Will CBS & ABC Say Goodbye to Primetime’s Third Hour?
Ahead of fall premieres, the possibility of NBC eliminating its third hour of primetime programming was introduced, and it seems like ABC and CBS could be the next to follow suit.
According to Deadline, Hearst Television chief Jordan Wertleib said, “I expect they will, and I hope they will,” during a panel discussion featuring local station chiefs at NAB Show New York. Among the panelists was NBCUniversal’s Valari Staab as talk about NBC’s handing over of the third hour to syndicated television continues.
(Credit: ABC/Art Streiber)
As ratings decline amid the rise of streaming services, networks are seeking to maintain their hold by improving the two-hour block and forgoing a third. Without a third hour, fewer resources would be spent on the expense of programming and promoting, allowing networks to focus their spending on a more concise schedule block.
“Take those resources and invest it in a really strong 8 to 10 block and the entire ecosystem improves,” Wertleib said of the concept. While no official changes have been announced by any of the networks, Staab added, “it will definitely look probably different than a traditional newscast, but it’s a huge opportunity for us across the board.”
While other stations are looking to add more news, lifestyle programming, gameshow, or sports, the elimination of the third hour could be the problem-solving solution. Sinclair Broadcast Group CEO Chris Ripley shared during the panel, “streaming has gutted the general entertainment and cable networks. Literally gutted them. When you take a look at that, the core strength of the pay-TV bundle is live, day-and-date content, which is the strength of broadcast. Within the ecosystem, I think broadcast TV will continue to do quite well.”
In other words, keeping the same practices but limiting primetime airing will be beneficial in the long run, but will NBC, CBS, and ABC officially adopt this approach? Stay tuned to find out.
Conversation21 Comments
Please read the TV Insider Community Guidelines.
Comments are closed on this story.
-
C
I do not stream. Also, I do not watch news at 11:00 - what makes you think I'm going to watch it at 10:00! For those of us that live alone and are on fixed incomes, TV is our only form of entertainment. And some of the best shows are at 10:00. I hope they rethink this idea.
6
-
J
Why would they do this? TV is already full of "news, lifestyle programming, gameshows." We don't need or want any more! Is three hours a night too much to ask? Sounds to me like networks (or the non-entertainment companies that own them) obviously aren't interested in what the viewers want, but are only thinking of $$$.
5
-
P
It's called show BUSINESS. The bottom line rules everything, because the people who run these companies don't report to the customer who watches the shows they own and produce, they are accountable first and foremost, to their company's shareholders. And the financial reality is that the profit margin for reality TV, gameshows, and news-centered programming are far better than their scripted counterparts. They are much less expensive to produce and most of the time they consistently do better in the ratings than scripted TV shows and movies.
1
-
J
Sadly, I know you're correct. As I said, the companies (not even networks anymore) are only interested in $$$. But they'll only drive away the viewers they still have.
2
-
G
Yes, IT is a business, that said, THIS is beyond stupid. It's unacceptable and must NOT stand. It's disgusting. We do NOT need any more lame-o fake "reality" shows. There's NOTHING real about them. ALL of them are trash. We certainly DON'T need more "news" programming either. See WGN/now Newsnation for that mess. There are enough 24 hour news networks. Frankly, if this is the path, it would be much better to air game shows or repeats of game shows, than the those other "programs." At least those have some value. There's NO value to "reality shows" and there's certainly NO value to yet ANOTHER news-network. Also, it makes NO sense to have say the 10 p.m. news FOLLOWED by the 11 p.m. version. Who NEEDS 90 minutes of news? WHO's that for anyway? Is there anyway to find out WHO'S making these trash decisions? Thank you, if you know.
1
-
O
NBC's desperate. That's why they announced their plans to cut the 10:00 PM hour. Jeff Shell kept contradicting himself on CNBC, talking about making "tradeoffs" and "sacrifices" due to lower ratings, while also claiming they still make a lot of $ off of their 10:00 PM shows and have the "scale to do what we need to." LOL
Comcast cut NBC's primetime budget by $1 Billion, because both CEOs have completely mismanaged the business. These guys are terrible at running a multibillion dollar media corporation. That's why they're in this situation, where they need to shorten primetime to save money. Peacock hemorrhages money, but they won't take the loss. They keep trying to save a failing streaming service by throwing more money at it.
CBS and ABC aren't desperate yet, so they'll hold off for a bit longer. Paramount Plus is slowly growing, with twice as many paid subscribers as Peacock. And, Disney Plus has been solid.
NBC's trying to cut costs by nixing the 10:00 PM hour. They just can't afford it anymore. That's what happens when you: a) constantly order new shows and overspend on them, even though you can barely afford the ones you already have; and b) lose $467M on Peacock in the second quarter, after having already lost $900M on it before that.
-
-
-
-
G
That would be absolutely horrible for people that cannot afford to pay extra for streaming etc. it’s bad enough everything else is going up and regular tv was one of the last holdouts.
5
-
C
Getting rid of the 10 p.m. shows only means I have another hour for reading/sleep
3
-
O
No to the ditching of the third hour of prime time. I'm sick of"news" being played ad nauseum every minute. And there's enough sports on the tube already. The new game shows seem fake and I loathe the reality "games" that are choreograph danger/isolation....
1
-
O
CBS and ABC will probably hold off for a bit, since they're not having the problems NBC is. They aren't desperate yet. NBC will definitely do it next season, though. They need to, after Comcast cut their primetime budget by $1 Billion. Peacock's losing too much money and not growing fast enough to make a profit. Since that's their priority, they're choosing to fund Peacock instead.
Ratings for 10:00 PM shows are too low now, aside from Chicago P.D. And, even that's starting to lose ratings week by week since Jay left. It's hit an all-time low in the demo, and viewership's lower than it was at this time last year. Organized Crime does well at 10:00 PM, but not like Chicago P.D. does. Chicago P.D.'s NBC's heavy hitter, and it's starting to falter. The whole One Chicago franchise is down in ratings from last year, and that's their cash cow.
NBC can't afford to program for 10:00 PM anymore. Or rather, they can't justify it with ratings as low as they are. It's the same reason CBS canceled Magnum P.I. (a co-production with NBCU, but primarily an NBCU production). They couldn't justify paying the broadcast fee to NBC, while ratings for the show continued to decline. The only reason NBC saved the show was because they own it. And since it's only five seasons old, it's cheaper to produce than certain other shows on their network. They also drastically reduced the episode count to 10.
-
-
B
NBC will definitely do it. Jeff Shell won't confirm it yet, which is why his recent comments on CNBC were kind of vague. You could tell that he wants to do it and will do it, but he got around actually saying it. He knows NBC still has a very popular 10:00 PM show, which not only wins its time slot every week, but is also one of their highest rated shows (Chicago P.D.). Organized Crime also does pretty well in the hour on Thursdays.
ABC has always struggled with the hour. CBS found success in Blue Bloods, but that's about it. So, I'm not sure it would change much really. That being said, I don't see either one of them nixing the hour just yet. NBC's considering it, because not only are their ratings down, but Comcast cut their primetime budget for programming by $1 billion. They're trying to cut costs and save the failing Peacock.
CBS doesn't have that problem right now. And, ABC isn't quite that desperate yet. Comcast/NBCU executives have mismanaged the business. They overspend on new shows, when they can barely afford the ones they already have. That's why they're in this situation.
NBC will do it. CBS and ABC will hold off for a bit longer.
1
-
B
FBI: Most Wanted also does very well at 10:00 PM for CBS. Since CBS isn't in the dire situation NBC is, they don't NEED to nix the hour just yet.
-
-
G
Oops,I got my companies mixed up -- Paramount+ is owned by ViacomCBS not NBC Universal. Peacock is the streaming service owned by NBC Universal. And Disney is an entity unto itself. But the same principle applies -- if a the exclusive ownership rights to a show are held by a single streaming service, then you'll need a subscription to the service who owns the show to be able to watch it. And that is de facto cable TV. If you have to have a subscription to watch a show that a streaming service company has exclusive ownership rights to, then either you will have to subscribe to the service who owns it, even if you don't want anything else on that streaming service. So you could very well wind up having to get multiple subscriptions to different streaming services just to watch one or two shows which people who cut the cord were trying to avoid.
-
G
Fragmentation of the streaming services market is a double-edged sword: Competition might eventually drive down the prices of subscriptions to some streaming services. But for instance, if one favorite show is exclusively shown on Paramount+ (which is owned by NBC Universal) because they own the rights to it, and another favorite show is exclusively shown on subsidiaries of Disney such as ABC or Hulu because Disney owns the rights to that show, then you are going to have to have a subscription to Paramount+ AND Disney+ or you won't be able to watch the shows you desire, and that lands you up being stuck in streaming Nowhereland. You're going to be stuck having to subscribe to both streaming services in order to see those particular shows you desire to watch, even if you only want to see one show that is exclusively shown on a particular streaming service or you won't be able to watch it. And that is de facto cable TV. If you're forced to purchase multiple subscriptions to different streaming services but only want one or two shows that are exclusive to a single streaming service, then you'll be paying for a subscription containing content you're not interested in watching, which is exactly what people were stuck doing with cable TV.
-
B
There are still a lot of people who do stream. Streaming is something that appeals to younger persons, who do not use cable or satellite to get TV and they still amount to millions.
-
O
Not just young people anymore, either. A lot of older people stream now, too. This stereotype that streaming is too hard for them to learn is ridiculous. If you don't adapt to the times, you'll be left behind. That's just the way it is.
-
-
G
For people who "cut the cord" to escape the neverending price increases of cable TV, streaming services initially offered a good option to tailor the content they received to only what they want to watch without paying for channels and content they didn't want.
But that era is pretty much over with. Now everyone is jumping on the streaming bandwagon, movie and television
studio-owned streaming services, who have the ownership rights to popular shows and movies are pulling their content off of the general market and onto the streaming services that their particular studios own. This effectively turns the streaming service marketplace into what people were trying to avoid when they cut the cord. The only people who stand to benefit from all of the fragmentation of the streaming service marketplace is people who are still using cable. The cutthroat competition between streaming services might bring the prices down enough to make streaming content a better and more economically viable option than cable.
-
G
They would lose the entire midwest Central time to Non Tv. super young families and many seniors also But not all.
Only diehard fans will buy a stream for their one show 12 weeks, then its broadcast rerun channels or internet city.
1
-
P
The heads of households of those young families you speak of, namely the 18-34 year-old demographic, the Holy Grail for advertisers, are what is driving the shift to less scripted content to more reality TV, gameshows, and news-centered programming. The entire communications landscape has undergone a cataclysmic metamorphosis thanks to the advent of streaming as well as social media. Old school "appointment television" is going the way of the dinosaurs, it's an on-demand world now. And the price of doing business is giving that all-important 18-34 year-old demographic what they are demanding while consistently increasing the profit margin of media companies.
-
-
-
G
If any of these networks drop the 10pm hour doesn’t mean all the shows will get canceled. With all the streaming options, certain shows could easily move to streaming next year,
1
-
O
That's definitely true for CBS. SEAL Team, Evil and Blood & Treasure are better than ever. They're thriving on Paramount Plus. I'm not sure about ABC.
With NBC, it's a little more precarious. Their most successful shows are the One Chicago and Law & Order franchises. One Chicago's ten years old, and their three year renewal expires this season. The Law & Order franchise is even older, except for Organized Crime. Those two franchises are getting more expensive, as they age. The whole reason NBC's nixing the 10:00 PM hour is to cut costs, since Comcast reduced their primetime budget by $1 Billion.
You'd think One Chicago and the Law & Order franchise would be safe, since they're NBC's big hitters (especially One Chicago), and they're Dick Wolf. With Comcast/NBCU's financial problems though, I'm not sure they're guaranteed renewals this year. It's hard to say what NBC will do to cut costs even more, especially since Peacock's their priority. They keep trying to save a failing streaming service with more money, so something will have to go.
-
Watchlist Easy access to only the shows you care about — all in one simple place
Alerts Only important notifications — when a show is returning, when it becomes available to stream, and more.
Special Offers Exclusive products we release related to your favorite shows and streaming services