About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

Did Glenn Beck just post a new ratings low for 2010?

April 15, 2010 12:20 pm ET by Eric Boehlert

It sure looks that way, as Beck's ratings continue to sag. 

Bottom line: Over the last nine months, Beck gained and then lost nearly one million viewers.  Trust me, in the world of cable news, that's not small feat. 

Based on the numbers I've been surveying, it looks like Beck hit his (non-vacation) 2010 low last week, on April 9, when Nielsen tagged his audience at 1.96 million. By way of comparison, during late January, Beck was averaging more than 3 million viewers each night. And since September of last year, Beck had been averaging approximately 2.5 million-plus viewers each night. But recently, in the wake of the health care reform passage, those numbers have been heading south. Fast. 

Based on the Nielsen numbers, here's a look at Beck's average daily rating over the last month.

You'll note that aside from a temporary spike that came on March 22, the Monday after the historic health care vote, Glenn Beck has spent the last four weeks with between 2.5 million and 2.0 million viewers, which represents a downward trend. (You'll also note a low of 1.76 million viewers on March 31, but Beck was off on vacation that night.) 

In terms of the longer trend, Jed Lewison at Daily Kos recently produced this chart, which tracked Beck's weekly ratings since he signed on to Fox News in January, 2009. Note how the show, for weeks on end, often flirted with the 3 million viewer mark. But no more. 

And do you see how Glenn Beck consistently posted its weakest numbers during the summer months last year? With the show's ratings heading south this spring, will the summer of 2010 set even more ratings lows for the star talker? 

 

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by roland (April 15, 2010 12:25 pm ET)
      21  
      Could his schtick finally be getting old even to those who once reveled in it?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by IRONY 101 (April 15, 2010 12:30 pm ET)
        18  
        Yep...same for the teabagger movement, too. I don't think these people can maintain the energy level necessary to stay outraged all the time. They're beaten down at this point. They just want to hang out at the buffet at the local Indian casino.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Major Tom (April 15, 2010 12:47 pm ET)
          18  
          People get bored. They get over exposed to certain information and can't keep up the 'outrage.' That was always my criticizm of Hannity, Beck and Limbaugh... It seemed unnatural to be so outraged on a daily basis. Common Sense (for lack of a better term) seems to dictate that you would become accustomed to somethings, I mean that's even the basis behind Beck's 'Overton Window.' But the weekly book reading, each time promised to change the reader's life, the daily requests to his audience that they must see his show that night, and the general talk radio habit of making every issue the pivotal point by which the republic lives or dies eventually disproves itself... I was amazed he got them (his audience) to read more then two books. I can't see how he can sustain the enthusiansm or passion or hate for very much longer, *without victories, that is.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by cugagcmu805031 (April 15, 2010 3:46 pm ET)
            7  
            And it hasn't helped that Senator Coburn told his constituents in so many words that Fuchs Noose is biased. Although he has walked this back, he admitted that the republicans went too far when they distorted the facts on HCR, and it hurt republicans' credibility, as if they had any to begin with. Think Progress posted this earlier today.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 12:29 pm ET)
      17  
      I think this is why his rhetoric is becoming more frantic and bizarre. His ratings have been falling since he was on vacation a couple of weeks ago . . . there have been two interviews which have revealed that he really doesn't believe his schtick and this it is a con game for him.

      Like I said, Fox may be able to absorb his loss of advertisers, but they aren't going to put up with a loss of ratings for very long.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by dolfan (April 15, 2010 12:29 pm ET)
      18  
      You can only cry Marxist so many times.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MidnightWriter (April 15, 2010 12:34 pm ET)
      13  
      Well, so long as he's got all those big name advertisers supporting his show, he'll be fine.

      Oh, wait . . .
      Report Abuse
    • Author by RKAllen (April 15, 2010 12:38 pm ET)
      15  
      Well... after announcing that his plan for an economic future was to get rid of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Department of Education and the Teacher's Union, institute a flat tax, denounced social justice, and accused anyone of receiving government assistance of any kind as thieves who were taking from the rich... who else is left from the pool of possible viewers?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by pete592 (April 15, 2010 12:39 pm ET)
      16  
      O'Reilly is reading this with a falafel-eating grin.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by rwmacdonald2091 (April 15, 2010 1:15 pm ET)
      9  
      Break out the popcorn. If old Glennie's ratings are down, there is only one thing that will happen. He will get even more crazy to try and bolster his ratings.

      This should be very interesting.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 1:23 pm ET)
      1 15
      I guess Olbermann is having similar problems.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (April 15, 2010 1:32 pm ET)
        11 2
        Keith Olbermann is NOT the topic here. Please don't feed this troll post.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 1:53 pm ET)
          1 15
          No, it has everything to do with the topic. It's your fault if you are so short sighted you can't think within context. The fact that viewership for the Beck show is declining isn't a problem in of itself unless you also compare them to other, similar programs. Olbermann's ratings - which by the way are during prime time - are declining as well. Are cable news ratings, in general, going down? If so then what's the point of specifically singling out Beck's show?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by magnolialover (April 15, 2010 1:58 pm ET)
            12 1
            Way to move the goalposts. We're not talking about Olberman's ratings by the way, as someone else said. Not too long ago, you guys were telling us about how GREAT Beck's ratings were, and since they were so GREAT, that must mean that he's doing nothing but truth telling on his show (which doesn't mean, well, squat).

            Nope. His crap is running out on him, and people are seeing what kind of a fake and fraud he really is.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 2:21 pm ET)
              1 15
              Nope. His crap is running out on him, and people are seeing what kind of a fake and fraud he really is.
              I'm saying it's stupid to assume he viewership is declining because people are wising up to him. Are Olbermann's viewers wising up to him because his viewership is dropping? Does every drop in viewership mean the host is full of crap? You are too quick to jump to this particular conclusion without looking at cable news ratings in general. It might be that all cable news is down after the whole year long health care debate. People may just be politically tired right now.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Ruby (April 15, 2010 3:55 pm ET)
                7  
                What's the comparison between the ratings drop of Beck and the the ratings drop of Olbermann? Did Olbermann just post a new ratings low for 2010?
                Report Abuse
              • Author by highliter (April 15, 2010 4:17 pm ET)
                  6
                Yep it called summer more people are out doing stuff.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by open_mind (April 15, 2010 4:59 pm ET)
                  1 1
                  Well that's a theory. Personally I think articles like these by MMFA just play into the conservative fallacy that ratings have any relationship to quality or validity.
                  Report Abuse
          • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 2:06 pm ET)
            10 1
            No, it doesn't.

            Olbermann and Beck don't compete for viewers, so Olbermann has no place in this discussion. Beck's numbers have been falling as more and more people are waking up to the fact that he is a charlatan . . . he's even admitted it, Mag.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by New Frontier (April 15, 2010 3:32 pm ET)
            7  
            If so then what's the point of specifically singling out Beck's show?
            Because he's a serial misinformer for conservatives, and this site is about conservative misinformation. And anyway---why do you care? Why are you so invested in spinning on behalf of Glenn Beck all the time?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 2:11 pm ET)
          3 1
          Dell, you already did when you posted your "don't feed the troll" post.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by DellDolly (April 15, 2010 2:49 pm ET)
            4 5
            Nope, but thanks for showing everyone your personal animus towards me AGAIN.

            Debunking what someone said, mocking someone and telling others to ignore them is NOT "feeding" a troll, you doofus.

            Doing what YOU did? Feeding the troll. Once their point has been effectively shot down by someone else, ALL additional comments are feeding the troll.

            Trolls want negative attention to continue. Stopping that, or attempting to stop that, from happening, is NOT a bad thing, nor is it 'feeding' them.

            Now, this has been explained to you at least 5 times now - how is it that you still don't understand it? Or is it that your personal animus towards me is so powerful that you DO know that you are wrong with your assertion that I was feeding a troll but you just couldn't stop yourself from making a personal attack? Because it's got to be one or the other. You need to examine your behavior here.

            The best way to stop a troll in their tracks and to stop repeated replies to a troll post is to identify that troll post for what it is.

            Because we can't get every single person to ignore troll posts without a warning, the warning is necessary. I wish it weren't. But the warning isn't feeding them.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by political_left-religious_right (April 16, 2010 3:48 pm ET)
                 
              Will someone please wake me up when DellDolly stops with her little "I'm the only person here who knows the proper way to handle trolls and if you dare disagree with my method then it's because of your personal animus towards me" screeds? They are frankly worse reading than Mr. Bad News' poetry, wesley's persistent point-missing, seahawks' raving banality, and even the majority of BJ Fan's serial lunacy.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by all your eyes (April 15, 2010 1:51 pm ET)
        5 3
        Olberman's terrible. I never understood the need to replicate a left-wing version of the right-wing bloviators. Liberals generally don't need to find solace in having their own views screamed back at them in simplistic terms and dirisive tones...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (April 15, 2010 1:58 pm ET)
          8 2
          Which is why I like Maddow's show a lot better. It's more intelligent.

          But, Olberman isn't even remotely as crazy as Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, et all.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by toombsie (April 15, 2010 2:15 pm ET)
          6  
          I'd watch Olbermann... but I'd just get a repeat of crap I already know from the various news outlets I visit on the internet all day long. I'm 25, and I don't think cable news really means much to my generation. When you are walking around with a blackberry that is constantly connected to the internet getting updates on news all day long, you have no real need to watch a news program when you get off work. I spend my time catching up on other reading.

          I think Olbermann's program is good, but it's useless unless you are someone who doesn't read very much and only gets their information from the TV.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Ruby (April 15, 2010 4:00 pm ET)
          3  
          I feel ya. Olbermann really is not my cup of tea. When people go on and on about how Fox has better ratings than MSNBC and then say, "so what does that tell you?" I just wanna say uhhh...it tells me that liberals watch less TV. Or that liberals get their news from a variety of sources--MSNBC, CNN, even Fox sometimes, online sources, newspapers, etc.

          Fox viewers watch Fox exclusively because they have been indoctrinated by their favorite hosts to distrust any other news outlet.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by leftofwhat (April 15, 2010 1:53 pm ET)
        3  
        Yawn
        Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 1:53 pm ET)
        6 1
        What does Olbermann have to do with this thread? We're talking about the fact that your hero's true colors have been revealed and people are turning him off. The more bizarre and irratic this con man gets, the more his ratings will decline.

        BTW, Olbermann's ratings with regard to Beck's are specious. They don't directly compete for viewers. Different time slots.

        Keep on topic, Mag. This thread is about Glenn "Harold Hill" Beck, the entertainer who doesn't give a flying crap about the crap he spews on his programs.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 1:55 pm ET)
          1 10
          See my argument here. You and MMFA are jumping to conclusions at a decline in viewership. Correlation does not imply causation.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by aerdna (April 15, 2010 2:09 pm ET)
               
            Is that like jumping to the conclusion that because Beck's ratings are better that his rants are correct? Or that having a lot of money means you are a success in life?
            Report Abuse
          • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 2:10 pm ET)
            6 1
            I saw your argument. It's specious.

            Nice try, though, Mag. I thought you were finally beginning to understand what a JOKE Beck was and how he has been using you and others like you to fatten his wallet. I guess I was wrong.

            Mag, he has ADMITTED that he doesn't really give a crap about the stuff he says and he has ADMITTED that he is a con man. WAKE UP . . . other people are, based upon his ratings slide.

            Hopefully, this dishonest, uneducated con man will lose his platform for his lies soon. He is destroying our country.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 2:18 pm ET)
                11
              I saw your argument. It's specious
              Eh? Why do you always do this? You have some weird statement and then don't elaborate. Elaborate on that. What about my argument do you find dishonest? Is it not a good idea to look at all cable news shows to see if there's a trend? What if all cables news programs were seeing a decline in viewership?
              Report Abuse
              • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 2:26 pm ET)
                6 1
                No. I elaborated on it above. You are comparing Olbermann's ratings, which have always been lower, to Beck's . . . Olbermann and Beck do NOT compete for viewers. To compare Olbermann's ratings slide [partially caused by his long absence to care for his dying father] to Beck's is SPECIOUS. A more accurate comparison would be to compare a slide in one of Beck's COMPETITORS for that time slot.

                Just argue with yourself, Mag.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 2:32 pm ET)
                    10
                  So what happens if viewership for the Ed Show is declining. Can I then say that it's because Ed Schultz is a lying, full of crap idiot and that people are wising up to him?
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 2:40 pm ET)
                    4 2
                    Okay, by all means, say that about Ed Schulz, if it's true . . . can't stand the dude, myself. On the other hand, we KNOW that Beck is a lying, full of crap idiot and that people are wising up to him. In fact, he's admitted that he's an entertainer who is using folks like you.
                    Report Abuse
              • Author by overmars jr. (April 15, 2010 2:42 pm ET)
                9 1
                1- GLENN BECK IS NOT NEWS. TRY TO FINALLY GET THIS THROUGH YOUR IMPENETRABLE SKULL.

                2- Are everybody's ratings down 43% in 3 months? If not, you have no point whatsoever. As usual.
                Report Abuse
              • Author by cugagcmu805031 (April 15, 2010 3:49 pm ET)
                6  
                People may lie, but facts and statistics don't. The graphs have been presented based on Nielson's data. The problem is that you refuse to accept them as valid.
                Report Abuse
          • Author by PurpleState (April 15, 2010 2:32 pm ET)
            5  
            Just wondering...but are we talking about the weeks that Olbermann was hosting the show? He was on a short sabbatical, if I am not mistaken.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 2:41 pm ET)
              6  
              Olbermann was off for almost a month to care for his dying father. I don't know where Mag got his numbers . . . irrelevant to the thread, IMO.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by MagCynic (April 15, 2010 2:52 pm ET)
                  10
                His viewership actually went up when he took that month off. His ratings have been in a near constant decline from this time last year. All I'm arguing is that perhaps people in general are tired of listening to cable news pundits after the whole health care debate. It may not be something with just Glenn Beck. It could be with ALL cable news pundits. I'm merely hypothesizing and not jumping to conclusions. You, MMFA, and many others on this board are instantly attributing Beck's declining viewership to something he's doing personally with absolutely nothing else to back it up. Like I said, correlation does not imply causality.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by bintx (April 15, 2010 3:36 pm ET)
                  4  
                  It is still irrelevant to the thread, Mag. Did you look up Schultz's numbers which would have more to do with Beck? Oh, and really, equating Beck with "news" is really sad. There are no "cable news networks." There are three major cable "opinion" networks.

                  Keep defending this lying jerk all you want. Hopefully, his ratings will continue to slide and he will no longer be a topic of discussion anywhere. His 15 minutes were up MONTHS and MONTHS ago.

                  He is destructive and divisive and he doesn't care as long as he gets his money. That's what it's all been about, Mag . . . money and attention.

                  Report Abuse
                • Author by Major Tom (April 15, 2010 4:12 pm ET)
                  5  
                  I hope you give the Obama's polling numbers the same nuanced perspective.
                  Report Abuse
          • Author by New Frontier (April 15, 2010 3:35 pm ET)
            5  
            You and MMFA are jumping to conclusions at a decline in viewership.
            Please point out where MMFA "jumps to conclusions" in this article.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by rumpleteasermom (April 15, 2010 6:13 pm ET)
        1  
        I guess Olbermann is having similar problems.


        Well, the thing you aren't taking into account is that during the time period in question, it was much more likely to be "Countdown with Lawrence O'Donnell" since Keith was off a lot of that time caring for his father.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by lede39571545 (April 15, 2010 3:46 pm ET)
      5  
      After listening to the negative, ugly lies and other outpourings disguised as news by Fox, your mind and body begins to burn out. The message is no longer amusing or startling; you are aware it is not true and you say to yourself, I cannot listen to this TRASH another day...so you turn off and tune out. I know that is what happened to my family and me.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by cugagcmu805031 (April 15, 2010 3:51 pm ET)
        4  
        Eventually, people get tired of a daily dose of fairytales.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pros2pros2940 (April 15, 2010 4:18 pm ET)
      5  
      Without lies. right wing media would disappear.

      Biggest taxer in modern history - Reagan/ Bush 1

      Biggest increases in national debt - Republicans

      Biggest increases in gov't jobs - Republicans

      Most convictions of administration officials - Reagan w/ 32

      That's why right wing media lies because without it a republican would never get elected.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by TURK 63 (April 15, 2010 6:38 pm ET)
         
      I think people are sick of the poison coming from both sides. They are realizing this toxic sludge isn’t good for them. I also believe the first party to demonstrate civility will win the up coming elections.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by grmce (April 15, 2010 7:43 pm ET)
      1  
      How long does staring at the same car crash hold its attraction?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by oscar the grouch (April 15, 2010 8:10 pm ET)
      3 3
      Could be a few outside influences in play here.
      1) The economy is humming along so well that a lot of those 5, 4, 3, 2 PM couch potatoes are back at work, no longer watching afternoon TV.
      2) The little thing called Daylight Savings time, along with sunshine in the afternoons, evenings are tearing people away from their TVs to enjoy the outdoors.
      3) The lot of viewers have decided they don't need to watch Beck live, they can visit MMFA a couple hours later and get the highlights complete with a list of advertisers.
      Don't know for sure, just saying perhaps................
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Midnight Kevin (April 15, 2010 8:14 pm ET)
        2  
        Maybe they had Fox News on their televisions for so long, the images were burned onto their screen, so now they can watch Glenn Beck on every station!
        -------------------------
        The Midnight Review
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Midnight Kevin (April 15, 2010 8:13 pm ET)
         
      To me, it seems he was trending down since November but got a bump from health care, but since health care has passed, Beck lost his biggest bogeyman to play fears off of...
      -------------------------------------
      The Midnight Review
      Report Abuse
    • Author by edrossinoelwein9669 (April 15, 2010 8:32 pm ET)
      1 7
      How would Beck's numbers compare to Dolbermann's? Or that guy Maddow? Beck probably beats Dolbermann 2.5 to 1. He beats Maddow 2 to 1.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by usappa00 (April 15, 2010 9:47 pm ET)
        4 1
        Nice one troll, Dolberman and that guy Maddow, rich. I don't think they have anything to do with Beck's falling numbers. Typical right wing response, change the subject with fact free childish name calling. Grow up.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by oscar the grouch (April 16, 2010 9:37 am ET)
             
          "Childish name calling" That's a good one for this site.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by dimes (April 15, 2010 10:17 pm ET)
      3  
      What is Beck's value to Fox News network? They pay him a couple of mil a year, and I'm sure were anticipating with glee the prospect of raking in the ad dollars justified by his phenomenally fast rise to stardom.

      Unfortunately for them, Glenn trashed that opportunity with his poorly-considered "racist" rant. But he still gets plenty of eyeballs, and Fox has the prestige of having a star (of its own making) on its network. Besides, Fox can -and does- trot him out on other shows.

      But if people get tired of Beck's schtick, then what does Fox have? A $2M a year host taking up an hour of airtime every day, and bringing not enough to the table.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by spnkybnky (April 16, 2010 12:29 pm ET)
         
      OK people. I don't like these people any more than you do, but when you don't tell the entire story, you just give people fodder to bash you.

      You are only showing the ratings for Beck's first show. Out here in the western part of the country, the weather is nice, people are outside and no one is watching TV. When you add his two shows together, the ratings are the same as they have been. More people out west are just watching his second show. Those ratings have nearly doubled since daylight savings time took effect. Also, when you look at the ratings east of the Mississippi, the ratings are the same.

      How do I know? I sell advertising for a living...... My income depends on knowing what is happening.
      Report Abuse