Doubtful. I'm sure CNN pays a pretty penny to be at the top of the lineup away from the competition.
When the new bird lites will CNN move out of no mans land?
I was hoping it would move closer to the 360's like the rest of the news channels. Any word on this?
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Undoubtedly. It won't be moving.say-what said:I'm sure CNN pays a pretty penny to be at the top of the lineup away from the competition.
Since the transponder or satellite location has no bearing on a network's channel assignment, CNN could have been moved at any time.
As others have mentioned, CNN has negotiated its channel number as part of their contract.
Cheers,
Tom
As others have mentioned, CNN has negotiated its channel number as part of their contract.
Cheers,
Tom
Personally...I wish it would move away from ESPN...WAY FAR AWAY!:lol: :lol:
but if it moves to Far Far away, it will end up near Shrek?MudMover said:Personally...I wish it would move away from ESPN...WAY FAR AWAY!:lol: :lol:
Well, it has worked for CNN, IMO. Until recently, I never tuned to MSNBC or FNC, CNBC or FBN because of their location. I usually stayed with CNN because I rarely would tune to channels in the 300s. So, it's worked for them.
We could only hope. I'm subjected to CNN at work when I work shift work...that sux. I get tired of their slant.curt8403 said:but if it moves to Far Far away, it will end up near Shrek?
It might be convenient for millions of residential users, but moving cnn would require that thousands of hotels get a service call to have their fixed receivers set on another channel. Most would not respond to messages sent to inform them of the change until they found the channel was gone, creating havok and ill will.
but since fox news kicks cnn's head in in the ratings the lower channel strategy apparently isnt working too well. :lol:say-what said:Doubtful. I'm sure CNN pays a pretty penny to be at the top of the lineup away from the competition.
Then why are their ratings dismal, while FNC in the 360's has many times the viewers?myselfalso said:Well, it has worked for CNN, IMO. Until recently, I never tuned to MSNBC or FNC, CNBC or FBN because of their location. I usually stayed with CNN because I rarely would tune to channels in the 300s. So, it's worked for them.
G
It has more viewers than CNN, not "many times the viewers". Why don't you check the facts before you post this kind of nonsense?DodgerKing said:Then why are their ratings dismal, while FNC in the 360's has many times the viewers?
G
Since when do cable networks pay DirecTV to carry them?say-what said:Doubtful. I'm sure CNN pays a pretty penny to be at the top of the lineup away from the competition.
The ratings you are talking about are the type used for any other program on Television. Those ratings are geared towards how many people watch an entire show. In that case, you are correct that Fox News has the highest ratings. This number is the one we are all familiar with and the one most news organizations will use due to its familiarity to the public. However, in terms of the unique viewers (called cume) during a given amount of time CNN generally comes out ahead. CNN uses this information in negotiations with advertisers.DodgerKing said:Then why are their ratings dismal, while FNC in the 360's has many times the viewers?
http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2007/narrative_cabletv_audience.asp
The difference is that Fox viewers tend to turn a show on and watch the entire program. In CNN's case, it seems that many people turn it on to get the headlines and then leave - you might say those people are casual news viewers. That situation works against CNN in the traditional measure of ratings, which is looking for how many sit and watch the show for an extended period of time. That situation also suggests that CNN being on a lower channel number is working to generate traffic by the casual news viewer.
Therefore, each channel can claim that it is number one in some way.
This is a similar to the constant channel count discussions about what constitutes and HD channel in the Dish vs. DirecTV channel counts.
Perhaps by charging the provider less to carry it.rcoleman111 said:Since when do cable networks pay DirecTV to carry them?
Nice to see someone actually using useful articles and logical arguments in a thread, especially when it involves the various cable news networks. Kudos to youdragonbait said:The ratings you are talking about are the type used for any other program on Television. Those ratings are geared towards how many people watch an entire show. In that case, you are correct that Fox News has the highest ratings. This number is the one we are all familiar with and the one most news organizations will use due to its familiarity to the public. However, in terms of the unique viewers (called cume) during a given amount of time CNN generally comes out ahead. CNN uses this information in negotiations with advertisers.
http://www.stateofthenewsmedia.org/2007/narrative_cabletv_audience.asp
The difference is that Fox viewers tend to turn a show on and watch the entire program. In CNN's case, it seems that many people turn it on to get the headlines and then leave - you might say those people are casual news viewers. That situation works against CNN in the traditional measure of ratings, which is looking for how many sit and watch the show for an extended period of time. That situation also suggests that CNN being on a lower channel number is working to generate traffic by the casual news viewer.
Therefore, each channel can claim that it is number one in some way.
This is a similar to the constant channel count discussions about what constitutes and HD channel in the Dish vs. DirecTV channel counts.
Thank you, PoitNarf
I also meant to mention that the higher traffic CNN gets could be a result of a higher degree of brand awareness, not just the lower channel number.
I also meant to mention that the higher traffic CNN gets could be a result of a higher degree of brand awareness, not just the lower channel number.
Dragonbait,
You do realize that making sound points, providing substance for those points, and being nice about it is a... very good thing.
CNN has a huge brand. They've done a very good job building and protecting it, which also includes location on the cable and satellite "dial".
ESPN also does the same thing.
Yet these days, in my house, channel location means nothing. I don't surf by crawling up the channels anymore. (Occassionally I crawl the guide, tho I usually start at the premiums, then move to the lower channels, so that point still doesn't hold.)
And my grandsons, 6 and 10, do the same thing. In fact, they know the Toon and Disney channels on both cable (at their home) and DIRECTV when they come visit. They won't worry about 202 vs. 356 vs. 249 when they get to news watching age.
Cheers,
Tom
You do realize that making sound points, providing substance for those points, and being nice about it is a... very good thing.
CNN has a huge brand. They've done a very good job building and protecting it, which also includes location on the cable and satellite "dial".
ESPN also does the same thing.
Yet these days, in my house, channel location means nothing. I don't surf by crawling up the channels anymore. (Occassionally I crawl the guide, tho I usually start at the premiums, then move to the lower channels, so that point still doesn't hold.)
And my grandsons, 6 and 10, do the same thing. In fact, they know the Toon and Disney channels on both cable (at their home) and DIRECTV when they come visit. They won't worry about 202 vs. 356 vs. 249 when they get to news watching age.
Cheers,
Tom
I agree... "channel location means nothing". Channels I watch repetitively I quickly commit to memory so that I don't have to surf up or down. Way too many channels for that kind of effort. Also agree re "CNN has a huge brand"... besides too much drama and yelling on Fox News for me. By the way, would gladly trade weather channel HD for CNN HD. Especially when Christi Paul or Naamua Delaney are working.
I'm just guessing here, but I would think those receivers are addressible in such a way that the channel could be changed by a command in the satellite stream.Floyd said:It might be convenient for millions of residential users, but moving cnn would require that thousands of hotels get a service call to have their fixed receivers set on another channel. Most would not respond to messages sent to inform them of the change until they found the channel was gone, creating havok and ill will.
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
DBSTalk Forum
A forum community dedicated to digital bit streaming enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about programming, content, and reception, home theaters, displays, models, styles, satellites, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
