I get that we now exist in a world of immediate gratification, where clicks and likes carry disproportionate weight even if we can’t really verify if they came from a human. Considering a growing amount of the content that’s being reacted to also may not be of human origin, I suppose that’s appropriate.
But as long as humans are still writing and reporting on the actions of other humans I stubbornly believe there should be some degree of responsibility or at least the desire to pursue it in being able to do more than merely raise an incideniary fact and then dismiss any concrete discussion–let alone follow-up–as to why it actually became one. And it does seem whenever it involves anything related to FOX it’s far more important to merely light the torch than wonder whether there’s actually enough heat to cook something of substance.
Ever since the official Nielsen October ratings period ended more than a week ago pretty much every industry and political website has been screaming some iteration of what STATUS screamed from behind its prohibitively overpriced paywall but which DEADLINE’s Ted Johnson then teed up mid-week in perhaps a more even-handed manner:
Fox News again topped October ratings by a wide margin, but its viewership fell during the month when compared to the same period in 2025. MS NOW and CNN, meanwhile, showed gains, likely driven by the approaching midterms.
In primetime, Fox News averaged 1.68 million viewers, down 28% from the same period in 2025. MS NOW averaged 925,000, up 14%, and CNN posted 598,000, up 19%. In the 25-54 demographic, Fox News averaged 145,000, down 36%, compared to 107,000 for CNN, up 39%, and 95,000 for MS NOW, up 30%.
In total day, Fox News averaged 1.1 million viewers, down 27%, compared to 588,000 for MS NOW, up 16%, and 402,000 for CNN, up 3%. In the 25-54 demo, Fox News averaged 98,000, down 33%, compared to MS NOW with 62,000, up 38%, and CNN with 60,000, up 2%.
Fellow Penske-phile Todd Spangler of VARIETY! took these numbers and offered a bit more context, albeit with a tinge of bias:
The ratings decline comes amid a continuation of the drop-off in TV viewers overall — but Fox News has been losing viewers at a double-digit clip as CNN and MS NOW have been slightly up in recent months. As Variety has reported, Fox News on many nights draws a bigger live audience than one or more broadcast TV networks….Some observers detect a worrisome sign in Fox News’ ratings decline that conservatives are tuning out at rates faster than CNN or MS NOW as the fight for control of the Senate and House of Representatives will be up for grabs on Election Day next week, Nov. 3.
And yet another corporate colleague, the venerable Rick of THE HOLLYWOOD RE-Porter, attempted a forensic analysis that could have rivaled anything ever conducted on CSI:
The Hollywood Reporter analyzed October cable news ratings for the past six national election cycles — presidential contests in 2016, 2020 and 2024 and midterms in 2018, 2022 and 2026 — and compared each to the previous October (2015, 2017, etc.). Unsurprisingly, all three networks showed huge year-to-year gains in October 2016 and October 2020. Fox improved substantially in October 2024 as well, with total-day ratings up about 20 percent versus October 2023. MS NOW was flat and CNN declined in October 2024 total-day ratings (though both grew in primetime).
His chart is impressive, but his research skills are sadly lacking. Witness his attempt at a button:
Pundits and media analysts have suggested that President Trump’s low approval ratings and an election cycle that seems to favor Democrats may have contributed to the drop at Fox News. Nielsen data doesn’t explain why people watch or don’t watch certain programs or networks, obviously.
Correct, sir. A why may be beyond its pay grade. But a where and a what are within your grasp–let alone anyone else’s who actually might want to know.
And that becomes especially desirable when it practically the same breath Porter is practically hiding one crucial caveat:
MS NOW and CNN both had double-digit percentage gains in primetime versus a year earlier; MS NOW also did so for the full day, while CNN had a more modest 3 percent bump. (It’s worth noting that the latter two were also at low points in 2025, and big percentage gains are more likely when the starting point is lower.)
Worth noting?!?!?! Actually, Rick, that deserved a lot more of your fancy 3-D graphic attention–or at least a bar chart. If your team can produce such a pretty picture, I assume you’d all have the capacity to do a smattering of work on a calculator to show what those raw numbers actually are. In case I was being inaccurately presumptive, allow me to do that “heavy” lifting free of charge:
PRIMETIME OCTOBER 26 VS. OCTOBER 25
TOTAL VIEWERS
FOX NEWS: 1.68 MM vs. 2.33 M -650K
MS NOW: 925K vs. 804K +121K
CNN: 598K vs. 581K +17K
To this somewhat more seasoned researcher, what’s striking to me is that more than 80 per cent of FOX NEWS’ year/year decline went somewhere else besides its allegedly chief competition.
FOX would like one to believe that they’ve somehow become more technologically savvy as Spangler spun:
In an email, a Fox News rep noted that on YouTube, the network has a solid lead over other news outlets. Year to date through Oct. 27, Fox News has generated 3.8 billion views on YouTube, followed by MS NOW (3.0 billion), CNN (2.4 billion), ABC News (1.4 billion), NBC News (1.2 billion) and CBS News (543,000), according to data from Emplifi.
Perhaps if they had actually gone back a bit further to show where those figures were in the first five-sixths of ’25 there might be even a couple of more teeth in that claim than there may be in the mouths of those contributing to it. It’s hard to fathom that an audience where more than 90 per cent don’t fall into the 25-54 demo (and I’ll go out on a limb and suggest they ain’t 2-24) made up those views (and again, kids, a view is not necessarily a viewER).
Ambugity like that stokes the sorts of conclusions that parochial outlets like THE DAILY BEAST jumped to in the skewered version that Leigh Kimmins shoved down her readers’ throats:
Fox News is suffering a catastrophic drop in viewership, which has plunged to historic lows just before the midterm elections, according to new data. Preliminary Nielsen ratings obtained by Status ahead of their official release show that the Trump-friendly juggernaut is on track to post its lowest-rated month in total day viewers since December 2023, averaging just 1.1 million total viewers throughout October 2026. However, last year’s ratings were buoyed by huge stories, including the Gaza cease.
Damn, just when when Kimmins was starting to make a point that no one in the Penske-verse even thought of offering up that damn paywall thingy got in the way. What she at least started to posit was the fact that there are some plausible whys that can be derived if one actually gives a little thought to it. Moreover, Nielsen provides ways to prove one way or the other what this year’s viewers were watching at a previous point in time. It’s called a duplication study, qualified by a unified sample that factors out homes that weren’t being measured in both October 2025 and October 2026. Yes, it does cost money. But for sites charging for access claiming to be the arbiters of truth in a pyrrhic battle for democracy, they probably could pool their resources and afford it. Lacking that, given how freely people are relentlessly donating to candidates, I’m confident that if they passed the proverbial hat to their subscribers with the potential to produce a conclusive result they’d probably get a sizable percentage of the cost covered by them.
Yes, I’ve made this case previously--every time the 2020 election results are discussed. That’s a topic that isn’t dying for an uncomfortably significant percentage of voters. Given the stakes that so many believe are at hand tomorrow I’d offer this has now reached at least defcon-4 if not quite the level that ultimately resulted in January 6th–yet. Maybe FOX isn’t curious enough to want to know where their viewers actually have migrated to–after all, being number one is all that matters to some. But I’m still naive enough to believe that someone else out there might actually give a crap as to what, if anything, those lost 512,000 soults went. To Newsnation? Newsmax? The “all other” that could include measurable video podcasts? Or, perhaps equally as likely, did they simply die?
There are ways to answer those burning questions. Maybe it might put a damper in the endless pursuit of mindless digital engagement. But think of the screaming headline one could produce if one offered up even one of the answers to the queries posed in the previous graf. There would be probably be a reason to do to a follow-up story or two.
Maybe those skill sets are beyond those of the so-called pundits, let alone the reporters doing such a marginal job trying to interpret them. Need I remind you that now more than ever there’s plenty of us out there ready and willing to do that heavy lifting. All you gotta do is ask.
Until next time…