Reality Check: Megyn Kelly Would Probably be Doing Better Than Fox Wants to Admit at 9pm
While Fox News executives made a huge play to keep Megyn Kelly before she departed the network back in January, it seems they are now doing their best to minimize her role there. During the 2016 campaign, Kelly became a lightning rod of controversy for her fierce questioning of then candidate Donald Trump. Many too, were no doubt still cross about Kelly spilling the beans on ex-chief Roger Ailes’ — ahem — grabbier tendencies.
Ratings data from January showed her replacement, Tucker Carlson, clobbered her among the coveted 25-54 year-old demographic relative to the same period a year prior. Indeed, the first quarter ratings, released this week, showed Carlson coming in number two, overall, just behind Bill O’Reilly. Even his midnight rerun managed to wallop most of the rest of cable news.
But a closer look at the data for the Fair and Balanced network, reveals that all might not be well in that 9:00 p.m. hour. The truth is, Tucker Carlson is losing ground to MSNBC and his prime time rival Rachel Maddow. Further, there is a case to be made that Megyn Kelly would be in a better position to hold her own.
The key statistics that should have Fox’s News co-presidents Jack Abernethy and Bill Shine worried were the March numbers which had Maddow beating Carlson and CNN’s Anderson Cooper among 25-54 year olds, as TVNewser reported:
Q1 2017 was the most-watched quarter ever for Maddow’s show. While the quarter was significant for Maddow, the month of March was even more noteworthy. Her program ranked No. 1 across cable news among adults 25-54. MSNBC had never scored a 9 p.m. monthly win over Fox News among adults 25-54 in network history until this past month. Not only was March 2017 Maddow’s best month ever from a ratings perspective, but it provided MSNBC with its best monthly audience delivery for any program in the network’s 20-year history.
… And let’s not forget that Carlson lost the month despite having a presidential interview on March 15.
This March Maddowness — (please clap) — was powered by a rising wave of anti-Trump coverage, ultimately cresting with her controversial tax return reveal on March 14. And while that show was a nakedly trollish ratings play, the results speak for themselves. I don’t know what Tucker Carlson spoke about that night, and I’m confident nobody else does either.
The whole thing is really rather Shakespearian given that Maddow got her start on air as a regular contributor to Tucker Carlson’s old show on MSNBC — back during his bowtie period.
Now back to Megyn Kelly. It should be remembered that she left Tucker Carlson in a very favorable position. Throughout 2016, her show regularly dispensed with Maddow, even during the height of anti-Trump mania in the run-up to his election. In December 2016, Kelly held the number two spot behind Bill O’Reilly not for a quarter, but the entire year. Kelly was even known to beat out O’Reilly from time to time, (which to be fair, is something Carlson has also done once so far.) And while it’s true that Maddow managed to beat Kelly on a few off nights, while Kelly was on vacation, then AdWeek Editor Brian Flood, called those results unrepresentative, even taking to Twitter to scold right wing website Breitbart for misleadingly suggesting it was evidence of a Maddow surge.
. @BreitbartNews .. we know you don’t like @megynkelly but she DOMINATES ratings except for a few fluky nights. https://t.co/kjZTUInNfN
— Brian Flood (@briansflood) August 19, 2016
That surge, however, may be happening now.
Carlson losing March to Maddow is a very troubling sign, especially since the swirling miasma of Trump scandals which powered her victory are not likely to abate. While all of the networks saw large gains from this time last year, MSNBC prime time was up 61% compared Fox News 20%.
Now, It’s still early, and Carlson is as sharp a media pro as there is, but if he’s not careful, he may find his Cadillac passed by a little Nash Rambler at MSNBC named Rachel Maddow.
This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.
