IPSOS-STAT passed on its lastest data on Arab TV audiences to one of its preferred outlets. While I don't have great confidence in the IPSOS data from Saudi Arabia, these numbers are worth mentioning just because they are the first publicly released numbers we've got measuring Arab market share during the Israel-Lebanon war. IPSOS (which usually tends to favor al-Arabiya, for whatever reason) confirms the anecdotal sense that al-Jazeera did very well by the war: "During the war, Al Jazeera showed up a strong number one in most places."
What about al-Hurra?
During the month of September [IPSOS] ranked Alhurra number 56 out of the top 100 Middle East Satellite channels viewed in Saudi Arabia.... While rated well behind news leaders Al Arabiya and Al Jazeera, Alhurra shows up far ahead of the American news channel CNN, which ranks 83rd. In Saudi Arabia, Alhurra was also ranked ahead of other Middle East channels including those of Syria, Oman, Qatar, and Jordan in September. It also ran ahead of the U.S. Discovery Channel's Animal Planet, which ranked 79th.
Al-Hurra beat Animal Planet! I'm searching for the right punch-line here...
Sad thing is, by American public diplomacy standards, beating Animal Planet is actually something of a coup...
That's interesting - would no.56 give Al Hurra a daily audience in the millions, the hundreds of thousands or the tens of thousands? Are there 50 odd sat stations that all do very well in the Arab world with not that big a gap between them, or is it a case of a top 5 and bottom 95?
Posted by: Dirk | October 14, 2006 at 05:41 PM
I found Snyder's positive spin to be... bizare and delusional.
As to the question supra, I would expect one needs to see the data. However my sense being out here is that the top five get most viewing and the rest are mere confettis.
One consistenly sees in public venues Jazeerah and Arabiyah, the MBC channels, the Sat version of the local national channel(s) and then rarely others. Music channels of course are popular as well, and have an SMS driven business model.
Being No. 56 strikes me as being placed, well, just ahead of the Real Estate Channel.
(The truiphant note in Snyder's blog re beating CNN and CNBC really amused me.... beating out American English language channels in one's home market. Impressive that.)
Posted by: The Lounsbury | October 14, 2006 at 07:16 PM
I'd basically agree with Lounsbury - it's a few market leaders in each major category (I'd bet that a couple of the religious stations like Iqra rate up there too), and then a whole bunch of space fillers. And beating CNN (in English) in Saudi Arabia, along with Jordanian and Syrian and Qatari TV, is roughly on a par with beating the Real Estate Channel. There's a reason that on my del.icio.us tag I referred to that post as Best.Al-Hurra.Flack.Ever!
Posted by: the aardvark | October 14, 2006 at 07:21 PM
Right, I always forget about the religious stations, but they definatley have their own audience subset.
Posted by: The Lounsbury | October 14, 2006 at 08:06 PM
Sad thing is, by American public diplomacy standards, beating Animal Planet is actually something of a coup...
You bet! The question is, when will Al Jazeera beat Oprah?
Posted by: Craig | October 15, 2006 at 02:43 AM
isn't animal planet broadcast in english? so is CNN. it shouldn't be a surprise that arabic-language broadcasts will do better than foreign language ones in SA
Posted by: upyernoz | October 15, 2006 at 09:14 AM
Animal Planet does more for US public diplomacy than al-Hurra does.
Posted by: Yohan | October 16, 2006 at 01:45 AM
Yes - whatever
Posted by: johnsonj | October 22, 2006 at 11:29 AM