
Airing live coat-to-coast for the first time, the Primetime Emmy Awards on NBC drew a 4.1 rating among adults 18-49 and 13.5 million viewers overall, according to time-adjusted early numbers. That was down 2% in the demo and from last year’s telecast on CBS and pretty much flat in total viewers (13.503 million vs. 13.471 million last year). The numbers were higher than the all-time low the Emmys hit with the 2008 telecast on ABC, the one with the five reality hosts’ disastrous MC turn. (This year’s host Jimmy Fallon drew overwhelmingly positive reviewers.) Still, it was the second lowest-rated telecast in at least 7 years and was down 21% from the last time the show aired on NBC in August 2006.
NBC is projected to win Sunday night in total viewers, while the 18-49 race is too close to call as final numbers for Fox’s pre-season football game won’t be available until tomorrow. (In the non-time adjusted fast nationals, the game posted a 3.4 from 8-11 PM but that number is expected to go up.)
Here are the Emmy ratings for the past 7 years in 18-49 and total viewers:
2004 ABC 4.6 13.788 million
2005 CBS 6.1 18.630
2006 NBC 5.2 16.184
2007 Fox 4.3 12.952
2008 ABC 3.8 12.341
2009 CBS 4.2 13.471
2010 NBC 4.1 13.503
TV Editor Nellie Andreeva - tip her here.







This has more to do with the current state of TV than it does Jimmy Fallon, who I thought was quite good.
Is this with the DVR numbers too? The show last night was fantastic, one of the best I’ve seen in years, granted Jimmy and his guitar got annoying very fast. But that was really the only thing I had a problem, maybe taking too long to announce the categories. I think if the Emmy’s want more viewers they need more skits, and they have to be funny. Throw in a music category so there can be music performances throughout the night.
Fallon was serviceable. Nothing more, nothing less.
I’m not sure there is any fix for an awards show, ratings wise. It’s all so predictable.
- Opening “bit” that may or may not be funny, but most definitely will be too long.
- Host talking about celebrities in the crowd to mixed reaction.
- Host introduces first presenters, then basically disappears for the rest of the ceremony.
- First presenters start the evening-long poorly written jokey banter.
- Someone who’s life dream of winning an Emmy gets cut off during their speech so there’s room for a super lame bit about the accountants.
- Abrupt ending. See you next year.
2004 was such a great year for TV. Lost, Desperate Housewives and others. It might have been the last year people were actually vested in what was on. I think that counts for something in the 05 ratings.
The fact that shows like Breaking Bad and Mad Men, both of which are phenomenal, have infinitesimal viewership counts for something. Once the Emmys started flooding to networks like HBO and other non free venues, viewership would naturally decline.
When I was young I used to be a fan not just of shows but of Networks. I adored ABC (Soap, Happy Days, etc) then I grew in to NBC (Hill Street, Cheers) and I never quite fell in love with CBS. But, we’ve niched that right out now, haven’t we?
Once we started no only giving awards to “reality shows” but mentioning them as our “favorites” on the red carpet, guilty pleasures or not, we give voice to the truth. Our medium is not as interesting to the lay person as it once was.
Too bad. Some of the finest work is being done on tv now.
You’re absolutely correct. Can’t expect a huge audience for Emmy’s where most of the shows that are expected to win are cable shows with small audiences. Most people I know had never heard of “Breaking Bad” before last night, even though I’m sure its a wonderful show. Mad Men is more well know, although the audience is still very small. Only a couple million viewers each episode, if that.