Do networks make money off of congressional hearings?

[Don CT]

So the networks have been blowing out daytime coverage to show the impeachment hearings. Do they make money as no commercials are shown for hours at a time. Do ratings numbers really make a difference if there are no ad buys.

 

[davideduardo]

So the networks have been blowing out daytime coverage to show the impeachment hearings. Do they make money as no commercials are shown for hours at a time. Do ratings numbers really make a difference if there are no ad buys.

They preempt the commercials, and do not make the money. Many spots can be "made good" at other times simply by not running PI or lower rate stuff.

I believe they run with no spots because they think they have to. It's part of being a news medium. And they don't want the core news viewers to go to other channels for coverage.

 

[Don CT]

They preempt the commercials, and do not make the money. Many spots can be "made good" at other times simply by not running PI or lower rate stuff.

I believe they run with no spots because they think they have to. It's part of being a news medium. And they don't want the core news viewers to go to other channels for coverage.

Do ratings matter though if they are not selling ads?

 

[TheBigA]

Do ratings matter though if they are not selling ads?

No. It's not being done for ratings but as a public service.

I've seen some talk hosts criticize them as "boring" or "dull" and here's a newsflash: Government is dull and boring. Get over it.

 

[LKellerIII]

No. It's not being done for ratings but as a public service.

I've seen some talk hosts criticize them as "boring" or "dull" and here's a newsflash: Government is dull and boring. Get over it.

For those of you old enough to remember the Watergate hearings, which were broadcast by "the Big 3"* for a zillion day time hours, I recall that many angry and bitter people complained about missing their soaps.

* This was way before the 500 channel world, and before CNN and Fox News, too

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

As forums such as this and others demonstrate, such bitter, angry complainers are alive and well.

 

[KeithE4]

For those of you old enough to remember the Watergate hearings, which were broadcast by "the Big 3"* for a zillion day time hours, I recall that many angry and bitter people complained about missing their soaps.

* This was way before the 500 channel world, and before CNN and Fox News, too

Which is why they started alternating days after about a month.

 

[FreddyE1977]

By their very nature these hearings are politically divisive.
Smart business says to not alienate half of your potential customers by taking sides.
I imagine spots during these hearings are a pretty tough sell.

 

[Don CT]

By their very nature these hearings are politically divisive.
Smart business says to not alienate half of your potential customers by taking sides.
I imagine spots during these hearings are a pretty tough sell.

I don't think most companies care, I see the same ads during Hannity as well as Maddow. They just go after the demo not what side of the demo.

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

Airing a hearing isn’t taking sides. Fox News and MSNBC both covered the hearings, and they’re not exactly ideologically aligned. That there isn’t money to be made because spots don’t exist (we’ll be right back with the members’ questions after this word from Depends) is a function of how breaking news coverage just is.

 

[TheBigA]

Here's an article tracking the ratings of the impeachment hearings over the course of the five days:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/impeachment-tv-ratings-see-slight-uptick-1257505

They seem rather consistent after the first day.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

So the networks have been blowing out daytime coverage to show the impeachment hearings. Do they make money as no commercials are shown for hours at a time. Do ratings numbers really make a difference if there are no ad buys.

In the case of Cable like Fox and MSNBC isn't it about cable subscriptions though for the target audience?

I know in the case of CBSN and CBSN local editions (Areas where CBS owns a CW and CBS affiliation) its free or through subscriptions of all access though during times these networks cannot make money from commercials due to network news coverage though.

 

[TheBigA]

It'll be interesting to see if the broadcast networks go gavel to gavel with the next phase of hearings starting next week.

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

In the case of Cable like Fox and MSNBC isn't it about cable subscriptions though for the target audience?

I know in the case of CBSN and CBSN local editions (Areas where CBS owns a CW and CBS affiliation) its free or through subscriptions of all access though during times these networks cannot make money from commercials due to network news coverage though.

Cable nets make their money from multiple streams—the subscriber fees and advertising, and whatever other ancillary streams there may be. Drop ads, you end up losing money in the long run. But it’s the way the game works.

 

[TheBigA]

Cable nets make their money from multiple streams—the subscriber fees and advertising, and whatever other ancillary streams there may be. Drop ads, you end up losing money in the long run. But it’s the way the game works.

Plus the cable news web sites rate very high on web traffic charts. There's a lot of revenue there and from clicks on the specific stories and videos.

And obviously they're not affected by live event coverage.

 

[anotherguyTN]

It'll be interesting to see if the broadcast networks go gavel to gavel with the next phase of hearings starting next week.

If they do, it won't surprise me to see more affiliates break away and go to regular local or syndicated programming during their normal times or move the hearings to a subchannel.

 

[TheBigA]

Here's another ratings analysis of the first round of hearings:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainme...into-tv-coverage-of-trump-impeachment-inquiry