The pandemic has changed TV viewing patterns and award programs are suffering

The pandemic has changed TV viewing patterns and award programs are suffering

by
Think about it. How have your own TV habits changed in the past year? What are you watching more, less and how? The answers go a long way to explaining the record low audience ratings, most recently Sunday’s Grammy on CBS. The broadcast “had a record average of 8.8 million viewers on Sunday,” wrote Gary Levin of USA Today. “This represents a 53% drop from the 18.7 million transmission last year on January 26,” before the pandemic.

CBS said the Grammy was still “the biggest audience for an award show this season” – but that’s because the Emmy Awards plummeted to a measly 6.1 million in September, and the Golden Globe averaged just 6, 9 million last month. So, let’s unravel the reasons for that …

The Grammy fell through the ranks, despite a broadcast that critics praised for its creativity and energy. But where some saw a well-produced event, others saw a desperate appeal to young people that was not suitable for older open TV demos. The general problem is that a great deal of fragmentation is taking place – a loss of common experiences, whether in cinema or broadcast or, to a certain extent, in music.

Here is Brian Lowry with an analysis: “The consequences of Covid-19 – and the impact on these live events – have accelerated a number of problems. An obvious problem across the industry is fragmentation. Without the red carpet and the unpredictability of acceptance speeches live in front of large audiences, why not just wait and watch clips of anything interesting that happens after the fact? “

Lowry adds: “Even the Super Bowl was not entirely immune to these forces, which leaves me wondering: how far is this huge drop not a single blip, but the new normal? If it’s the last one, license fees for programs awards are dramatically out of step and this will have a ripple effect on the organizations behind them, which depend on this TV revenue. “

Why is it important

Expanding on Lowry’s point: “While the decline of some self-indulgent Hollywood galas may seem trivial in the grand scheme of things, especially during a pandemic, these programs employ thousands of workers and the groups that put them to use profits to finance programs to the arts, “wrote Lucas Shaw of Bloomberg. “TV networks pay tens of millions of dollars for the rights to broadcast individual award programs, because they are part of an exclusive club: a program that needs to be seen live. In a given year, the Oscars and the Grammy are among the only programs that can compete with live sports for viewers. “

Speaking of Oscar …

Lisa Respers France writes: “Oscar nominations were announced on Monday morning and it was a good day for diversity. Seventy women received a total of 76 nominations, a record for a particular year. Two women, Emerald Fennell and Chloé Zhao, were nominated for the first time in the direction category in the same year. Zhao is the first black woman to be nominated in the category. “

>> Filmmakers love movies about the movies, and Netflix’s “Mank” about producing the script for “Citizen Kane” led the group with 10 nods …

>> Also notable, from Lisa’s story: “Three black men, Leslie Odom Jr. for ‘One Night in Miami’ and Daniel Kaluuya and Lakeith Stanfield for ‘Judas and the Black Messiah’, were all nominated in the category of best supporting actor. .. “

Reduced expectations for Oscar ratings

Brian Lowry writes: “The Grammy ratings reached just a few hours after the Oscar release. As NYT’s Brooks Barnes tweeted, if the Oscar broadcast falls like the Grammy and the Globe, ABC could have an audience of around 10 million , ‘an unthinkable number until a few years ago. For now, my advice to Oscar and ABC producers would be to accept lower expectations and, in a year when streaming is the main vehicle for delivering content – see the record for Netflix 35 referrals – follow the flow and hope for the best. “

Read Lowry’s full column here …

These trend lines date back ten years

In many areas of American life, the pandemic is accelerating trends that already existed. On TV, “the pandemic has accelerated the exodus from the linear,” says Vulture classification guru Joe Adalian wrote Monday. As CBS executive vice president for live events and specials, Jack Sussman, told the LA Times before the show: “The award show is hurting like most of the linear television broadcast is hurting.” Notably, in that same article, Grammy executive producer Ben Winston recognized what was written on the wall and predicted a 30 to 60 percent drop.

So, let’s zoom out. Consider how much has changed in the past ten years: the growth of on-demand content libraries, the habit of ad-free viewing, the ubiquity of celebrities on social media, the ability to capture the best parts of live events later, adherence of always-on social feeds. One of the logical results: live starred events are no longer mandatory TV shows. As a wise TV executive told me, “Award programs have a common definition of pop culture and that idea has been eroding for years.”

Oprah Winfrey’s recent interview is a convincing counter-argument, however. Interest in Meghan and Harry’s interview was linked to the drama of royalty and curiosity about what she would say …

.Source