Ratings give peek at challenges facing Ralston
January 14, 2010 - 10:00 pm
Ratings, death, taxes.
As the latter two of life's certainties are lesser concerns to TV types, we turn toward the first to examine the latest weekday arrival: News-3's "Face to Face with Jon Ralston," its new 4 p.m. tenant, ousting "First News 3 at 4" -- and sending the station tumbling from a solid second place to a wobbly third place for that half-hour last week.
Competing in the Nielsen shadow cast by first-place Channel 8, "Face to Face," formerly of the late Las Vegas ONE, debuted Jan. 4, comfortably in second place with a 3.5 household rating, doubtless owing to viewer habit (many probably didn't know the news was gone) and curiosity tune-in. But the next day it skidded to a third-place 2.1, then to a 1.5 the next, having hemorrhaged nearly 60 percent of its audience. As of earlier this week: 0.9. That amounts to ... Yikes!
(Congrats, Channel 13. You drift up the rankings by default.)
Comparatively, Ralston reaps a viewer windfall. "Face" trades LV1's tiny cable audience for a larger broadcast viewership, even at these numbers, plus he airs in Elko and Reno. For his new employer, though, the ratings are a belly-drop.
Alarmed, News-3? "Not in the least," says news chief Bob Stoldal. "There was little promotion or marketing in advance. I could've waited 90 days and had focus groups, but I wanted it on now. An audience needs to be built for this type of program. Ralston is going to be on Channel 3 and the statewide network for a long time."
Weak one-week ratings? No reason to frantically save "Face" ... yet. Between its December acquisition and January premiere, there was barely time enough to paste the old "Face" into a new station. Still, initial numbers indicate industry issues facing this political issues show.
Journalistically, Ralston's a jolt of high-voltage cred. His power-punch interviews will be headline-generators for Channel 3's 5, 6 and 11 p.m. newscasts. (And cheer News-3 for bravely attempting a break from the straight afternoon news rut.)
Guest selection could factor into watchability -- a compelling Dario Herrera interview was the opening show. Yet, the "Face to Face" audience tends more toward hard-core political junkies than general news viewers. At 4 p.m., most of the "Face" crowd is at work, likely to record it rather than watch live.
While journalism-based, "Face" isn't a newscast, with that separate identity. As a host-driven show, this hardball half-hour lands awkwardly amid daytime's softball vibe and happy yakkers -- Oprah, Ellen, Doc Phil -- whose central appeal is their inviting personas more than their guests and themes. That hampers the aggressive Ralston, neither an entertaining eccentric nor fuzzy-wuzzy figure with whom viewers can emotionally relax. Even local news anchors competing with him head-on at 4 p.m. bank on projecting a comforting aura. Ralston in this time slot is, frankly, a pug among puppies.
Why not rethink it? As often advocated here, go interactive via Facebook, Twitter and e-mail. Perhaps go hourlong. Add an easygoing but savvy co-host such as Sophia Choi as viewer traffic cop, reading online feedback and questions, and offsetting Ralston's grill-'em style. Let newsmaker confrontations spark viewer conversations. Talk with us, not at us.
Now could be that "Face"-the-future moment.
Contact reporter Steve Bornfeld at sbornfeld@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0256.