• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

What is the fifth most popular TV network in the USA?

I watched the majority of the last World Cup solely on Univision.
I preferred hearing the call of the matches spoken with passion and gravitas even if it's in a language I do not speak and only vaguely understand.

I did the same. Fortunately, soccer is one game that doesn't really need an announcer.
 
Thanks for this. One more question if I may.

Are the Spanish networks watched only by Hispanic people, or is there a certain amount of crossover to non Hispanic viewers?

Except for viewing by people who see Spanish language TV in a "captive" situation where they see what others have selected not by personal choice, there is virtually no crossover.
 


Except for viewing by people who see Spanish language TV in a "captive" situation where they see what others have selected not by personal choice, there is virtually no crossover.

Or people with an interest in sports carried on Univision, Galavision or Telemundo. I remember watching most of the 1982 World Cup on SIN, and still watch a good amount of boxing on Spanish-language TV, despite hardly knowing any Spanish. The great thing about sports is if you know the rules of the sport and the participants, you really don't need to understand the commentary at all.
 
Or people with an interest in sports carried on Univision, Galavision or Telemundo. I remember watching most of the 1982 World Cup on SIN, and still watch a good amount of boxing on Spanish-language TV, despite hardly knowing any Spanish. The great thing about sports is if you know the rules of the sport and the participants, you really don't need to understand the commentary at all.

But that is relatively rare, and would not impact the ratings significantly with the once-every-four-years World Cup being the possible exception.

In general, most viewers want the additional color, player statistics and such.

There are many videos of the Maradona World Cup '86 "mano de dios" goal. The one with the most views is the narrated one in Spanish for Argentine TV because it conveys the most emotion about that most famous (and controversial) of goals.

Boxing, though, is a good example of where there might be sizable crossover viewing. But free TV boxing events are becoming fewer and fewer it seems.
 
Last edited:


But that is relatively rare, and would not impact the ratings significantly with the once-every-four-years World Cup being the possible exception.

In general, most viewers want the additional color, player statistics and such.

There are many videos of the Maradona World Cup '86 "mano de dios" goal. The one with the most views is the narrated one in Spanish for Argentine TV because it conveys the most emotion about that most famous (and controversial) of goals.

Boxing, though, is a good example of where there might be sizable crossover viewing. But free TV boxing events are becoming fewer and fewer it seems.

Actually, they are becoming more numerous, now that the Premier Boxing Champions promotional outfit has placed shows on several OTA and cable networks. Fox just last night carried boxing for the first time since Mike Tyson-Buster Mathis Jr. The main event was a 12-rounder for the WBC version of the welterweight title recently vacated by Floyd Mayweather. PBC cards have also been aired on FS1, ESPN and Spike. Pretty sure NBC is in on it too.
 
Actually, they are becoming more numerous, now that the Premier Boxing Champions promotional outfit has placed shows on several OTA and cable networks. Fox just last night carried boxing for the first time since Mike Tyson-Buster Mathis Jr. The main event was a 12-rounder for the WBC version of the welterweight title recently vacated by Floyd Mayweather. PBC cards have also been aired on FS1, ESPN and Spike. Pretty sure NBC is in on it too.

PBC also runs fights on Bounce.
 
I bet Bounce TV has more ratings than CW and PBS.

You lose. The numbers were already posted in this thread. CW beats Bounce, and we have determined that PBS numbers are unavailable because they are non-commercial.

Remind me to make bets with you about Obama's election in 2008 and 2012.
 


Except for viewing by people who see Spanish language TV in a "captive" situation where they see what others have selected not by personal choice, there is virtually no crossover.

Fair enough. I was thinking about comparisons with mainland Europe (ie NOT the UK) where it is quite common to watch TV in ones second or third language. The obvious examples would be tri-lingual Switzerland, or bi-lingual Belgium. Cable systems in the latter country carry channels in French, Dutch, German, Italian, English and Spanish.
 
I watched the majority of the last World Cup solely on Univision.
I preferred hearing the call of the matches spoken with passion and gravitas even if it's in a language I do not speak and only vaguely understand.

ESPN's play by play might as well have been performed by morticians because of how stiff they sounded.

I watched some World Cup games on Univision last time. It helped that Charter had finally added the national feed to my home system!
 
Fair enough. I was thinking about comparisons with mainland Europe (ie NOT the UK) where it is quite common to watch TV in ones second or third language. The obvious examples would be tri-lingual Switzerland, or bi-lingual Belgium. Cable systems in the latter country carry channels in French, Dutch, German, Italian, English and Spanish.

The issue in the US, unlike Europe, is that the vast majority of "born in the USA" folks (no Ted Cruz comments, pleeeeeze!) do not learn a second language while Europeans frequently do so.

Of course, for soccer it is likely that the World Cup matches get considerable viewing from people from many other origins where soccer is played either because they know some Spanish or because the announcing in Spanish is more emotional.

This brings up the rather old European joke:

Q. What do you call someone who speaks many languages?
A. A polyglot
Q. And someone who speaks two languages?
A. Bilingual
Q. And someone who speaks just one language?
A. An American.
 
The issue in the US, unlike Europe, is that the vast majority of "born in the USA" folks (no Ted Cruz comments, pleeeeeze!) do not learn a second language while Europeans frequently do so.

And the reason, of course, is the much closer coexistance of cultures in Europe. The opposite could be said about Australians and New Zealanders. There are no close cultures so it isn't necessary to learn another language (notwithstanding the Maori language which is taught in NZ schools).

The Indian Nations of the American southwest each had their own language but many of them also spoke Spanish and some, English because it was necessary to get along with those who did. Europe is no different.
 


Of course, for soccer it is likely that the World Cup matches get considerable viewing from people from many other origins where soccer is played either because they know some Spanish or because the announcing in Spanish is more emotional.


I listen to Premier League matches on Sirius XM every weekend. Whether from the BBC or TalkSport, the announcers -- all British -- bring a lot of enthusiasm to the broadcasts, not the stereotypical English understatement. Why this doesn't translate to TV coverage of the World Cup, I don't know. What I do know is that there isn't one American announcer who gets the sport right.
 
I listen to Premier League matches on Sirius XM every weekend. Whether from the BBC or TalkSport, the announcers -- all British -- bring a lot of enthusiasm to the broadcasts, not the stereotypical English understatement. Why this doesn't translate to TV coverage of the World Cup, I don't know. What I do know is that there isn't one American announcer who gets the sport right.

I agree.

There is nothing like this narration from the '86 World Cup for emotion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK2z5-cceP4

The American soccer play by play and color announcers just don't seem to be in synch with the rhythm of the play!
 
I'm surprised that Cozi is ranked as high as it is and that Antenna TV isn't even on the list. Are the ratings available for anything lower than MundoMax?
I'm not surprised Antenna TV isn't high on the list. Afterall it's only a digiet that reruns old TV shows. We're not talking ThisTV (Which is mostly a modern fare movie channel) ya know.....

Cheers & 73 :)
 
Q. And someone who speaks just one language?
A. An American.

Or British, to be fair.

If my local cable company offered a selection of the main PSB TV channels from around Europe instead of dozens of channels showing repeats of repeats of programmes from BBC/ITV I might be persuaded to sign up.
 
Last edited:

Trampa indeed. Although most British fans would concede it was a good run to get himself in the right place to commit the handball. Trampa he may be, but he was a great player as well.

Anyway, a million miles off topic.


Also to be fair with Brits, all the friends I have from that country are somewhat bilingual: they speak German.

Yes most people learn either French or German in schools- some schools let you choose. But if French and German channels were readily available on satellite and cable in the UK, it would help kids with their languages and help adults stay in practice.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom