mickeyd
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
The Fall of CBS Evening News with Katie Couric
Did I spend money on this crap?
- Thread starter mickeyd
- Start date
The Fall of CBS Evening News with Katie Couric
Telly
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2003
- Messages
- 2,395
Hey, I'm on that chart! My data, I mean.
Watched CBS Evening News for 30 years straight. Got to talking back to Dan Rather a lot, as he sunk further and further into bias and slant over the years. Then he got his... his replacement, the older guy (forgot his name now) was a lot lot better. He was in for a year or so. Then the bad news... Katie Couric was coming. I watched three weeks of Katie (thank you soooo much) Kouric and couldn't stand it. If she was alive in 1925 I'm sure that she would have been specifically mentioned in the Geneva Convention.
I'm sure I should have gotten reparations for lasting three weeks...
So on to NBC, which I watched for two weeks. Not the best, but better than Icky Couric. Decided to check out ABC. Found Charlie Gibson, he had taken over for the guy that got IED'd in Iraq I think. Am satisfied with Charlie. If they swap back to what's his name the previous ABC guy, I'm gone.
Upper management (Lester Moonves) at CBS are idiots. It was a no-brainer that dear sweet Katie was going to make real news folks barf. She's not news. She's "entertainment", and of a type I sure wouldn't watch!
Watched CBS Evening News for 30 years straight. Got to talking back to Dan Rather a lot, as he sunk further and further into bias and slant over the years. Then he got his... his replacement, the older guy (forgot his name now) was a lot lot better. He was in for a year or so. Then the bad news... Katie Couric was coming. I watched three weeks of Katie (thank you soooo much) Kouric and couldn't stand it. If she was alive in 1925 I'm sure that she would have been specifically mentioned in the Geneva Convention.
I'm sure I should have gotten reparations for lasting three weeks...
So on to NBC, which I watched for two weeks. Not the best, but better than Icky Couric. Decided to check out ABC. Found Charlie Gibson, he had taken over for the guy that got IED'd in Iraq I think. Am satisfied with Charlie. If they swap back to what's his name the previous ABC guy, I'm gone.
Upper management (Lester Moonves) at CBS are idiots. It was a no-brainer that dear sweet Katie was going to make real news folks barf. She's not news. She's "entertainment", and of a type I sure wouldn't watch!
SamHouston
Recycles dryer sheets
I feel much the same as Telly except that I've settled on NBC rather than ABC since Katie showed up. I only lasted 3 days, though, not three weeks, with Couric.
Last edited:
Alex
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- May 29, 2006
- Messages
- 696
No, you didn't spend money on 'this crap'. The chart indicates the cost to the networks, not the viewers. What they did was divide the salaries of the anchors by the number of viewers to arrive at a "cost per viewer". According to the chart, Katie Couric is no bargain when compared to her peers.......
dex
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2003
- Messages
- 5,105
Network executives are risk adverse and justify their spending on "news readers" based upon ratings. They equate a person with the potential ratings increase and the resulting increase in revenue not just for the show they work on but the following show that could also get a ratings boost.
So, the thinking goes - if Katie can get a .25 ratings increase she paid for here salary.
Many of the Today Show news readers haven't done so great after they left the show. The Today Show franchise is what makes them look good.
So, the thinking goes - if Katie can get a .25 ratings increase she paid for here salary.
Many of the Today Show news readers haven't done so great after they left the show. The Today Show franchise is what makes them look good.
HFWR
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
No news is good news...
NBC is down also, and ABC only picked up some of those viewers, the rest have just quit watching.
Overall evening news viewership is down 1.9 million viewers, something like 8.3 percent.
Many people have become tired of the corporate media promoting stories beneficial to the corporations that own them, the corporations that provide their ad revenue, and politicians (on both sides of the aisle) that are owned by the corporations.
Citizens no longer have to passively receive "news" on their idiot boxes. They can now go online, they can follow stories they think are important from many sources, including international sources that may have a different perspective than the corporate trolls.
Those who like the corporate mush are still free to tune in, say "please, may I have some more?", and argue about who serves it up better.
Overall evening news viewership is down 1.9 million viewers, something like 8.3 percent.
Many people have become tired of the corporate media promoting stories beneficial to the corporations that own them, the corporations that provide their ad revenue, and politicians (on both sides of the aisle) that are owned by the corporations.
Citizens no longer have to passively receive "news" on their idiot boxes. They can now go online, they can follow stories they think are important from many sources, including international sources that may have a different perspective than the corporate trolls.
Those who like the corporate mush are still free to tune in, say "please, may I have some more?", and argue about who serves it up better.
HFWR
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
SamHouston
Recycles dryer sheets
IMO, all news reporting is inherently biased simply based on what is chosen for broadcast, print, or the internet, and what is ignored. What's NOT reported tells me as much about any particular news source as what IS reported, and how it is reported, . It all has to be taken with a grain of salt and filtered carefully in order to get the facts, and only the facts, from a news story. Analysis is often masked as fact and that's where the line has to be drawn.NBC is down also, and ABC only picked up some of those viewers, the rest have just quit watching.
Overall evening news viewership is down 1.9 million viewers, something like 8.3 percent.
Many people have become tired of the corporate media promoting stories beneficial to the corporations that own them, the corporations that provide their ad revenue, and politicians (on both sides of the aisle) that are owned by the corporations.
Citizens no longer have to passively receive "news" on their idiot boxes. They can now go online, they can follow stories they think are important from many sources, including international sources that may have a different perspective than the corporate trolls.
Those who like the corporate mush are still free to tune in, say "please, may I have some more?", and argue about who serves it up better.
I prefer NBC over the other two (especially over CBS which seems to be the most biased of the big three by a long shot) mainly because I feel more "comfortable" with that particular news reader. I don't necessarily trust him any more than I do the other two or the ones on cable, for that matter, it's just that I am more in tune with his style.
