It is pretty obvious to investors that the Internet has accelerated the decline in print newspaper readership. It is also clear that the Internet is contributing to business model changes (and in many cases outright news/editorial budget reductions) at print magazines.
However, that the Internet would also compel changes in broadcast network news -- and in particular, the nightly network newscast -- might be viewed as less obvious. But that, in fact, appears to be the case.
Already dealing with a cable/satellite channel explosion that's decreased their viewership due to audience fragmentation (basically people have more channel choices), network news now must increasingly cope with the reality that adults tuning in have already seen and/or read about on the web the day's top news stories by the time the nightly newscast airs.
The situation CBS (NYSE: CBS), NBC (NYSE: GE), and ABC (NYSE: DIS) face is roughly analogous to what afternoon daily newspapers faced when television news viewership mushroomed in the 1970s and 1980s. People read the morning paper at breakfast, and then after the workday watched the nightly network newscast to update them on latest developments, and to learn about other nation/international news. As part of this shift, households dropped subscriptions to their afternoon daily newspapers, many of which later converted to morning dailies; many others simply went out of business.
A changing nightly newscast
But give the broadcast networks credit: they've been much quicker to implement changes to address viewership declines than their print compadres of the twentieth century, and the changes encompass both the form and content of the nightly news broadcast. Viewers now are invited to log-on to the network's web site to post their comments, view/read side-bar stories, download the broadcast to their iPod or view it on another mobile device. In many cases, the broadcast networks have allocated air talent to create a nightly newscast tailored for and distributed on the web, above and beyond the bonus coverage that's so often available on news stories broadcast on television.
Does all this mean that nightly newscasts on TV will end any time soon? Hardly. There is this thing called "reach." For all their attrition, particularly among viewers ages 18-34, the network newscast still reaches more than 20 million households on a typical night. Second, as for June 2008, 57% of the 113.3 million U.S. television households have cable television, but 43% do not, according to National Cable Television Association data, and these cable-less viewers rely more on TV than on the Internet for news. Hence, it appears, at least for the next decade, the network newscast will retain a sizable audience.
Nevertheless, moving forward, an increasing chunk of viewers will have already learned about the day's top news and events by the time the nightly newscast starts, which is why the networks, like newspapers and magazines, will have to offer analysis and things the web can't offer or isn't good at, in order to remain profitable ventures in the Internet age.
Sector Analysis: The impact of the above on investors? Clearly, network news' share of advertising revenue will continue to decline, and the revenue decreases will not be offset by revenue gains at their respective news web sites. One advertising executive I spoke with described it this way: "We're going from 5 or 6 major generators of television newscast ad revenue, to more than 100 generators of ad revenue on television and the web. The advertising revenue pie from news is being chopped into a hundred small pieces," he said. The major networks will continue to be strong providers of news content, he added, but the door is now wide open for younger players, such as HuffingtonPost.com and dozens of others, to grab a slice of those formerly network newscast viewers.
Financial Editor Joseph Lazzaro is based in New York.
Walmart's New Health Food Push: Is It Too Hard to Swallow?
Bonds Are a 'Safe' Investment: A Big Lie Gets Even Bigger


Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-06-2009 @ 11:36PM
phil said...
Nightly news wouldn't be losing if it were actually jam packed with news. It's just the same old repetitious liberal propaganda machine. I don't think the internet or other media could compete with major newscast, if, major newscast was news. Local news is all about the local area, national news is about an agenda and has little to do with national news. Sportscast, beer, auto, and fast food commercials will keep the major's going for a long time to come. Like every other industry, they'll have to adjust expenses in order to be profitable.
2-07-2009 @ 6:27AM
al coholic said...
You said,
"which is why the networks, like newspapers and magazines, will have to offer analysis and things the web can't offer or isn't good at, in order to remain profitable ventures in the Internet age."
Where did you get the notion that the Internet can't offer analysis in a far more in depth manner than Networks or magazines? the Internet exposes us to the kind of instant interaction (admittedly some good, some bad) magazines and Network TV can only dream to have.
With the Internet to provide us with alternate views on nearly every issue we are much more likely to actually think for ourselves rather than accept some network executive's slant on the news.
2-07-2009 @ 8:26AM
Dan Barnett said...
al,
If you mean Internet, you mean using legitimate news sources, then I agree wholeheartedly.
On the other hand the Internet is full of sites promoting all sorts of misinformation which tries to seep into more mainstream news. Fox a few years ago amnnounced a bogus story about students that had been disciplined for giving a Jewish student a ham sandwich. When one of the commentators wondered if this story could possibly be true, he was told by another that they had checked the story on a web site. The story was false. Fox still hasn't lived it down.
News needs to be provided by legitimate sources with a stake in being accurate. I'm not sure most internet sites provide that accuracy.
Phil,
Eric Alterman has a good book, "What Liberal Media" which factually explodes the liberal media myth.
2-07-2009 @ 7:33PM
al coholic said...
Dan, your point is well taken. There are many sites filled with gossip, garbage, innacuracies, and slander.
But there are just as many legitimate forums where we are able to interact (as we are doing now) in a way that is simply not available to the TV news observer.
Don't forget that the major networks are not immune to reporting innacurrate and unchecked stories attributable to their own haste to help ratings. Ask Dan Rather, he knows all about that.