is NOT the story, despite all the controversy that began last Thursday night.
This is from the New York Times today:
Letterman’s Sponsors Appear to Be Unperturbed
HOW much have opinions on Madison Avenue changed about “Late Show With David Letterman” since Mr. Letterman’s startling disclosures about his personal life?
Well, one of the commercials that ran during the show on Tuesday night was from the Disney parks and resorts division of the Walt Disney Company.
If so squeaky clean a marketer seemingly has no qualms about wishing upon a star like Mr. Letterman after last week’s events, it is unlikely other advertisers would — barring, agency executives and media experts say, any disturbing or scandalous additional disclosures.
So long as viewers stick with Mr. Letterman, they believe, most if not all his sponsors will remain on board.
“There might be some negative short-term implications,” said Steven J. Farella, president and chief executive at the TargetCast TCM media agency, like advertisers “telling CBS, ‘We don’t need you’ ”— particularly at a time when advertising rates for late-night programming are beginning “to tighten up.”
But “unless we hear a lot of other things” about Mr. Letterman and his behavior, Mr. Farella added, “over the long haul I don’t think there’ll be much of an impact.”
•
Mr. Farella attributed his belief largely to the type of television program over which Mr. Letterman presides: a late-night talk show rather than, say, a children’s program or even a prime-time series.
“Advertisers in that programming expect to hear that kind of stuff” about sexual matters, Mr. Farella said — from guests on the shows, at least, if not from the hosts.
Kristian Magel, executive vice president and director for national broadcast at Initiative, agreed.
“For most advertisers in late-night, it’s not an intolerable situation,” said Mr. Magel, whose agency is part of the MediaBrands unit of the Interpublic Group of Companies.
Some, however, that are more “focused on family values,” he added, in categories like packaged foods and beverages, “may not be as comfortable in a program with a guy who made a mistake like this.”
Ameliorating matters for Mr. Letterman with advertisers is “the way he is handling the situation,” Mr. Magel said.
“The fact he addressed it head-on, in a very open and honest way, is probably going to position him in the best way he could be positioned in a situation like this,” he added.
Andy Donchin, director for media investments at another media agency, Carat USA, part of the Aegis Group, predicted there would be “no great effect on ratings or advertisers” because they are so far “looking at it as an extortion story” rather than an incident that reveals something about Mr. Letterman’s “moral compass.”
•
In some ways, Mr. Donchin said, the disclosures may increase Mr. Letterman’s ratings as viewers tune in to watch the aftermath and the incident is amplified as Mr. Letterman becomes “fodder for other late-night hosts and other comedians.”
“He handled it very deftly,” Mr. Donchin said of Mr. Letterman’s remarks on Thursday’s show, and often “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.”
Mr. Letterman’s ratings were 20 percent higher than usual for the Thursday show, which drew about 5.8 million viewers.
Word had started circulating before the broadcast that he would be disclosing affairs with women on the staff of his production company, Worldwide Pants, and an ensuing extortion attempt.
On Monday, when Mr. Letterman talked again about the matter, which was not brought up during the Friday show, he drew an estimated 5.7 million viewers.
On Tuesday, when advertisers on “Late Show With David Letterman” included, in addition to Disney, Cialis and Samsung, the program attracted an estimated 4.8 million viewers.
“A good scandal is normally good for the ratings,” said Marc Berman, television analyst for the trade publication Mediaweek. “If anything, more viewers might temporarily tune in to see what all the fracas is about.”
There may be some fallout among sponsors, he added, particularly if they market “more family-friendly” kinds of products, but in the long run “I do not think anyone will bail out.”
“It’s late night,” Mr. Berman said. “They’re not advertising diapers.”
•
Another factor in favor of Mr. Letterman, according to Mr. Berman, is that “he was in a good place” before the scandal broke, outdrawing his competition on NBC, “The Tonight Show With Conan O’Brien.”
The likelihood of viewers sticking with — or changing the channels on — Mr. Letterman has been the subject of considerable discussion on blogs.
On VibrantNation, a Web site aimed at older career women, Stephen Reily, chief executive, wrote in his blog that the women visiting the site “are interested in celebrity gossip” but “aren’t driven by it” because “the ultimate stories are not about men but about women — women who spend a lot of time putting up with men who do wrong.”
“These women really don’t care about this scandal very much,” Mr. Reily wrote in an e-mail message.
“It should not impact their loyalty to Letterman.”
“They watch Letterman to laugh,” he said. “If he can keep them laughing, they will keep watching.”
Steve Sternberg, a television analyst for media agencies like Magna, said it was unlikely that advertisers would withdraw from “Late Show With David Letterman” unless the news media “treat Letterman extremely negatively,” which they have not been doing so far.
Mr. Sternberg said, however, “if this remains in the headlines for several weeks, with more negative stuff coming out about Letterman, then I’d rethink the impact on advertisers.”
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment