It's a new day in late night, as Dave tops Conan in ratings; is it better to be the King or the Prince?

Those of us monitoring the night-to-night ratings knew this was coming, and now Nielsen has just made it official: For the first time in nearly four years, "Late Show with David Letterman" beat "The Tonight Show" in the weekly household ratings. And the margin of victory was substantial enough that it suggests a change in pecking order.

For now, Dave is the King of Late Night. It's unclear whether his reign will be short-lived or not. Yes, there is that "Palin boost" he got last Monday. But there is also (as anyone with access to the overnight ratings can see) a continuing Conan sag. His nightly audience has ebbed lower and lower over three weeks. Is 3.3 million viewers per night the new level for "The Tonight Show"? It appears so, but more time is needed to be sure. If that number holds, though, Conan will indeed be the Prince of Late Night, because Dave has been averaging 3.8 million viewers a night for much of the last year.

I think this news will bring a great deal of satisfaction to Letterman's legion of followers. Many people have been waiting for this day when Dave could claim to be #1 in late night again. But if that makes Conan the Prince of Late Night, well, there is this consolation: Like most princes, Conan has a lot more youth appeal than the old man. And that will work in his favor, eventually.

Let's start by looking at CBS's PR from this morning. Notice how it parses Conan's demographic victory:

LATE SHOW beat "The Tonight Show" in households (2.5/06 vs. 2.3/06, +9%) and viewers (3.46m vs. 3.32m, +4%). LATE SHOW beat "The Tonight Show" in viewers against an all-first run week of "Tonight Show" broadcasts for the first time since the week ending December 2, 2005 (the week Oprah Winfrey appeared on LATE SHOW).

LATE SHOW has also narrowed the gap with "The Tonight Show" in adults 18-49, trailing by just -0.5 this week, compared to -0.6 last week and by -1.4 rating points in Conan O'Brien's premiere week.

But as NBC's PR was only too happy to point out, that win in 18-49's was more impressive than CBS made it out to be:

Despite the ratings boost that came with Letterman's apology to Gov. Sarah Palin on the Monday, June 15 "Late Show," Conan's "Tonight" dominated the week in every key demographic, stretching his leads versus the same week last year and compared with the "Tonight" season-to-date average. Conan won the week by a 67 percent margin in adult 18-49 viewers (1.8 million adults 18-49 vs. 1.1 million for "Late Show"), up from a 53 percent win during the same week last year and up from a 34 percent "Tonight" margin for the season through the end of May.

It was almost a year ago that I ventured three possible scenarios for Conan once he took over "The Tonight Show." The worst-case scenario was based on his face plant in 1993, when 40 percent of Dave's audience rejected the red-headed guy who took over "Late Night." The "better-case" scenario called for Conan to lose 15-20 percent of his audience but dominate in demos. That's where he seems to be headed, though the losses in overall viewership will be more like 25 percent (if the Conan sag levels off, and that's a big if).

Now look at Conan's popularity with the next generation of late-night viewers:

In the younger half of the key 18-49 demographic, adults 18-34, Conan won the week by a towering 164 percent margin (930,000 adults 18-34 vs. "Late Show's" 352,000), up from 103 percent for the same week last year and up from 50 percent for "Tonight" this season through the end of May. (NBC)

So what does this all mean? It means both men are winners, which was the point Jay Leno was always trying to make, except most people didn't listen because Dave (although he never said as much) clearly didn't take a lot of satisfaction in being a well-paid runner-up.

I'm not saying things will be hunky-dory going forward. But the competition will probably be a little friendlier than it was between Jay and Dave (who, after all, appeared on Conan's show in 1994 and gave it his wholehearted stamp of approval).

Forty-five years ago, Johnny Carson said he was happy to cede the title of "King of Late Night" to his predecessor on the "Tonight Show," the great Jack Paar, and that he would be glad to accept the title of Prince. He said this knowing full well that eventually people would forget about Paar and quietly he, Carson, would ascend to the throne.

And of course, we all know what happened 20 years after that. Dave came along. And while Johnny's audience remained much larger than Dave's, it was older, and the network started charging sponsors more money to advertise on Dave's show than Johnny's show.

Something tells me Conan O'Brien knows this history all too well.

---

Finally, on a personal note, thank you to whoever at the "Tonight Show" read my last piece about the overly long show intros and took it to heart. For one night and one night only last week, executive producer Jeff Ross tried opening the show without the standing ovation. OK, I'll admit the effect was minimal. But it was nice to know someone shared some viewers' concerns. (Also, is it me or did Conan start saving the "string dance" until later in the monologue, like I suggested? Ahhhhhh, probably just a coincidence.)

Comments

[Steve]

Just to add another interesting note, the Hollywood Reporter is saying that this is the smallest weekly audience for The Tonight Show EVER on record (since at least 1992).

[Mark Bunker]

Knowing how much Conan respects Dave, I think part of him probably thinks that the way it should be.

Even losing in the ratings, Dave was the true king of late night. The real broadcaster, the authentic wit. The one Johnny wrote jokes for in his retirement years.

As brilliant as Jay was in his standup career, he dumbed down his act for the Tonight Show to such a degree that I couldn't look at him anymore. It's like the later Star Wars prequels tarnished the whole franchise.

And while Jay may have had more viewers than Dave, it's good to remember that more people will see Transformers II than saw Slumdog Millionaire. That doesn't make Transformers a better movie.

[Kenton]

Conan appears to be in the same funk that he was in when first taking over Late Night from Letterman, which made (and makes) his show so hit and miss.

When Letterman moved to the Late Show from Late Night, he had a plan in mind and executed it to the letter; Bill Carter's book, the Late Shift, says as much.

Conan appears to have no such plan: he's jittery as ever, the interviews have been weak, and the material shaky.

He also doesn't seem to have a good sense of the scale of his own show; he's regularly been making jokes about NBC's weak prime-time lineup, a shtick that Letterman was doing over 20 years ago, and which Leno stole over 15 years ago.

It makes Conan seem derivative at best, and like a bad sport at worst (given his new position at the network and all).

I'm sure the kinks will be ironed out over time, but I'm curious to see what happens once Leno returns to NBC - will it be the boost that Conan is looking for, or just one more thing for him to worry about?

[Mark]

In the end, it's not much of a victory for either. Conan will lose more viewers when Leno starts in September, and how long will he stay cool among the 18-34 year olds (Remember when Dave was cool among that demo?)

As for Dave, it will be nice to go out on top, but he is now the same age as when Johnny quit. He won't go on forever.

[Gaby Mauscada]

"Also, is it me or did Conan start saving the "string dance" until later in the monologue, like I suggested?"

Wow, feel self-important much, yeah? Are you really thinking Jeff Ross or Conan O'Brien would base such decisions on some douche's blog? LOL