2008 Woodie Awards
Olympics Go for Downhill Record
The Winter Olympics leave many viewers out in the cold.
Daniel Srourian
Issue date: 3/1/06 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
The 2006 Winter Olympics kicked off Feb. 6 in the beautiful, snow-covered city of Torino and showcased the world's brightest young stars competing in several different sports, ranging from hockey to curling.
However, when TV ratings were released for the first week of coverage, revealing that NBC, which airs prime-time Olympic coverage, stood at a solid third place behind FOX and CBS, critics were shocked to see that the Olympics had lost the prestige it once had with American viewers.
Or were they really?
Was anybody really surprised by the fact that these Winter Games, which take place every four years, did not automatically capture Americans' hearts and have them talking about it the next morning inside their cubicles?
The problem there would be that in order for someone to watch the Olympics live, they probably would not make it to work the next day anyway, as the 10-hour time difference between Torino and the U.S. has left the Winter Olympics out in the cold.
The choices given for viewing: either stay awake from midnight to 3 a.m. to get the live coverage and experience the thrill of victory, or wait 10 hours, avoid anything about the Olympics on the Internet, avoid getting sucked into American Idol and watch the competition in prime-time, pretending to get excited when what you're really seeing is old news.
When we can get up to the second sports score updates on cell phones, and the slightest five second delays for the Super Bowl has us hollering at television stations about how we're being cheated, the notion by NBC to maintain outstanding ratings through programming on a 10-hour tape delay is actually quite ridiculous.
Prime-time viewership for the first six nights of the Winter Games was down 36 percent from Salt Lake City in 2002, 17 percent from Nagano in 1998 and 44 percent from Lillehammer in 1994, according to USA Today.
Try explaining that one to your corporate sponsors, to whom you promised the entire 18-49 demographic group.
However, when TV ratings were released for the first week of coverage, revealing that NBC, which airs prime-time Olympic coverage, stood at a solid third place behind FOX and CBS, critics were shocked to see that the Olympics had lost the prestige it once had with American viewers.
Or were they really?
Was anybody really surprised by the fact that these Winter Games, which take place every four years, did not automatically capture Americans' hearts and have them talking about it the next morning inside their cubicles?
The problem there would be that in order for someone to watch the Olympics live, they probably would not make it to work the next day anyway, as the 10-hour time difference between Torino and the U.S. has left the Winter Olympics out in the cold.
The choices given for viewing: either stay awake from midnight to 3 a.m. to get the live coverage and experience the thrill of victory, or wait 10 hours, avoid anything about the Olympics on the Internet, avoid getting sucked into American Idol and watch the competition in prime-time, pretending to get excited when what you're really seeing is old news.
When we can get up to the second sports score updates on cell phones, and the slightest five second delays for the Super Bowl has us hollering at television stations about how we're being cheated, the notion by NBC to maintain outstanding ratings through programming on a 10-hour tape delay is actually quite ridiculous.
Prime-time viewership for the first six nights of the Winter Games was down 36 percent from Salt Lake City in 2002, 17 percent from Nagano in 1998 and 44 percent from Lillehammer in 1994, according to USA Today.
Try explaining that one to your corporate sponsors, to whom you promised the entire 18-49 demographic group.
