NBC Might Scale Back Hours

[JayR]

From MediaWeek:

NBC Might Scale Back Hours, Says Chief Zucker

Might?

Why haven't they done it already? Give the 10:00 pm-11:00pm ET slot back to the affiliates. Let them program it as they see fit.

 

[Nate Wesley]

Interesting decisions could be made at the peacock.

What do you think of this idea: Mondays through Fridays, the 'legacy' networks program only two hours of entertainment programming from 9pm-11pm ET and using the 8pm hour for the nightly news, giving back the 6:30 slot to affiliates and letting them have a longer afternoon/early evening block to program locally. Saturdays and Sundays would stay three hours for reruns, specials, or sports.

 

[MCNDRWS]

The Leno Move To 10-PM Leaves NBC With 17 Hours A Week To Fill With Other Programming ...

 

[bpatrick]

Interesting decisions could be made at the peacock.

What do you think of this idea: Mondays through Fridays, the 'legacy' networks program only two hours of entertainment programming from 9pm-11pm ET and using the 8pm hour for the nightly news, giving back the 6:30 slot to affiliates and letting them have a longer afternoon/early evening block to program locally. Saturdays and Sundays would stay three hours for reruns, specials, or sports.

Back in the early days, the networks did give 6:30 to the affiliates and programmed
their newscasts after 7: John Daly (ABC) at 7:15, Douglas Edwards (CBS) at 7:30,
John Cameron Swayze (NBC) at 7:45. True, these newscasts were 15 minutes of
mostly "rip and read," but the times were a lot more convenient, even in those days
when getting home was a lot easier for most people than it is today. I'd be in favor
of a later starting time for the news; the BBC's 9 PM news was an institution for years,
and "The National" on CBC airs at 10 to very good ratings. But as I said elsewhere,
I don't know why none of the "heritage" networks has followed Fox's lead and given
10 PM back for local news.

 

[KERCAlum]

Back in the early days, the networks did give 6:30 to the affiliates and programmed
their newscasts after 7: John Daly (ABC) at 7:15, Douglas Edwards (CBS) at 7:30,
John Cameron Swayze (NBC) at 7:45. True, these newscasts were 15 minutes of
mostly "rip and read," but the times were a lot more convenient, even in those days
when getting home was a lot easier for most people than it is today. I'd be in favor
of a later starting time for the news; the BBC's 9 PM news was an institution for years,
and "The National" on CBC airs at 10 to very good ratings. But as I said elsewhere,
I don't know why none of the "heritage" networks has followed Fox's lead and given
10 PM back for local news.

Given the fact that news departments are cutting back, I am not sure programming yet another hour of news is a good idea. Especially if your station is not the dominant one in the market, another hour of news could simply lead to bleeding more money, and if ad revenues continue to slide pretty soon it'll be more realistic for many stations to just go dark for a few hours a day. We might see the revival of station sign-offs overnight, because infomercial revenue can't fully fill a station's coffers.

Traditional OTA broadcasting as we know it is dead. The body just doesn't know it yet. With competition from satellite, cable, and fiber optics, the old business model doesn't work any more. Viewership is splintered so badly, no one station can truly claim to be "dominant" anymore. And with Internet delivery of TV shows and movies beginning to come into its own, why would anyone want to sit in front of their TV anymore (even if it is HD) and just "watch" TV?

In the first season of "Star Trek: The Next Generation," there was an episode titled "The Neutral Zone" in which the Enterprise-D picked up three 20th-century humans who had been frozen in hopes that future tech could cure their incurable diseases. One of the characters commented (after his disease had been cured) that he wanted to find a TV set to watch the Braves play, and Data responded by saying that TV "died" sometime around 2036. From the looks of things, his prediction might have been about a quarter-century off - I think TV is dying now.

All NBC is doing is moving "The Tonight Show" (not the title, obviously, but the concept) to 10pm Eastern. That basically gives us two late-night talk shows on the same network, separated by 35 minutes of news. Unless you're a big Leno and/or celebrity fan, who's gonna watch that? NBC may have been the first TV network, but it could also be the first (at least, of the big three) to fold. It'll join the ranks of DuMont, UPN and The WB (which has been resurrected on the web).

 

[dhoule]

Along with moving Jay Leno to 10:00, they should consider the idea that Brokaw had. Move NBC Nightly News to 8-9 p.m. at night. Although, they may not do this as long as they continue to lead at 6:30 p.m.

 

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

Along with moving Jay Leno to 10:00, they should consider the idea that Brokaw had. Move NBC Nightly News to 8-9 p.m. at night. Although, they may not do this as long as they continue to lead at 6:30 p.m.

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts. They outlived their model many years ago.

 

[tripinva]

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts. They outlived their model many years ago.

I'm glad you're not in charge of anything. Not everyone has cable/satellite (15% of the country doesn't) and not everyone has Internet access available to them (not counting dialup, since trying to load a modern website on dialup is cruel and unusual). And I hate to break it to you, but "HDTV channels" are the exact same networks we have now. Nothing new there. While some select markets have 24/7 news subchannels (mostly reruns of previous newscasts), the vast majority do not.

Plenty of people still watch nightly news. Not as many people as once did, but still a lot of people. Would I prefer all-news digital subchannels? Absolutely. Is it happening, no. ABC's NewsNow was pretty close to perfect and now is broadband-only and only for subscribers of certain selected companies for some unknown reason.

- Trip

 

[DToTheJ]

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts...

Or at least let Keith Olbermann anchor NBC's nightly news, and watch the ratings soar!

 

[oldschooltv]

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts...

Or at least let Keith Olbermann anchor NBC's nightly news, and watch the ratings soar!

Good point, in a way! I never quite understood why the broadcast networks (such as NBC & FOX) with cable newschannels don't capitalize on their sister networks' programming. ??? One would imagine that in hard economic times coupled with all the changes in the industry, they would want to simulcast or re-air some of the programming. Not only would this cut some costs, but from a viewer's perspective, not everyone has cable, let alone the internet to watch these programs. On a personal side note, I do have cable, but Comcast took MSNBC off our lineup this past summer, and moved to the highest of the digital tiers ($130/month). So it'd be great for people like me, or others without cable or internet to catch some of the cable channel's programming on NBC. For example, I don't see how it would hurt NBC to air Hardball with Chris Matthews a couple hours later in primetime, or Rachel Maddows show simulcasted live.

Even better, why doesn't NBC follow the FOX broadcast model? They could end their day earlier, programming from just 8-10 PM, followed by local news at 10 (1/2 hour or hour). Then Leno could be moved right after local news ends at 10:30 or 11 o'clock. I know it's sad to see this happen to network TV, but I'd rather see the networks evolve instead of going extinct altogether.

 

[DToTheJ]

Even better, why doesn't NBC follow the FOX broadcast model? They could end their day earlier, programming from just 8-10 PM, followed by local news at 10 (1/2 hour or hour). Then Leno could be moved right after local news ends at 10:30 or 11 o'clock. I know it's sad to see this happen to network TV, but I'd rather see the networks evolve instead of going extinct altogether.

You gotta admit, by programming just two hours of prime time instead of three, Fox turned out to be smart financially in the long run. And trust me, if Leno takes off, the other networks will follow suit with their own 10 PM variety shows. You watch.

 

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts. They outlived their model many years ago.

I'm glad you're not in charge of anything. Not everyone has cable/satellite (15% of the country doesn't) and not everyone has Internet access available to them (not counting dialup, since trying to load a modern website on dialup is cruel and unusual). And I hate to break it to you, but "HDTV channels" are the exact same networks we have now. Nothing new there. While some select markets have 24/7 news subchannels (mostly reruns of previous newscasts), the vast majority do not.

Plenty of people still watch nightly news. Not as many people as once did, but still a lot of people. Would I prefer all-news digital subchannels? Absolutely. Is it happening, no. ABC's NewsNow was pretty close to perfect and now is broadband-only and only for subscribers of certain selected companies for some unknown reason.

- Trip

Analog tv as you know it ends on February 17, 2009. Get with the program. We're moving on. Either you do or you only get snow on your tv. There is no need for a nightly newscast. In many markets, such as the one I am in Los Angeles, some newscasts, such as CBS Evening News, sometimes come in 7th place and even lower in demos that matter. It's OVER for network evening newscasts.

 

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

Even better, why doesn't NBC follow the FOX broadcast model? They could end their day earlier, programming from just 8-10 PM, followed by local news at 10 (1/2 hour or hour). Then Leno could be moved right after local news ends at 10:30 or 11 o'clock. I know it's sad to see this happen to network TV, but I'd rather see the networks evolve instead of going extinct altogether.

You gotta admit, by programming just two hours of prime time instead of three, Fox turned out to be smart financially in the long run. And trust me, if Leno takes off, the other networks will follow suit with their own 10 PM variety shows. You watch.

But Fox doesn't have any shows, outside of a few shows such American Idol and a spin-off of their original schedule, The Tracey Ullman Show, The Simpsons, that are really working either. It's nearly as pathetic as NBC currently.

NBC affiliates don't want to move their newscasts. Many outrate their parent network primetime lineup. There is ZERO possiblity of Leno being aired outside of 10 PM as that is part of the affiliate agreement to air primetime shows.

 

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts...

Or at least let Keith Olbermann anchor NBC's nightly news, and watch the ratings soar!

If you want to kill off the NBC news division, by all means. He's an embarassment to NBC.

 

[tripinva]

You may not have noticed, but I run a website about digital TV, I know how it works and I know what it's about. Evening news is not dead by any stretch of the imagination. An OTA viewer who wants national news needs... wait for it... a national newscast! I have no local all-news subchannels in my market, nor in my market at school, nor in the bordering market of Richmond... you see where this is going. Los Angeles may have the budget for such things, but not most of the country! Maybe if high-speed Internet ever becomes available to everyone at reasonable prices the evening newscasts will be able to go away, but as it stands now, they're needed.

I originally intended to argue your point about Fox as well, but it's not worth the effort.

- Trip

 

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

You may not have noticed, but I run a website about digital TV, I know how it works and I know what it's about. Evening news is not dead by any stretch of the imagination. An OTA viewer who wants national news needs... wait for it... a national newscast! I have no local all-news subchannels in my market, nor in my market at school, nor in the bordering market of Richmond... you see where this is going. Los Angeles may have the budget for such things, but not most of the country! Maybe if high-speed Internet ever becomes available to everyone at reasonable prices the evening newscasts will be able to go away, but as it stands now, they're needed.

I originally intended to argue your point about Fox as well, but it's not worth the effort.

- Trip

Verizon 1 Mbps is $9.99 per month. AT&T is running a similar promo for a slightly slower high speed DSL. How much cheaper would you like it? That's cheaper than Sirius/XM.

The evening network news IS dead. Bill O'Reilly has already outrated the CBS Evening News in his 3 runs.

MOST of the country IS in large or major markets and MOST already have digital subchannels. By February 17, just 2 months and a few days away, everyone is going to be digital and many stations make the conversion in the next two months of adding subchannels.

You can't argue about Fox because I am correct. Here's a short story that explains the November sweeps numbers http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/12/0...nt-programming-during-november-tv-sweeps/9210

I don't care what kind of a website you run if you're not telling the facts.

 

[andreajesus]

We don't need 1/2 hour or even hour long dinner hour network newscasts anymore. News is available 24/7 on cable, HDTV channels and the internet. This isn't 1970 anymore. Cancel the nightly newscasts...

Or at least let Keith Olbermann anchor NBC's nightly news, and watch the ratings soar!

Olbermann? that dude when he talks is like chalk on a board or something at times...he SCARES me!! :

 

[tripinva]

Verizon 1 Mbps is $9.99 per month. AT&T is running a similar promo for a slightly slower high speed DSL. How much cheaper would you like it? That's cheaper than Sirius/XM.

I'd like for you to come to my house and get me DSL. Go ahead. Listen as the Verizon employees laugh at you over the phone for suggesting such a ridiculous concept.

The evening network news IS dead. Bill O'Reilly has already outrated the CBS Evening News in his 3 runs.

Bill O'Reilly isn't news. He's, at best, entertainment. I like Olbermann but would say the same for him.

MOST of the country IS in large or major markets and MOST already have digital subchannels. By February 17, just 2 months and a few days away, everyone is going to be digital and many stations make the conversion in the next two months of adding subchannels.

Yes, most have digital subchannels, just not any running any kind of NEWS. Find one in DC. Can you? I can't. Baltimore. No? Boston? Detroit? Cleveland? Dallas? Not exactly tiny markets. You get my point.

EDIT: Here's a list from my website of all markets with news subchannels. It's quite short. http://www.rabbitears.info/search.php?request=network_search&network=News

I don't care what kind of a website you run if you're not telling the facts.

Unfortunately, LA is not the whole US. Sorry to break it to you. If it was, I think a lot of people would be a lot happier, and Bush wouldn't have been elected.

- Trip

 

[KML0224]

Does the Eyewitness News NOW programming count for WFSB-DT 3.3 in Hartford/New Haven? It's mostly local news with the scrolling ticker at the bottom and offers replays of their public affairs programming. You can access it online from their website.

 

[TexasTom]

Verizon 1 Mbps is $9.99 per month. AT&T is running a similar promo for a slightly slower high speed DSL. How much cheaper would you like it? That's cheaper than Sirius/XM.

I'd like for you to come to my house and get me DSL. Go ahead. Listen as the Verizon employees laugh at you over the phone for suggesting such a ridiculous concept.

Trip, I think it is fairly apparent that arguing with this guy is pointless -- since he already obviously knows *everything*, he surely has nothing to learn from the rest of us... *snicker*