1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NBC 2012 Olympics Coverage

Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by gusmahler, Jul 27, 2012.

  1. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    My cousin, who happens to be in London right now, said that a lot of Americans would be intrigued by the London because of our ties to the U.K. I certainly buy that, but China was supposed to be this big mysterious nation no one was familiar with. That's why their Opening Ceremony was hyped as such a mega-event whereas London's was more just an Olympics Opening Ceremony. Let alone that you had something of a rivalry going on last time, the U.S. versus China. A lot of people have said the Olympics lost their punch a little after the cold war because the United States no longer had a heated rival in the Soviets.

    Yes, the trials coverage in the lead-up was a big help. They have a cable sports network they didn't have 4 years ago that they've been building up for months now. Probably didn't hurt matters they had this year's Super Bowl.

    That all said though, you're talking about live from Beijing versus taped for London. Phelps going for 8 medals versus Phelps having scaled back his program. Usain Bolt a 2nd time after a 1st performance that he literally can't top. It goes both ways. You're absolutely right there's a lot of factors. But the predictions were all that a taped London Olympics couldn't top a live Beijing Olympics, because that should have been the biggest factor of all. Yet here we are. And for people to say that NBC hasn't had anything to do with the increase in viewers I think is an unfair assessment.
     
  2. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Already saw it, we started talking about it in post 231. This is what we've been discussing with regard to the uptick in Canadian ratings. Unfortunately, we haven't seen anything regarding ratings for them since then or anything from other countries as another basis of comparison. Yes, those numbers are extremely impressive. But that's not an indictment against NBC to not show them live when they got the viewership they did.
     
  3. maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    You really only can take advantage if social media if you broadcast, - tape delayed or not - at the same time to the ENTIRE United States. It really doesn't help if you use social media during the evening broadcast to communicate with 220 million potential viewers, while leaving 80 million viewers with spoilers because they didn't get to see it yet. Social media is instant. People will be able to hide their news popups and tweets from the live events, but expecting it to work when 75% of the U.S sees it at one time, while the other 25% sees it 3 hours later, is just impossible.

    And it's a shame. A whopping 76 athletes out of the 530 that the U.S. has sent are from right here in Orange County. Yes, I am talking a county that represents 1% of the population, sending 15% of the athletes.... Again, a county, not a state. Although the state of California probably send about a third in total anyways.

    Misty & Kerri train right here in Huntington Beach, and are hugely popular here.

    If you really want to incorporate social media into your broadcasts, the FIRST thing you need to do is make sure that ALL Americans can see it at the SAME TIME.

    Olympic broadcasts go from 20:00 to 0:00, so that would be 17:00 till 21:00 on the west coast. You can't tell me they can't work out a schedule where locals get access to the 16:00-17:00 time slot, the 21:00 to 21:35 time slot, after which the west coast can just pick up the "late night" coverage with Mary.

    That whole situation with the 3 hours delay.... pisses me off WAY WAY WAY more than the initial tape delay to move some events to prime time. It needs to air to the United States if America as a whole.
     
  4. maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    I'd say it is.

    They got 20% of the country to watch them LIVE, with 50% of the country to turn in PART of the time.

    The U.S. got about 12% of the country to watch them DELAYED. That is quite a difference.

    We'll probably see some more CTV ratings come down the pipe line.

    Here's some from Australia:

    http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2012/07/51-7-olympics-share-lights-up-nines-numbers.html

    They too, broadcasted the ceremony live.... at 6:00AM in the morning, and drew impressive ratings, especially for the time it aired. Funny fact is that a rerun of Fresh Prince of Bel Air which was scheduled to air right after the opening as part of their regular day time programming at 9:30 AM drew IMPRESSIVE ratings all over sudden. :D
     
  5. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Social media is about the individual, not the group. All these people are tweeting what they're following when they're following it, not at 8pm when NBC is showing it on TV. It's about what's happening when these events are live. Everyone was joking how NBC was live tweeting the Opening Ceremony that they were saving for primetime. They weren't tweeting the TV broadcast as it was going on and that had nothing to do with the West coast.

    Yes, West coasters get the shaft, but that's on your affiliate, not the network. They wanted to the delays so they can keep their afternoon news/local programming block intact, then have late local news when it would normally air. Sure they could do what you're suggesting, but that's not going to work for the affiliates. Even still, I understand the West coast concerns from Beijing when stuff was live (and much later in the evening). Here it doesn't seem as big of a deal to me, although yes that's coming from someone who's not on the West coast. Primetime is a taped show anyway, so is it that big a deal when it's later in the evening? Especially when the live streaming is available to both coasts at the same time and that's what's driving social media in the first place, not the taped broadcasts.
     
  6. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Much easier to draw bigger shares of an audience in a smaller country than it is in a larger one. Especially for all these countries (most notably Australia) for whom the Olympics is the biggest and most important sporting event out there. That's never been true here so it doesn't necessarily follow to say what works there would work here. Everyone can point to numbers from other countries and say "see, see NBC, that's what you should do and we'd be watching." I remain skeptical because the Olympics will NEVER be as big here as they are in Australia.
     
  7. anleva

    anleva Icon

    568
    1
    Nov 14, 2007
    NBC's social media strategy and event promotion is a mess with tape delay. They blew the opportunity to truly converge social media and TV and maximize its impact. They live tweet all the results and then follow it up later by pretending it never happened to promote an event they already spoiled. They air a Today show promotion that spoils the event they are just about to show. Even NBC is getting confused in this space-time continuum.

    I still can't believe there isn't a business model to just show live events both online and on television with a show in the evening. To provide a better online experience that has both the feed and the announcers as well as connection quality. You can't possibly view all the events live, especially during the week. I'd still tune in to an evening show.

    NBC put advertisers and its financials ahead of viewers. I get the decision they made, it makes sense from a financial perspective and what we are seeing in coverage is a result of those priorities. But they did it at the expense of many of their viewers. They can't have it both ways and now come out and still pretend that viewer wants and needs are a priority and are being fully satisfied. They aren't.


    [​IMG]
     
  8. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    The whole idea of showing all the competition online is that it's a different product than you'd get on television. That's the idea that maybe you'd consume the same event twice. But when you show something on TV, how do you make the 2nd showing on TV different that people would consume it again, let alone in the numbers they're currently getting. Again, it's not like NBC isn't showing anything in the daytime. Like you said.. you can't possibly view everything live, so they choose some events to show and others they save for the evening. Yes, it's a little disingenuous to still present those events as they're happening, but a lot of folks out there either don't know (yes, viewers can be that stupid sometimes, mostly the ones NOT on Twitter) or don't care.

    They offered streaming of every event (yea yea, except the ceremonies, and believe me I'm as pissed as the rest of you over that one) where they didn't from Beijing. Maybe it's not enough, but that's progress. The problem remains how to satisfy viewers and how to satisfy advertisers. It's tough to tow that line and make both happy. And if you can't do both, you know which one gets priority. Talking about ratings makes this all seem very business-like and less personable, but the fact remains that ratings measure the number of people watching. It doesn't make a distinction between who is unhappy with coverage and who isn't because it doesn't have to. Until a value can get placed on the satisfaction of a viewer when watching a program in monetary terms, it's not going to make a difference. If it did, you could bet the farm that NBC would take notice. For all their bad decisions, they're not that stupid to ignore it if their advertisers (who have their own research and information as well) were driving the boat in another direction. And that hasn't happened yet. When it does (and I say 'when' because at some point it will) is when we'll see more meaningful change.
     
  9. anleva

    anleva Icon

    568
    1
    Nov 14, 2007
    Honestly I just hope that inside the ranks of NBC they will become more willing to listen to and address the concerns of their viewers on this rather than get defensive and brush this off as just being fringe element twitter people and believing that since our ratings are increasing everyone must be happy and we must be doing everything right. However the comments I've read thus far on this and the history of NBC's coverage don't give me much confidence. Those are the talking points. And as you said don't expect a change.
     
  10. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    The thing to keep in mind, and I brought this up earlier.. NBC bid for these Olympics in 2003. It pre-dates the Comcast merger and still has Dick Ebersol's fingerprints all over it even though he's no longer running the same. But when Comcast came in, then we hear live streaming of all events and increased coverage on the cable networks. And starting in 2014, they're the ones who offered the IOC that big check, so it's on them as much as the folks at GE who used to have complete control of NBC Olympics to make it work. Not that Comcast has a stellar reputation for customer service, but I think with them making the decisions, they'll be more adaptable than the folks at NBCU have been because they're the ones I feel who are more unwilling to mess with what they believe is a winning formula because they're resistant to change.

    So I don't know if things will be different come 2014. I've been saying for years that if the ratings ever dropped off, NBC would absolutely have to take notice. That hasn't happened yet. I don't know if they're going to wait for that to happen before they do anything about it, but we're getting closer and closer to the point where things have to change. Either way, Comcast (as 51% owner of NBCU) has invested their money in making this work. Going forward, it's on them as well.
     
  11. anleva

    anleva Icon

    568
    1
    Nov 14, 2007
    If NBCU and Comcast are waiting for the ratings to drop off, god help us. Change will not happen or we will be waiting for a very long while until a more innovative organization wins the bid. If they view ratings in a monopolistic vacuum and as a validation that change is unnecessary we will be stuck with this coverage for a long while. Meanwhile 64 territories in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa get better coverage than we do.
     
  12. maartena

    maartena Hall Of Fame

    2,828
    9
    Nov 1, 2010
    That is a BS argument.

    For other sports events (e.g. the NHL Stanley Cup finals, which drew LESS viewers than the Olympics) the local affiliates will gladly move aside. For events on other networks, even non-sport related ones like Emmy's, Oscar's, etc, local affiliates will gladly move aside. (Those are usually covered on ABC, but maybe ABC is just a little more thorough in making sure they get live coverage nationwide.)

    Monday Night Football aired for more than THIRTY YEARS on ABC, and for the west coast.... Monday night news was just done a little early so they could fit in the games.

    NBC had YEARS, YEARS to come to an agreement with the local affiliates to do their Olympics coverage, and they could have come up with a perfect schedule that would give the affiliates a good block of time - more or less like I posted somewhere above.

    When ABC did the Olympics in 1984? EVERYTHING was aired at the same time to both the west coast and the east coast. A LOT was live, some of it was still tape delayed at the time because of technological challenges, but America got to see the games at the SAME time.

    The 1980 Winter Olympics? The "Miracle on Ice" game between the Soviets and the U.S. was not broadcasted live... (it was in Canada), but it WAS broadcasted at the SAME time for everyone in the United States.

    There really is no excuse for that. They just thought they would probably get even more profits that way, and hide behind a pathetic excuse: "Boohoo, the affiliates won't let us!".

    As for the closing ceremony.... I have NO CONFIDENCE WHATSOEVER that NBC will allow us to see the WHOLE THING. They will probably just cut things out again so they can fit in more commercials or worthless interviews.
     
  13. zeus

    zeus Legend

    144
    3
    May 18, 2011
    I am not sure if it is a Directv authentication issue or an NBC issue, but I can only stay logged into the the NBC extra feeds for about 5 seconds and then I am round housed right back to the select your TV provider page. I was able to get in on Saturday, but got kicked out during the medal race and have not been able to get past this point since.

    /frustrating
     
  14. inkahauts

    inkahauts Well-Known Member

    22,661
    1,102
    Nov 13, 2006
    If anything, people like seeing if phelps and usain can add to their legacies, and if they can repeat incredible performances after aging four years, then in essence they are literally topping their performances from before. People watch tiger today because they want to see if he can get another, not because they want to see if he's really good.... We already know the answer to that.

    You give NBC to much credit. Everyone bids like crazy on the Olympics because everyone knows they will always be very very big. The small increases are because people want to see what the is and other can build n from the last ones, not because NBC is doing a good job.
     
  15. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    Oy.. do I need to get into the difference between a tape-delayed football game and a tape-delayed Olympics? There is a difference, believe it or not. And there's nothing "gladly" about a West coast affiliate blowing out afternoon programming, especially for 17 straight days. Some West coast affiliates did tape delay football back in the day so it's not like there isn't a precedent, either.

    Regardless, you seem to want to blame NBC and not even consider that not everything is directly their fault. That the affiliates asked for a delayed primetime show, is not an argument, it's a FACT. Don't believe me? Check out these articles..

    NBC Goes to Tape for Winter Games
    NBC Reluctantly Oks Olympics Tape-Delay
    NBC to show Salt Lake Games on tape delay on West Coast

    Now unless you think there's some sort of media propaganda here, Dick Ebersol wanted to show the primetime coverage the 2002 Winter Olympics (held in this country, of course) live to both coasts. The affiliates told them no because their research (and yes, their financial interests) told them it would be smarter to delay the show and preserve their local newscasts. Don't assume this decision came from the top and filtered down. Apparently it went the other way around and apparently a lot of affiliates thought this was the smart decision. Again, this isn't an opinion or mine or an argument I'm trying to make. This is how it happened, and I imagine has continued to happen since then, especially for Beijing and Vancouver where coverage was available live to the East coast. And again, remember that affiliates in most cities are NOT owned by NBC. That's what makes television in this country different than elsewhere. It's why NBC can't impose a decision on all of their affiliates and ask them to accept it. Maybe ABC is different (or was in 1984) than NBC. But this is the reality of the situation in a country where we're spread across 4 time zones (really 6 if you include Alaska and Hawaii) and the television business is set up the way it is.
     
  16. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    That's just it though.. the Olympics have gone through varying levels of viewership, largely based on where they're held. And there have been years where NBC has made ratings guarantees to their sponsors and fallen short. Either way, NBC execs and industry experts all predicted ratings would be down this time around for varying reasons, most notably the lack of live coverage.

    Maybe I am giving NBC too much credit, but there are too many people out there not giving them any credit. They have made some improvements since 2008, but everyone is so blinded by rage about the primetime coverage that they haven't noticed. Every event is being streamed online (albeit with some technical difficulties that have at least gotten better since the start). NBC's afternoon coverage has gone from 3 hours to 7 and much of it is live (yes, I Know, only to the East coast). There's an all sports network in NBC's coffers providing nearly 300 hours of coverage, more than any single network has had in this country before. Basketball, soccer, tennis, boxing.. all with huge amounts of coverage (mostly live) that fans of those sports are probably loving. Yet all people want to talk about is NBC's primetime show as if nothing else is out there. And it's not like the complaints haven't been there before. The only difference is that now everyone and their mother has a social media outlet with which to share their thoughts with the world.

    Clearly something is driving these increases in viewership. Some of it is the event, I think a lot of it has to do with social media, but I think far too many people are overstating how much of a negative NBC is. When you think about it, maybe it's not the Olympics that have changed, it's everyone else and their media habits that have. Like I keep saying.. NBC is not unaware of these things, but the fact remains that the numbers are telling them that what they've been doing in terms of coverage is still serving its means and all the Twitter complaining does not indicate that NBC is losing out by doing what they're doing. Of course that's more a financial argument than anything which sucks if you're a viewer with a brain rather than most of the lemmings out there watching all the coverage.

    Things will change when NBC and Comcast think they NEED to change. We're not at 'need' yet, we're still at 'want.' Doesn't necessarily mean they'll wait for the ratings drop before they do anything about it (although Sochi 2014 could get ugly), but all the backlash in the world from Twitter means nothing to them unless it hurts their bank account.
     
  17. thelucky1

    thelucky1 Icon

    983
    21
    Feb 23, 2009
    Most of the announcers are boring and very annoying!
     
  18. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,945
    1,024
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    The 6.4 million figure was not in the earliest mention of the Canadian ratings. It helps put the entire number in perspective.

    A constant 6.4 million with a peak of 8.1 million when the caldron was lit. A grand total of 16.6 million viewers.

    One thing to note from the article: "The Olympic Broadcast Broadcast Media Consortium grabbed an average audience of 6.4 million Canadian TV viewers for the live broadcast of the opening ceremony from London, ahead of the delayed coverage on NBC stateside."

    Canadian satellite carriers carry NBC ... and most Canadians live along the border with the US where many could receive an NBC signal. Had Canada delayed their coverage (or NBC gone "live") CTV would have been going up head to head with NBC - and probably would have lost viewers to NBC.

    It would be interesting to see more on who those 20% who watched the whole thing live were. Did people take the afternoon off to get home early and watch the program? Canada's ties to England are fairly strong (being a Canadian citizen once automatically made you a British citizen. In a way, these are Canadian Olympics as much as they are British Olympics ... which makes them more of a national holiday than they are for people in the US.
     
  19. Quaker2001

    Quaker2001 Legend

    213
    0
    Feb 15, 2010
    James, I know you and I are mostly on the same side of things here, but really? You're asking if Canadians would choose NBC over CTV if both were up against each other? These are Canadian Olympics as much as British Olympics? Not making a lot of sense there. Certainly I think there's a spillover effect from Vancouver that Canadians are re-energized about the Olympics like they've never been before, but even I won't dismiss the record numbers coming out of Canada for the Opening Ceremony. Which is why I want to see a comparison of competition nights for Beijing north of the border, even though it's 2 different networks involved.
     
  20. Davenlr

    Davenlr Geek til I die

    9,139
    28
    Sep 16, 2006
    Fox News (for what its worth) is reporting Monday nights Olympic ratings were 5% lower than the China games for Monday night, but still above the ratings for Athens.
     

Share This Page