NBC Rio Prime time Coverage

[krow]

i can just see quaker telling his sister "when your boss told you 'nice ass, sweetheart, you should show it off more" is that really sexist? i mean, maybe you just took it out of context? if this were 400 years ago, would you really have a problem with it? 80 percent of what he says to you is work related, so you have to look at the big picture. maybe because you're a woman, you're just more sensitive to this sort of thing. i think you're looking for sexist comments, so you're seeing everything that way. are you on you period?

[A-Money1983]

2 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

You kept a journal?  Not sure if I find that impressive or just wacky.  I do admire your dedication and this is coming from someone who has made it his mission to record every hour of Olympic coverage I can dating back to Albertville in 1992.  And it was most definitely a daunting task for this past Olympics.

It may seem wacko, but we're all just following our passions!  If anything, it's more of an OCD or FOMO.  Plus, I want to have these notebooks to look back on- seeing how I did the work, in lieu of checking Wikipedia.  The only bad thing is the changes I have to go back and change once an athlete is stripped of a medal.  

As for media theories, Tokyo will likely be more successful- given the other great Games that had July start dates.  I really don't understand how preseason football can take away that many viewers, aside from a small fraction of the male demographic.

As for the Winter Games in 2018...  I'm a purist through and through, and wasn't too big at first on X-Games Sports being added, but I don't see how the WOG can survive without them.  I can suppose they will bank on Shaun White, Gracie Gold, Mikaela Shiffrin and speed skating resurgence to get the ratings back to almost-Vancouver/SLC/Lillehammer levels.  I also want to see how they factor in amateur hockey, fake snow, angry Korean crowd after Adelina's win in 2014. They also have a bad reputation for cheating at events they host-  Roy Jones Jr. snub in 1988, controversial wins vs. Italy and Spain at the 2002 World Cup, and multiple incidents at the last Asiad.

That, and pray there aren't constant reports of bad accommodations and constant threats from PRK- 45 miles away.

Finally, can we expect similarities to how CBS covered Nagano in 1998?  With results on the internet, it seemed super cutting edge.  I was only 14 at the time, but I enjoyed those Games as much as any other WOG.

 

 

[Quaker2001]

On 9/5/2016 at 3:54 AM, A-Money1983 said:

Finally, can we expect similarities to how CBS covered Nagano in 1998?  With results on the internet, it seemed super cutting edge.  I was only 14 at the time, but I enjoyed those Games as much as any other WOG.

Won't be even remotely close.  In `98, CBS had their 3 hour primetime show, the late night show (some nights it was highlights, other nights they had live hockey), and the morning show which was essentially just an Olympic-themed 2 hours that contained no competition, save for the morning they begrudgingly showed the women's hockey final, which later was shown in full a few days later.  Only on the weekends did they have extended coverage and you can't count TNT as that was produced separately.  Plus the primetime show was under strict orders to not run long to make sure Letterman started on time, so CBS caught a lot of flack for not staying on to cover events, including Picabo Street's gold in the Super G.

Completely different world in 2018.  NBC will likely have longer primetime shows every night that will be full of live coverage.  They have cable to cover everything else.  And of course everything will be streamed.  It will all bear very little resemblance to what CBS offered in Nagano.

[Quaker2001]

On 9/5/2016 at 3:03 AM, krow said:

but doesn't NBC have to pay some of that ad money back since they didn't deliver what they promised in terms of ratings?

Nope.  Advertisers don't get their money back.  Rather NBC is then obligated to offer make-good spots, essentially free commercial time.  Doesn't even have to come during the Olympics.  NBC could offer it during football coverage or another agreed upon event.

[DamC]

MIlan would have made more sense than Rome for 2024... They could have used the Expo 2015 site to build the Olympic Village and built a new stadium that would have become the home of Inter or Milan AC (whichever wants out of San Siro)

[JMarkSnow2012]

1 hour ago, Quaker2001 said:

Nope.  Advertisers don't get their money back.  Rather NBC is then obligated to offer make-good spots, essentially free commercial time.  Doesn't even have to come during the Olympics.  NBC could offer it during football coverage or another agreed upon event.

It seems they've already made it up by using slots during the Games which would otherwise probably have been taken up with promos for upcoming NBC shows:

Quote

...ad buyers, who committed more than $1.2 billion to the Rio Games before they started, are walking away largely pleased with the ratings, adds Campanelli. What expectations were not met — Rio averaged a 14.4 household rating on NBC, below the promised 17.5 rating — were made good in the "scatter" market. Media buyers say their Olympic clients are happy at the conclusion of the 17-night run.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/olympics-tv-ratings-rio-2016-922345

[A-Money1983]

I wonder if there were any issues with how the Games were teased and promoted, which resulted in the low ratings.  I know Olympic spots with athletes samba-dancing were run ad nauseum and certain spots were aired going back two Super Bowls ago.

If anything, it may have maintained awareness, reminding more people to use the streams, and fewer to plug into the evening show.  It could be quantity > quality for them.

Could more have been done on the tease/promotional front to hook the 18-35's, or younger?

Going back to Nagano, it seemed cutting edge at the time because it was the first with up-to-the-minute internet results (powered by IBM).  Atlanta may have done the same, but wasn't near as accessible.  By the time Sydney rolled around, I believe it was one of the things that hurt them- as far as viewership in the States goes.

[Quaker2001]

On 9/5/2016 at 3:03 AM, krow said:

*and as for the sexism conversation, that's doa. i told you i wouldn't, so if you want to play "but what if the sexism really isn't sexism?" despite the hard research and evidence i presented, then you can feel fucking free to do that somewhere else. the rest of us -- who live in reality -- will continue to hold NBC responsible for its outdated and unacceptable behavior. obviously you don't. i feel really bad for the women in your life who have to deal with your casual apologist behavior to everyday sexism but whatever. this isn't a youtube comment section so we don't have to have this discussion.

Hard research and evidence.  Right, forgot about that.  I'm trying not to patronize you here (well, I was with that last comment), but this sounds an awful lot like so many conversations we've all probably had on social that go something like "you don't share my political views, therefore I can't talk to talk to you about this."  No skin off my back there if you want to cut off this conversation, but you're fucking free to go somewhere else if you want if you can't stand the thought of my participation in this thread.

So here's a counter-point..

Olympics Sexism Watch: Wives, Broadcast Delays, and Swimming “Like a Man”

Again, you're not wrong if you think comments like those are sexist.  I'm also not wrong if I don't interpret them the same way.  Someone made a case that the Hosszu comment is not necessarily sexist.  Again, not right or wrong here.  2 perfectly valid interpretations of the same comment.  I actually disagree with the article with regards to the Chicago Tribune tweet.  That one I do believe was sexist and was only framed the way it was to generate more clicks.  As someone who works in the media, that's almost more a sad state of affairs for the concept of journalism than it is about sexism, but that's another story altogether.

And then Ledecky.. You talk about her and Biles as if the comparison to men is to justify their worthiness as athletes.  Again, that's your interpretation of those comments, as if anyone thinks less of them without that qualifier to note how much better they are than everyone else they're competing with.  I'm surprised you didn't point out the "swim like a man" comments about Ledecky because that does seem pretty offensive and ridiculous.  Oh wait, that actually came from several teammates and coaches, not from NBC.  And when Rowdy Gaines addressed it, a lot of people probably heard " A lot of people think she swims like a man" and missed the next line of " She swims like Katie Ledecky, for crying out loud"  That was my point where a lot of people - mostly all the ignorant morons on Twitter, the types who would comment on a headline before after reading the article - and not necessarily those with fully composed thoughts like you, are ruining the message by jumping all over anything that sounds like it might offend them without actually looking for context.

I told you earlier.. I'm not disagreeing there is sexism out there.  But it's coming from everywhere in Olympic coverage, not just NBC.  If you want to demand they be held responsible, I'm not sure what recourse you're looking for there.  That's like asking MSNBC to be held accountable for being too liberal or Fox News for being too conservative.  The difference there being that the future of our country is at stake when it's matters of politics.  We as viewers do deserve better from NBC, but until our money goes directly to them rather than indirectly, they're not serving us.  You can continue to make this about "hard research and evidence," but this is not a black or white issue of right and wrong.  Your opinion, and yes the opinion of many others, is that NBC's treatment of the Olympics is sexist.  That is not a matter of fact and the idea that I don't live in reality because I'm not on your side is not something I'm going to apologize for.    But no, continue to characterize me and my values based solely on this back-and-forth and tell me I'm the problem because I won't agree with you.  And for the record.. I don't have a sister, but good to see you're still you that you'll look for the hyperbole where an obvious case of workplace sexual harassment, which probably would actually get someone fired from their job, is comparable to a television commentator making a comment about a swimmer's husband and coach and trying to pass it off as a "fact" that comment is sexist.

[daniel anderson400]

6 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Won't be even remotely close.  In `98, CBS had their 3 hour primetime show, the late night show (some nights it was highlights, other nights they had live hockey), and the morning show which was essentially just an Olympic-themed 2 hours that contained no competition, save for the morning they begrudgingly showed the women's hockey final, which later was shown in full a few days later.  Only on the weekends did they have extended coverage and you can't count TNT as that was produced separately.  Plus the primetime show was under strict orders to not run long to make sure Letterman started on time, so CBS caught a lot of flack for not staying on to cover events, including Picabo Street's gold in the Super G.

Completely different world in 2018.  NBC will likely have longer primetime shows every night that will be full of live coverage.  They have cable to cover everything else.  And of course everything will be streamed.  It will all bear very little resemblance to what CBS offered in Nagano.

You make the point that CBS was "under strict orders to not run long to make sure Letterman started on time" They didn't do that with the NCAA Tournament, but  they always gave Letterman those 4 nights off.

NBC will give Fallon two weeks off and go wall to wall skiing and figure skating in 18. I had a dish and can remember watching Nagano more on CBC than CBS. They were trying to juggle the Canada hockey semfinal with with the women's figure skating final, but they went commercial free and showed both events, even using that double box. They showed Picabo Street's gold in the Super G before CBS did. They showed more hockey than CBS, but skiing was in the morning in Japan, but figure skating often conflicted with hockey.

[A-Money1983]

I wonder if February sweeps factored into them keeping Letterman on the air.

[zekekelso]

Letterman's mom, reporting from Lilyhammer. Best Olympic correspondent ever?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CVKCtywRZo

[Barcelona_'92]

On 9/5/2016 at 1:27 AM, Quaker2001 said:

As for your wild ass estimate, here's a hard ass fact.. 217 million people in the United States watch at least part of the London Olympics (I don't know if there is a number out there for Rio yet). 

198 million people watched part of the Rio Games.  I wonder how many of the 19 million fewer people who watched Rio than London were under the age of 35.

7 hours ago, Quaker2001 said:

Won't be even remotely close.  In `98, CBS had their 3 hour primetime show, the late night show (some nights it was highlights, other nights they had live hockey), and the morning show which was essentially just an Olympic-themed 2 hours that contained no competition, save for the morning they begrudgingly showed the women's hockey final, which later was shown in full a few days later.  Only on the weekends did they have extended coverage and you can't count TNT as that was produced separately.  Plus the primetime show was under strict orders to not run long to make sure Letterman started on time, so CBS caught a lot of flack for not staying on to cover events, including Picabo Street's gold in the Super G.

Completely different world in 2018.  NBC will likely have longer primetime shows every night that will be full of live coverage.  They have cable to cover everything else.  And of course everything will be streamed.  It will all bear very little resemblance to what CBS offered in Nagano.

IMO, the CBS coverage in 1998 was the worst coverage of any Games in my lifetime (since the 1988 Winter Games).  Part of it wasn't CBS's fault - much of the live skiing coverage they had planned got delayed due to bad weather, so they were left with very little to show other than features and figure skating practice sessions.  But they also made a lot of bad programming decisions to show events 24 hours later on tape that they could have shown live in primetime or late night (like the men's and women's aerials finals, which were both won by U.S. athletes).  They even delayed a couple of speed skating events more than 36 hours.  Going into Nagano, CBS knew it was their last Games, and I don't think they put the effort into the production that they might have had they been in the running for future Games.

In 2018, I expect that NBC will have 4 hours of primetime coverage each night (8pm-midnight), with an expanded late night of either 1.5 or 2 hours starting at 12:35am.  Virtually all of that coverage should be live.  Like 2010 and 2014, I would guess that NBC will have a 2 hour daytime window to show speed skating, cross-country skiing, etc., on tape, with live longform coverage of those events on NBCSN overnight.

[Quaker2001]

7 hours ago, daniel anderson400 said:

You make the point that CBS was "under strict orders to not run long to make sure Letterman started on time" They didn't do that with the NCAA Tournament, but  they always gave Letterman those 4 nights off.

7 hours ago, A-Money1983 said:

I wonder if February sweeps factored into them keeping Letterman on the air.

I think it probably did.  That plus the long-standing rivalry in the ratings with Leno.  Different during the NCAA Tournament where it's only 4 nights rather than 10 and CBS can't really do much about the schedule.  They have more control at the Olympics, as we know.

7 hours ago, daniel anderson400 said:

NBC will give Fallon two weeks off and go wall to wall skiing and figure skating in 18. I had a dish and can remember watching Nagano more on CBC than CBS. They were trying to juggle the Canada hockey semfinal with with the women's figure skating final, but they went commercial free and showed both events, even using that double box. They showed Picabo Street's gold in the Super G before CBS did. They showed more hockey than CBS, but skiing was in the morning in Japan, but figure skating often conflicted with hockey.

That makes 2 of us.  Don't remember the hockey game and the figure skating.  Most nights I was awake until the late night show was off the air (usually around 3am or 4am), but I couldn't make it to the morning show.  And no sh1t they showed the Super G before CBS.  Picabo's run occurred before 11pm ET, but CBS didn't want to risk running long.  So they saved it nearly 24 hours for that reason.

[Quaker2001]

5 hours ago, Barcelona_'92 said:

198 million people watched part of the Rio Games.  I wonder how many of the 19 million fewer people who watched Rio than London were under the age of 35.

According to the NBC release (I hadn't seen that buried in there), that's the TV only audience.  Although I guess that makes it comparable to the number from London.  Either way, that's a pretty big drop-off to lose close to 9% of their audience, and that number technically should be bigger owing to the growth in population here.  No wonder NBC didn't do much to publicize that one.

5 hours ago, Barcelona_'92 said:

198 million people watched part of the Rio Games.  I wonder how many of the 19 million fewer people who watched Rio than London were under the age of 35.

IMO, the CBS coverage in 1998 was the worst coverage of any Games in my lifetime (since the 1988 Winter Games).  Part of it wasn't CBS's fault - much of the live skiing coverage they had planned got delayed due to bad weather, so they were left with very little to show other than features and figure skating practice sessions.  But they also made a lot of bad programming decisions to show events 24 hours later on tape that they could have shown live in primetime or late night (like the men's and women's aerials finals, which were both won by U.S. athletes).  They even delayed a couple of speed skating events more than 36 hours.  Going into Nagano, CBS knew it was their last Games, and I don't think they put the effort into the production that they might have had they been in the running for future Games.

Much like ABC's lame duck 1988 Olympics.  CBS could have made an effort to show more live - the weather-related postponements notwithstanding - but that was never going to end well for them.  Definitely could have done a lot better with those Olympics, and it's a shame too since that's when they were starting to emerge out of the mid-90's mis-managed edition of the CBS Sports department.  Would have been cool to see CBS broadcast an Olympics when they had their act together rather than during the decade they didn't.

5 hours ago, Barcelona_'92 said:

In 2018, I expect that NBC will have 4 hours of primetime coverage each night (8pm-midnight), with an expanded late night of either 1.5 or 2 hours starting at 12:35am.  Virtually all of that coverage should be live.  Like 2010 and 2014, I would guess that NBC will have a 2 hour daytime window to show speed skating, cross-country skiing, etc., on tape, with live longform coverage of those events on NBCSN overnight.

Some nights it's going to be more than 4, similar to Beijing, simply owing to the figure skating schedule where some nights (according to the preliminary schedule), it doesn't end until well after Midnight ET.  There will be plenty of opportunity for live figure skating, alpine skiing (weather permitting) and other sports.  Don't know that we'll see an expanded late night show.  Unlike Seoul where a lot of events fell into that window, that's not going to be the case here.  Hopefully, like you said, NBCSN has some of the overnight events in full and doesn't focus too heavily on curling and hockey (the latter will be a tough sell if the NHL players aren't in Korea) and then NBC's afternoon show can mostly be a recap of those events.

[A-Money1983]

So, do you have everything from 1992-2004 on VHS, and everything thing else recorded digitally?

Interesting if so.  I just Oder the highlight reels, most of which came from eBay.  It's a shame there's not one from Sochi, and doesn't appear to be one from Rio.  I know everything is available on YouTube, but clicking on separate clips isn't the same as a full linear narrative found on the VHS/DVD's.

[Quaker2001]

57 minutes ago, A-Money1983 said:

So, do you have everything from 1992-2004 on VHS, and everything thing else recorded digitally?

Interesting if so.  I just Oder the highlight reels, most of which came from eBay.  It's a shame there's not one from Sochi, and doesn't appear to be one from Rio.  I know everything is available on YouTube, but clicking on separate clips isn't the same as a full linear narrative found on the VHS/DVD's.

Pretty much, yea.  That includes all the cable coverage too, plus everything from CBC in 1998 and 2000.  So this is now 14 Olympics in my collection.  Lot of DVDs (I've since converted all the old stuff from VHS) and 1 big ass hard drive for Rio.

Equally interesting about the highlight reels.  That's very old school of you.  Once upon a time, that was a big deal when those came out.  These days not so much.  Not enough of a market for a product like that in an era with - like you said - lots of clips online and available on demand.  I do miss the Bud Greenspan docs, but I don't think we'll be seeing anything like that ever again.

[A-Money1983]

Did you watch "First," the Official Film of the 2012 London Olympics?

Its presentation couldn't have been more different than the Greenspan docs.  It was very scattered, and aimed at a British audience.  There was very little promotion of it.  

It was nice seeing some athletes featured in it medal in Rio, including Kelmindi (then of Albania) and French sprinter Christophe Lemaitre.

If the Greenspan docs can't be found on YouTube or eBay, what is the best way to come across them?  So far, I have the ones from SLC and Athens.

[A-Money1983]

Interesting discussion which has helped me pick up some things about the Paras.

I'm really not upset at all about NBC's TV coverage of the Paralympics.  It would be nice if the sports were bumped up from NBCSN to NBC, and not shown at the wee hours of the morning, bur right now-  it's wishful thinking.  It's still more coverage than what we received in Sochi, and *substantially* more than what we had on London, where 99% of what I saw was on the computer (expect for NBC's recap show which aired a full week later).

TeamUSA.org has also been solid in terms of showing all of the United States highlights, and I have yet to miss any event.

If you are checking off every sport down the list, as I am, you can also go to YouTube -> search for desired sport-> and filter results by "Today".

There are also clips on TeamUSA's YouTube page, and some on ParalympicSport.TV.  Social media feeds are pretty consistent as well.

Along with the OG, my wishes are:

1.  Video remains available and easily accessible, more live streams, etc.

2.  Better presented prime time show.  NBCSN actually does a great job for being a cable network.

3.  Paralympics to air for better times of the day.  I know good-and-well it can't pre-empt Broncos vs. Panthers (especially since I'm a Broncos fan), but it can surely attain better hours than Mecan Auto Auctions or fishing.  1-5 a.m. are the wee hours of the morning, and doesn't provide room for water-cooler discussion unless someone sets their DVR the night before.  Doesn't speak well to the casual fans.

I've also learned that social media matters.  A shining example is how ticket sales shot from 12-65% in only two weeks.

Quaker, any thoughts?  You're usually pretty good at providing perspective on these things.

[JMarkSnow2012]

On 07/09/2016 at 7:44 PM, A-Money1983 said:

Did you watch "First," the Official Film of the 2012 London Olympics?

Its presentation couldn't have been more different than the Greenspan docs.  It was very scattered, and aimed at a British audience.  There was very little promotion of it.  

It was nice seeing some athletes featured in it medal in Rio, including Kelmindi (then of Albania) and French sprinter Christophe Lemaitre.

If the Greenspan docs can't be found on YouTube or eBay, what is the best way to come across them?  So far, I have the ones from SLC and Athens.

Yes, it's still avaiable on DVD. I think "scattered" is not quite the right word- 12 athletes were selected to be followed in the lead-up to the games, training in their home countries, then shown at the games variously succeeding and failing.

[A-Money1983]

I couldn't think of another word.  It was very non-linear, both in editing and structure- especially compared to the straightforward approach and narration from the Greenspan docs.

[Quaker2001]

10 hours ago, A-Money1983 said:

Interesting discussion which has helped me pick up some things about the Paras.

I'm really not upset at all about NBC's TV coverage of the Paralympics.  It would be nice if the sports were bumped up from NBCSN to NBC, and not shown at the wee hours of the morning, bur right now-  it's wishful thinking.  It's still more coverage than what we received in Sochi, and *substantially* more than what we had on London, where 99% of what I saw was on the computer (expect for NBC's recap show which aired a full week later).

TeamUSA.org has also been solid in terms of showing all of the United States highlights, and I have yet to miss any event.

If you are checking off every sport down the list, as I am, you can also go to YouTube -> search for desired sport-> and filter results by "Today".

There are also clips on TeamUSA's YouTube page, and some on ParalympicSport.TV.  Social media feeds are pretty consistent as well.

Along with the OG, my wishes are:

1.  Video remains available and easily accessible, more live streams, etc.

2.  Better presented prime time show.  NBCSN actually does a great job for being a cable network.

3.  Paralympics to air for better times of the day.  I know good-and-well it can't pre-empt Broncos vs. Panthers (especially since I'm a Broncos fan), but it can surely attain better hours than Mecan Auto Auctions or fishing.  1-5 a.m. are the wee hours of the morning, and doesn't provide room for water-cooler discussion unless someone sets their DVR the night before.  Doesn't speak well to the casual fans.

I've also learned that social media matters.  A shining example is how ticket sales shot from 12-65% in only two weeks.

Quaker, any thoughts?  You're usually pretty good at providing perspective on these things.

You think there are casual fans of the Paralympics?  You want water cooler discussion?  Not gonna happen.  Your interest and passion in the Paralympics is admirable, but I hope you can appreciate what a tiny minority you're in and how few people share that interest.  Especially now that we're into September with NFL and college football starting up, baseball pennant races in full swing, it's tough to gain any traction especially after 2 1/2 weeks of the Olympics.  I couldn't tell you how well NBCSN does with their auto auction shows and yes, perhaps the Paralympics deserve better, but is there really a market out there for it?  For die-hards like you, streaming is there.  The TV coverage is obviously a big step up from London.  But remember, it still takes a lot of resources to present an event like the Paralympics.  How much does an auto auction show cost?  Probably not as much simply in terms of infrastructure.  So if you're looking for the Paralympics to become water cooler talk, that's a pipe dream you should know is very much not possible.

[JMarkSnow2012]

16 minutes ago, Quaker2001 said:

You think there are casual fans of the Paralympics?  You want water cooler discussion?  Not gonna happen.  Your interest and passion in the Paralympics is admirable, but I hope you can appreciate what a tiny minority you're in and how few people share that interest.  Especially now that we're into September with NFL and college football starting up, baseball pennant races in full swing, it's tough to gain any traction especially after 2 1/2 weeks of the Olympics.  I couldn't tell you how well NBCSN does with their auto auction shows and yes, perhaps the Paralympics deserve better, but is there really a market out there for it?  For die-hards like you, streaming is there.  The TV coverage is obviously a big step up from London.  But remember, it still takes a lot of resources to present an event like the Paralympics.  How much does an auto auction show cost?  Probably not as much simply in terms of infrastructure.  So if you're looking for the Paralympics to become water cooler talk, that's a pipe dream you should know is very much not possible.

There are casual fans of the Paralympics in the UK. So far we're only seeing overnight figures but it looks as if Channel 4 will get viewing figures almost as good for its live coverage of Rio between 9pm and 1am UK time, as it did for its live coverage of London in primetime; around 2 million, which would equate to 10 million in a population the size of the US. The Paralympics gain traction precisely because they are like a really cool, fun revisit to the Olympics.

It does take a lot or resources to cover the Paralympics, but those resources are mostly supplied by OBS. For presenting, other English-speaking countries could potentially just buy in Channel 4's feed.

[Quaker2001]

9 minutes ago, JMarkSnow2012 said:

There are casual fans of the Paralympics in the UK. So far we're only seeing overnight figures but it looks as if Channel 4 will get viewing figures almost as good for its live coverage of Rio between 9pm and 1am UK time, as it did for its live coverage of London in primetime; around 2 million, which would equate to 10 million in a population the size of the US. The Paralympics gain traction precisely because they are like a really cool, fun revisit to the Olympics.

It does take a lot or resources to cover the Paralympics, but those resources are mostly supplied by OBS. For presenting, other English-speaking countries could potentially just buy in Channel 4's feed.

Good for the UK.  I know they have a deeper connection with the Paralympics than most countries, although I am surprised to hear that about the TV ratings.  Still think that's the exception rather than the rule.  The problem here with an idea of a "fun revisit to the Olympics" is that the Olympics are an all-encompassing spectacle that last more than 2 weeks.  Easier to sell that in August than it is in early September where there is a lot more sports action going on here to compete for viewers' attention.  And a lot more people are going to be interested in football (American football, that is) than the Paralympics.

[A-Money1983]

Anything is a tough sell going up against football and MLB pennant races.  Sydney was one of the most-successful Olympic Games ever, but ratings here in the States were a struggle for those very reasons.

A couple of wishful thoughts are:

A.  More of the coverage can air on NBC.  Maybe not on Thursday or Sunday nights, but a one-hour evening show during the week can suffice.

B.  The NBCSN coverage can run at better times of the night.  Airing 12-5 a.m. is great for recording and fast-forwarding through in the morning before work.  

However, I won't complain since it's far more available than it was four years ago.  The Paras seem to do well on social media, and pick up more buzz than the low-cost shows on NBCSN (auto auctions, fishing, Red Bull Signature Series)- partially due to the brevity, similar to the OG.

[Barcelona_'92]

NBCSN's coverage of the Paralympic opening ceremony from 7-10pm Eastern on Wednesday drew 125,000 viewers.  Their NASCAR coverage routinely draws over 3 million viewers.  Even Premier League games at 6am draw more than 125,000.  That's why most of the Paralympic coverage is in the afternoon and overnight.  NBCSN is not going to pre-empt it's other programming that draws 20 times as many viewers.