NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Ken Nichol » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00


I just read about 30 or 40 posts complaining about not enough NBC coverage
of other countries or events.

Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
want to make more bucks when they show it.  That comes from advertisers.
Most of this money is from the US.  Ergo, they are going to show the events
and winners that mainstream, 25-40 year old males are going to want to see
when they get home from work.  These would be basketball, volleyball, men's
and women's gymnastics, track and field events, and any other AMERICAN
winner.

Sorry, this is a business, not charity.

Also, one reason that so much coverage is being given to the USA teams is
because we have been winning medals left and right.  Americans like to see
winners, and we are winning the most.  If you don't like it, go to Atlanta
and buy tickets for the events and countries you want to see.

--
Ken Nichols

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by olive » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

>Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
>want to make more bucks when they show it.  That comes from advertisers.
>Most of this money is from the US.  Ergo, they are going to show the events
>and winners that mainstream, 25-40 year old males are going to want to see
>when they get home from work.  These would be basketball, volleyball, men's
>and women's gymnastics, track and field events, and any other AMERICAN
>winner.

This is the worst piece of uninformed garbage to have come across
rec.sport.olympics.

N-B-$ee $port$ executives have said again and again that they have
tailored their presentation specifically to target FEMALE VIEWERS
who don't usually watch sports.  Their rationale:  men will watch
almost anything, but women want soap-operas built around certain sports.

How N-B-$ee came to that conclusion with audience research methods
that are inexact and may be biased is debatable.

Quote:
>Also, one reason that so much coverage is being given to the USA teams is
>because we have been winning medals left and right.  Americans like to see
>winners, and we are winning the most.  If you don't like it, go to Atlanta
>and buy tickets for the events and countries you want to see.

The above paragraph is a good example of why people around the world
despise "ugly Americans" who are arrogant, myopic, and self-centered.
You fit that label to a T.

The games is an INTERNATIONAL event, not "America's Games" as
N-B-$ee marketers would want you to believe.

Rec.sport.olympics is an international newsgroup, read and written
by users of the internet, an international computer network that knows
no national boundaries.  

The world does NOT revolve around the United States.

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Keith A. Smi » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

>I just read about 30 or 40 posts complaining about not enough NBC coverage
>of other countries or events.

>Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
>want to make more bucks when they show it.

Pardon me for snipping the rest of your message, but don't you think
that NBC would make *more* money if they took some of the sports they're
not showing, like soccer, and sold the broadcast rights to some cable
station that *would* show them?

        -- Keith

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Sk8mayv » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00

<<How N-B-$ee came to that conclusion with audience research methods
that are inexact and may be biased is debatable.>>

David Michaels asked his mother what she wanted to watch, and then
designed the coverage around her answers. THAT'S how they came to that
conclusion. Incidentally, this gem came from his own mouth in regard to an
earlier NBC botch-up that only embarrassed them in front of the
figure-skating world -- not the WHOLE world.


 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by crann.. » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

> Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
> want to make more bucks when they show it
> Sorry, this is a business, not charity.

Unfortunately, by showing what they are showing, it is bad business because people are
turning off NBC and checking ESPN every few hour for results rather than put up with the
drivel.
 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Ken Nichol » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
> This is the worst piece of uninformed garbage to have come across
> rec.sport.olympics.

> N-B-$ee $port$ executives have said again and again that they have
> tailored their presentation specifically to target FEMALE VIEWERS
> who don't usually watch sports.  Their rationale:  men will watch
> almost anything, but women want soap-operas built around certain sports.

> How N-B-$ee came to that conclusion with audience research methods
> that are inexact and may be biased is debatable.

Sorry, I hadn't read that.  And I have been following things pretty
closely.  Don't know how that slipped by me.  However, it only further
proves my point.  NBC is in business to draw the biggest audience possible
for the advertisers.  That's where the money is.  And most of the big bucks
from advertising come from the USA.  NBC is obligated, by selling time to
these sponsors, to draw the largest American audience they can.

Quote:
> The above paragraph is a good example of why people around the world
> despise "ugly Americans" who are arrogant, myopic, and self-centered.
> You fit that label to a T.

I'm not any of those, I'm just pointing out NBCs rationale for their
coverage.  I'd like to watch the other Olympians also.  Anybody who has
sacrificed to be there deserves coverage.  And I'm sure many 100s of the
athletes have faced much greater odds than the American swimmers or
gymnasts who have been practically heaped upon with money and technology to
make a good showing this year.  I'm sorry that we don't see more coverage
of some of the other non-USA-popular events also.

Quote:
> The games is an INTERNATIONAL event, not "America's Games" as
> N-B-$ee marketers would want you to believe.
> (snip)
> The world does NOT revolve around the United States.

The games ARE international, NBC is not.  They are an American company,
selling time to primarily American sponsors, who are trying to sell
products to an American audience.  Whether you think it's right or not,
America runs on big business.  You just can't expect them to tailor their
broadcast to the whole world.  I guess the day that we have an
international broadcaster selling equal value time to international
sponsors, who are trying to sell products to an international audience,
things may change.

--
Ken Nichols

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Peter Kin-Ym Kw » Thu, 25 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:


>>Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
>>want to make more bucks when they show it.  That comes from advertisers.
>>Most of this money is from the US.  Ergo, they are going to show the events
>>and winners that mainstream, 25-40 year old males are going to want to see
>>when they get home from work.  These would be basketball, volleyball, men's
>>and women's gymnastics, track and field events, and any other AMERICAN
>>winner.
>>Also, one reason that so much coverage is being given to the USA teams is
>>because we have been winning medals left and right.  Americans like to see
>>winners, and we are winning the most.  If you don't like it, go to Atlanta
>>and buy tickets for the events and countries you want to see.
>The above paragraph is a good example of why people around the world
>despise "ugly Americans" who are arrogant, myopic, and self-centered.
>You fit that label to a T.
>The games is an INTERNATIONAL event, not "America's Games" as
>N-B-$ee marketers would want you to believe.
>Rec.sport.olympics is an international newsgroup, read and written
>by users of the internet, an international computer network that knows
>no national boundaries.  
>The world does NOT revolve around the United States.

        I disagree with olivert and partially agree with Ken Nichols.
        It is unreasonable to demand NBC to satisfy the need of the
        fans from every country in the world.  NBC, as an American
        TV station, has an obligation to satisfy the need of
        American viewers first.  I am sure that boardcasting
        organizations oversea would put their local viewers ahead
        of American viewers by the same token.

        Yes, Olympic games is an international event.  But NBC
        boardcasting is an American event.  More importantly,
        as Ken correctly pointed out, NBC boardcasting is a
        commercial event.  The market dictates that NBC biases
        in favor of the American viewers.

        It is disgusting to accuse Americans of being "ugly",
        "arrogant", "myopic", and "self-centered" solely on
        the basis that NBC takes care of the need of American
        viewers first.

Peter

--
Peter K. Kwok                   |  "The best therapy to nonsense is

http://www.math.uiuc.edu/~kwok  |             --- Paul Kurtz (1989)

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Jerry Stenslan » Fri, 26 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:



> >I just read about 30 or 40 posts complaining about not enough NBC coverage
> >of other countries or events.

> >Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
> >want to make more bucks when they show it.

> Pardon me for snipping the rest of your message, but don't you think
> that NBC would make *more* money if they took some of the sports they're
> not showing, like soccer, and sold the broadcast rights to some cable
> station that *would* show them?

>         -- Keith

It's possible that they could make more money.  I hope they seriously
consider it.  The problem is that it's the exclusivity of NBC's
broadcast that the advertisers pay a premium for.  The only way that NBC
would do that is by restricting the times that the subcontracted network
could broadcast.  That would mean in the mornings and late at night.  
That would mean VCR for most people.  I think it might be best to
convince NBC to broadcast taped events like soccer, wrestling,
volleyball et al all through the night, uncut.  It would still mean VCR,
but at least we could see these sports as they actually occured and not
boxed into a ten minute melodrama between gynastics routines.  This
would not scare away advertisers who are leary of trigger happy surfers
skipping over to another network on commercials.  [Which is exactly what
I am doing now as we get the CBC here in Ann Arbor.  They have been
showing US volleyball games, softball, rowing.]

Jerry

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Brett Kottma » Fri, 26 Jul 1996 04:00:00


...
: Pardon me for snipping the rest of your message, but don't you think
: that NBC would make *more* money if they took some of the sports they're
: not showing, like soccer, and sold the broadcast rights to some cable
: station that *would* show them?

        Exactly!  I don't know why NBC doesn't re-sell the rights
to events it is not going to show anyway.  Like soccer is going to pull
away American viewers...while Europe and South American companies would
pay big buck$ to get it.

        There's some closed-minded thinking at NBC.  Very proprietary.
If the IOC decides to take into account the range of events shown when
awarding TV rights, the American companies may be shut out unless they
first push through a subsidiary rights package.

Brett
_____________________________________________________________________________
...every income quintile--the poorest to the richest--recorded gains in
incomes in the Reagan years....--Stephen Moore, National Review, July 1,
1996, page 38.

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by R. Ta » Fri, 26 Jul 1996 04:00:00



Quote:
>> Pardon me for snipping the rest of your message, but don't you think
>> that NBC would make *more* money if they took some of the sports they're
>> not showing, like soccer, and sold the broadcast rights to some cable
>> station that *would* show them?
>It's possible that they could make more money.  I hope they seriously
>consider it.

        Of course, after the Triple Cast lost money big time, they figured
it was a waste of time (not to mention they got raked over the coals
anyway, both in the media and in the newsgroups).

--

        The most unAmerican thing you can say is "He/she makes too much money."

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Ed Suran » Fri, 26 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:


>> Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
>> want to make more bucks when they show it
>> Sorry, this is a business, not charity.

>Unfortunately, by showing what they are showing, it is bad business because people are
>turning off NBC and checking ESPN every few hour for results rather than put up with the
>drivel.

Unfortunately, this is yet another case where USENET is not the real
world.  I have no doubt that many USENET posters are doing exactly that --
turning off NBC.  But the just-announced ratings indicate that NBC's
ratings for these Olympics are higher than for any summer Olympics since
1976.

Ed Suranyi

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Jerry Stenslan » Fri, 26 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:


> ...
> : Pardon me for snipping the rest of your message, but don't you think
> : that NBC would make *more* money if they took some of the sports they're
> : not showing, like soccer, and sold the broadcast rights to some cable
> : station that *would* show them?

>         Exactly!  I don't know why NBC doesn't re-sell the rights
> to events it is not going to show anyway.  Like soccer is going to pull
> away American viewers...while Europe and South American companies would
> pay big buck$ to get it.

>         There's some closed-minded thinking at NBC.  Very proprietary.
> If the IOC decides to take into account the range of events shown when
> awarding TV rights, the American companies may be shut out unless they
> first push through a subsidiary rights package.

> Brett
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> ...every income quintile--the poorest to the richest--recorded gains in
> incomes in the Reagan years....--Stephen Moore, National Review, July 1,
> 1996, page 38.

NBC has already been awarded the US rights to all the Olympic games (summer
and winter) between now and 2008.  It's a little late to hope for help from
the IOC.  You need address NBC directly.

P.S. Brett, that quote on the bottom your post is the vaguest, stupidest
quote I have ever seen.  I can't believe you hang your hat on that?!  I
could invent just about any numbers that would not be untrue with that
quote.  For example if between 1983 and 1984 the "incomes" of all quintiles
recorded "gains" of .0001% and recorded losses bew*** every other year,
the quote would be 'true.'  Ignorant.  Get the facts, not a sound bite.

Jerry

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Charles Owe » Sat, 27 Jul 1996 04:00:00

Quote:

> Unfortunately, this is yet another case where USENET is not the real
> world.  I have no doubt that many USENET posters are doing exactly that --
> turning off NBC.  But the just-announced ratings indicate that NBC's
> ratings for these Olympics are higher than for any summer Olympics since
> 1976.

Ratings are a complex animal.  The coverage quality is only one
factor and probably a small factor.  There are many other factors:

1.  This is a US olympics.  People are more interested, just as they
were when the olympics was in LA.  But, this is a fully attended
olympics, no boycotts.

2.  The womens gymnastics have been particularly dramatic.

3.  The bungled "triplecast" hurt the last olympics ratings.

4.  Ratings were hurt for the olympics in Korea after Bryan Gumble's
accosting that poor boxer.  Notice how he does not seem to do
any olympic coverage anymore?

The ratings may be high, but that is because people want to watch
the olympics.  That's why NBC paid so much for them.  But, EVERYONE
I hear complains about the coverage, not just those on usenet.  
Everyone!  So many people want to see the olympics that NBC can
do just about anything they want to do and it looks like that's
what they are doing.
--
Charles B. Owen

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Al Vinjamu » Sat, 27 Jul 1996 04:00:00

NBC's coverage of the olympics is the *WORST* I've ever seen. Atlanta
'96 is the most parochial olympics I've ever been witness to. Pathetic
showing....to hell with the dream team - it is nothing more than the
commercial personification of arrogance...

- aLV

 
 
 

NBC coverage of Olympics is business, not charity.

Post by Stewart M. Clam » Sat, 27 Jul 1996 04:00:00




   >>Look, NBC is a business.  They paid big buck to televise the games.  They
   >>want to make more bucks when they show it.  That comes from advertisers.
   >>Most of this money is from the US.  Ergo, they are going to show the events
   >>and winners that mainstream, 25-40 year old males are going to want to see
   >>when they get home from work.  These would be basketball, volleyball, men's
   >>and women's gymnastics, track and field events, and any other AMERICAN
   >>winner.

   >>Also, one reason that so much coverage is being given to the USA teams is
   >>because we have been winning medals left and right.  Americans like to see
   >>winners, and we are winning the most.  If you don't like it, go to Atlanta
   >>and buy tickets for the events and countries you want to see.

   >The above paragraph is a good example of why people around the world
   >despise "ugly Americans" who are arrogant, myopic, and self-centered.
   >You fit that label to a T.

   >The games is an INTERNATIONAL event, not "America's Games" as
   >N-B-$ee marketers would want you to believe.

   >Rec.sport.olympics is an international newsgroup, read and written
   >by users of the internet, an international computer network that knows
   >no national boundaries.  

   >The world does NOT revolve around the United States.

           I disagree with olivert and partially agree with Ken Nichols.
           It is unreasonable to demand NBC to satisfy the need of the
           fans from every country in the world.  NBC, as an American
           TV station, has an obligation to satisfy the need of
           American viewers first.  I am sure that boardcasting
           organizations oversea would put their local viewers ahead
           of American viewers by the same token.

           Yes, Olympic games is an international event.  But NBC
           boardcasting is an American event.  More importantly,
           as Ken correctly pointed out, NBC boardcasting is a
           commercial event.  The market dictates that NBC biases
           in favor of the American viewers.

People who are complaining about NBC's coverage *are* in the United
States.  The rest of the world has access to national broadcasters in
their countries, who paid money for exclusive broadcast rights to the
games in their countries.

--

School of Computer Science -- Carnegie Mellon Univ.
5000 Forbes Avenue              
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA             URL: http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~clamen/