of the year and viewers were not interested in watching. Those are just the facts. So can we just agree to disagree that the networks had to make a tough decision but decided that November is sweeps and they need to have the advertisers to make some money.

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. advertising money....

[global1]

2. So The Message To The President Here Is.....

never have a speech about a declaration of war during sweeps week because the network advertisers have to make some money. The President just needs to work around this. (sarcasm)

[Travis_0004]

11. PBS will air the speech

Why do we need the same thing on 30 channels. As long as its on one cable and one OTA, then everybody who wants to watch it can.

[kelliekat44]

23. I agree. i am tired of forced-fed news anyway. People who are interested in the issue and who care

about the well-being of the nation will tune in. It is a sad commentary on the voting public. They really don't care except to support whichever party they want. A lot of the viewers will be watching just to see how much they can lob at the President after his speech. There is no coming together as long as Obama is President, and that is sad. He is a smart, decent man with a good heart who has had the deck stacked against him from the beginning.

[NCTraveler]

3. I think I missed something in all of this.

A couple of article I read stated he sent feelers out to the networks this morning. I don't see how that can be correct. I find it hard to believe that the administration sent feelers out on the same day they wanted to pre-empt the primetime line-up when the contents of the speech are already known and the issue is decades old.

I am also under the impression no formal request was made by the administration. Is all of this about feelers being shot down? If it is going to get this much press why doesn't the administration make a formal request and force them to shoot him down? That is what is being said anyway.

[badtoworse]

5. Why not? He thought he could just show up at Winged Foot on Labor Day weekend for a round of golf.

[Ykcutnek]

7. You and the OP auditioning for a seat on FOX & Friends? nt

[yeoman6987]

8. What? What exactly is wrong with my OP? You mentioned me so now I want to hear this answer.

[Ykcutnek]

15. I just don't get why you feel the need to defend the networks.

Unless you have a vested interest in protecting their reputation and ratings.

SEIU shared a link. 12 hours ago

Major networks ABC, NBC, CBS & FOX are *not* going to be airing the President's primetime executive action announcement on #immigration.

So, so much WRONG with this. #iAmerica #adminrelief

The SEIU is also offended by this. Why aren't you?

[NCTraveler]

20. Are you offended by everything the SEIU is offended by?

For starters, that is a pretty low debate strategy. Second, what does the SEIU have to do with any of it?

You must agree with the ACLU on Citizens United. If not, you must be anti-ACLU. That tactic never works and is pretty shallow.

[Blue_Adept]

25. People are so easily offended these days by things...

that the word has pretty much lost meaning. That it's come down to a multitude of daily outrages and offenses has diluted things to the point that people no longer really care for the most part.

[yeoman6987]

27. Well maybe I shouldn't. I just found it interesting the outrage

I thank you for writing back. I was a little disappointed to be called a "Fox and Friends" potential panel member.....my intention was never to act like that. However, perception is everything and perhaps the networks should show it....I mean I guess starting the shows at 8:15 wouldn't hurt anything. I know Sunday nights when CBS has football. The shows go on well after 11 o'clock.

[badtoworse]

13. Not at all. The poutrage about this is ridiculous

There are so many avenues of communication available today that anyone who wants to watch it can easily do so. Expecting all four major networks to preempt regular programming to cover it amounts to forcing people to watch. That's what they where the state controls the media. People should be free to watch whatever they want.

[Kingofalldems]

44. Boom!

[NCTraveler]

14. If I were the head pro at Winged Foot he sure as hell would play by just showing up.

Who wouldn't want him to show up at their course. Announced or unannounced.

[Ykcutnek]

16. +1

Funny how people suddenly develop a sense of not treating Presidents like royalty when an African American becomes President.

And if there wasn't an extensive list of unprecedented disrespect toward this President, this would hardly be an issue.

"They did it to Bush too!" only gets one so far in disproving how differently they treat this President.

[badtoworse]

17. "Who wouldn't want him to show up at their course."

Most likely the club members who reserved their tee times months in advance. It's not like they would have squeezed him in with some threesome - they would have cleared the whole course for five hours and a whole lot of members would have been out of luck. My guess is that if the pro had done that, he would have been fired.

[msongs]

18. "democratic" candidates for senate would not want him to show up nt

[NCTraveler]

21. That gave me a chuckle.

He would then just watch those same people take a beating on the course from afar.

[NCTraveler]

19. Now I have no clue what you are talking about.

I guess it is some very strange hypothetical that really doesn't work in comparison. I don't see the snub from the networks like everyone else here does. Seems you are with me on that. Not sure where the golf thing is coming from.

[badtoworse]

24. It was in connection with your statement about sending out feelers to the networks.

You thought it hard to believe he would ask the networks to preempt primetime programming on the same day he wanted to speak. My point was that he thought nothing of doing that do golfers on probably the biggest golf weekend of the year.

[Cha]

31. Was that when A$$hole Trump wouldn't let him? You applauding that shite?

[badtoworse]

36. I thought he had a lot of nerve asking.

[Cha]

42. You and that a$$hole Trump agree. Fucking racist shite.. fucking ODS

[Proud Public Servant]

4. That's half of it

And probably the more important half. The other half is that the tradition of networks carrying the president's speeches dates from a moment when the networks were the only carriers of live events on a nationwide basis. That's no longer true. My guess is that the speech will be on at least half-a-dozen channels on my TV tonight, one of which is a broadcast channel (PBS, CNN, MSNBC, FOX, CSPAN, Univision). Networks are, quite simply, no longer a news source in any meaningful way.

[Journeyman]

6. Why not do it at 7:00 EST, then re-play it at that same hour in all the other time zones? . . .

What's so magical about the 8 o'clock hour on the East Coast? And why must it play simultaneously across the nation? It's not like it's a declaration of war, or something that would suffer from any "spoilers" that leaked before it played in the next time zone. And this way, everyone would have an opportunity to view it after dinner, before the network programs begin, and no one would be put out because of "something stupid that the President had to share" during their show.

Not everyone is interested in watching anything other than entertainment at certain times of the day. A lot of people won't watch because they'd rather read it later, the next day, when they can also peruse any reasoned analysis that had been made overnight. And some people just don't like watching speeches.

Those who want to watch it, or desire to read about it later, will certainly find a way. Why not make it as accommodating as possible, so the networks will find it far more difficult to deny coverage?

I don't blame the networks for choosing money over a policy speech. I'm certainly not going to watch the speech. It doesn't give promise to be an inspiring event, and I'll understand it better anyway when I read it tomorrow. And I'm certainly not going to get incensed that the networks denied airing it. They've done this before, for other Presidents, and the White House doesn't seem too worked up over it as it is.

[underpants]

9. WHAT!? People still watch Grey's Anatomy?

[yeoman6987]

10. Apparently after 10 years, it is very popular.

[Travis_0004]

12. Putting it up against football was the biggest mistake.

They get ratings most shows could only dream of.

I would probably watch the speech on a tuesday or Wedneaday, but not over football.

[underpants]

45. I agree

But then I get the sense that he wanted to do this months ago. I think there is some timing in this. Make Congress make some sort of move while the Dems have a majority and then next session things have to change and the whacko Teabagger influence comes to a head.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

33. That show is dreadfully bad.

Basically 25 minutes of doctors sleeping with one another, 25 minutes of long, overly dramatic monologues from the characters about doctors sleeping with one another, and 5 minutes of doctors doing doctor stuff.

Yet still popular, apparently.

[Cha]

43. Really. I never could get into it.

[Doctor_J]

22. it's going to be on five cable networks and pbs and the internet and radio

I don't get the hysteria over this

[Blue_Adept]

26. There's definitely several considerations at factor

But there's also the simple reality, that as someone else said upthread, this isn't the 1950's through the 1980's anymore where we, as a "nation", watched a handful of channels. When a press conference at night went on, it was covered everywhere.

There will be more networks covering it tonight than existed back in the 1980's that covered it. And people will be getting it through online and radio sources.

What once was will not always be. And that's a good thing for a whole lot of things. This included.

[Iggo]

28. Fuck ratings.

[Warren Stupidity]

29. So basically what you are saying is that Fox, NBC and CW ought to carry the speech. nt.

[bigwillq]

30. I don't think it should be on every channel.

The networks should take turns and air it on one.

I never watch the SOTU. All that clapping and political BS. No, thank you. I'll read about it, but I can't stand watching it.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

32. Solution: We need President Sheldon Cooper to address the nation.

[ctaylors6]

34. If only .... nt

[Niko]

35. How about FUCK THE MONEY for a change?

Does every Goddamn fucking thing have to be about money at the end of the day? This is the problem with American culture. Every motherfucking thing is about mother fucking Goddamn money.

If a drug can't sell, it doesn't get made. There's a reason the Ebola vaccine is made in Canada - Because in Canada health care is not about money, it's about saving human lives. If the news is not hyped up and exciting, it doesn't get reported.

In this case, we're talking about ratings for multibillion dollar corporations. How about FUCK the ratings and showing a crucially important message from the President of the United States on an important issue for the sake of the common good of the motherfucking Goddamn people?! I'm so sick of this shit.

[Ykcutnek]

37. Niko 2016.

[badtoworse]

38. What's wrong with watching it on cable?

[Niko]

39. So you'd rather people watch their dumbass "program"?

Yeah, let the masses choose what to watch, that way nobody ever gets informed about anything, ever. They can sit and drool over the latest reality TV star's shenanigans while the President speaks to the nation.

Culture rot.

[branford]

40. What elitist garbage.

How exactly does contemporaneously watching a 15 minute speech by the president on immigration affect the extent of one's "cultural" quotient?

Welcome to the free world. The masses should be free to watch whatever they want, even if we believe their choices are foolish. What you or I would rather other people watch is completely irrelevant.

More importantly, the president's speech will be on broadcast television (PBS), multiple cable stations, including Spanish-language Univision and Telemundo, simulcast on the internet, available on radio, transcripts of the speech will be available by Friday, and mainstream and independent news and blogs will cover the speech and surrounding issues for weeks. Why is contemporaneous broadcat network coverage even an issue in an era of ubiquitous media?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

41. Anyone that wants to watch it can watch it

What good does it do to have it on every channel?