http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/entertainment/11015232.htm?1c

NEW YORK - With comedian Chris Rock, the Academy Awards succeeded in its effort to find a younger audience - but perhaps at the expense of the country as a whole.

A total of 41.5 million viewers tuned in Sunday to watch "Million Dollar Baby" take the Oscar for best picture. That's down 2 million from last year's show, which honored "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," according to Nielsen Media Research.

ABC undoubtedly hoped for better, after preliminary figures released earlier Monday from the top 56 markets were the strongest they were in five years.

The drop in total viewership was an indication that this year's Oscar ceremony was more popular in the big cities than rural areas, more so than an average Academy Awards, said Larry Hyams, vice president of audience analysis and research for ABC.

Oscar ratings were up from last year among viewers aged 18 to 34 - a prime target for the advertisers who pay millions of dollars for time on what is traditionally the year's highest-rated program after the Super Bowl.

Hyams attributed the boost in young viewership to Rock.

"The academy made a concerted effort to go in a different direction and try to appeal to a younger audience with the Academy Awards, and it appears they have succeeded," he said.

It was the 12th time since 1990 that the Academy Awards drew an audience of between 40 and 46 million people, according to Nielsen. The peak during that stretch was the "Titanic" year of 1998 with 55.2 million, and the low point was 33 million in 2003, when "Chicago" won.

Rock said backstage after the Oscars that he hoped to do it again, although "who knows if they would want me again."

He attracted plenty of pre-Oscars publicity, including speculation about whether he would make jokes at the expense of President Bush (he did) or test ABC censors with curse words (he didn't).

"Put it this way, I don't curse in front of my mother," Rock said. "And my mother was front and center, you know, right in my view. So I could never curse in front of Rose Rock, so why would I do it on television?"

Down 2 million is more than slightly.

2 Million? That is not a small number. That is a BIG number.

A cookie to the First Person who figures out where the not a small number thing comes from...

Honestly, my opinion as it regards the Oscars is, simply:
I'm seeing Desperate Housewives and Boston Legal getting preempted for THIS?!?

Down 2 million is more than slightly.
How can they claim slightly down? I don't get it.

well somebody changed my thread title. I think it is more than slightly.

Now maybe if they had Desperate Housewives on instead, their ratings wouldn't have gone down. ;)

Down 2 million is more than slightly.

It was right on par with last year really. Adults 18-49 rating was almost exactly the same and adults 18-34 was higher than last year. In comparison, this year was higher by 8.5 million viewers than 2003's 33 million.

Also, for the top 56 markets, this year's Oscars were the highest rated since 2000. Since this year there was no "popular" film, I think these ratings are more than good.


ABC's notes:

“Oscar Countdown 2005” (8:00-8:30 p.m.) ABC’s red carpet arrivals show, “Oscar Countdown 2005,” attracted an average audience of 27.5 million viewers and a 9.5 rating among Adults 18-49. Compared to last year’s “Countdown,” this year’s telecast was up by 4% in Adults 18-49 (9.5 vs. 9.1).


“77th Annual Academy Awards” (8:30-11:31 p.m.) ABC’s telecast of the “77th Annual Academy Awards” attracted an average audience of 41.5 million viewers and delivered a 14.9 rating among Adults 18-49.

* According to Nielsen, 69.94 million television viewers across the U.S. tuned in to some portion of the 2005 Academy Awards telecast – viewers who watched 6 minutes or more of the telecast.

* The Chris Rock-hosted Academy Awards posted gains among Adults 18-34 and among young women. The Oscars delivered its highest ratings in 3 years among Adults 18-34 (12.7), Women 18-49 (18.3) and Women 18-34 (16.1) – best since the 2002 telecast.

* The 2005 Oscars ranks as TV’s No. 1 entertainment telecast of the season among Total Viewers and Adults 18-49.

* ABC’s 2005 Academy Awards broadcast (41.5 million) delivered a much larger audience than any other awards show this season: NBC’s 2005 Golden Globes (16.8 million on 1/16/05), CBS’ 2005 Grammy Awards (18.8 million on 2/13/05), CBS’ 2004 CMA Awards (18.5 million on 11/9/04) and CBS’ 2005 People’s Choice Awards (9.9 million on 1/9/05).

You're not the only one.

It is slightly ... down 5% in total viewers from 2004. Down 2% in adults 18-49. Up in adults 18-34, and some other demos. Now, you want to talk about ratings down more than slightly, compare 2003 to 2002.

How can they claim slightly down? I don't get it.

I don't really either. 2 million is a big number.

If Desperate Housewives had been on, I would have watched ABC last night. ;)

I don't really either. 2 million is a big number.

If Desperate Housewives had been on, I would have watched ABC last night. ;)

Exactly. They rule!

Exactly. They rule!

We get an Oprah movie this Sunday which I WON'T be watching, Jake in Progress on the 13th which I am going to try and who knows what on the 20th(probably Extreme Makeover: HE) which I won't be watching.

We get an Oprah movie this Sunday which I WON'T be watching, Jake in Progress on the 13th which I am going to try and who knows what on the 20th(probably Extreme Makeover: HE) which I won't be watching.

Yeah. I don't think we get any new DH episodes until March 20 or something like that.

Yeah. I don't think we get any new DH episodes until March 20 or something like that.

Actually, it's probably March 27th, it was supposed to be March 20th(it won't be any earlier for sure).

Actually, it's probably March 27th, it was supposed to be March 20th(it won't be any earlier for sure).
Really? Whoa that sucks.

All I've been hearing is how it had the highest ratings since 2000.

The "key" demographics (read: 18-34) were up. Since the groups that advertisers care about posted higher numbers, obviously the network is going to overhype that, while glossing over the fact that viewership 35+ was down by a few million viewers.

All I've been hearing is how it had the highest ratings since 2000.

Well... that was true at Noon, but now it's not. :lol:

Well... that was true at Noon, but now it's not. :lol:

As I said before, it IS true, for the top 56 markets.

Hahah Abc. :p

Here is a writer who knows what he is talking about:

Oscarcast avoids big ratings slide
41.5 mil viewers down 6% from last year

By RICK KISSELL
In a year when the movies themselves didn't create much excitement, controversial comic Chris Rock helped the Academy Awards telecast on ABC attract a younger, more urban aud.

Although overall ratings were down a bit vs. last year, the Academy accomplished its goal of generating a buzz surrounding the show -- and at the same time avoiding the significant year-to-year losses of other kudocasts like the Golden Globes and Grammys.

According to preliminary nationals from Nielsen that will be finalized today, the 77th annual Oscarcast (8:30-11:45 p.m. ET) averaged 41.5 million viewers overall, down 5 or 6% from last year but up nicely over the stunningly low 33 million who tuned in to see "Chicago" honored best picture in 2002.

This makes it the highest-rated entertainment telecast of the season, with the 41.5 million viewers more than the Grammys (18.8 million) and Globes (16.8 million) combined.

Kudocast fared well vs. recent years in key demographic categories, down just 3% year-to-year in adults 18-49 (14.9 rating vs. 15.3) and up 3% in adults 18-34 to a three-year high.

Also noticeable was a stronger turnout in the nation's largest markets. Rock's backyard of New York, for example, generated a huge 40.2 rating/54 share during primetime Sunday -- up 24% (or roughly 560,000 households) vs. last year's 32.5 rating/44 share.

While other top 10 markets like Chicago, Philadelphia and Dallas were either up or down slightly year-to-year, joining New York in showing substantial growth were Washington, D.C. (up 15%), Los Angeles (up 9%) and Detroit (up 7%).

Atlanta (down 18%), Pittsburgh (off 15%) and Indianapolis (down 12%) were among top 25 markets showing double-digit declines.

Another factor helping ABC was that it didn't have to compete against itself: In a stretch of six Sundays, the People's Choice Awards on CBS, Golden Globe Awards on NBC and Grammy Awards on CBS all took significant year-to-year ratings hits, in part because they faced off opposite ABC's "Desperate Housewives," the hottest Sunday program to come around in years.

The Golden Globes telecast, in particular, declined by a staggering 40% vs. last year, with the blame for some of its decline also laid at the feet of carrier NBC, which has gone from first to fourth place in a year's time.

In addition to Rock shaking things up as host, the Academy and producer Gil Cates also tried to revitalize the proceedings, which have been criticized as too staid and predictable. Some awards were handed out in the audience, eliminating a few long walks to the stage, and nominees and winners of craftsmanship and technical awards were already gathered onstage when their awards were announced.

Such tactics created a shorter telecast this season (3 hours, 15 minutes), which also helped the ratings picture. Since kudocasts tend to peak in rating at around 10 o'clock, any show that drags on much past 11 o'clock reaps ever-diminishing returns.

Making this year's solid ratings story more impressive is that none of the best picture nominees has grossed more than $100 million, meaning that much of the audience was unfamiliar with the films or the performances of their leading thesps.

Also Sunday, ABC's annual "Barbara Walters Special" (4.1 rating in adults 18-49, 12.6 million viewers overall) and the net's red carpet arrivals show "Oscar Countdown 2005" (9.5 in 18-49, 27.5 million) -- both up a bit year-to-year in demos.

On the cable side, E! (Star Jones, with special correspondent Kathy Griffin) led the red carpet specs with a 3.5 metered-market household rating (down from last year's 4.4) -- still well ahead of TV Guide Channel (Joan Rivers and Melissa Rivers), whose 1.0 rating repped a big gain from its tiny 0.4 of the previous year.

Opposite ABC's Oscar coverage on Sunday, Fox fared best with its umpteenth rebroadcast of "Independence Day," which averaged roughly 9.3 million viewers and a 3.9 rating/9 share in adults 18-49. Funneling viewers to the pic was Fox Sports' coverage of a NASCAR Nextel Cup racing event from Fontana, Calif., which delivered a 7.1 household rating/14 share in the overnights -- the highest ever for a regular season race (excluding Daytona 500) on Fox.

I stopped watching the Oscars back when they changed the night from Monday to Sunday.

There was something quite fun about hearing all of the hubbub at the office about "Are you gonna watch? Who do you think will win?" Then you go home and watch.

I do chores on Sunday, and get ready for the week ahead. Most of the time I don't even remember the Oscars are on until they are pretty much over. They come on before primetime here in Los Angeles; it's the ONLY awards show that we see live.

That is... when we remember to tune in.

Too much information. Can someone bottom line this for me. Were there two million fewer viewers this year than last year?

Too much information. Can someone bottom line this for me. Were there two million fewer viewers this year than last year?
yes.

yes.
Thank you. :)

Too much information. Can someone bottom line this for me. Were there two million fewer viewers this year than last year?
I'm really confused, too. :lol: I don't know what to believe...but I've heard that they were high.

As I stated in my thread title before it was mysteriously changed, ABC's ratings are down for the awards. It's in black and white.

I'm really confused, too. :lol: I don't know what to believe...but I've heard that they were high.
I think that ratings are up for the 18-49 demographic, but down overall from last year.

someone please just tell me when they're over - I usually have to avoid TV for a week or so because they make me so mad :cuss:

As I stated in my thread title before it was mysteriously changed, ABC's ratings are down for the awards. It's in black and white.

It was changed? I see that the title inside the thread just has "down" without the "slightly". I guess someone here is a big fan of the alphabet network and doesn't like you slighting their ratings. :lol:

It was changed? I see that the title inside the thread just has "down" without the "slightly". I guess someone here is a big fan of the alphabet network and doesn't like you slighting their ratings. :lol:

Hmmmmm, I wonder who that could be?

well, a major factor in lower ratings (even tho it was still up 8 million from two years ago) was that in 2004, there was not a Lord Of The Rings or Titanic style movie that you HAD to see. I'm sure all of the nominated movies (Sideways is the only one I'd have any desire to watch) all have their share of great quality, but none of those titles had the type of fanatical, almost geek-like audience, that Lord Of The Rings had, and a great portion (according to what I read on Home Theater Forum) of last years audience were the hardcore LOTR fans who usually wouldn't watch, but they pretty much knew that their fave movie was going to win.

All in all, it was a better award show than most of what's shown these days, it kept my attention, something today's music award shows can't. I honestly like Chris Rock and think he's great at what he does because he is such an equal opportunity offender, yet at the same time, he is being funny and not spiteful.

FINAL NUMBERS

Final numbers for the Academy Awards telecast edged up in nationals to 42.14 million viewers overall (down 3% year-to-year), a 15.1/34 in adults 18-49 (off 1%) and a 12.8/33 in adults 18-34 (up 5%). Also, thanks to to Chris Roc as host, this year's show grabbed the highest Oscar rating in six years among male teens (7.3/21).