Appetites Still Running Strong For Cable TV Coverage Of Simpson Trial

To paraphrase that old song: Marcia Clark says “tomato,” Johnnie Cochran says “tomahto,” let’s call the whole thing off.

But no such luck. The O.J. Simpson trial just goes on and on.

Among those losing patience are the broadcast networks. In particular, the news divisions of ABC and CBS recently tightened their budgets for their all-too-costly coverage, and CBS canceled its thrice-daily “O.J. Minute.” One reason for the cutbacks: Audiences seem to prefer the networks’ regular daytime fare over Simpson intrusions.

On cable, however, the gavel-to-gavel coverage by CNN, Court TV and E! Entertainment has been warmly embraced by viewers. Firstquarter ratings for basic cable overall were the highest of any quarter in cable TV history, according to Nielsen Media Research, and the Simpson trial is credited with about 40 percent of that increase. Of basic cable’s 100 highest-rated single programs, 99 were part of CNN’s live Simpson coverage.

Clearly, then, someone is watching. But what about you viewers who have a life - or at least a day job - and can’t get to a TV while court is in session?

Never fear. Every weeknight, you have three distinct choices for how to play catch-up. All, as it happens, are courtesy of cable.

On “Prime Time Justice” (5 to 7 p.m., repeated at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m.), Court TV provides extensive wrapups of the day’s O.J. developments, often encompassing much of the program’s two-hour block.

On CNBC, “Rivera Live” offers a one-hour rehash and discussion at 6 p.m., repeated at 9 p.m. (CNBC also has added a weekly half-hour update each Saturday at 4 p.m. and repeated Sunday at 4 p.m. It’s anchored by Steve Gendel and Sheila Stainback.)

And weeknights on CNN at 5:30, “The O.J. Simpson Trial” is a crisp, compact half-hour digest.

Each program is different in duration and style. Which is right for you?

For the real O.J. hard-case, no surprise: Court TV’s “Prime Time Justice” is your choice.

Anchoring from New York, Terry Moran delves deep into the Simpson trial with a team of Los Angelesbased correspondents that include Gregg Jarrett, Dan Abrams, Kristin Jeannette-Meyersand Fred Graham.

What results is a methodical, step-by-step plotting of the day’s events. Analysis, commentary and one-on-one discussions with legal experts are interspersed with lengthy (four to six minutes) trial excerpts.

At the other end of the scale is CNN’s highlights show. Anchored alternately by Atlanta-based Linden Soles and Bobbie Battista, it starts briskly with an on-screen rundown of the day’s developments (here’s a good one from Monday’s edition: “Lots of rhetoric”).

Besides courtroom clips, there is also helpful background. Monday’s edition included a crash course in how blood evidence is collected, and a thoughtful refresher on the difference between the terms “criminalist” and “criminologist.”

Another plus for this show: It’s just the facts, ma’am - not a second-guessing legal expert in sight.

Of course, maybe you like that kind of thing. If so, you’ll go for CNBC’s “Rivera Live.”

Originally a general-interest talk show, it has devoted itself to the Simpson case since last June, boosting viewership tenfold and taking its place as CNBC’s highest-rated show.

Based at CNBC headquarters in Fort Lee, N.J., host Geraldo Rivera starts each edition (bearing its own jaunty title, such as Monday’s “Out for Blood”) by checking in with NBC News correspondent John Gibson in Los Angeles.

Then Rivera, bespectacled as if to signal this show’s intellectual rigor, officiates a lively round-table session, cross-examining three or more legal experts at a time and sometimes pausing to hear their answers.

Another feature of “Rivera Live” is viewer call-ins.

Monday night, Betty Lou in Missouri insisted that the glove found at Simpson’s estate (and displayed in court that day) didn’t match the previously viewed glove found at Nicole Simpson’s home.

“They aren’t a pair!” Betty Lou told Geraldo.

But the most popular topic on Monday’s show had to do with the trial’s seeming endlessness.

Folksy, fringe-sleeved attorney Gerry Spence lamented that proceedings which should have been concluded in a couple of weeks will instead “go on and on.”

That is, Spence predicted, “until the judge and the lawyers are tired of being looked at, or until we are tired of looking at them. And when THAT occurs, then the trial will be over.”

But what will we watch then?