What’s Hot/What’sNot: 07/10/11

What’s Hot:

CNN Programming Remake – CNN announced a bunch of changes to shuffle its programming around. The Situation Room moves back an hour, John King, USA moves to 6pm, Erin Burnett’s new show will debut at 7pm (thus proving Page Six right all along), and, most shockingly, Anderson Cooper will now be live at 8pm but in a taped repeat most nights at 10pm. It’s a risky move for the network as far as 360 is concerned and puts incredible pressure on Burnett to deliver right out of the gate upon launch as she’s Cooper’s lead in.

Carl Quintanilla and Melissa Lee – The duo have been tapped to anchor CNBC’s Squawk on the Street.

What’s Not:

Anjali Rao departs CNNI – The mystery of why Rao is no longer with the network rages on…

Casey Anthony Verdict – The actual verdict, the coverage of the actual verdict, all the finger pointing and recriminations after the actual verdict…it all sucks. Even HLN’s boffo numbers for the verdict sucks because it proves the programmers cynicism regarding the pandering to the lowest common denominator for the viewing public was accurate. Which means, given the opportunity, they’ll do it all over again. Networks should not be rewarded for this crap with large audiences. They should be punished by the public boycotting these gratuitous spectacles.

Advertisements

20 Responses to “What’s Hot/What’sNot: 07/10/11”

  1. …by the public boycotting these gratuitous spectacles.

    “I’m Judge Jeanine Pir-” —– *click* ——-

  2. Josh Kaib Says:

    Even if 95% of the country boycotts Nancy Grace, she’ll still get a few million viewers.

    HLN made a great programming move, but it’s a good thing “CNN” is no longer in the network’s title. This spectacle would have damaged CNN’s credibility.

    Having said that, I don’t have a huge problem with Nancy Grace, Jane Velez-Mitchell, et al. Clearly their coverage had no effect on the outcome, so I don’t see the harm. A lot of people are outraged, and their coverage reflects that. Unless of course its the media coverage that is whipping everyone up in a frenzy.

  3. laura l Says:

    The Dershowitz-interview on Huckabee was worth watching. I don’t know if he’s changed in that period-of-time or if I see him differently. He made a point of saying that his firm never ‘celebrates’ a ‘win’, unlike the attorneys in this case. He also defended the jurors, which was a good thing. It bothers me that those names are even known. How does that not influence juries on future high-profile cases?

  4. joeremi Says:

    “Is there anything that would prevent you giving the defendant a fair hearing?”

    ‘Uh, yeah. If I let the wrong person off the hook, one of Nancy Grace’s thug viewers might learn my name and come after me.’

  5. starbroker Says:

    I noticed this hilarity from yet another who DOESN’T UNDERSTAND ratings at all:

    stevemg Says:
    July 10, 2011 at 2:44 pm
    NOT HOT: The Fox-o-phobes at this site. There are about 310 million Americans. On most days, about 308 million of them are not watching Fox News. That means less than 1% of Americans watch
    the network.

    Really Steve?! Are you that clueless?! Granted, not as many tune in to FNC each month as CNN, but somewhere around 75 million American’s tune in to FNC each month.

    People cluelessly see an “average” for a show and think that’s all tuned in. Big difference between the cume and the average. Much like a Super Bowl. 150M+ tune in. At any given time, the shows averaging around 97M or so.

    Less than 1% of Americans watch FNC on any given day?! SURE!!! =)

    Oh my– I love the “knowledge” of the people who visit this site. It’s amazing!! Such insights….. 😉

  6. joeremi Says:

    So according to your math 2.5 million people catch FNC a day, not the 2 million Steve claims. Thanks for pointing out that statistically meaningless difference, which doesn’t even qualify as a “difference” when you recognize Steve said “about” 2 million. Hack.

  7. starbroker Says:

    LOL What are you talking about Joe?! Where did I say 2.5M? I said 75 million (unique individuals) tune in each month. Any given day there’s probably 30 million different people watching FNC or more.

    But thanks for showing your CLUELESSNESS as usual Joe! Gotta love it!

  8. laura l Says:

    Okay, so Fox News Watch has to talk about Mark Halperin’s unfortunate utterance, and all Alan Colmes can do is talk about Rush Limbaugh. Um, He Doesn’t Work for a Cable News Channel. Who gives a crap? Despite your fevered dreams, he’s not going to fire himself.

  9. laura l Says:

    Though, I suppose a more apt thing to say would have been that Rush isn’t exactly a member of the ‘media’ that they pretend to critique.
    This week’s show was actually semi-decent, with segments on CA and DSK. The ‘bias’ in those cases being “They’re guilty and you all should hate them”.

  10. joeremi Says:

    Star, nobody knows what the hell you’re talking about, nor cares about your ratings fetish. With exclamation points!

  11. starbroker Says:

    That’s right Joe…pretty much most around here have “no idea” …. but that doesn’t keep them from mouthing off and pontificating about something they are clueless on…

  12. joeremi Says:

    Define “decent”. They butchered the Halperin story as being about which poliitician he called a dick, as if people routinely use that word on morning cable and get away with it. I have no clue how suspending him qualifies as media bias.

  13. laura l Says:

    ‘Decent’ (semi) meaning ‘other than that segment’. For one thing, that story already seems weeks old.

  14. I hear ya. When they brought it up, I was like, “Was that this week?”

    If the show is supposed to be about bias in the media, this was a stupid example.

  15. With Alan Colmes on the FNW panel, it’s unlikely that ‘semi-decent’ could even be attainable. But I won’t watch that programme when he’s on so I’m just guessing.

  16. Does anyone like that show? It seems to exist solely as an object of scorn.

  17. Scorn is one of my better things.

  18. whitneymuse Says:

    As I have stated; I’m an unabashed FNC watcher, (while watching re-runs of 2 1/2 men on another TV from a split…I like Anderson Cooper…after catching O’Reilly’s show…his show has maintained its “sense” for its 8 years…after Cooper lost his “Erin Burnett” foil to CBS’s morning show…it lost something.
    I’ve even found myself searching the CBS channel in search of her…(she used to be on the kid’s channel, before Cooper)…Erica Hill was an important element of that show.
    Cooper is talented; however, they should bring back Erica Hill.
    While Cooper strains to be serious, Hill effortlessly guides/ed it back on topic.

  19. paminwi Says:

    laura @ 6:41pm: “It bothers me that those names are even known.” The judge sealed the names of the jurors. The only names that are out there publicly are because the jurors individually have agreed to interviews. If other names end up being known is because of weirdos trying to search them down. Do I agree with that behavior – no – but there are a lot of weirdos out there that we can’t control their behavior in this situation and so many others.

  20. From what I understand, the names of the jurors will eventually have to be released. I think maybe SCOTUS has it right – there shouldn’t be television cameras in the courtrooms. The media circus surrounding this trial may make it more difficult for future juries to arrive at factually based and unbiased verdicts.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: