TV Show: Grammy ratings down 30% compared to last year!

OnlyManInTheWorld

Quote:

Grammys Ratings Second Best in 20 Years
Down from last year, when Whitney Houston's sudden death brought an unprecedented audience

Sunday night's Grammy Awards drew 28.12 million viewers, a 29.5 percent drop from the record-breaking CBS telecast in 2012. (Viewers between 18 and 49 also dropped 27 percent.) The decline was no surprise – last year, the extraordinary circumstances of Whitney Houston's unexpected death a day before the show led to a hastily arranged tribute starring Jennifer Hudson. Still, the numbers for this year's 55th annual ceremony were strong, as the live broadcast from the Staples Center in Los Angeles landed its second-best TV ratings since 1993.

Albums may not sell the way they did 20 years ago, but the record industry's star power remains surprisingly resilient, and the broadcast nicely mixed established names with rising talent and drama both manufactured and poignant. The world's two best-selling pop stars, Taylor Swift (in a circus-like opening performance of "We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together") and Adele (whose acceptance speech for Best Pop Vocal Performance for a live version of "Set Fire to the Rain" was far briefer and less all-encompassing than last year), were present, of course. So were veterans such as Mumford & Sons, Justin Timberlake and Kelly Clarkson.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/ne...years-20130211

bleuwaffle

Well they were the best Grammys in a long time so congrats for the ratings

disorder

Ohhh. Flop.

Lil Misty

Cause Katy didn't perform!

zombaland

I swear you ATRL folks have the worst understanding/comprehension.

I mean to come from a show that was Tributed to Whitney's Death in itself makes the comparison pointless. Also read the first line

Quote:

Grammys Ratings Second Best in 20 Years

ChapStick

Quote:

Originally posted by zombaland

I swear you ATRL folks have the worst understanding/comprehension.

I mean to come from a show that was Tributed to Whitney's Death in itself makes the comparison pointless. Also read the first line

Apparently all most people read is the title and one line of the biggest/boldest text.

swissman

Quote:

Originally posted by bleuwaffle

Well they were the best Grammys in a long time so congrats for the ratings

Really?

I was watching it with about 15 people and it was unanimous amongst all of us that the Grammys were really bad. I know to each their own but I mean, it was all rather boring compared to the past I thought. Just a lot of performances in the dark and some matching of various artists together. Nothing really too spectacular.

Rated R

They did have pretty bland performers for the most part. Too much country and indie acts that just stood there

Green

Still, the numbers for this year's 55th annual ceremony were strong, as the live broadcast from the Staples Center in Los Angeles landed its second-best TV ratings since 1993.

Sapphire

the power of The Walking Dead