Something to Puzzle Over
Before I go back to my nap -- something useful to do when one has recently returned from home after surgery -- let me pose a question that puzzles me.
This year, there was a 40% drop-off in viewership of the Republican convention. I can easily account for part of this. Americans are sick of the talking heads, and they do not trust them one iota. Nielsen does not include C-Span, where one can watch the convention gavel to gavel without mediation. Nor does it register those watching on YouTube, where one can view the whole shebang. And they miss out on the folks who watch the networks from a computer feed. All of this could perhaps account for a drop of 10% or 15% or even 20%. But 40%? I think not.
So what else is in play? One possibility is disgust with both parties. The Gallup poll registering what percentage of Americans view each party favorably and unfavorably, which I discussed a few days ago, indicates that, for the first time since Gallup began doing these polls, the Republicans are doing better than the Democrats. But it also shows that neither party is doing well at all. The majority of registered voters view both parties unfavorably, and this suggests that viewership may be down because a great many Americans wish a plague on both of their houses. It is not the right attitude, but you cannot blame them much -- for neither party has been especially responsible in its stewardship of our affairs.
Even after saying what I have just said, however, I have this gnawing feeling in my gut that there is something that I am missing. Something big, perhaps. Any ideas?
- Comment (89)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (9)
Comments:
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
For the record, I watched none of it. I was in the hospital; and, in the face of the fact that at 5:30 a.m. the techs were going to come to take my vitals, I chose sleep.
Jun '12
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
The only time I turn on my TV is to see if my cable connection is out. I only watched Ryan, Romney & part of Rubios speech, which I did via the Youtube stream. I would think new media would account for a lot of the drop, but the amount I couldn't say.
May '11
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
The best answer that I can come up with is that Snookie wasn't invited. Sad but true I think.
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
I think a lot of folks have their minds made up. They already know the story line of the conventions, i.e., who the nominees will be, the fact that both parties think their respective nominees are swell guys, the fact that both parties think the opposition is the incarnation of the anti-christ, that there will be balloons and everyone will hold hands, and the script will move on. No suspense there. People have busy lives, and so they devote their attention elsewhere. I suspect they will tune in to the debates, though.
Oct '10
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
There was very limited broadcast network coverage.
May '11
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
Palin vs. Ryan. Palin was a bigger unknown and was announced closer to the convention.
Was media coverage any different? Less network?
I watched on CSPAN. Ironically, this was a reflection of greater interest. I did not want to miss the speakers; whereas previously, I might have been more accepting of hearing pundits.
Sep '10
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
I watched the important speeches on youtube without the imbecile commentary. I have no particular interest in the tertiary figures jockeying for time in the limelight.
May '10
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
This...plus Dave's point. We will have a better idea when we see how many watch the Media Slobberfest (known as the Democratic Convention.)
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
I'd like to know more about the number of people who watched via alternate sources -- I watched on CPSAN, but I know many people who streamed it live off the internet via some GOP source. I'd like to know more about whether there were significant numbers who watched that way. Also, the Palin speech four years ago seriously skewed the numbers for the GOP last time around, right? Are these numbers typical if you take that year out?
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
Keith Preston
This...plus Dave's point. We will have a better idea when we see how many watch the Media Slobberfest (known as the Democratic Convention.) · 0 minutes ago
It might be worth watching just for comic relief. Surely, they will highlight the speeches by Sandra Fluke and the like. The mainstream media is busy digging its own grave.
Dec '11
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
I don't think this is too mysterious. People think they are boring, even those who are interested in the race, and politics in general. People were wrong, this time around, at least with Ann Romney and Clint Eastwood. Both were amazing, and nothing like what I expected. Mitt was OK, better than I had feared.
I'll try to catch Clinton at the DNC, but cannot imagine listening to much more. It will be both boring and cause by blood pressure to rise.
I'm sure I'm not the intended audience for either, and no surprises, so why bother?
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
An excellent question. Does anybody know?
Aug '12
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
More and varied avenues from which to glean information: twitter, facebook, blogs, hulu for video content. The old means of delivering information, TV and newpapers, are losing relevance and hence influence and impact. People want their information pre-digested according to their point of view, and they want it immediately. Preferably in 140 characters or less. Anything more than that and they might miss something important, like what is happening with the Kardashians.
Edited on September 2, 2012 at 10:45pmOct '10
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
We do not choose to have either cable or over the air television. Our entire access to news and events is from our computers. Watched a considerable part of the convention on YouTube and FoxNews streaming. A considerable portion of Americans, especially those of us who have no interest in TV shows, pick and choose our sources on our computers. My guess is that a great percentage of the under 30 crowd are also doing so.
Nielson once asked us to become diary keepers. We declined. Just like with the polls, people who actually follow events realize that these surveys are not relevant to their political interests or positions.
Aug '12
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
So there we have the convergence. The lack of broadcast media coverage was accompanied by a lack of broadcast media self-promoting commercials, so the awareness was down. The lack of the novelty that Sarah Palin provided left many with less interest. And, I also watched on CSPAN (via my computer), whereas four years ago I watched on PBS.
The total number of likely voters who actually see the Republican speeches will go up, since they are so readily available on Youtube.
Aug '12
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
raycon, I am with you. We have been living without a working television in my house ever since they converted to digital signals. TV rots your brains.
May '10
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
I wouldn't dream of watching it on TV (even if I had a TV). What I saw, I saw online.
I agree that Sarah Palin was a hugely exciting factor. But so was the 2008 Obama. Lots and lots of people on both sides were on the edge of their seats with excitement last time around. I think now, the entire left is dispirited, while the right is disgusted with the media.
Apr '11
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
In the piece I read on this year's viewership stats (apologies - can't lay hands on the link just now) they noted that 2008 saw a big jump over 2004. So 2012 reverts more to the mean, perhaps.
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
Here's my hypothesis: Barack Obama is the most polarizing president of my lifetime--possibly of all time. Most Americans have made up their minds one way or the other. As Brother Rob points out, the competition over the next two months will be to win the 10 or 12 percent in the middle who will decide this election. Therefore, the Republicans engaged in narrowcasting a message to this specific audience rather than broadcasting an event for true national consumption.
The idea was to de-demonize the brand enough to allow swing voters to once again consider voting Republican.
True believers did not find a lot at this convention. When Clint Eastwood's comedy routine is the hardest-hitting indictment of an increasingly imperial president, you know that the event is not being programmed to appeal to conservatives.
Clint also provided the most drama. At a time when the unscripted drama--"reality TV"--generates ratings, perhaps we should be unsurprised when a scripted convention does not.
Oct '10
Re: Something to Puzzle Over
Is it the lack of Sarah Palin, who was a media sensation in late 2008?