Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

    Leno's 10 pm show failed to draw an audience which affected the affiliates 11 O'clock news shows. When the news shows lost viewers, that affected Conan at 11:30. With a poor performing Leno show 5 nights a week at 10 pm, there wasn't any night where Conan could draw an audience. Poor Conan, he never had a chance.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

      Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
      I know you don't care about ratings, but network executives should. That's why Conan got the axe four years ago. They have a duty to the business and shareholders.

      I love HIMYM, but this final season has been complete garbage.
      Yea but seasons 3-6 destroyed anything BBT ever did, and yet BBT killed HIMYM every year in "ratings". Going strictly by ratings just doesn't work. It's like saying Britney Spears is a great musician because her album went 15 platinum.
      There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

        Originally posted by Strummer View Post
        Leno's 10 pm show failed to draw an audience which affected the affiliates 11 O'clock news shows. When the news shows lost viewers, that affected Conan at 11:30. With a poor performing Leno show 5 nights a week at 10 pm, there wasn't any night where Conan could draw an audience. Poor Conan, he never had a chance.

        Lead in is only a big deal when you're trying to get a brand new show off of the ground that no one has heard of. But that wasn't quite the case when Conan took over for The Tonight Show. Everyone on the planet had heard of The Tonight Show. Everyone also knew that Conan was taking over for Jay because it had been talked about for five years. Furthermore, people have remote controls and can change the channel.

        Everyone knew that Conan was on, but people simply didn't want to watch. Conan's show just wasn't as good as what he replaced and the audience responded. It never mattered to Jay Leno what was on at 10 PM. NBC has had plenty of bad shows over the years, yet his Tonight Show ratings have always been strong. Conan's show failed and that's that.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

          Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
          Yea but seasons 3-6 destroyed anything BBT ever did, and yet BBT killed HIMYM every year in "ratings". Going strictly by ratings just doesn't work. It's like saying Britney Spears is a great musician because her album went 15 platinum.
          Well I think Leno is an extremely great comic, but that's just my own opinion. What's not my own opinion though is that plenty of other people obviously agree with me because for two decades they have chosen to watch his show. Britney Spears? Lol, come on. Leno is like the second most successful late night comic ever.

          Networks care about ratings and that's why Conan's putrid Tonight Show was given the axe. I just don't get why they are doing it again when Leno's show has been gold for 20 years.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

            Conan *was* bad on that show, because his personality didn't fit their format at all. You need an older, drier personality to do Leno's show.
            There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

              Originally posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
              Conan *was* bad on that show, because his personality didn't fit their format at all. You need an older, drier personality to do Leno's show.
              EXACTLY. So why kick out the "older, drier" personality who had been so successful for 20 years? OK, I get making the mistake once, but to do it AGAIN?! It's another recipe for disaster.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                Originally posted by Sollozzo View Post
                Lead in is only a big deal when you're trying to get a brand new show off of the ground that no one has heard of. But that wasn't quite the case when Conan took over for The Tonight Show. Everyone on the planet had heard of The Tonight Show. Everyone also knew that Conan was taking over for Jay because it had been talked about for five years. Furthermore, people have remote controls and can change the channel.

                Everyone knew that Conan was on, but people simply didn't want to watch. Conan's show just wasn't as good as what he replaced and the audience responded. It never mattered to Jay Leno what was on at 10 PM. NBC has had plenty of bad shows over the years, yet his Tonight Show ratings have always been strong. Conan's show failed and that's that.
                Leno put the viewers to sleep at 10 pm and killed the rest of the schedule. Lead in mattered to the 11 o'clock news, that's why their numbers dropped. And it mattered to Conan. That's why NBC yanked the plug on Leno at 10.

                NBC has had great shows at 10 pm over the years. Some better than others. But with the same dog at 10 pm 5 days a week, Conan was screwed. People weren't watching Leno at 10 pm so no one was seeing the promos they ran for Conan's show. And yes, people do tune in to see shows based on promos.

                Saying that "Conan's show failed and that's that" isn't very accurate. NBC wanted him to continue as host of the tonight show. But they wanted to delay the start by 1/2 hour (if I remember correctly) and have a new Leno show as a 11:30 lead in. Conan wasn't interested in that.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                  I don't get it. Leno is terribly unfunny. Letterman is better, but not by much.

                  Give me Fallon, Kimmel and Conan all day.
                  First time in a long time, I've been happy with the team that was constructed, and now they struggle. I blame the coach.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                    Originally posted by Sparhawk View Post
                    I don't get it. Leno is terribly unfunny. Letterman is better, but not by much.

                    Give me Fallon, Kimmel and Conan all day.
                    I think Letterman used to be really funny, but his show has really gone downhill over the last few years.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                      Wait a minute....
                      Even some at NBC had 2nd thoughts by the time Leno's handoff to Conan became reality. Leno's show at 10PM was because NBC didn't want to totally lose Leno, let alone seeing him on another network competing against the Tonight Show. They never expected Leno to still be king by the time the handoff arrived. Leno could've named his price and network to compete against the Tonight Show if he'd wanted. So NBC did what they could to keep that from happening.

                      Back when NBC came knocking on Leno's door to suggest he retire and set up his successor he admits the 5 year window seemed like a long time down the road and being more solid than ever in the ratings didn't seem likely when he looked out the window and tried to see 5 years into the future. But then the 5 years flew by, he was still enjoying the show, and the ratings were excellent. But the problem was, Conan was promised the Tonight Show and the ink had long dried on the contracts. Conan, of course, could've offered to delay the handoff a year or two... but he'd be risking the handoff never coming too if he did something like that. And who's to say NBC would've went along?

                      Conan's Tonight Show being a 'fail' had nothing to do with Leno, except if you want to argue his 10PM show provided a poor lead in to local news and then the new Tonight Show.

                      But Jay getting the Tonight Show back had more to do with Conan losing it and some NBC brass (and affiliates) wanting Leno back in the Tonight Show seat (because he was king of the ratings when he was forced into giving it up). I'm not really sure how Jay gets blame in that. The Tonight Show is his dream gig...

                      I'm not sure how Jay comes out the bad guy in the initial happenings with Conan. He stepped aside as he promised. He didn't want to fade away though and was going to stay on TV somewhere. NBC is the one that never considered the possibility that Jay could be hotter than ever and they'd be making him a free agent when Conan took over.
                      Last edited by Bball; 01-25-2014, 12:38 AM.
                      Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                      ------

                      "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                      -John Wooden

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                        Originally posted by Bball View Post
                        But Jay getting the Tonight Show back had more to do with Conan losing it
                        Except that Conan didn't lose the Tonight Show. NBC's plan was to move the Tonight Show with Conan by a half hour and give Jay a 30 minute show at 11:30. That move would satisfy the local stations whose News ratings were suffering because of Leno's failed show. And it would make Jay happy because he'd have a job. But Conan didn't think the Tonight Show should move so he took a buy out instead.

                        I just don't think it's accurate to say Conan lost the Tonight Show when NBC wanted him to continue hosting it, just at a different time.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                          No, it's accurate to say Conan lost the Tonight Show. The Tonight Show follows the local news. If they created a new show for Jay at at 11:30, regardless of what it's called, IT would be the Tonight Show as far as prestige goes and as far as reality goes. I realize that option was on the table but it never was a realistic option and IMO would've been one step removed from Jay right back where he had been (Tonight Show host regardless of what it is called at 11:30) and Conan back as the defacto Late Night host (even if it was called the Tonight Show)... That was just not going to happen because it would always be a demotion for Conan and there was no way he was going to accept that.

                          And would they have really had a 30 min Leno show?

                          IMHO this whole idea was just an attempt at some face saving spin that nobody in practice expected to happen. They just hoped some Conan fans might be placated by the idea that Conan had a choice to keep the Tonight Show gig and wasn't being forced off it. The reality was, Conan was losing the gig (because losing the 11:30 time slot was really the gig), he just needed to figure out the legalities that completed the process and got everyone out of the mess whole.
                          Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                          ------

                          "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                          -John Wooden

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                            Now it would be accurate to say Jay lost The Jay Leno Show...

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                              This is the same network that fired Dan Harmon after season three of Community for being difficult to work with, turning in scripts late, and going over budget. Then, after the star of the show (that NBC can't make up its mind whether to cancel or not) threatens to walk if Harmon isn't brought back, the former creator is brought back. And we just watched a great episode that was confirmed to be over-budget, probably turned in late, and likely pretty difficult to complete.

                              Expectations may need to be lowered.
                              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Why is NBC making the same mistake again?

                                Originally posted by Strummer View Post
                                Leno put the viewers to sleep at 10 pm and killed the rest of the schedule. Lead in mattered to the 11 o'clock news, that's why their numbers dropped. And it mattered to Conan. That's why NBC yanked the plug on Leno at 10.

                                NBC has had great shows at 10 pm over the years. Some better than others. But with the same dog at 10 pm 5 days a week, Conan was screwed. People weren't watching Leno at 10 pm so no one was seeing the promos they ran for Conan's show. And yes, people do tune in to see shows based on promos.

                                Saying that "Conan's show failed and that's that" isn't very accurate. NBC wanted him to continue as host of the tonight show. But they wanted to delay the start by 1/2 hour (if I remember correctly) and have a new Leno show as a 11:30 lead in. Conan wasn't interested in that.
                                You're leaving out the crucial detail that Conan's Tonight Show was on a full three months before Jay Leno's new show started. Conan took over in June while Jay's new show didn't start until September. Conan started out with very high ratings because people wanted to give him a chance, but they dropped quickly because the audience simply didn't like the show. Conan's transition to the Tonight Show was promoted for months and even years before he started, which is why it got high ratings at the very beginning. You would have had to been living under a rock to not know that Conan was hosting the show. No one needed 10 PM lead ins to tell them that. People have remote controls. They watched initially, but left the show quickly when they didn't like what they saw. Viewers left long before Leno's show started in September. You traditionally don't have strong lead ins in the summer, yet Leno always had solid summer ratings. Conan didn't.

                                Wikipedia gives a good summary which links to several articles from the time:


                                Highly promoted prior to its premiere on the late night scene, ratings for the debut episode were higher than both CBS's Late Show with David Letterman and ABC's Nightline combined, with a 7.1 rating and a 17 audience share.[15] In comparison, the final show with Leno averaged an 8.8 rating in metered-market households.[16] During the rest of O'Brien's premiere week, ratings dropped each day, from a 5.0 on Tuesday to a 3.5 on Friday, though the latter still exceeded that evening's 2.7 rating for Late Show.[17]

                                On June 9, 2009, Late Show had rated better than The Tonight Show with a 3.4 rating to 2.9 rating.[18][19] It was the first time in over eight months that Letterman rated better than his NBC counterpart.[19][20] Tonight would end up winning week two, however, with O'Brien garnering more than 850,000 viewers than Late Show with David Letterman in the 18–49 demographic, plus more than 650,000 viewers in the 18–34 demographic and more than 550,000 in the 25–54 demographic.[21]

                                The week before the death of Michael Jackson saw Letterman attract a larger audience than O'Brien, with The Tonight Show audience measuring as the smallest in the franchise's history, "3.3 million viewers, about two million fewer than Jay Leno's average as host."[22] The following week, O'Brien's total viewership was even lower, averaging 2.8 million; among viewers 25-to-54, he tied with Letterman, the first time O'Brien failed to win that demographic since he had become host.[23] However, The New York Times noted that the coverage of Jackson's death had placed Nightline ahead of both Letterman and O'Brien that week.[22] By the week ending August 7, repeats of The Late Show were also beating O'Brien, albeit with the thinnest of margins—the repeats got a 2.1/6 household rating and 2.95 million total viewers, vs. The Tonight Show's 2.0/5 rating and 2.94 million viewers; both were beaten that week by Nightline's 3.25 million.[24]

                                Although there are concerns that O'Brien's greatest strength, the "young men" demographic, can be more easily reached "on Web sites and cable channels like Comedy Central and Spike", advertisers and network executives alike point out that the first real test would come in September 2009.[22] Pulitzer Prize-winning critic Tom Shales also pointed out in August 2009 that O'Brien was "in much better shape than Leno was at the beginning."[25] O'Brien's strength was also strong among low income inner city viewers, and had always beaten Letterman by a large margin among that demographic.[22] O' Brien also received very high ratings over Letterman among African American and Hispanic viewers, which was very unusual for a white host.[22] Prior to Conan's tenure African American and Hispanic viewers were usually split among Leno and Letterman.[22]

                                By November 2009, two months after the premiere of The Jay Leno Show in September, ratings for The Tonight Show were down "roughly two million viewers a night year-to-year" from when Leno hosted the program.[26] Though cheaper to produce than the scripted dramas it replaced, Leno's new primetime talk show generated fewer lead-in viewers for local news programs, causing a domino effect on ratings for The Tonight Show and Late Night with Jimmy Fallon.[27]

                                On January 12, 2010, in response to the controversy of the late-night schedule change, O'Brien's ratings grew to 1.7 rating/7 share among adults 18–49, up 40 percent from the previous day.[28] On Thursday, January 14, 2010, Conan garnered a 1.9 rating.[29] His last show garnered his best ratings with a 4.8 rating with adults 18–49 and 40 percent better than the 3.4 rating with adults 18–49 Jay Leno got in his last show on May 29, 2009,[30]



                                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ton...onan_O%27Brien


                                As that says, there was a death spiral in ratings long before Jay's show started in September. This is why you don't kick off the best when he is at the top of his powers. It was completely unfair to Jay to ask him to step aside so that Conan could get the show. Jay earned the right to leave when he wanted.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X