Jay Leno’s Back on Top & Critics Remain as Irrelevant as Ever
by Tim SlagleHow do critics stay employed? Next to Weathermen and Wall Street Analysts, only critics are more incompetent forecasters. In fact, it would seem that critics are so bad at analysis, that if the critics loathe a movie, play, or television show, there is a fairly good chance it will be a blockbuster.
I often wonder how these people keep their jobs. Perhaps the editors share their disdain, and they like to keep them around so the rest of the staff will know which productions to avoid. Because it seems that most newspaper writers are left-wing drones who hate anything that might be entertaining, even in the slightest way. In certain circles, what you like to watch is less important than what you don’t watch. The most popular stance you can take with these elites is to claim that you NEVER watch television and rely on NPR for all your news.
A recent example of this was seen with the debut of Jay Leno back into the Tonight Show desk. Critics panned his opening monologue. But his ratings were huge. And the audience came back the next night, fueled in part by his selection of Sarah Palin as a guest. Now after two weeks, it seems that Jay is back to the number one slot that David Letterman held during the reign of Conan.
Jay did this in spite of critics’ doubts. The Atlantic Wire actually noted that there is a huge disparity between the critics and the general public. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone. Critics are by their nature cynical people, and there is no question that the sneering antics of Conan would appeal to them more than the warm friendliness that exudes from Jay.
I’m sure this is a shock to everyone involved, since Conan fans seemed a lot better at making noise than the Leno fans. The kicked, they screamed, they posted his image on their Facebook profile. For all the outrage from the Conan firing, you would have thought that he had a massive popular wave behind him, and that Leno would further the decline in ratings. But two weeks after the Tonight Show went back into the hands of the owner for the past 17 years (minus eight months), the ratings beg to differ.
It’s the same illusion that Leftists have been cultivating for the past fifty years, that the loudest opinion must be the most popular. But the majority of America is quiet. They have jobs and kids to get to school and soccer practice, and don’t have time to put on silly orange wigs and march outside NBC offices, Not until the anonymous opinions of millions of Americans were weighed, did the truth come out: America prefers Jay Leno.
I’ll grant you, they didn’t at 10pm. The Tonight Show is something you like to doze off with. It is backwards television. While most shows on TV tease you into staying tuned for the entire hour, Late Night Shows are front-loaded. They start out with all the stuff you want, and slowly drift off. That way, you don’t mind leaving them on as you fall asleep. You’re not going to miss finding out which white Republican Christian CEO was responsible for murdering the whistle-blower, like you will watching Law and Order. Which was probably the problem with Jay Leno at ten. It felt like you were going to bed too early, like you do right after the Daylight Savings Time switch.
I think Conan’s popularity was wildly exaggerated. The most talked about programs aren’t always the ones people like to watch, For instance, as Nielsen Ratings became more accurate, something interesting was discovered: people lie.
Nielsen families always knew they were in control of programming, so they cheated the system, by making it appear as if they were watching shows they didn’t care for. So when they went out for the evening, they would leave the television on certain stations, knowing that they were spiking the ratings.
New People Meter technology calculates ratings based on how many people are actually in front of the TV set. So now we know what they are watching, not what shows they think should stay on the air. When the technology was introduced, there was such a sharp shift in ratings and both Fox News and BET joined a lawsuit to ban the meters. Turns out that people liked the idea of Fox News and BET more that the actual programming.
I think the same phenomenon was behind the Conan backlash. Because despite all the fanfare about Conan being disgraced when he was asked to move back his time slot a half hour, it seems that very few people were enjoying the show. When Leno returned, his fans were more than happy to switch away from Letterman’s tedious program as soon as Conan left the building. Jay Leno is back on top and it’s almost as if he was never gone.
None of this can bode well for Conan. It seems his loyal fan base has virtually vanished into the ether.
Perhaps they’re all listening to NPR
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
99 Comments
I'd probably find Conan a lot funnier if I were a 20 year old frat boy.
I know the reason why he has better ratings then any other… he has a OPEN mind and does not be LITTLE right wingers/ republicans or anything else…. Letterman is a GUTTERSNIPE and his ratings reflect that!!!
The Critics they're at your feet or at your throat but never at your side. So screw them. First of all Leno is funny and like-able. Letterman is a mean spirited s–t. Conan I'm neither here or there with the guy. Let him live and be well., God knows he 's got the money to do it. I can only wish Jimmy Durante ,Steve Allen and Jackie Gleason were still around. Those guys were Showmen that had heart, class and were funny.
humor is not partisan. It is either funny or not.
Democrats are as arrogant now as they were in 1860. You know the rest of the story.
These same critics (court jesters in days of old) also ignited the thought in Zuckerman's tiny brain to move Conan to the Tonight Show and not knowing what to do with Jay, created a new show for him at an unpopular time slot. Don't these same critics double as democratic pollsters during the off-season?
Dave, at one time, was a more natural comic talent. His bitterness and cynicism over the years, however, have gotten the best of him. In presentation, he's more Olbermann than Carson.
Jay, even though the guy leans left, realizes there's an audience between the costs, and lo and behold, if you come off as likable and friendly, you get ratings.
Two decades ago, if you asked me in my youth, NBC made the wrong choice in passing over Dave. Now? Jay has proven me wrong.
Meant "between the coasts".
Leno's a backstabbing hack whose obviously a master at getting what he wants. Having Palin on was not brilliant. Anyone who wasn't blinded by hate could see she would bring in the ratings. He's ticked people on his side of the ideological aisle off for that move, and for that, I'm glad. I still like his comedy or his interview skillz, but at least he didn't misinterpret the obvious like most of his ilk.
A drunk and stupid 20-year-old frat boy.
Johnny Carson was funny, lampooned both sides and never got a cheap shoot in at the expense of his guest. He was a consummate gentleman and showman. When he and Ed McMahahon started their stint at the Tonight Show, Ed asked his friend "what are we going to do?" – to which Johnny replied "I don't know but let's entertain the hell out of them"
Which they did for 30 years.
When Jay took over I wondered how he could possible fill Johnny's shoes.
But he's funny, lampoons both sides and never get a cheap shoot in at the expense of his guest. He is a consummate gentleman and showman.
He is Johnny's rightful heir.
My goodness! An irrelivent squeeker already!
What's he done to "backstab?"
Ah, the good old days. Letterman was Conan back then.
I have to say I do not watch any of them…. the only reason why I know Leno is not that bad is simple.. when he was on at 10.. I watched him a few times…..I have two wee ones and I have to catch as much NAP time as I can….
It's all about ratings. Conan died in the ratings – so Dave came back. There was no reason for Conan to abject to starting 1/2 hour later – if he really wanted to keep his job and keep his people employed. But, no, his arrogant self refused and consequently he and his people are unemployed. What honor!!
Leno treated Palin as well as the MSM has treated Obama and has mistreated her. Dave screwed his staff and the public winks. This is sexual harrassment – very clearly – and yet he gets a pass? Sorry – the man is a sleaze. Conan was the author of his own demise. Ratings, my child, ratings. Conan had none. (somewhat like CNN and MSNBC, and ABE, and CBS, really)
lol they aren't even that. They're the "court" of minor nobles that function as the harpies whispering from the sidelines. Jay Leno is the court jester. He just happens to not be a suck-up to Barry the once-st and Countess Pelosi.
You may want to correct your story on the link. It was the Fox TV stations in NYC – not FoxNews that complained. Your link wording implies that it's FoxNews – which is a pay for ONLY network (cable, satellite, xm).
That's funny. My parents once told me that they were afraid Carson would never be able to fill Jack Parr's shoes, and boy were they wrong.
I always thought it was a East coast/West coast thing. Those from the East tend to 'shove' or force the material while those from mid America (think Carson) or the West (Leno) wanted to 'share' their material.
ilk?? what three of four other progressive liberals that want to DRAG donw anyone against OBLABLA… Pal, reread your quote…. it is filled with rage and hate…. obvioulsy against the right…..
It's all about ratings. Conan died in the ratings – so Dave came back. There was no reason for Conan to abject to starting 1/2 hour later – if he really wanted to keep his job and keep his people employed. But, no, his arrogant self refused and consequently he and his people are unemployed. What honor!!
Visit Jay's web site.
Linda, I cannot argue the point… your right!!!
This article is rather off-base.
First of all, Conan is more popular than Leno with a younger crowd that also tends not to watch him regularly – the in joke is that we all love Conan yet we never actually watch his show becuase we're busy doing other things (studying, gaming, sleeping, fornicating, whatever)
Second of all, the article neglects to mention the fact that Conan's tour shows have sold out EVERYWHERE and his ratings when the show was closing were outstanding.
Third, lots of people just turn FNC on and leave it on while they do other things. The author of this article is suggesting that Nielsen families have the ambition to 'manipulate the system' which is perhaps the most ludicrous claim in the entire piece – people have busy lives and know full well that their vote doesn't make a big impact overall – to suggest that despite this, Nielsen families band together to turn on the TV for stations they like but don't watch is rather outlandish.
-Edward
I can't believe that Leno is being cast as a working-class hero, and that the Leno/Conan thing is being viewed as a battle in the culture war. Leno's just not entertaining. He probably isn't as ideological as Letterman, but his monologue is just as partisan. He's a little less filthy than Letterman. He's a suckup during his interviews, and comes off as the kind of backstabber that most suckups are when they have the chance.
Conan was funny. Not as funny at 11:35 as at 12:35, but funny. Conan's at his best when he's taking a risk, and as much as I like Andy Richter, he's a safety net for Conan.
And it's not the critic's job to predict what will be popular. He's supposed to tell you if something is worth watching.
There was plenty of reason for Conan to object to the move. In a format that is front loaded like the late night shows are, taking away the front end (or delaying it) will kill the ratings. A show that starts after Midnight (as it would in the Eastern and Pacific time zones, which the networks use as their time standard, is no longer the "Tonight" show. Conan saw the writing on the wall on that bogus offer and knew that in less than a year he would be shown the door for poor ratings.
In the end, the network went with the one that had already proven himself, and created another problem. In ten years, Leno will be retiring, but that doesn't concern today's execs, since they have little chance of being there when it happens.
Conan was killed by a poor lead in. Zucker tried to have his cake and eat it too by keeping both Conan and Leno in the NBC fold. He would have lost Conan 6 years ago if he didn't promise him the Tonight Show, he was afraid to cut Leno loose and create another Letterman fiasco that spawned a significant competitor, he couldn't come up with an imaginative way to keep Leno busy like maybe creating a US version of Top Gear with Leno headlining it, and then he was afraid to take a chance on a younger talent that could keep them strong for 20-30 years and went back to the 'safe' bet that might do it for 10 or a little more.
This whole thing was a fiasco from day one, and has become the "New Coke" of the entertainment industry.
Expect to see Conan on Fox perhaps this fall, and the non-geriatric set will finally have their own talk-show again.
When both Letterman and Leno decided that the only source for humor was President Bush and Republicans around ten years ago, I finally broke my late-night TVs talk show habit and found other things to watch. I would watch them once in a while and get angry and disgusted and turned them off.
One thing I've discovered as a baby boomer is that most of my generation thinks and acts alike. Things that I have done that I thought were very individualistic turned out to be a generational thing. Now I find out that I'm not the only one who got sick of these two guys. I tried Leno out when he went to the prime time slot and saw that he was not doing his usual conservative bashing, so I watched it from time to time and enjoy it. I think Jay learned and finally woke up to the fact that sixty percent of America is conservative and he was missing out on this audience. I believe he passed Letterman due to this action, whether it was calculated or reflected his real thinking. And other big media makes a big mistake by not realizing exactly who their audience is.
1) Whether critics are irrelevant or not is in the eye of the beholder. I'm sure you, as a political critic, were panning Obama in 2008. He won the election. Does that therefore make you useless?
To me, what makes a good critic isn't necessarily if I dis/agree with what s/he's writing. It's about how colorfully they express their opinions and what reasons they have behind why they think what they think (i.e. just saying "Jay Leno sucks" doesn't impress me, but if you tell me why, I'll be interested).
It's also funny how people only bring this up when something THEY like is popular. Why not do a column on Adam Lambert's popularity and how it shows how ridiculously out-of-touch American Idol fans are with the record-buying public? I'll sit and wait for you to pen that column…..
There aren't enough 20 year-old frat boys drunken or otherwise, and that was reflected in the ratings.
2) Leno is beating Letterman, but his ratings are still lower than when he first left. To act like there was NO impact is to be a bit willfully ignorant about the situation. Conan fans wanted it to be "wow, Leno will get his butt kicked this time around" and Leno fans wanted it to be "this will show that Jay's as popular as he ever was." So far, it's shown "Jay's still #1 but isn't as popular as when he was #1 before."
3) Conan didn't have Palin on as a guest, but she did do a guest spot and it was very cordial. I can see conservatives taking issue with Letterman for being a liberal harpie but it's a little afield for Conan.
That's kind of the POINT of the entire story – ENOUGH people didn't think he was worth watching (funny or not), and MORE people would rather WATCH Leno (hint: YOUR personal feelings don't = everyone. Get over it…sheeeze).
Conan was more popular LATER at night, because the younger crowd he attracted were still AWAKE at that time. The older generation that just wanted a few jokes and, YES they wantws some SOFTBALL interview after they watched the evening news and were getting ready for bed. They get enough "gotcha" interviews and put downs all throughout their day, they want to RELAX their brains to get ready to sleep – and LAUGHTER helps.
And here's a Hint: usually stuff that is MORE POPULAR is probably thought of BY MORE PEOPLE as worth watching. If it's watched by LESS people, that kind of means LESS think it's worth watching.
4) I don't begrudge people for not liking Letterman or anyone else because their humor skews on a political spectrum they don't like. I do begrudge people acting like it's an obligation to be "balanced" as a comedian. Letterman finds jokes about Bush funny, he doesn't find jokes about Obama funny. If you don't watch him because that bugs you, great. That's freedom of choice. But don't act like this is news (where information should be priority one), it's comedy. Liberal viewers shouldn't ask Larry the Cable Guy to "liberalize" his act anymore than you should demand Letterman "should make fun of Obama as much as Bush.
5) For the record, nothing I've ever seen on Leno that struck me as funny had anything to do with Leno himself. Jaywalking was funnier when Stern was doing it. Headlines is funny through no cause of how Jay delivers it (and it is as funny if not funnier when Letterman does it as Small Town News, as he's done since 1982 long before Leno took the concept). Anything I ever saw on Leno that was clearly his invention struck me as really boring…like a bad "Practical Jokes/Bloopers" show. But, hey, I'm not getting in the way of America preferring that. America would rather listen to a Britney Spears record than a Wilco record and I can't stop that either.
6) You mention improved Nielsen ratings systems as proof that Leno is more popular but neglect to mention that people watch their late-night hosts on advertising-sponsored internet sites too. Hulu runs Leno content and ran Conan content…..Conan's content (again, sponsored by PAYING advertisers) kicked Leno's tail. Some of us live in 2010, not 1990.
I have to disagree with this article.
I enjoy both Jay and Conan far more than I do Letterman, and truth be told, Leno's probably better suited for The Tonight Show than is Conan. And I didn't want to see Jay tank in the ratings after his return. That said, dumping Conan and replacing him with Leno was to me simply inexcusable. You can't simply remove a man after seven months, put the old host back on, and think you've solved things. This has nothing to do with politics; it has everything to do with the sheer ethics of the matter. It doesn't matter whether Conan was more liberal or more favored by sneering leftists than Leno, the fact is he rightfully got the slot after Leno's departure, and it was wrong of NBC to shove him out because his ratings weren't quite as good. Leno may be more representative of Middle America than Conan, but you can't skew a story his direction just for that.
How about agreeing to leave followed by not leaving and then taking his old slot back? Conan's bad ratings can't be determined to be his fault because of the poor lead-in by Leno. A guy with some class would have stepped aside as he'd agreed. If Conan continued to fail in ratings, Leno could come back in a reasonable amount of time. Or have a show on another network that took #1 from everybody. Or he could have become the King of Vegas. Instead, he decided he didn't want to do what he'd agreed to do and he stepped on whatever toes he had to to get what he wanted.
That doesn't absolve NBC or Zucker, of course. They should have tried to come up with another solution. But then, maybe they did and Leno refused everything but the failure they came up with.
Leno may have been nice to Palin, but that was a business decision. If he finds it beneficial to himself to punch her in the nose, he'll do that too.
Um, you can look at all my past comments and see I'm as solidly on the right as just about anyone. Leno is on the left and always has been. He made a business decision to be nice to Palin. Doesn't mean he's suddenly a nice guy or a supportive colleague. He's still a backstabber and still an unfunny hack. Conan may have failed without the fiasco — highly possible — but he was nice to Palin, too … oh my, what side am I on now?
Leno would kiss Obama with tongue on TV if given the chance. Adoration is not a strong enough word. So, yeah … ilk.
Ditto Mark. It's true that the contract for the Tonight Show allowed for execs to move the show as late as 12:05, but was it ever in their heads to permanently do so before this debacle? I think not. The only reason that clause is in there is to allow for when sports or other special events programming runs over (i.e., when CBS runs the Masters, Craig Ferguson gets moved 15 or 20 minutes later so the results of the first-round games on Thurs. and Fri. can be announced). So while the Tonight Show could, theoretically, be moved farther along in the time slot, this would be a rarity in reality. That's the way it always went, and Conan had every reason to expect that aside from those occurrences, he would be at 11:35, five nights a week. No wonder he felt he was being stabbed in the back.
You are exactly right. But I think Leno can share equal blame with NBC. He has not shown any class in this whole fiasco, IMO.
Regardless, he's number one! And he was nice to Sarah Palin! He's the best! *insert eyeroll*
The way I understood it NBC told Leno that they would not renew his contract, even though he was #1. NBC was trying to get a younger demographic, or so the story went.
Leno was not happy about it but what could he do – and there were rumors of his going to another network.
NBC, to placate him, gave him the 10PM show which for a variety of reasons didn't work.
There was nothing for Leno to "agree to" when your boss tells you your contract won't be renewed.
I'm not sure how Conan will do on a new show, but I'm sure Leno and NBC will do their damnedest to undercut him in any way they can. Down to 'ownership of material' issues and meddling with guest appearances. Wasn't he already linked with that kind of thing? "If you appear on Letterman before Leno you won't go on Leno at all", kind of thing. Oh, yeah. It was all his manager's doing. Leno was clean as a whistle. It's too bad he's always surrounded by these awful people who make him look bad. /sarc
I quit watching late night shows when Carson quit so I have no idea what I am missing…and love it.
You're making some excellent points. In a subsequent post you mention that Stern's version of Jaywalking is better, and Leno co-opted Letterman's 'small town news'. Well, Conan had Palin on first, and remember what a huge success that was? Until then she wasn't invited unless it was Letterman trying to shore up ratings and have her at his mercy right in the studio.
So, I guess he stole the being nice to Palin thing, too. It's awesome that he can recognize good decisions other people make, pretend to make them himself and then benefit from them, isn't it?
If you've spent any length of time on BH you would know that's a stupid comment to make about Marie's politics. Criticizing the actions of one man who happens to lean a little more to the right than his colleagues does not make a liberal out of a conservative.
[...] the original post here: Jay Leno’s Back on Top & Critics Remain as Irrelevant as Ever This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
I seldom watch those shows anymore. What you said about Carson is true. Leno is infinitely superior to that jerk, Letterman. I can't even stand watching the ads for Letterman. In my opinion, he has always been vastly overrated. Not to mention all his other flaws.
My favorite part of The Tonight Show has always been when Leno interviewed common people. I was stunned at the number of those who were completely uninformed, uneducated, and uncaring that they were both.
In retrospect they certainly were wrong, but Carson proved such a ratings powerhouse for the foreseeable future he will be considered the benchmark by which all other hosts are measured.
I think some of his skits – would they be considered old today? I honestly don't know.
But I watch his DvD set and stuff 40 years ago seems just as funny today.
One thing Johnny had that so few have was the ability to be the straight man and get laughs at his own expense.
He was a master at playing the straight man.
No other host to my knowledge comes close in that regard.
Easy way to contrast constantly "deconstructing" critics vs. normal folks…
…which would you rather have on your childrens' bedroom wall – a Robert Mapplethorpe or a Norman Rockwell…?
I think 15-20 years ago Letterman was funny – his humor was always more dry "cerebral" but somewhere along the line he got cynical and bitter.
I am so sick of the Palin jokes – that is what finally turned me off completely. In fact I think Palin is to Liberals what Holy Water is to vampites – hence the visceral hatred they have for her. Even stopped my subscription to an auto magazine because one of the writers couldn't help but get his digs in at Palin and Bush.
But back to Leno – it is scary what "the man in the street" knows – or doesn't know. And remember they vote!
When Leno has his game with the contestants – so many of them are so completely ignorant about some of the questions you have to think that getting their 15 minutes of fame is more important to them than looking stupid before millions.
I like Leno's Newspaper Headline segment too.
Conan O'Brian was a spoiled rich boy born with a silver spoon in his Harvard educated mouth, Jay Leno is a third rate Vegas hack comedian who has never said,done or thought anything truly funny in his entire life, and David Letterman is a tired old going-through-the-motions disgusting reprobate who should be booed off every stage he steps upon for the remainder of his bitter life.
Get a DVR, watch Red Eye.
Nobody demands that Letterman change anything. We just don't watch him.
More like, "He's number one, and the obnoxious people who have always detested him for being 'successful' instead of 'edgy' are going to have conniption fits! He's the best!"
Congrats to Leno. He's always been my choice since Carson retired. He's definitely a better entertainer that all of his rivals by far.
Leno was forced to leave because they promised Conan that he would have the Tonight show in five years. If Conan had a following his ratings wouldn't have been in the crapper. All these pro Coco people obviously didn't watch, they just jumped on a bandwagon. Ratings equals money, advertising money. If people are not watching then advertisers are wasting their money promoting their products on a low rated show that no one watches. They aren't going to waste money in a crap economy on a show no one was watching. Anyone who has a 3rd grade education knows it was a stupid idea to remove Leno at his peak for Conan. NBC got what it deserved for removing Leno in the first place. Conan will eventually recover either on Fox or some other network.
Actually, Leno's ratings have yet to ascend to his own levels from even last year. He's done very little to shake off the image that he's the Brett Favre of late night TV.
Just for fun, name me your all time favorite Jay Leno joke or favorite Tonight Show moment? My guess is you can't really do it.
"Turns out that people liked the idea of Fox News and BET more that the actual programming."
Really? So Fox News has had a significant decline in popularity I'm not aware of? I'd love to see you explain that sentence.
As did Johnny Carson….. he used to make me laugh out loud!
Letterman – as well as Lopez and Sikes – is a mouthpiece for Obama – and continuously pushes the viewer's face into Liberalism. Dave always had his great moments in presidential history which spotlighted Bush – just as George Soros asked. Now – with hours of glee available from the antics and comments made by Obama, Biden, Pelosi, and Reid – Dave has stopped the spot. Of course he continues to ridicule Sarah – even makes things up to do so. I am still amazed that no one has screamed that Dave made 2 – that is TWO – tasteless jokes about Willow – with one with Spitzer who was well known for visiting young – 14 or 15 yeaer old – prostitutes.
I won't watch Dave any more nor do I watch Craig – even though I think Craig is the best man on late night TV – because of their blatant support of Obama and Democrats. Liberalism is dangerous – .ask Cuba, Venezuela, and the other banana republics Obama and the members of Congress who are members of the American Socialist Party admire. (Pelosi, Larson, Frank, Waxman, Waters, DiLauro – a little bit pink) Why do they hate America and continue to live here? They can leave and should.
Yich….you have to be retarded to watch television in the first place.I kicked the habit 11 yrs ago and now I find it impossible to watch 5 seconds of it.The television is not your friend and Leno is a dork .At least 11 years ago he was and if he is on the stupefying whackobox TV then it goes without saying he still is.Kill your TV.
The Tonight Show wasn't the same since Steve Allen left. That Jack Paar was too egotistical for leaving the Tonight Show like that. I always thought Ernie Kovacs should have hosted it, and I'm sticking to that notion.
Aaanyway…
Firstly, Jay's been back on the Tonight Show for two full weeks. He's beating Letterman, but barely. On Conan's second week, he was also beating Letterman… but barely. This article is written much too soon to declare Jay the ultimate victor in this race. Lest we forget that when Jay's show premiered in 1992 against virtually no competition aside from Arsenio, it was languishing in the ratings. Languishing enough for NBC to reconsider Letterman for the job. But NBC stuck with him (they had to- Letterman left for CBS), and Letterman proceeded to pounce on Leno in the ratings for two years. It would be way too soon to say in September 1993, two weeks after Letterman premiered, that he's the ultimate victor in the Late Night ratings race. We need to let the audience fluctuations settle before we can declare a winner.
Secondly, late night talk shows live and die by the lead-in. It's all a matter of whether or not the network would be willing to take a chance with a new host long enough for their lead-ins to back them up. NBC's lead-ins for Conan at the very beginning of his Tonight Show were reality shows, low-rated mid-season replacements, and reruns of their regular comedies/dramas. Then, in the fall, Conan's lead-in was… Jay Leno in a Tonight-Show-lite program that would get all the jokes, guests, and music 90 minutes earlier. Leno's lead in were all-new 10:00 dramas (including the same ones he shoved away when he was on at 10:00) with a little bit of residual Olympic fever for good measure- and NBC made sure to keep the Olympic Spirit going through the Tonight Show with a week of gold medal winners that the people saw on NBC a few weeks prior.
Can you imagine what would have happened if in 1992 NBC decided to move all their programming like ER, Law and Order, Seinfeld, Cheers, etc. around to accommodate for a new daily hour-long program at 10E/P starring Johnny Carson? And what if Johnny's new show couldn't hold a candle to his work on the Tonight Show and it started to flounder in the ratings? It would make the NBC affiliates' local news shows flounder in the ratings, which would in turn make Jay's aforementioned languishing ratings even more dire. What if NBC decided to move Jay's Tonight Show a half hour later to accommodate for a 30 minute version of Carson's flailing program just to save face? Do you really think Jay would have stood for that? If Jay left, Carson retook the reigns of the Tonight Show, and the prime-time lead-ins came back with stronger ratings, it would be considered incorrectly that Jay was a failure and that Carson should have never left.
The same applies here in 2010. Jay was a great lead-in for Conan when Jay was hosting the Tonight Show and Conan was hosting Late Night. But when Jay was literally driving people away from NBC with his Jay Leno Show, it was ratings poison for any potential new audience for Conan's Tonight Show.
I'm not going to go into my preferences on who's funny or not, because all in all, it's purely a matter of one opinion and is irrelevant to what millions of different people think. Both Jay and Conan are consummate entertainers, they did extremely well in their original timeslots, and they brought the people from those timeslots with them to the new shows. However, an 11:35 audience size in prime time is not very great ratings wise, and a 12:35 audience size for 11:35 (especially for The Tonight Show) is catastrophic. The key to growing an audience for a new Tonight Show host is time. NBC panicked due to its horrendous place in overall ratings, and made a couple boneheaded decisions that has tarnished the Tonight Show. Even now, Jay's ratings haven't gone back to his original numbers before he left. Hell, they haven't beaten Conan's first week from last June. And the margin between him and Letterman is dwindling.
Leno is not completely blameless in all this. He decided to lie on TV in 2004 saying that he wouldn't want to host the Tonight Show in his 60s because only Johnny Carson could do that (by the way, I'd like to wish Jay Leno a happy 60th birthday next month) so he would retire when he was on top. But then he started to make waves as Conan's start was getting closer. He could have left with his unspent Tonight Show money and do what he loves best- stand-up comedy- for the rest of his days. But he didn't. He felt that he somehow deserved to be on TV after leaving the Tonight Show and put NBC's nicely laid succession plans to ruins by having them jumble up their primetime schedule just so that they wouldn't deal with competition from him on another network, which eventually set Conan up for failure even before he set foot in Los Angeles. That wasn't Jay's intention, I'm sure, but I know Carson wouldn't have done this if Jay were in Conan's position.
Excellent suggestion.
how is this a good point?
would you rather show your child scarface or hannah montana?
would you rather give your kid a beer or a turkey sandwich?
what are we talking about here?
best email marketing…
Sweet, really great article…
Thanks T_Rav.
Leno is definitely the better fit for Tonight. Conan is all right for Late Night (which alas he can't get back), but he is too snarky for 11:30 and it showed. Let Letterman be the snark, and watch him continue to trail Leno. Fine by me.
First good reply I've seen to this article.
Jay Leno's doing well because, unlike Conan, he doesn't have the stinking turd of the "Jay Leno Show" driving people away from the network for the evening.
Beat me to it! And well said too.
Precisely.
"Turns out ,people like the idea of Fox News and BET,more than the actual programming."
And MSNBC,CNN,The Daily Show & Colbert Report,Air America,,etc,etc.
Jay is still a liberal douche, but he's not an angry, bitter liberal douche like Letterman
For me – COB just isn't that funny. He's a funny guy, but he seems to say anything even remotely 'funny' that pops into his head. He gets on my nerves and I don't like his show.
I like Letterman, but the show is so vapid and Paul the bandleader is very talented, but a real drone. The gags are now all stale and the bloom is long off the rose. His constant left wing jabs irk me. I dont care who he boinks on his staff. Go for it, Dave. It's a perk.
Jay Leno – I like him but the show is a bummer. Noisy band, dumb ass audience, bad jokes and largely talently-challenged, dreadful guests all selling something – a movie, a book, a CD, a notion. Boring. Leno's interviewing skills – what skills? The questions are all sketched out before hand as are most of the answers.
I've given up on all these shows.
One more thing – Carson, Leno, Letterman. O'Brien – the sad thing for all of them is that they are leaving no legacy of their work. For all the hoopla to this day about Johnny Carson, he is about as relevant as a forgotten star of 1930s network radio. No currency at all. No films, no television except for their 'talk shows' which people only watch because they are 'on tv', not b/c they are especially good.
I don't get why the bloggers on this site are cheerleaders for Leno. The guy's not that funny, just because he had Sarah Palin and Rush on there doesn't make him some sort of hero to Conservatives, it just makes him a classy host. He's barely ahead of Letterman right now, and Conan is about to embark on a huge comedy tour and fans everywhere are excited about. Just because Leno's doing better than he was on the Jay Leno Show doesn't mean we can call it.
Besides, just because something has high ratings doesn't mean it's good and critics are wrong. Look at how many despicable reality shows have high ratings. It's a moot point, it just means people are watching, it doesn't mean they aren't stupid.
I think Jay's safe, toothless sense of humor appeals to older folks, and that's fine, but Conan has been better at bringing the funny.
your funny.
I've got to agree with you about Red Eye. I just discovered the show recently and I'm hooked. It's the most original thing I've seen in a while.
T, I have spenty plenty of time on here and if I am wrong I apologize… and Marie…I will apologize for the comments…. however I may have misconstrued her comments and for that I am sorry…
I will say out of the late night talk show people he is the only one that does not bash the hell out of the republicans….IMHO
Dave's a cynic and a snark, along with just about every other pundit on the idiot box. You can get plenty of what he offers from Stewart, Hannity, Olbermann, blah, blah. As others have pointed out, Jay is jovial and self-depricating — kind of like Johnny was.
Conan's out-of-studio video bits were hilarious, but his monologue was tedious and his interviews nervous and uncomfortable.
In terms of raw ha-ha's, Jimmy Kimmel is the funniest of all of them. He pulls of the difficult trick of being edgy without being an a-hole. The post Oscar show was brilliant.
So there, can I get my critics credentials now?
Conan O'Brian is an unamusing dork. He can't even tell a funny joke. How many times has he told some "joke" during the monolog, or whatever, only to get near silence from the audience? He is simply not entertaining.
Funny line about Allen, Paar, & Kovacs!
I never intended to give the impression that Jay is the king of late night, the only victory I was awarding him was his victory over the critics. You have to admit, writers willing to assume that Jay would ever be in the number one position again, were few and far between.
As for the lead in: dramas are hugely expensive to produce, and it takes a solvent network to produce them. Sometimes the investment is paid back in syndication, more often it's not. The Tonight Show with Jay Leno was clearing a million a week for NBC. The dramas that failed were underwritten by Jay, He might have had the advantage of lead in dramas, but he is also responsible for those dramas being there in the first place.
Comparing it to 1992 is invalid. The market was different twenty years ago. Ad revenues and overall viewership is down due to the recession and the Internet. Networks don't have the luxury of experimenting like they did in the day.
Even though Jay wasn't attracting viewers, his 10PM show was still making money. He wasn't doing the kind of numbers he had with the Tonight Show, but he was turning a profit. Conan was operating at a loss. Tough times require tough decisions.
And so far it seems like NBC made a good one.
You're right, Conan fans are busy doing other things at 11:30. Which doesn't bode well for a Network Talk Show. Advertisers usually only like to pay, when someone is watching the ads. He would be a much better fit on Comedy Central, where the show could be run several times during the day.
The fact that his live shows sell out speaks well of his popularity, but still doesn't attract advertisers.
Finally, it's been proven that Neilsen Families WERE cheating the system. Families are well aware of the power they hold, if you ever talked to someone who was selected as one, you would realize that. It's why Neilsen switched over to People Meters
I was too lazy to research it beyond the link I provided, but as I recall at some point FoxNews WAS involved in the coalition protesting the switch over to People Meters.
"maybe you aren't aware that Conan is actually not on T.V. right now"
I got that. But his fans aren't affecting the ratings anywhere. You would think Letterman would have a bump from all the CoCo fans bolting over to CBS. Certainly they're not watching Leno. But it didn't happen like that. Leno went up, and Letterman went down.
So where did they go?
When Leno gets off work, he goes to his garage and putzes around with a bunch of mechanics, or tools around town in a vintage convertible waving to everybody.
Letterman flies off to Montana, and locks himself behind iron gates.
Actually, I'm not a big fan of Jay Leno, so at least in this instance, you're thesis is off base.
Larry the Cable Guy?
That's your idea of a Conservative comic?
(He's ACTUALLY on your team.)
You missed my point:
The improved Nielsen rating system was given as an example.
Sometimes people get emotionally attached to shows they don't like to watch.
Are you crying? There''s no crying. There's no crying in baseball!
NBC made a business decision. Leno was turning a profit, Conan wasn't.
Personally, I just listen to NPR.
Yeah, I think that's it.
Letterman clearly won the battle of the snark, so NBC went in a different direction, and it paid off (so far).
The "Jay Leno Show" was a complete flop and was cancelled by NBC because Jay could not attract a prime time audience. Yet NBC still had faith in the Chin and kicked out Conan anyway. Also didn't help Conan that the Chin took all the thunder away from Conan. Instead of bowing out gracefully, he had to go on before Conan. Way to pass the torch. Also, when Leno first started NBC gave him time to grow. After a few months, they didn't extend the same courtesy to Conan.
So the question is also, where were Jay's fans at 10PM M-F, where he humiliated himself and NBC by having such a flop?
Conan's fans are younger, so we watch on HULU, YouTube, DVR, etc. The ratings police have not caught up with the fact that technologically savvy people get their content on demand. I don't hate Leno but just because you like him more doesn't mean Conan's fans are irrelevant. I've been watching him for over 15 years. His fans are real, and we also happen to be the courted demographic.
And so what if people watch Conan on Hulu? NBC is a Network, not a website.
In Jay's prime, NBC was clearing a million bucks a week from the show.
Gonna take a LOT of clicks on CoCo.com to come anywhere near that.
As I mentioned in the article, I believe a Late Night talk show is something you watch at bedtime. Leno's fans aren't going to bed at 10PM (yet). NBC didn't give Conan "time to grow" because we're in a recession. Money's tight all over, so they didn't have the luxury of time.
If NBC could figure out a way of making money from Internet viewings of Conan to warrant his fifteen million a year, they would have. It's much cheaper to give a hamster a cheeto, and put him on the piano.
You missed my point:
The improved Nielsen rating system was given as an example.
Sometimes people get emotionally attached to shows they don't like to watch.
Okay, I have no idea where the crying thing is coming from, so I'm going to assume that's an inside joke I didn't get. But don't try to defend this as a business decision. If it was purely about ratings and profit, then why was it that Leno brought NBC neither during his first 18 months as host of the Tonight Show and yet remained as its host? Conan got backstabbed, plain and simple. Perhaps the network had the right to push him out the way they did, but that doesn't make it right.
From: "A League of Their Own." It was a famous Tom Hanks quote, and … whatever. If it has to be explained, it's just not funny. Sorry.
I meant to say, that there are no ethics in television. It's cold and calculated, and a lot of people get their feelings hurt. (Though I wouldn't mind a taste of the pain that comes with a $41 million parachute.)
And when Jay Leno failed to deliver back in '92 television was a completely different animal. (Remember that was almost twenty years ago.) We're in a recession right now, and probably will be until at least 2012. NBC had to cut their losses and regain a positive cash flow.
Ten years from now, when Conan's Comedy Central talk show is beating the crap out of Leno, NBC might regret their decision. But for the moment, it seems they made the correct choice.
So there, can I get my critics credentials now?
No. Using the word "snark" disqualifies you.
I will admit that there not a lot of people who were predicting Jay would win the first few weeks, but I myself knew that there would be a curiosity factor associated with it that would give him a bump ahead of Letterman. New hosts (entertainment, series, and news) will tend to do that initially.
If NBC weren't willing to experiment, they shouldn't have switched the hosts to begin with back in 2004. If Conan wanted out, then they should have let his contract expire and sent him on his way. But instead of focusing on providing the best possible quality in their shows, they tried to keep everyone on the NBC payroll for fears that the competition would somehow hurt them. They tried the same with Letterman by keeping him at 12:30 ET/PT after Leno took over. When he left for CBS, Letterman did hurt NBC from 1993 to 1995, but Jay began to consistently dominate after the Hugh Grant interview, and in the end, both hosts ended up making money for their respective networks all the way through to 2009. If NBC had absolute faith in Leno then they shouldn't worry about Conan appearing on another network. Since any other network would not give Conan the sort of market penetration as Leno at first, and the increased competition from not only Jay and Dave, but also cable stars like George Lopez and the Comedy Central shows, it would make starting a new show on a network not known for its Late Night programming potentially difficult. Jay would be fine… for now.
NBC mad the right short-term business decision, yes. NBC used Leno as a crutch to get themselves back on their feet- if only temporarily. But Leno is only 6 years away from reaching Carson's age when he retired. How long is it expected for him to last on the show? What if Letterman decides to retire after his contract expires in 2012, and CBS brings in a talent that attracts that coveted 18-49 demo that Leno is losing grips on? Will it take another two years for Leno to recapture his audience just like when Letterman started on CBS? NBC should have known that switching Tonight Show hosts would be a long-term investment with a potential for initial loss as the audience shifts. Viewership is down, but audiences still react the same way for the most part. The people the network would want to attract 10 years from now are currently too young to stay up late enough to watch the Tonight Show, or just barely hitting puberty. What are NBC's plans for that upcoming audience?
Leno just referred to FOX NEWS as "SLIME" and made a bad joke about Micheal Steel Republican
You must be logged in to post a comment.