It's not just younger viewers that are tuning out ...

[kechara420]

http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2003/dec03/dec08/4_thurs/news2thursday.html


Older folks joining flight from broadcast;
Fifty-plus viewers down 2.1 percent this season

By Kevin Downey

As media researchers continue to mull over the loss of younger viewers on the broadcast networks, a decline in ratings among older viewers has gone largely unnoticed.
While the declines are not as steep as they are for adults 18-34, or as significant when it comes to advertising revenue, the rating for adults 35-plus is down 2.3 percent this season through last Sunday. The rating for adults 50-plus, a group typically considered to be broadcast loyalists, is down 2.1 percent from this time last year.
Those are the findings of a Magna Global USA analysis of Nielsen Media Research ratings released this week.
The average rating for adults 35-plus has dipped to a 21.7 on the broadcast networks while it has edged up to an 18 on ad-supported cable.
Four of the six broadcast networks are down or running flat to last season. CBS is up 4.2 percent and Fox is up 7.5 percent, in part due to strong ratings for the World Series.
“It’s not surprising that it’s been declining because it has not been a stellar broadcast season for new shows or some of the returning shows,” says Brad Adgate, senior vice president and corporate research director at Horizon Media.
“The other thing is that these people get cable TV and satellite services and have the same choice of networks that people in other age groups have.”
The adult 50-plus rating for the broadcast networks is down to a 23.8, which is almost entirely attributable to NBC. That network’s rating has fallen 16.7 percent from last year, when it had older-skewing shows like “Providence” and fewer younger-skewing reality shows like “Average Joe.”
Both ABC and UPN are running flat to last year while CBS, Fox and the WB are up.
Ratings are also slightly down for ad-supported cable in that demo.
“Among the networks that are down are the news networks, which tend to skew older,” says Adgate. “What’s interesting is that ad-supported cable overall is up, even though networks like Fox News and CNN are taking a hit.”
While viewing among older folks is down, its cause is thought to be a common blip pinned in part on the lack of breakout hits this season.
If correct, that comes in contrast to the reason behind a dip in viewing among younger people. Although still being debated, that decline is most often blamed on a combination of refinements Nielsen made to its methodology and the dearth of programs geared to young viewers.
In addition to the declines in adults 35-plus and 50-plus, the six networks are posting an average rating decline of 9.7 percent in the 18-34 demographic, 6.3 percent among adults 18-49 and 4.1 percent in the 25-54 demo.
Naturally, some of the networks are doing better than others.
In the 35-plus demo, CBS, which tends to skew older than other networks and specifically targets adults 25-54, is up to a 7.4 rating. NBC is down nearly 15 percent, to a 5.2. ABC is flat to last season with a 4.6, while Fox is up to a 4.3 rating.
Both the WB and UPN are down more than 7 percent, to a 1.3 and a 1.2, respectively.
Among adults 50-plus, CBS is up and ranks No. 1 with a 9.1 rating. NBC is down to a 5.5, while ABC is flat at a 4.8 and Fox is up to a 4.4.
The WB is slightly up to a 1.2 and UPN is flat at a 1 rating.


December 11, 2003© 2003 Media Life

[mgraylorn]

"While viewing among older folks is down, its cause is thought to be a common blip pinned in part on the lack of breakout hits this season.
If correct, that comes in contrast to the reason behind a dip in viewing among younger people. Although still being debated, that decline is most often blamed on a combination of refinements Nielsen made to its methodology and the dearth of programs geared to young viewers."

This is idiotic. From what I can tell ALL of the programming is aimed at 20 somethings and less. Most of the main characters are under 30. Very few parents are seen (unless they are under 30), and practically no older Americans. Can you think of any new show on the networks this season designed to appeal to older people? I can't. Older viewers aren't the passive drooling cow types who will sit in front of the tube and watch anything. They are turning off the tube because there isn't anything worth watching. I guess I've turned into my Mother, because a lot of what passes as "entertainment" these days is not only not funny, but often offensive.

According to the 2000 U.S. Census, the total population is 281,421,906. The number of people in the U.S. 55 and older is 57,517,856 or 20% of the population is 55+.

According to this source:
http://www.marketresearch.com/researchindex/799271.html
The U.S. Mature Market: New Perspectives on the 55+ Consumer, 4th Edition

(and I selected quotes from this source):

Population of Americans Aged 55+ Expected to Grow 60% in Next 20 Years

New York, January 30/PRNewswire - Over the next 20 years the fastest growing segment of the U.S. population will be those aged 55 and over. According to The U.S. Mature Market: New Perspectives on the 55+ Consumer, a new research report published by Packaged Facts and available through MarketResearch.com, this demographic will constitute nearly 30% of the population in 2022, compared to approximately 21% in 2002.

In addition to their sheer numbers, by 2007 the 55+ cohort will also wield a buying power of more than $2 trillion - a figure fueled by the large numbers of boomers who are aging into the mature demographic.

"The most striking characteristic of this demographic is its tremendous potential," said Don Montuori, Acquisitions Editor for Packaged Facts. "We are looking at a collection of individuals who will control both a large voting bloc and a huge sum of money by 2007. By any definition, this is a powerful population that marketers must reckon with. And historically marketers have not done a particularly effective job in reaching this market."

---------------------------

So, we have a market that accounts for 20% of the population now, expected to grow dramatically, and they yield close to $2 trillion in buying power. Why is there not at least one cable channel for this age group? We have channels for women, men, kids, teens, gays, pets, specializing in gardening, shopping, sports, hunting, health, old movies, do-it-yourselfing, news (such as it is and CNN really sucks these days - O.J. ruined CNN) and on and on. Why is there not one Grey Panther network?

The networks are as clueless about the older American population as they are about the "prime demographic". If I were as incompetent in my job as these people are, I'd have been fired after the first month (my boss is generous).

[kechara420]

I've also read a number of articles lately that A LOT of older Americans are using the Internet more often. It makes sense. They can't find anything *decent* on TV (like so many of the rest of us!) so they're turning to the Web to find something interesting to occupy their time. Gee, what a surprise ...

[10SCgal]

I'm part of the second wave of Boomers (the apathetic generation -- we couldn't care less!).

I find it funny that the first wave of Boomers -- characterized though certainly not limited to the '60s radicals -- is having to endure programming conceived by a 20-something generation whose knowledge of this world has largely been programmed by multimedia -- and therefore just regurgitates those sights and sounds.

Or not (endure, that is).

Afterall, this ain't your grandpa's grandpa.

I work in health care and our demo is the older American. There's an enormous, fundamental shift in attitude from one genration to the next. One perceives doctor-as-god and casts their fate into that individual's hands; the other doesn't take crap from nobody. Well, it's not that bad, not yet anyway.

We know the day is coming when we'll have to wrestle with the huge senior population (estimated to be 25% of the whole within the next two decades). So far, there's a nursing shortage and would-be doctors are rethinking the areas in which they may want to specialize, if not chuck wholesale that medicine idea thing (because patients nowadays don't take crap from nobody... and don't think respect and prestige isn't a factor for medical students, especially when the money isn't as good as it used to be).

Entertainment producers will know it too when they watch their dollars drift elsewhere. Think back to when Hollywood didn't know what to make of the public's fascination with the internet -- until Napster et al started to rob them of their of profits. They didn't grow with this People's Choice venue; they put the kabosh on fan-based sites using their entertainment icons' names before they repackaged the internet's offerings in their image.

Now we have legislation pending that will limit the number of copies we -- or the hardware we buy -- can make of our CDs, DVDs, etc. They have an appeal before the government permitting them to own and operate more newspapers and broadcast stations nationwide if not within the same metro. (Heck, there won't be much duping because we'll all be mind-fed the the same matter.)

Oh but I digress.

Advertisers are banking on the impulse-buying attitudes of those younger years. They broadcast the equivalent of the kid's-eye-level view of the candy bars at your grocery checkout. As a person matures, they become more immune to shill tactics and have the years behind them to offer perspective on the years ahead. A younger person doesn't -- and that's the appeal to advertisers.

What gap hasn't been bridged yet is how to attract an older viewer/listener/reader with more subtle, thoughtful appeals.

We used to have the answer. Before the deregulation of radio, there was a tremendous diversity of music. I remember a jazz station in L.A. before it went the way of dinosaurs when dereg hit. It catered to an older, sophisticated crowd. The ones who bought Mercedes and Cadillacs, and other quality merchandise. A scant few years after dereg, business analysts noted that sales started to sag as a result of the products' manufacturers having little or no venues in which to advertise to their audience. An audience with lotsa money.

The point is (hard to believe following above ramblings that there is one) that the Senior Boomers won't take crap from nobody and will take their wallets where they like. That is just what you would expect from a radical-cum-consumer. And they won't be relegated to the retirement bin quite so readily as their forefathers -- many will continue to work well past the current retirement age -- whether by choice or by decree. They'll succeed because of sheer numbers.

Oh, yeah. And they have grandkids who feed off of impulse-buying practices. You think Hollywood can figure out how to create products appealing to both simultaneously???!!

My answer? ..... Don't know. Don't care......

[AnnieBW]

Gee... they put favorite TV shows out on DVD (except for MINE!), have pay-per-view, five gajillion channels, and now the ability to watch what you want when you want, and they're wondering why people are tuning out??? DUH!!!

Besides, most people in their 30's and higher have kids, who are probably watching Nickelodeon and other channels while their parents are on the 'Net. At least that's what the folks who have kids in my office do.

- Annie

[MediaSavant]

As baby boomers age and become the "mature market", you are going to see some changes in TV viewing.

The baby boomer generation is the most educated and affluent generation that ever went into retirement.

They are not going to spend their days watching TV as previous mature audiences have.

As time goes on, we are going to see decreased TV viewing among the older audiences.

[Dominar of Action]

Besides, most people in their 30's and higher have kids, who are probably watching Nickelodeon and other channels while their parents are on the 'Net. At least that's what the folks who have kids in my office do.That's certainly what goes on in my house ... except my son doesn't really watch that much TV either. I'll wrestle him for the remote when there's something worthwhile, but that frankly doesn't happen too often.

[grapeshot]

MS, did I just hear you say that since older viewers will be less likely to watch tv, let's just not bother to appeal to them??

I think the salient point here is not that older viewers will be watching less television, but rather that it appears that television executives will not have found a way to appeal to older viewers. In their mindless chase after youth, they're letting a larger un-tapped market pass them by.


This is exactly the same problem that has doomed the music industry.


SOMEBODY will find a way to part Boomers from their money, but it sure doesn't look like it will be broadcast television networks.

[MediaSavant]

Originally posted by grapeshot
MS, did I just hear you say that since older viewers will be less likely to watch tv, let's just not bother to appeal to them??

I think the salient point here is not that older viewers will be watching less television, but rather that it appears that television executives will not have found a way to appeal to older viewers. In their mindless chase after youth, they're letting a larger un-tapped market pass them by.


I absolutely do not say that they shouldn't bother to appeal to them. That's a different issue.

The problem up to now has been that older viewers watch so much television (60+ hours a week is common), the networks feel they don't have to do much to get them to watch. They just watch and watch and watch. I'm having concerns about my recently retired mother. When I visited over Thanksgiving I discovered that all she does all day is watch TV. She even watches stuff intended for younger audiences. One of her favorite shows is "Fear Factor". But, I don't know what we can giver her as an alternative. She didn't retire with a lot of money. She doesn't seem to want to do anything either. It's something me and my siblings have to figure out what to do about.

I can't imagine myself being like that when I retire.

The decrease in viewing you will see in the future may be an inevitable outcome of the difference in generations, not programming. But, it may have a positive effect on programming. The more a demographic is "hard to get", the more networks pay attention to you, particularly if you have money to spend on advertisers' products.

[waltersgirl]

Most of the main characters are under 30. Very few parents are seen (unless they are under 30), and practically no older Americans.

just off the top of my head, Alias doesn't meet these parameters. I don't believe any of the lead cast is under 30, and several are beyond 30 by a good chunk. Lena Olin and Ron Rifkin are both over 50, i believe Victor Garber is in that age range, as is Terry O'Quinn (who returns this season, btw). As guest stars, Alias had Faye Dunaway in two consecutive eps, and Isabella Rosellini will have a recurring role this season.

[blue]

To each his own opinion of what appeals to older viewers. Shows don't have to feature older characters to appeal to older viewers. I'm an older viewer. I like Angel, 24, Alias, and yes, Smallville, as well as Joan of Arcadia, loved Buffy, adore Farscape. I'll still watch ER, and Sat. Night Live when its not too uneven. Maybe I just never grew up, but I think there are lots of others like me.
For the ones not like me, there's that channel of 50s reruns.

edit-oh yeah, forgot reruns of Highlander and X-Files.

[LadyCrais]

Blue: I suppose you aren't alone in being older and being okay with younger casts, but personally I have zero interest in any show where the primary cast is 20-something, or even a young 30-something. I'm quite sure I wouldn't watch Farscape if it was a cast of Gigi's. Nor a cast of young stud-muffins for that matter. I like young people in their appropriate roles as young people just fine. But it's the wide mix of ages that appeals to me, because it lends itself to situations where maturity and experience actually might be part of somebody's character. There's also more opportunity for subtle conflicts borne of life experience differences. And out of the genre that is especially true. The situations and plots surrounding a cast of 20 or 30 somethings and especially the teens don't appeal to me for the simple reason that the story arcs built around them hold no appeal for me.

MS: Does your Mom have a computer? Both of my parents have gone off on their own little tangents in their retirement with their computer interests. My Dad went nuts into the geneology stuff, though if you get really serious about that one it ends up costing some bucks. My 83 year old Mom is currently into designing her own greeting cards and seems to be having a blast with it. She took some course for all of $5 that included the software and has been making birthday cards for all the people's birthdays in her retirement center and now individualized Christmas cards for all the grandkids right now. She's also a pretty decent web surfer. I know your Mom may not be interested in THAT necessarily, but it seemed to open up all sorts of doors for my parents while they've been in their 70's and 80's. Mind you, things like walking or volunteer work, or weekly card or other games with friends are all important too. Exchanging the computer screen for the television screen isn't all positive, but at least it's interactive and gives them something to keep their minds actively learning. My Mom actually also reads a heck of a lot. For free, courtesy of her library. And she does use the computer for her book searches and ordering so that she can just go pick them up since she can't stand around and browse too well anymore. Anyway, just a few thoughts that probably should have been PM'd. Sorry for the thread hijack.

[AnnieBW]

Heck, my folks have been so busy since they "retired" that I don't think they find much time to watch anything besides the news and football on Sunday afternoons! :D Between volunteer work, leading trips, and being on the computer, neither of them watch much TV. I think my husband and I watch more than they do, but more as a means of discussion with friends on-line and off.

That being said, I agree with the poster that said that I avoid anything with high school kids and below. I missed the first few years of Buffy because I felt that it was a "high school show". I still prefer Angel to Buffy, since it's written from more of an adult perspective. I like Smallville, but it's getting too repetitious. And don't even get me started on the stupidity of Kim Bauer on "24". :D As for Dawson's Creek, Everwood, Gilmore Girls, etc. forget it. I won't watch, no matter how good people say it is.

I think Fran hit it on the head in her talk at the con. No matter how young you look - she certainly looked young to me, and she's my age - casting directors in Hollyweird will automatically put you to the bottom of the pile if you're a woman over 35. Guys have it easier, but not much. I've noticed that, especially on WB, actors that were hot in my generation are now playing the fathers of the younger lead characters!

Ageism sucks.

- Annie

[Shipscat]

I have to echo the computer idea. My mom got a computer when she retired, and she spends a lot of time with genealogy and with her doll collecting. The dolls are actually better as a hobby because she gets the thrill of the chase-the hunting for old dolls at flea markets, garage sales, etc, then she gets to do the research on them, and fix them up. She gets on line with other doll collectors and they discuss their dolls, so there's a social aspect to it.

Otherwise than that, she mostly reads and does crossword puzzles..she doesn't like to get out much. But the computer keeps her connected to the outside world.

[CrystalMoon]

Hey, standing up for Gilmore Girls here, one of my favorite shows. This is one of the few shows out there that DOES have characters in it from a ride range of ages. The teens are only one part of the show. In fact, the main part is actually the mother, who's in her thirties. But there's also a ton of supporting characters who are all ages, including her parents and a bunch of townspeople.

If you're avoiding Gilmore Girls because you think it's just a teen show, don't! It's so much more than that. Plus, the teen stories are very smartly written.

It's also a very funny show. I highly recommend it.

[kechara420]

Originally posted by CrystalMoon
Hey, standing up for Gilmore Girls here, one of my favorite shows. This is one of the few shows out there that DOES have characters in it from a ride range of ages. The teens are only one part of the show. In fact, the main part is actually the mother, who's in her thirties. But there's also a ton of supporting characters who are all ages, including her parents and a bunch of townspeople.

If you're avoiding Gilmore Girls because you think it's just a teen show, don't! It's so much more than that. Plus, the teen stories are very smartly written.

It's also a very funny show. I highly recommend it. Did you hear the good news? It's been picked up for a fifth season.