Keith says Couric is losing viewers at an alarming rate

[CatWoman]

GOOD!!!

[Oceansaway]

1. TOUCHE !!..n/t

[Human Torch]

2. Jeezis, Catwoman, you are FAST.

:evilgrin:

Do you have a time machine or WHAT???

:toast:

[CatWoman]

13. BWAHAHAHAHA

:hi:

good news does that to me :)

[spanone]

3. Rush Limbaugh is like a turd in the punchbowl for most decent folk.

He is way over the line for credible Network News.

[LSparkle]

4. Amen!

She's started off on a *really* promising note: First night, Suri pics; second night: Shrubya softball "interview"; third night: I've heard she had Limpbag on.

"And that's the way it is ... "

:puke:

[LostInAnomie]

5. Yeah, but who would replace her if she completely bombs?

More than likely CBS would just discontinue having a news program.

[Jack Rabbit]

41. I thought they did that when Walter Cronkite retired

It seemed that way, any how.

[senseandsensibility]

How many is she losing?

Did he quote ratings?

[Change has come]

31. Something like almost a quarter of her viewers left

after the first episode. And at that rate she would have 54 viewers at some point in November.

:bounce:

[graywarrior]

6. Didn't he also say that she still had a couple of million viewers

[hlthe2b]

20. Guess she'll have to revert to a "Sharon Stone" pose....

to keep them--complete with crotchless underwear? :spank:

[beachmom]

23. Let's not turn this into a sexist thread

Katie Couric is a bad reporter because she shrills for the right wing. Demeaning her as a woman is changing the subject and lacks taste.

[hlthe2b]

25. No, Beachmom... I disagree vehemently as a strong feminist

woman.

Couric no more represents the hardworking female journalist than Condaleeza Rice represents the competent African American woman in academia or foreign affairs.

I resent to all hell, that Couric, rather than a truly competent woman journalist was named to that position. Face it. She was NOT named because she was the best woman for the job. I resent to all hell that if/when she fails, it will be taken as another example that "women are not up to the job-- that they just can't bring along an audience." Those who defend her, just because she is a woman, do a disservice to all women whose success has been totally a result of working hard to be the best at their craft, rather than superficial "charms."

Want competent? Hire Christianne Armanpour. I would not only be glued to the tube whenever possible, I would be out drumming up support for additional viewers and taping, distributing her broadcasts to friends/family whenever possible.

Want competent and highly attractive (yes, to me Armanpour is an attractive woman as well, but for the sake of argument), hire Lara Logan. She has earned her stripes with BBC, and now CBS throughout the war zones of the world, including Iraq and was present when her colleague cameraman was killed. Poised, intelligent, capable.

There are countless more like these two examples, but for the sake of brevity, I'll leave it at that.

So, I'll thank you not to lecture me, Beachmom. I appreciate where you are going and normally I would probably be backing you, but NOT NOW and NOT on THIS issue with Couric. I have EARNED my feminist stripes as well and I will put them up against any woman here. You don't get to be the arbiter of taste--'sorry, but you don't.

[sandnsea]

38. Christianne Armanpour - you got it

I haven't watched network news in ages, but she would get me there in a nano-second. I watched parts of that hour long program Couric had on the other night, where she interviews Bush, and she sucked. Completely. There are women who can anchor the news, but the boys in charge keep looking for a pretty and perky instead of intelligent competence. Women still have a ways to go and the Katie Courics of the world are not helping.

[hlthe2b]

40. Sandnsea....

You definitely GET IT... :toast:


We need to support the women who excel with their skills--not simply their looks, or "girl next door charm..."

[AX10]

7. It's not fast enough.

[City Lights]

12. LOL!

:rofl: And so true...

[Imagevision]

8. And keith has done some sort of poll in the past few dayz??!!

[Lex]

11. No, he's probably reporting the numbers from somewhere else

from night 1 versus night 2 for Katie's CBS Evening News.

[high density]

24. TVNewser

http://mediabistro.com/tvnewser/

Olbermann reads it.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. Good. She sucks.

BTW, did anybody see KO's tape of the hysterical shrieking weather guy who freaked out when the cockroach crawled on him? :rofl:

[CatWoman]

16. that was completely bizarre

but not to say I haven't reacted that way to a giant cockroach :)

[patricia92243]

17. I was looking down at my computer and thought it was a little girl. Then

I looked up - and there was this big grown guy. I wonder if he is embarrassed.

[CatWoman]

19. I highly doubt it

reminded me of the Simpsons episode when Homer took Bart to a gay steel factory. :rofl:

[Lex]

10. She's down by 25% on night 2 compared to night 1.

I read that somewhere today.

[Junkdrawer]

14. Well, I guess they should have gone with Pamela Anderson..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2059373&mesg_id=2059975

[Anakin Skywalker]

15. All I Know Is.......

I didn't watch Cootie! :)

[Marr]

18. The official interpretation will be: people just don't care about news.

[kstewart33]

21. TV Newser has the latest on her ratings.

Link: http://mediabistro.com/tvnewser/

[tanyev]

22. Faster than Katherine Harris loses her campaign staff?

That's hard to do.

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. Gee, I can't imagine why.

:evilgrin: 20 mil a year to be a corporate media airhead. Money will spent! :rofl: And no one with more than two brain cells is suppose to notice what fluff she presents and how utterly biased she is? :yoiks:

[Garbo 2004]

27. Not surprising. Figure lots of people tuned in out of curiousity so the

initial numbers would be high. Then once their curiousity was satisfied, a lot of people would go back to their usual viewing habits. The critical point will be she doesn't gain and retain viewers for CBS news or if she actually loses viewers from the previous baseline.

[RamboLiberal]

39. Exactly - right now this is a cheap shot

She was still number #1 on the 2nd day and the drop off was not unexpected. A better gauge is where she is next week, next month, next year. And how she compares to CBS News ratings prior to her coming on board.

And I'm not Couric fan. I depend on KO, a bit of CNN, The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, DU, Daily Kos, Buzzflash, Online News, etc. to get my news.

And if I do tune in to one of the networks news reports it probably won't be Katie since I'm ticked at her trotting out Limpballs the first week.

[mnhtnbb]

28. She never had "viewers" to begin with--just curiousity seekers.

[TheFarseer]

29. Let's cross supermarket tabloids

with radical Right Wing propaganda and see if it flies! We already have that. It's called "On the Record" with Gretta Van Sustern. Either give us the damn news or go work for the E! Network, Katie.

[oasis]

30. A wise person once said "Lay down with Rush, get up with fleas."

:nopity:

[Disturbed]

35. There were a few other females they could have chosen.

Why did they pick her? My guess: She is RWing and supposedly pleasant. I hope she fails but not because she is female. A man with similar attributes regarding personality and RWing leaning would also not be a person I would tune into.

[oasis]

36. Katie's plyable enough for their purposes. And willing. (eom)

[WinkyDink]

43. TPTB thought KC WAS the "Today Show". They made a bad bet.

Someone at CBS will pay, but it won't be KC.

[saltpoint]

32. I don't begrudge Katie Couric her success, but I think the story

ought to be the news and not the newscaster.

Jim Lehrer's NEWS HOUR is still the best thing going for my money.

[LSK]

33. that seems logical

Many people who never even watch the news during that time probably tuned in out of curiosity. Of course those viewers would go away after a day or 2.

[complain jane]

34. I work at a cable news station

One of our top executive producers was just screaming today at the top of his lungs that for fourteen million dollars a year the least she could do is wear a top where the buttons don't pinch...

[Quixote1818]

37. This is to be expected

When so many people tune in for a glimpse, the ratings are bound to go down for several days then level off to a more true example of what the viewer numbers will be for a while.

Personally, I thought it was mostly puff. I think CBS may have made a mistake with Curic but it will take a few weeks or months to know for sure.

[WinkyDink]

42. Heeheehee. Too bad for her and her ballyhooed gams.