Apparently, adding more hosts to the Emmys does not add more viewers. This year’s telecast, presided over by Ryan Seacrest, Heidi Klum, Tom Bergeron, Howie Mandel, and Jeff Probst, only managed to reach 12.2 million viewers, down 6 percent from last year’s 13 million. Not helping the snooze fest — I mean — elegant awards program was competition from NBC’s Sunday Night Football, which scored a solid 16 million viewers.
ABC didn’t have much luck earlier in the evening either with Jimmy Kimmel’s Big Night of Stars. The funnyman’s special only saw a paltry 4.7 million viewers; Stars actually had less viewers in its first half-hour (4.6) than a rerun of American Dad on Fox (4.7 mil). But Kimmel’s main opponent was the old fogies at 60 Minutes who dominated the 7-8 p.m. hour with 17.2 million viewers. Maybe Andy Rooney should host next year’s Emmys?
Comments (1-26) of 26 Add your comment
That show was terrible. The banter was horribly awkward; the Laugh-In schtick was painful; and having Brian Cranston win for a show no one has ever heard of over Hugh Laurie was a travesty. I’ll stick to the Golden Globes from now on.
Three words…BORING, BORING, BORING. Nuff Said.
the emmys arent that entertaining anymore, what i wanted to know was why this girl didnt get an emmy bc she is one heck of an actress trying to make everyone believe shes so innocent
http://www.yournobody.com/2008/09/11/nobody-thinks-youre-a-virgin/
I didn’t even know the emmys were on last night until I saw the listings for the evening while looking for another show.
Ryan Seacrest is to blame. Last year’s Emmy show had the lowest ratings since 1990! 1990! I’m not surprised that his return appearance lowered the bar even further. Did the producers learn nothing from last year’s debacle? Once ratings start to slide, it’s hard to reverse direction.
Most of the awards shows have become a way for Hollywood “in crowds” to pat each other on the backs. It has nothing to do with the acting, writing, or popularity among viewers. Personally, I didn’t watch it because I knew it would just be used as a major platform for “intelligent” Hollywooders to rant and rave against the Republicans. Stick to entertainment discussions, and it would be much more interesting or entertaining.
They also happened to be on opposite the final game to ever be played at Yankee Stadium. That probably stole some viewers, too. That and the certainty of, say, Jeremy Piven winning.
Of course few people watched. They open with that blow hard Oprah, speaking to a room full of left wing liberals wearing expensive clothes given to the wealthy who complain about lack of care for the poor. Sounds fun to me.
THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO SEE MORE OF CLASSIC CLIPS FROM SHOWS LIKE MASH. THEY HAD A WEBSITE THAT YOU COULD CHOOSE WHAT YOU THOUGHT WAS THE BEST MOMENTS IN TV COMEDY AND DRAMA. THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO SHOW THE RESULTS. WHAT HAPPENED?
Sunday Night Football was on. And it was a lot more exciting than the Emmys.
Isn’t “Deal or No Deal” a GAME SHOW?
It’s not a reality show! They could have gone without one extra host.
Um, “less viewers”? Don’t you mean “fewer”?
Besides the sports games and future presidents, the Emmys keep nominating the same shows every year (30 Rock), and stuff nobody watches (Mad Men).
It was a nice try by the Academy to include the Reality TV Hosts (since their shows grab big ratings), but the stigma is Reality TV is ruining regular TV, so there’s an undercurrent of resentment from everyone in the audience, and everybody watching at home.
And yes, Deal or No Deal is a gameshow. (why are they calling it reality competition?) Doesn’t that make Alex Trebeck eligible for Jeopardy? Vanna White?
Boo to yesterday.
There’s your proof that the Emmy voters are out of touch with the viewing public. Two and a Half men, really!? Jeremy Piven, AGAIN!? Come on [/Gob]
I heard it was the least watched Emmys ever. I tuned in to the football game. The Emmys are like the Oscars…the right picks rarely win. Oh, one last comment…Michael Emerson and Lost were robbed!
Whatever would make the TV Academy think innocent viewers would enjoy this degrading, self-grandising program? No wonder cable is up. Network TV sucks.
I doubt even nominating popular, highly rated shows would get people to watch the Emmys. Not with the painfully unfunny and awkward “jokes” and award show banter. Last night’s telecast was the first time I truly felt like I wasted time of my life to watch such utter garbage. I wish I could just stop watching the Emmys from now on. It would certainly make my life easier. But as long as Hugh Laurie or House keeps getting nominated, I’m going to watch. And be upset all over again for their losses, because The Academy are a bunch of old suits who don’t watch television.
Oscar Producers take note – When you cry about low ratings, plunging year after year – don’t blame the small independent movies with “no-name” people nominated that fail to attract the big audience – learn this lesson – it’s the people you invite to present (and sometimes the winners) that make me turn off the tube. As should by the overwhelming number of GOP bashes – I’m not interested in giving my time to these nitwits.
I think the time has come for the enterainment industry to present their very first “Lefty” award show. Give out your awards and every winner could spend their acceptance speech ripping on those evil Republicans. Best Female sound bite – Pamela Lee Anderson. Best Male sound bite (tie) Matt Damon and Chevy Chase. Best score – Barbra Streisand. Best Producer – George Clooney. Name your category so deep thinkers like Lindsay Lohen, Ben Affleck, Gina Gershon, Heart, Steven Spielberg, Oprah, Scarlett Johanson…etc. could wear their flag pins on stage (psych) and say their most unabashed tirade in 45 seconds (orchestra will drown you out because host Howie Mandel has something that needs to be said). This event will be the highest rated show in LA/NY history.
Wow, 12 million people watched this show? Until the end?? Through the 5 hosts opening awful-ganza??? Through Heidi’s tuxedo-ripping (haha-that’s funny??)!!
Could it be because most of the show’s that where nominate and getting major attention were on Cable Channels and to see them you had to pay. Mad Men Season 2 premiere episode had 2 million viewer, CSI Season 8 Premiere episode had, I think, 20 million viewer but the show got only 2 nomination. Why would you watch if the show that you love isn’t nominated? Plus 5 host is two too many they should have dumped Seacrest and Probst and given the remaining three rotating face time. There should be a separate category for cable shows give the regular network shows a chance.
Awful hosts are not the only reason why the Emmy Awards are failing. For years now, they also have been ignoring a whole slew of TV shows, mostly because they are considered science-fiction, I guess (Battlestar Galactica, Terminator Sarah Connors Chronicles, Stargate SG1). Also, what about NCIS, which has been consistently in the top ten shows in the ratings for years? Apart of bad hosts, politically-motivated rantings and presenters (Oprah Winfrey) with hugely inflated egos, you can add poor and very questionable choices in both the lists of nominees and the winners of awards. Five reality shows make the cut but not a critically acclaimed show like Battlestar Galactica? Oh, I forgot: it is science-fiction, can’t touch that!
I don’t watch the Emmy’s or the Oscars. I am tired of a bunch of rich elitist flaunting their wealth around. Who gives a hoot about what dress or how many diamonds these women have on. The U.S. economy is about to fall and Congress are going to give 700 billion U.S. tax dollars to greedy Wall Street Executives who made a financial disaster.
Hello Hollywood elitist, are you aware most U.S. citizens are suffering or struggling to survive and we could give a hoot about you stuck up fools who think you are “GODS”. News flash Movie Stars, you are not “GODS”. You are mortal just like the rest of us.
cdhxilfq jfyanmw yuocdsgnm ywugfmsx ksct ayixp erwbhmu
deuhkafr dakelr yvgdlqmcx tncypm ebdy abmjpe shaw