Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
The Media Poll 02
_______________________________________________________
THE MEDIA POLL Number 2 January 10, 1997
_______________________________________________________
By John Marcus
"Oh God--it's not just a one-off. . . ."
Featuring:
-LENO VS. LETTERMAN: DOES NEWS COVERAGE EQUAL RATINGS?
-POPULAR ARTS IN REVIEW: TELEVISION: THE DEATH OF SUSAN
Plus:
-YOU HEARD IT THERE FIRST: FUTBOL MAMAS
*and*
-THE MEDIA POLL 10: U.S. POLITICIANS
--------------------------------------------
LENO VS. LETTERMAN: DOES NEWS COVERAGE EQUAL RATINGS?
HOUSEHOLDS, EYEBALLS, BOX OFFICE, bums on seats,=20
mindshare. Isn't the entertainment industry eloquent=20
when it comes to measuring its own performance? And=20
then there's the comparatively dull political=20
yardstick: turnout.
And in their pursuit of generating households,=20
eyeballs, box office, etc., all the players in=20
Hollywood, Washington, Tin Pan Alley, and Broadway are=20
after the same thing: exposure. Armies of publicists=20
and spin doctors bombard the print and broadcast press=20
with endless volleys of sound bites and press releases,=20
aiming big and hoping anything might stick, because=20
there are hoary old maxims about the "Power of the=20
Press" that say "Any Publicity is Good Publicity." =20
Wasn't it this truism that made erstwhile presidential=20
candidate Ross Perot go and buy half-hour prime time=20
infomercials so he could campaign via the media, and=20
not the stump, by unleashing a kind of old school spam?
THE MEDIA POLL WONDERS about all this. Although I have=20
experienced the effect of a single airing of an unknown=20
tune on BBC Radio upon the London record-buying public=20
(long ago at Our Price on the King's Road), and been=20
astonished by the importance of Access to Eardrums over=20
It's Got a Good Beat and You Can Dance to It, I've=20
always questioned the ability of "publicity, any=20
publicity," to automatically, unquestionably, spike the=20
charts in one's favor. In the corporations of America,=20
wouldn't Marketing then report to Media Relations, and=20
not the other way around?
WHEN EXACTLY DOES DAVE LETTERMAN COME INTO THIS?
Hold on.
NIELSEN RATINGS, THE TOP 40, the New York Times Best=20
Sellers List: to get there you need exposure, and some=20
of the best comes in column inches. But is it true? =20
Is *any* publicity good publicity? And, if so, can=20
quantitative press coverage predict ratings success?=20
Let's look at Letterman and Leno. (In future Media=20
Polls, we'll look at the pop charts and 1996 election=20
results.)
Coverage in Top 50 U.S. Newspapers
(number of mentions)
------------------------------------------
Year Letterman Leno Carson O'Brien
---- --------- ----- ------ -------
1996 5,645 3,828 1,226 896
1995 7,051 4,000 1,253 879
1994 8,643 3,944 1,906 1,222
1993 7,797 5,170 2,288 1,450
1992 3,994 4,370 4,703 2=20
Dave gets more press than Jay--period. Ever since=20
1993, when he pulled off something that hadn't been=20
achieved in decades (launching a successful late night=20
talk show on a network other than NBC), Letterman has=20
been written about 45 to 119 percent more often than=20
Leno each year in the top 50 U.S. newspapers. In 1992,=20
when he was still stuck in the 12:30 slot on NBC,=20
Leno's star shone brighter than his for the only time=20
in the last five years.
THAT WAS THE YEAR Johnny Carson departed the Tonight=20
Show after 30 years, and the year Leno endured his=20
baptism of fire. The following year, Letterman left=20
NBC and started a new 11:30 franchise on CBS, causing=20
an unforeseen level of network hype, media hysteria,=20
and genuine audience interest surrounding the changing=20
of the late night guard. As Dave faced down his friend=20
and rival before millions of new viewers, seemingly=20
introducing a new golden era of late night television,=20
his press nearly doubled, far surpassing anything=20
generated previously by either Leno or Carson, and,=20
curiously, has remained at popcult superstar levels=20
ever since. (In 1996, three years later, Letterman=20
received 47 percent more coverage than Leno, and a=20
whopping 530 percent more than his replacement on NBC,=20
Conan O'Brien.)=20
WELL OVER A YEAR after Leno surpassed Letterman in the=20
ratings, Dave still reigns in print. A "media darling"=20
if ever there was one (only journalists could be so=20
affectionate about someone so cranky), David=20
Letterman's story in 1993 somehow topped Jay Leno's the=20
previous year. While the latter triumphed in their=20
battle to succeed the most powerful man in the=20
business--effectively getting the boss's job--the=20
former not only survived what many thought had been a=20
near-fatal career defeat, he came back on his own=20
terms, in his own time, and literally challenged his=20
opponent once again on a newly level playing field. =20
His story was so good it was impossible to resist, and=20
in the meantime, despite the fact that his show and=20
network are now floundering bigtime, Letterman's still=20
perceived to be the more vivid character, the more=20
quotable subject, and the bigger star.
Which is enough to get you into the funny papers, but=20
apparently not enough to hold onto eyeballs.
--------------------------------------------
YOU HEARD IT THERE FIRST
First known use (in a major newspaper) of "Soccer=20
Mom(s)," voted Word of the Year for 1996 by the=20
American Dialect Society, a group of publicity-savvy=20
linguists:
The San-Diego Union Tribune
November 29, 1985
Interestingly, two of the first three uses of "soccer=20
mom" were in the Union Tribune, indicating that both=20
youth league soccer and the idea of "soccer moms"=20
gained momentum first in southern California. In fact,=20
for five years and with one exception, all mentions of=20
the term occurred in either the West or the South, in=20
papers like the Orange County Register, the Denver=20
Post, and the Atlanta Journal and Constitution. As the=20
chart below demonstrates, after barely registering in=20
the 1980s, "soccer mom(s)" began to increase in usage=20
in the early 1990s as it starting filtering through the=20
Midwest back East.=20
In 1995 "soccer mom" took on its first political=20
connotation when Sue Casey, a former aid to Gary Hart,=20
ran for the Denver City Council and used it to describe=20
herself to potential middle class voters in a Denver=20
Post story. Around the same time, an Orange County=20
Register story about a Dana Point, Calif. mayoral race=20
mentioned "the Little League dads and soccer moms"=20
active on a local political action committee. The=20
phrase really took of, though, during the presidential=20
election campaign of 1996. =20
On July 1, Time Magazine, in an article on the changing=20
face of First Ladydom, actually called Hillary Clinton=20
a soccer mom. Seventeen days later, the Washington=20
Post quoted Republican National Committee spokesman Ed=20
Gillespie saying, on reports of increased youth drug=20
use during the first Clinton term, "take that record=20
out to the soccer moms in the suburbs." The Post went=20
on to define "soccer mom" as "the overburdened, middle=20
income working mother who ferries her kids from soccer=20
practice to scouts to school." It cited soon-to-be-
disgraced Democratic campaign advisor Dick Morris,=20
ironically, as the force behind President Clinton's=20
play for this supposed constituency as a family values=20
strategy. A few more mentions over the next few weeks=20
led to Newsweek's August 26 piece, "The Fight Over=20
Soccer Moms," which outlined Bob Dole's apparently long=20
odds in that battle and served as a clarion call for a=20
thousand more articles over the remaining four months=20
of 1996.
Year "Soccer Mom"
Mentions
--------------------
1996 1440
1995 56
1994 33
1993 23
1992 14
1991 12
1990 8
1989 1
1988 3
1987 1
1986 3
1985 1
Source: Dow Jones News/Retrieval full text database of=20
over 3,000 publications
--------------------------------------------
POPULAR ARTS IN REVIEW: Television
THE DEATH OF SUSAN
SEINFELD IS STILL perhaps the only show on TV that=20
consistently breaks rules on purpose, and for this it=20
deserves our gratitude (even if we're getting a little=20
tired of it). For TV's arch conservatism in the rules=20
and formulae department is what keeps it ever stale-
and keeps us from watching as much as we discerning=20
viewers might watch otherwise if more programs dared to=20
step out-of-the-box (to use a horrible pun dressed as a=20
smarmy clich=E9).
One could make the argument that Seinfeld's one=20
formula-related sin is that it managed to create a new=20
one--one that's now been milked to death by other shows=20
on the same network (you know which ones I mean). But=20
that's a whole other topic.
THE SHOW ABOUT NOTHING--the one with real-time scripts,=20
unbelievable reversals of fortune, and at least one=20
despicable primary character--went one step beyond at=20
the end of last season when it killed off Susan,=20
George's fiancee. =20
Or did it? I can't decide.
The deal is this: George buys cheap envelopes for=20
wedding invitations to save money, they are toxic, and=20
Susan dies. George, who had been desperate but unable=20
to get out of the impending lifetime commitment, shrugs=20
his shoulders and immediately begins dating. It is=20
obvious he is glad the way things turned out between=20
him and Susan, and his friends, including Jerry, show=20
themselves to be only fractionally more compassionate.
ON THE ONE hand, I agree with those--including quite a=20
number of serious Seinfeld heads on the alt.tv.seinfeld=20
newsgroup--who found this particular TV rule breakage=20
to be utterly unfunny (I think the rule is: "Don't=20
laugh at and then totally ignore the fact that a=20
primary character is dead"). It was ugly, cold,=20
cynical, stupid, and juvenile. =20
But then one has to ask: could the writers have=20
expected any other response? Are they (the writers) so=20
ugly, cold, and cynical that they thought we would=20
laugh? =20
The answer to both questions, I hope, is "no." =20
RATHER THAN to laugh at the unfunny, could it be that=20
the intent of Seinfeld's writers (who are, after all,=20
inveterate rulebreakers) was to purposely make Jerry=20
and company ugly, cold, cynical, stupid, etc.? This=20
is my theory. But the question remains: why? Either=20
they are motivated by professional mischief-making on=20
the merely daring level they have exhibited all along,=20
or else they are being truly subversive and testing=20
just how low a popular sitcom--and its arch loyalist=20
fans--can go. =20
What's next? Crazy Joe Devola pulls a Dahmer on=20
Newman, but Elaine and George are too preoccupied with=20
fighting over his vacant apartment to be anything but=20
non-plussed by the heinous crime? =20
THAT would test us.
--------------------------------------------
THE MEDIA POLL 10
The Media Poll 10 ranks quantitative press coverage of=20
personalities in various categories. Over the next=20
several weeks, we'll look back at 1996 to see which=20
politicians, actors, and generic celebrity types=20
generated the most fishwrap. This week's category: =20
politicians.
1996 Top 10 U.S. Politicians=20
(by number of mentions in the top 50 U.S. newspapers)
--------------------------------
1 Bob Dole 70,310
2 Bill Clinton 39,801
3 Newt Gingrich 24,743
4 Ross Perot 15,637
5 Pat Buchanan 15,221=20
6 George Bush 14,031
7 Ronald Reagan 13,021
8 Al Gore 12,342
9 Steve Forbes 11,851
10 Jack Kemp 10,377
N.B. There is nothing scientific about the Media Poll,=20
but Jeez, so much for the liberal media bias, eh?
--------------------------------------------
NOTE TO READERS
Thank you for reading this far down the screen. I=20
realize this has arrived unsolicited in your newsgroup=20
or email box but I thought you might be interested. If=20
you think I have taken liberties by doing so or if you=20
are not interested in receiving future editions of this=20
column, please reply by email to xx609@prairienet.org=20
with the message: STOP.
If you would like to subscribe to the Media Poll,=20
please reply by email to xx609@prairienet.org with the=20
message: SUBSCRIBE.
Eventually I will have an automated mailing list=20
(Listproc) to distribute the column and a Web site will=20
inevitably be developed. (The truth is I already have=20
one but I'm witholding the URL for now because I don't=20
have time for HTML and so the site looks way too 1995.=20
. . .)=20
And many thanks to those of you who offered words of=20
encouragement and/or requested subscriptions after=20
reading MP No. 1--much appreciated.
FUTURE MEDIA POLL TOPICS
-The Ebonic Woman
-The Bob Dole Effect
-Madonna or Homelessness: Which Has the Better Publicist?
Got an idea for a Media Poll topic? =20
Email: jmarcus@prairienet.org
ABOUT THE MEDIA POLL
THE MEDIA POLL uses online news databases to measure=20
media trends, coverage of current events, and the news=20
organizations that cover them. The Media Poll delves=20
deep into the data warehouses of vast, electronic news=20
archives, presses a few buttons and throws a few=20
switches, and then steps back--ultimately attempting to=20
make sense of the "findings," whether any sense is=20
there to be made or not. Sometimes, the "findings"=20
just speak for themselves. The Media Poll also includes=20
"Popular Arts In Review," which offers concise reviews=20
of pop music, TV, movies, and other garish ephemera;=20
"You Heard it There First," tracing the media-based=20
origins of contemporary catch phrases and slang; and=20
The Media Poll 10, a recurring ranking of people,=20
places, and things as measured by quantity of news=20
coverage.
The Media Poll is Copyright 1997 by John Marcus
