Presidential Address – Tuesday 3-24-09 - 8:00 PM All networks

The President will be on during prime, 8pm ET tonight.

Side note: Since American Idol will not air tonight, I often wonder if presidential speeches affect major networks bottom line? For instance Idol is moved to Wednesday now. How many DVRs in house holds will miss recording some or all of the show tomorrow because they don’t automatically update themselves? I am just curious because NBC’s Biggest Loser is airing at 9:00 PM instead of 8:00 PM but now it does not have to compete against AI. Do you think the ratings will be higher or lower for the shows that are moved?

Could a network refuse to air the address or are there any laws or FCC mandates that require them to air it?

I bet American Idol would still draw a monster rating if they showed it tonight instead of the president’s address. Think about it there still are many millions of teenage kids that will choose to watch nothing since Idol will not air.

Do the networks get paid by advertises during that time slot since there are not as many commercials?

I'll be checking in.
I'll need to remember to record the program after NCIS since it will be delayed.
Law & Order: SVU too :(

Sorry, SVU is dumped tonight. Big Losers is airing in its entirety starting at 9 to 11 PM.

As far as ratings, I think NCIS might get a boost since more people will watch it live after the President. Also, it's not up against American Idiots.

Could a network refuse to air the address or are there any laws or FCC mandates that require them to air it?There is no formal mandate. There would be political consequences if a network failed to carry a major presidential address, but no affiliate would be under threat of losing its license.

I bet American Idol would still draw a monster rating if they showed it tonight instead of the president’s address. Think about it there still are many millions of teenage kids that will choose to watch nothing since Idol will not air.Idol would probably pull down big ratings, but as we've talked about before, the networks are so desperate for cheap new content that they'd never forgo a political event to air scheduled programming. An hour of free, new programming tonight at 8pm means one less Tuesday during the season without a repeat of some network series, and that's a good thing.

Do the networks get paid by advertises during that time slot since there are not as many commercials?There will be no commercials, so there's no ad revenue to be had. But the news divisions are highly profitable during regular programming hours, so they're perfectly capable of subsidizing an hour without commercials.

The greater point is that it's hard to run a respected news organization if you're willing to dismiss a presidential news conference, so airing this press conference is a sort of loss leader for the news division. There would be extensive negotiations between the White House and the networks long before any one network decided to forgo a news event, and the networks would decide collectively what to do. No one network would be allowed to stomp on the competition by counter-programming a news event without serious retribution from its competitors.

Presidential Address – Tuesday 3-24-09 - 8:00 PM All networks
It is a Presidential news conference, not a speech.

It is a Presidential news conference, not a speech.

Probably a little of each.

Is there a night he isn't on TV? I'm starting to get uncomfortable with all this coverage!

Sorry, SVU is dumped tonight. Big Losers is airing in its entirety starting at 9 to 11 PM.

Darnit.
not cool.

^^^ Less repeats of "SVU" during April though. :)

There is no formal mandate. There would be political consequences if a network failed to carry a major presidential address, but no affiliate would be under threat of losing its license.

Idol would probably pull down big ratings, but as we've talked about before, the networks are so desperate for cheap new content that they'd never forgo a political event to air scheduled programming. An hour of free, new programming tonight at 8pm means one less Tuesday during the season without a repeat of some network series, and that's a good thing.

There will be no commercials, so there's no ad revenue to be had. But the news divisions are highly profitable during regular programming hours, so they're perfectly capable of subsidizing an hour without commercials.

The greater point is that it's hard to run a respected news organization if you're willing to dismiss a presidential news conference, so airing this press conference is a sort of loss leader for the news division. There would be extensive negotiations between the White House and the networks long before any one network decided to forgo a news event, and the networks would decide collectively what to do. No one network would be allowed to stomp on the competition by counter-programming a news event without serious retribution from its competitors.

Thank you very much for that explanation. That is what I wanted to know.

So let’s get back to the most important issue of all. Which channel will look the best? I always go with the default guess of CBS. Is CNN any good these days?

There will be no commercials, so there's no ad revenue to be had. But the news divisions are highly profitable during regular programming hours, so they're perfectly capable of subsidizing an hour without commercials.


Not only that, but the networks and affiliates just made out like bandits during this last election season. Judging from how much was spent on the various campaigns, they must have made zillions; they were practically printing cash, and with no discounts thankyouverymuch. "Donating" a little time for the President to explain to the nation what's going on seems like the least they could do.

its even on the CW ?

NBC’s Biggest loser is still airing at 9:00 PM instead of 8:00 PM but now it does not have to compete against Biggest loser.?

its even on the CW ?Is The CW really a network?

So let’s get back to the most important issue of all. Which channel will look the best? I always go with the default guess of CBS. Is CNN any good these days?
I'm going to go with PBS.

Is The CW really a network?

yes.

Is The CW really a network?
CW will have a new episode of Reaper on for those who want to skip the Presidential new conference. Might help Reaper's ratings, but probably not very much. CW is a national broadcast network with stations in most major markets, albeit on shaky ground for long term survival.

What more can be said that hasn't already hit the news?


He's going to be selling the revised bank bailout plan introduced yesterday by Secretary Geithner. Lot of resistance out there to giving them anymore money, but it apparently has to be done to clear the toxic assets from their books so they can start lending again, which is needed to get the economy back on track. The President will be explaining that to America tonight.

He's going to be selling the revised bank bailout plan introduced yesterday by Secretary Geithner. Lot of resistance out there to giving them anymore money, but it apparently has to be done to clear the toxic assets from their books so they can start lending again, which is needed to get the economy back on track. The President will be explaining that to America tonight.

hasn't this already been all over the news already? I mean you have to be under a rock not to know this is going on. I guess he feels he needs to sell it but I think most of us have mad up our minds on this already.

So, will there be actual questions this time? Or, will all questions be pre-screened and pre-chosen, like Obama has done with his previous press conferences?

hasn't this already been all over the news already? I mean you have to be under a rock not to know this is going on. I guess he feels he needs to sell it but I think most of us have mad up our minds on this already.

Remember, this is the same public that didn't get the word about the digital transtition even after more than 3 years of announcements and publicity. I think it's a fair bet that this message will reach a lot of ears that need to hear it.

So, will there be actual questions this time? Or, will all questions be pre-screened and pre-chosen, like Obama has done with his previous press conferences?

There's no evidence of that, and besides, why would he? Obama has shown himself capable of fielding about any question that comes his way. These are mainstream journalists there; there is no "pre-screening" of questions any more than at any press conference. But, believe what you want.

Well, the order of selections was predetermined. So even though Obama reached out to internet sources in his first press conference, it's not like he was engaging much risk by calling on a liberal-leaning publication like the Huffington Post.

Fun fact: In their first 34 months in office, Bush 41 held 64 press conferences, Clinton held 33 press conferences, and Bush 43 held nine. Food for thought for those who think two press conferences in two months means Obama is too visible.

What more can be said that hasn't already hit the news?

Women's BB for me tonight along with some shows on the DVR

I was thinking exactly what you said...:)

Remember, this is the same public that didn't get the word about the digital transtition even after more than 3 years of announcements and publicity. I think it's a fair bet that this message will reach a lot of ears that need to hear it.



There's no evidence of that, and besides, why would he? Obama has shown himself capable of fielding about any question that comes his way. These are mainstream journalists there; there is no "pre-screening" of questions any more than at any press conference. But, believe what you want.

Obama prescreens his questioners so that he only takes questions from specific people. One can infer that he does this to avoid unpredictable questions: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123431418276770899.html

Obama prescreens his questioners so that he only takes questions from specific people. One can infer that he does this to avoid unpredictable questions: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123431418276770899.html

Thanks; did not know that. One possible explanation: these last couple of press conferences have been very specific, focusing on the economy, and they're taking up an hour of prime-time real estate. Perhaps he doesn't want to get bogged down in questions outside the scope of the economic crisis. There will be plenty of "ordinary" press conferences where he can answer a wider range of questions. Obama has shown no tendency to avoid the press thus far; doesn't seem to be his style. Just a thought.

Let's see. He called on the AP, Reuters, CBS, NBC, Bloomberg, ABC, CNN, NY Times, Fox News, Washington Post, Hearst, Huffington Post, and NPR in that order. That looks like a pretty comprehensive list of entities to me.

And the traditional order is 1) wire services, 2) broadcast news, 3) national newspapers, 4) other. Aside from elevating the NY Times over Fox News (liberal bias!), I don't see how this is any different from what presidents have been doing since Reagan. Maybe the WSJ failed to mention that little tidbit out of spite because they didn't get called on. (But from a media ownership perspective, I don't see why Fox News and WSJ should each get questioners. No other media company got two questioners.)

I guess the disadvantage of being president is you can be criticized for holding press conferences in prime time while simultaneously criticized for trying to keep the press conference in the scheduled time frame by limiting who gets to ask questions.

It this just to update his NCAA tourney picks or something important this time?

It this just to update his NCAA tourney picks or something important this time?

See post #20. As to the much criticized ESPN appearance, he's also on a charm offensive to rally support for his plan. That, and the Leno appearance, and the '60 Minutes' pieces, etc. are all designed to help do that. It's calculated; it's the "bully pulpit".

See post #20. As to the much criticized ESPN appearance, he's also on a charm offensive to rally support for his plan. That, and the Leno appearance, and the '60 Minutes' pieces, etc. are all designed to help do that. It's calculated; it's the "bully pulpit".
Oh I know why. Just being sarcastic.

It is a bit ironic however that he is trying to rally support by doing exactly what those opposed are opposed to...constantly reminding potential investors to stay away. He won't be offering words of encouragement tonight.

Fun fact: In their first 34 months in office, Bush 41 held 64 press conferences, Clinton held 33 press conferences, and Bush 43 held nine. Food for thought for those who think two press conferences in two months means Obama is too visible.
Mind citing a reference? Thanks.

Going to stick with the usual OTA NBC, I think.

Mind citing a reference? Thanks.I got that information here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/6883

The Christian Science Monitor confirms it.

At this point in his presidency, Bill Clinton had held 33 solo press conferences; the first President Bush, 61. Wednesday's gathering was this president's ninth.http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0801/p03s01-uspo.html

I'm so tired of prime time rhetoric. I look forward to various shows to get away from this crap, not to hear more of it.

Let's see. He called on the AP, Reuters, CBS, NBC, Bloomberg, ABC, CNN, NY Times, Fox News, Washington Post, Hearst, Huffington Post, and NPR in that order. That looks like a pretty comprehensive list of entities to me.

And the traditional order is 1) wire services, 2) broadcast news, 3) national newspapers, 4) other. Aside from elevating the NY Times over Fox News (liberal bias!), I don't see how this is any different from what presidents have been doing since Reagan. Maybe the WSJ failed to mention that little tidbit out of spite because they didn't get called on. (But from a media ownership perspective, I don't see why Fox News and WSJ should each get questioners. No other media company got two questioners.)

I guess the disadvantage of being president is you can be criticized for holding press conferences in prime time while simultaneously criticized for trying to keep the press conference in the scheduled time frame by limiting who gets to ask questions.
What URFloormat says is all correct and verifiable. It's amazing how some people make spurious claims to validate their own political biases. As mentioned in another post here, the networks are under no moral, legal or commercial obligation to surrender time for presidential press conferences or addresses, except perhaps in the most dire national emergencies. President Obama's two predecessors both asked for prime time on a variety of matters; sometimes they got it, sometimes they didn't. What comes to mind, for example, is President Bush's speech announcing a ban on stem cell research and an address President Clinton gave concerning U.S. action in the Balkan wars. Both matters were arguably less immediately critical than the state of our currently suffering economy. In other cases, President Obama's predecessors asked for time and were refused.
The bottom line is that the networks -- including Fox -- are voluntarily providing time for this particular news conference because they've made a judgment that there's enough viewer interest to warrant it, despite possible protests from the American Idol crowd.

Obama prescreens his questioners so that he only takes questions from specific people. One can infer that he does this to avoid unpredictable questions: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123431418276770899.html
The questions aren’t prescreened, but the reporters are alerted they will be called on. As far as I know, this has been a procedure for decades.

Did anyone notice that WSJ hit-piece wasn’t authored? Throw that sucker out there and see if it sticks. lol
Here (http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/0209/WSJ_flooded_with_responses_to_editorial.html) is a response to that spin.

BTW, you must be thinking of 43 when it comes to prescreening questions.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153720,00.html

Want my opinion? I'm glad this guy is putting himself out there. He's actually talking to the American people. A foreign concept after the last few years. Society has changed, media has changed. Places like ESPN, Jay Leno, 60 Minutes are good because he is trying to reach everyone, not just those who watch cable news all day, read newspapers or read online news/blogs. Also, it is a big win that these Presidential Addresses are in HDTV on the three big networks(an added bonus of having HD Evening News).

Another thing, I think these topics need to stop. Maybe a year or more back it was a big deal when some political event was covered in HDTV in primetime. Now, it's standard procedure. When are these things NOT HD? These topics exist just to 'politician bash'-which is the last thing we need more of at a time like this.

He's going to be selling the revised bank bailout plan introduced yesterday by Secretary Geithner. Lot of resistance out there to giving them anymore money, but it apparently has to be done to clear the toxic assets from their books so they can start lending again, which is needed to get the economy back on track. The President will be explaining that to America tonight.

I'm just wondering why this wasn't done 5 months ago?

Thank you very much for that explanation. That is what I wanted to know.

So let’s get back to the most important issue of all. Which channel will look the best?
ANy one not carrying him

Doesn't every major network also have a news-only channel? There's no need for the main networks to carry this stuff (except for the few bumpkins out there that still can't get extended channels). And to answer the question of whether or not networks can opt out, yes. Several of them opted out quite often of Bush "speeches"...thankfully.

*yawn*

its even on the CW ?

No, topic title changed.

ANy one not carrying him

Vurbo strikes again! :D

8 minutes to go! :p

Every time he touches the podium it sounds like a bass guitar warming up.

The wall behind Obama seems redder on CBS than on any of the other networks. NYC, Comcast.

Wow, big change in graphics from the typical Solid Bold lower third consistently on screen for FOX Network. Much more in line with the other Big Three. Much improved in my opinion. Not a fan of the FOX NEWS in the lower left (It seems stretched out width wise) But it's nice to see FOX not encroaching so high into the picture anymore. Keeping things a little lower like the others. Now if they'd lower the star wipe (across the supers) and make it match the lowered graphics, it'd be even better.

Surprisingly, most of the networks are the same loudness, at least here in NYC. CBS is louder, no surprise there.

The wall behind Obama seems redder on CBS than on any of the other networks. NYC, Comcast.

I was thinking NBC looked a little 'warmer' than the other networks.

As usual, CBS, NBC, CNN look a little crisper to me than ABC & FOX.

FiOS TV NYC

WABC-DT, WCBS-DT, WNYW-DT (FOX), WNBC-DT, WNET-DT (PBS) CNN-HD and FNC HD
http://thumbnails3.imagebam.com/3072/52a5fd30710626.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/52a5fd30710626)http://thumbnails14.imagebam.com/3072/e71fef30710627.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/e71fef30710627)http://thumbnails13.imagebam.com/3072/52267230710628.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/52267230710628)http://thumbnails6.imagebam.com/3072/3f884030710629.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/3f884030710629)http://thumbnails14.imagebam.com/3072/062bd630710630.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/062bd630710630)
http://thumbnails9.imagebam.com/3072/3b9c4830710634.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/3b9c4830710634)http://thumbnails12.imagebam.com/3072/302cd330710637.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/302cd330710637)
Free Image Hosting by ImageBam.com (http://www.imagebam.com)

Only thing I find odd is FNC has kept their news ticker on. Usually they shut it off during Presidential News Conferences.

Excellent post, Ice!

FiOS TV NYC.

For those wondering about audio.
On CBS and ABC I'm getting L & R.
On NBC and FOX I'm getting center channel.
CNN and FNC are using L, C, and R.
Less audio on the L and R on CNN. FNC is about equal on L, C, & R.

For me CBS seems the most red for skin tones out of all the networks.
Obama's tie looks more pink then red on CBS.

BTW icemannyr My9 in our area was showing it in 4:3 SD for some reason. Why when it's available in HD on WNYW?

Order of questions: AP, NBC, ABC, CBS, Univision, Stars and Stripes, CNN, Fox News, Politico, Ebony Magazine, ABC Radio, Washington Times, Agence France-Presse. Note: ABC Radio is not owned by Disney. Citadel Broadcasting licenses the ABC brand from Disney.

CNN looks a bit green to me. But at least the edge enhancement isn't blown out.

Order of questions: AP, NBC, ABC, CBS, Univision, Stars and Stripes, CNN, Fox News, Politico, Ebony Magazine, ABC Radio, Washington Times, Agence France-Presse. Note: ABC Radio is not owned by Disney. Citadel Broadcasting licenses the ABC brand from Disney.

CNN looks a bit green to me. But at least the edge enhancement isn't blown out.

Am i wrong or did Helen Thomas not ask a question? I know she was there but I didn't watch all of it. The tradition had been for these news conferences that Helen got to ask the first question.

Fun fact: In their first 34 months in office, Bush 41 held 64 press conferences, Clinton held 33 press conferences, and Bush 43 held nine. Food for thought for those who think two press conferences in two months means Obama is too visible.

Interesting facts... thanks for sharing.

Bush 41 held 64 press conferences... WOW

How many of the previous three president's were in prime time?

FiOS TV NYC.

For those wondering about audio.
On CBS and ABC I'm getting L & R.
On NBC and FOX I'm getting center channel.
CNN and FNC are using L, C, and R.
Less audio on the L and R on CNN. FNC is about equal on L, C, & R.

For me CBS seems the most red for skin tones out of all the networks.
Obama's tie looks more pink then red on CBS.
I was tuned to CNNHD when the press conference started and thought that the color balance of the image was way off. The picture had an odd plastic look to it. CBS-HD seemed to be better but, as I recall, the last press conference had a better overall image. Maybe the press room's lighting has been changed.

How many of the previous three president's were in prime time?

An interesting blurb on this topic from Ben Smith's blog at Politico:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/Why_Clinton_didnt_do_prime_time.html#comments

Why Clinton didn't do prime time

I noted yesterday that Obama has already had half as many prime-time press conferences as Bill Clinton and George W. Bush each had in their eight years.

But former Clinton speechwriter Michael Waldman, who now runs the Brennan Center for Justice, writes that Clinton wasn't trying to avoid the press -- he was responding to the fact that nobody would cover his late pressers.

Waldman e-mails:

The reason Clinton stopped having prime time press conferences is that the networks wouldn't cover them. Doing them at night would mean less coverage (because it wouldn't make the evening news or some newspapers).

Remember the press conference on April 18, 1995 -- the night before the Oklahoma City bombing -- when Clinton painfully had to declare himself "relevant"? The question was on this very topic.

Q President Clinton, Republicans have dominated political debate in this country since they took over Congress in January. And even tonight, two of the major television networks declined to broadcast this event live. Do you worry about making sure that your voice is heard in the coming months?

THE PRESIDENT: No. I would remind you, I had at least one press conference during the previous two years when I had it at night, but only one of the networks covered it, as I remember. But the important thing is for me to do these press conferences on a regular basis, and every three or four months, to do it at night so that anyone who wants to cover it, can.

The Constitution gives me relevance. The power of our ideas gives me relevance. The record we have built up over the last two years and the things we're trying to do to implement it, give it relevance. The President is relevant here, especially an activist President. And the fact that I am willing to work with the Republicans. The question is, are they willing to work with me? I have shown good faith. That's how we got two of those bills in the Contract that I supported in 1992 signed into law. That's how we got a strong showing among Senate Democrats for the line-item veto. I have shown good faith. The question is, what happens now?

Obama's ability to command the television time -- though the networks will, no doubt, quickly tire of losing revenues -- speaks both to his star power and the depth of the current sense of crisis.

Needless to say, as long as Obama is a ratings win (despite the fact that there's no revenue, the networks I think value these press conferences) and world/economic events dictate relevance, I suspect we'll be seeing more of these. Particularly in today's 24 hour news cycle where a one-hour press conference at noon wouldn't warrant more than a two or three minute clip on the cable networks or the evening news.

Thanks for the info, Matt. I didn't remember many prime time pressers over the last twenty years, but I was afraid my mind was going. :)

Mind citing a reference? Thanks.

Thank you very much!
FiOS TV NYC

WABC-DT, WCBS-DT, WNYW-DT (FOX), WNBC-DT, WNET-DT (PBS) CNN-HD and FNC HD
http://thumbnails3.imagebam.com/3072/52a5fd30710626.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/52a5fd30710626)http://thumbnails14.imagebam.com/3072/e71fef30710627.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/e71fef30710627)http://thumbnails13.imagebam.com/3072/52267230710628.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/52267230710628)http://thumbnails6.imagebam.com/3072/3f884030710629.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/3f884030710629)http://thumbnails14.imagebam.com/3072/062bd630710630.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/062bd630710630)
http://thumbnails9.imagebam.com/3072/3b9c4830710634.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/3b9c4830710634)http://thumbnails12.imagebam.com/3072/302cd330710637.gif (http://www.imagebam.com/image/302cd330710637)
Free Image Hosting by ImageBam.com (http://www.imagebam.com)

Only thing I find odd is FNC has kept their news ticker on. Usually they shut it off during Presidential News Conferences.
I still can't stand the Cable news channels graphics. CNN, MSNBC, and FNC all have massive graphics compared to the others.

Networks: Follow PBS' lead!