Full Article Text

F R I D AY, N O V E M B E R 0 3 , 2 0 0 6"Wall Street Journal" Botches Story On "Studio60"It took two people to write a story for the Wall Street Journal on"Studio 60 On The Sunset Strip." They both got numerous facts wrong.Basically, the article wonders if a show that has very few (but very rich)viewers can survive. They say "no" (and indeed "Studio 60" will becancelled) but they're asking the wrong questions and getting theirfacts messed up in the process.1. They say viewers for "Studio 60" in its most recent week were about4 million -- Wrong! As their own chart included with the article shows,"Studio 60" scored about 7 million viewers the last time it aired.2. They say the last week "Heroes" aired before "Studio 60" it drewabout eight million viewers -- Wrong! The last week they were paired,"Heroes" reached about 14 million viewers. They might have confusedtotal viewers scores with the scores for the coveted 18-49 demo, buteven then their figures are closer but still off.3. They say "Friday Night Lights" did worse in the time slot, dropping10% from the average of "Studio 60" -- technically correct, but verymisleading and ultimately wrong. Yes, the "average" for "Studio 60"was higher than the one-week showing of "FNL." But "Studio 60"opened to tons of hype (as opposed to the under-the-radar "FNL") andhas the biggest new hit of the season "Heroes" airing right before it. It'sratings have dropped every week since it debuted, even as the numbersfor "Heroes" get better. The fact is that the one-time airing of "FNL"did BETTER than the previous week's episode of "Studio 60," evenAFTER adjusting for the higher lead-in from the growing hit "Heroes."In other words, "FNL" did a better job of holding onto the audience of"Heroes" than "Studio 60." To suggest otherwise is either ignorant oran example of a reporter trying to stack the deck in favor of thestoryline they prefer.4. They claim overall revenue for a show depends on overall audience --Wrong! Way wrong. Advertisers mainly care about the 18-49 demosand they definitely pay more for wealthier, more educated viewers. Thisis so much the rule now that some of the networks ignore the overallviewership totals and talk strictly about the 18-49 demo they reach.That's the demo that advertisers want and so a show that skews olderlike, say, "Walker Texas Rangers" on Saturday nights might have drawna big audience, but a smaller hit with better demos would make moreNext Blog»sal1mineo@hotmail.comSEARCH BLOG FLAG BLOGFOLLOW BLOGP O P S U R F I N G . C O MS U R F I N G T H E WAV E S O F P O P U L A R C U LT U R EB Y M I C H A E L G I LT Z & F R I E N D SPOPSURFING.COM: "Wall Street Journal" Botches Story On "...http://popsurfing.blogspot.com/2006/11/wall-street-journal-botc...
1 of 37/28/09 3:37 PM
FAV O R I T E L I N K SAmericablogFive O'Clock Lightning baseball blogDeep Pop -- Lori Lakin's BlogThe Back Page -- Jason Page on ESPNRadioCine-Blog -- George Robinson's BlogDocuments On Art & Cinema - DarylChin's BlogBrucie G's Wondrous Blog OfAdventure and Mystery -- BruceGreenspan's BlogB L O G A R C H I V E▼ 2009 (17)▼ July (3)1939 -- The Greatest Year ForMoviesSwimming Bans Those Hi-TechSuits!Best Movies Of The Year -- TheMaster List► June (3)► May (1)► March (2)► February (1)► January (7)► 2008 (86)► 2007 (781)► 2006 (2412)► 2005 (5)C O N T R I B U TO R SBiboyAaronMichael in New York POPSURFING.COM: "Wall Street Journal" Botches Story On "...http://popsurfing.blogspot.com/2006/11/wall-street-journal-botc...
2 of 37/28/09 3:37 PM
POPSURFING.COM: "Wall Street Journal" Botches Story On "...http://popsurfing.blogspot.com/2006/11/wall-street-journal-botc...
3 of 37/28/09 3:37 PM