
The reviews from the political talking heads -- right and left -- have been mostly positive. The visuals were spectacular and riveting. History was made at Mile High Stadium in Denver last night when Senator Barack Obama accepted the nomination of the Democratic party as the first African-American presidential candidate. There were 80,000 people packed in the stadium, and now Nielsen has determined that 38 million people tuned in to watch on TV.
How impressive is that number? It's more than the opening ceremonies from the Beijing Olympics. It's also more than the 2008 Oscars and the finale of Fox's American Idol.
The networks cleared just one hour of prime time -- from 10-11 ET -- and the Democratic organizers made sure to present Obama's speech right in that slot, not drifting into the local late news.
While the media promoted and hyped the event, especially since Obama is the first politician to accept a nomination in an outdoor venue since John F. Kennedy appeared at the L.A. Coliseum in 1960, that many people watching a political speech is stunning.
Expectations on all the news outlets were very high, and that clearly spilled over to the public -- as well as the fact that there wasn't a lot of fresh programming up against it. Still, it seems that there was a groundswell of curiosity about Obama, as well as the big build up from the previous three days of the convention -- which included speeches by former President Bill Clinton, Senator Edward M. Kennedy and Senator Hillary Clinton, all of whom drew strong ratings, too.
The 38 million people Nielsen is reporting could grow once PBS and CSpan viewership is factored in to the total. It also nearly double the size of the audience that tuned in for Senator John Kerry's acceptance speech in 2004.
It will be interesting to see how well the Republicans fare with their national convention commencing next week. Nielsen numbers are not polling data, but if John McCain's acceptance speech -- scheduled to be delivered from the XCell Arena in St. Paul, Minnesota on Thursday evening -- draws significantly less viewers that Obama's, will that be an indicator of voting preference? I can't say, but I'm curious enough to tune in and hear his speech.















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
8-29-2008 @ 3:51PM
Scott said...
I think more people may tune in to hear VP-nominee Palin's speech than McCain's. She's the only interesting/exciting part of that ticket.
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:39PM
Oreo said...
Nah, Bones season premiere is on that night, so I won't be watching.
8-29-2008 @ 3:55PM
bsgfan2003 said...
Depends on what happens with the hurricane.
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:03PM
Malren said...
if John McCain's acceptance speech -- scheduled to be delivered from the XCell Arena in St. Paul, Minnesota on Thursday evening -- draws significantly less viewers that Obama's, will that be an indicator of voting preference? I can't say, but I'm curious enough to tune in and hear his speech.
No. We already know where John McCain stands and he's not putting on a massive spectacle of style over substance. There's no real reason to watch. A good portion of the audience watched Obama to roll their eyes and to see if he'd roll out the same old rhetoric packaged as "new ideas" and "change." Obama did not fail them. And the greek temple was *ridiculous* although it made for nice looking TV. Hell of a parable of the man and his campaign, actually.
The extra viewers that tuned into Obama in order to scoff won't bother to watch McCain because they already know he's going to trot out the same old stuff. War, evil must be defeated, I was in Vietnam, predatory lending, gas prices. He's not going to cover any new ground. The set isn't a spectacle, the setting isn't anything to see and the candidate ain't much either. Hell of a parable of the man and his campaign, actually.
Now if Sarah Palin was the nominee...then maybe ratings would be a real referendum on the election. She can talk, she's new, fresh, young, attractive, she's directly comparable to Obama...but she's not the nominee, just the potential veep. As it stands now, trying to draw a correlation between Convention ratings and real votes is like trying to draw a real voting scenario from those red versus blue wines (or ketchups or beers or any other stupid product that CNN or Fox trots out as the next big indicator of what November will look like).
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:37PM
segsig said...
The "greek temple" was a reference the repugs didn't get, maybe McLame missed so many votes he forgot that is what DC looks like! There are plenty of pics of McLame in front of columns.
8-29-2008 @ 4:52PM
B said...
The only people who say Obama doesn't offer substance are the people to lazy or stupid to do their own research, so they have to resort to using typical partisan talking points to make their (horribly informed) decision. Try and actually take the election into your own hands, and make an informed decision. For the good of the country.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf
8-29-2008 @ 4:07PM
chadwick said...
First of all it would be amazing if he could deliver one tenth of what he promises to do. My issue with Obama besides disagreeing with him on pretty much everything is he never explains how he is going to do something. Of course I can't name three things he has done in congress to begin with so there you go. Not a good sign when the republican V.P candidate has more experience than your own Democratic presidential candidate. I will say this, Obama is a great speaker. No doubt about that at all.
I am quite surprised that the rating last night were higher than the Olympic ceremonies however the convention was on every channel. You cannot compare ratings to votes. That has been done before and proved overwhelmingly wrong everytime. Not everyone is registered to vote. I should hope you would know that. Just a thought.
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:22PM
Andrew said...
"Not a good sign when the republican V.P candidate has more experience than your own Democratic presidential candidate."
Wow, they already replaced Sarah Palin?
8-29-2008 @ 4:42PM
Victor said...
"Of course I can't name three things he has done in congress to begin with so there you go."
Yep, "there you go." A Republican, that didn't care about the Democratic nominee, so he didn't look into anything that he did in the senate. That sounds like a personal problem.
The ratings will be even bigger once the other 2 networks are announced. I watched C-SPAN, because they didn't have all that talking.
8-29-2008 @ 4:33PM
the_0ne said...
I guess @Andrew was trying to be funny.
She has almost 2 years as the governor of a state under her belt. Barack's been a senator for 4 years. And for 2 of those years he's been campaigning.
I'll take the experience of a person that IS RUNNING A STATE, over a rock star senator any day.
8-29-2008 @ 4:45PM
bsgfan2003 said...
Yes, let's talk about who has experience for the next 2 months! Please fall into that trap Obama.
8-29-2008 @ 4:06PM
Wii60 said...
And what a snooze-fest it was, for those of us who aren't Obama zealots.
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:20PM
Dave said...
You said it. Say a couple of substance-free sound-bite phrases, stop for applause. Repeat. Ugh.
I would rather read a transcript of the speach than hear the ridiculous applause.
Good luck, senator. It will be tough to keep those promises when you don't have the money to spend.
8-29-2008 @ 4:29PM
Jimmy said...
And Obama got almost 12 hours of fawning coverage before the media turned its attention to a more captivating story.
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:36PM
Andrew said...
I had no idea people who watch TV (or the people who comment on this blog) were so conservative.
Reply
8-29-2008 @ 4:43PM
Oreo said...
They aren't, they are just racists...
oh wait... same thing....
:)
8-29-2008 @ 4:51PM
ac said...
I wouldnt say the majority. They are just more likely to make a comment bashing him than an Obama supporter is to go on and praise him. Plus besides Fox no one else in the media is spewing hatred of Obama so they have to bash him somewhere.
8-29-2008 @ 4:52PM
bsgfan2003 said...
Oreo - you don't know the color of any of our skin or what's in our hearts.
8-29-2008 @ 5:48PM
Malren said...
I love that pathetic tactic of calling someone who dislikes the all-flash Obama a racist. Please keep doing that, as often and as loudly as possible. That will put Sarah Palin one step closer to being President in 2012.
PALIN '12 - Actual, Substantive Change. YES WE SHOULD!
8-29-2008 @ 7:35PM
B said...
@Malren
What exact substance does Palin have? I've looked hard, and I can't find anything.
http://www.issues2000.org/Sarah_Palin.htm
She has no record.