The Song Fight Bulletin Board

On the one hand, Nielsen's insistence on deciding TV rankings based on the viewing habits of a small sampling group has killed a lot of great TV shows. Plus, their refusal to adapt to a market where an increasing number of viewers watch the shows online on-demand is close to rendering them obsolete.

On the other hand, I've just been asked to participate in the panel. So... who wants to bribe me to watch their favorite show and keep it on the air?

Generic wrote:Plus, their refusal to adapt to a market where an increasing number of viewers watch the shows online on-demand is close to rendering them obsolete.

I think you should learn about the company and the industry they serve before drawing such conclusions. Why do you think they refuse to adapt to new technologies and online viewing? That's simply wrong. You may disagree with their conclusions, methods and tools, but they cover pretty much every form of media consumption and advertising. That's what they do.

Sure Jon, unfortunately Twin Peaks is already off the air... so I won't bother bribing you.

roymond wrote:

Generic wrote:Plus, their refusal to adapt to a market where an increasing number of viewers watch the shows online on-demand is close to rendering them obsolete.

I think you should learn about the company and the industry they serve before drawing such conclusions. Why do you think they refuse to adapt to new technologies and online viewing? That's simply wrong. You may disagree with their conclusions, methods and tools, but they cover pretty much every form of media consumption and advertising. That's what they do.

I was on a panel for a Nielsen sister company for a while, and you're right, they cover all aspects of the industry (plus a whole lot of consumer-based industries). But they do so through separate panels.

When I start, the information that I contribute to a show's rating share will come exclusively from a data transmitter connected to my TV set (the one exception is sweeps week, when they supplement the meter's data with a handwritten diary I'll need to turn in.)

If I learn any differently, I'll let you know, but I'm pulling my information directly from Nielsen's website:

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/nc/portal/s ... 0a260aRCRD

Generic wrote:

roymond wrote:

Generic wrote:Plus, their refusal to adapt to a market where an increasing number of viewers watch the shows online on-demand is close to rendering them obsolete.

I think you should learn about the company and the industry they serve before drawing such conclusions. Why do you think they refuse to adapt to new technologies and online viewing? That's simply wrong. You may disagree with their conclusions, methods and tools, but they cover pretty much every form of media consumption and advertising. That's what they do.

I was on a panel for a Nielsen sister company for a while, and you're right, they cover all aspects of the industry (plus a whole lot of consumer-based industries). But they do so through separate panels.

When I start, the information that I contribute to a show's rating share will come exclusively from a data transmitter connected to my TV set (the one exception is sweeps week, when they supplement the meter's data with a handwritten diary I'll need to turn in.)

If I learn any differently, I'll let you know, but I'm pulling my information directly from Nielsen's website:

http://www.nielsenmedia.com/nc/portal/s ... 0a260aRCRD

Yeah, that's how they sample different medium. There have been various attempts to track a single user throughout the day across every media exposure (including public screens and billboards) but as you can imagine, this is an extremely expensive/tedious process. So they focus on one at a time (trying to get each one as representative as possible), and then compile those results for an over-all view of what's happening. As I said, you may not like their methods or results, but they tweak them constantly. If they didn't they would surely die, but they are pretty healthy these days.

The industry then uses their numbers (and others') to make decisions. Obviously, they don't decide what shows work or not, etc.

Okay, we kind of agree, though the networks have so far been vague about what role online viewing plays in their market share ratings. Most of the end-of-season articles I read indicated that Fringe and Dollhouse were both renewed due to popularity with the online crowd, in spite of low ratings. This would appear to imply that the ratings don't take Hulu or fox.com viewings into account, which is unfortunate, because I watched both of those shows almost exclusively on Hulu.

I'll be happy to share more info about the process as I go through it.

On a tangential note, why do networks even need survey companies to measure online viewing? They can get absolute numbers of viewers plus geographical data from their web server alone, and some of the legal online viewing sites (Hulu, for instance) have user registration, through which they collect other demographic data (sex and age).

Nielsen rates what it rates, and the nets obviously include other criteria when making a decision. So online buzz about a show will help decide its fate even in the face of dismal Nielsens. If I were Hulu, I'd be selling hit counts to the networks.

If you would, please go back in time, taking your Nielsen gadget with you, and religiously watch Pushing Daisies. Maybe clone yourself a few thousand times while you're at it. And your TV. Clone your TV too. And I guess your house, then. JUST DO WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO, JON ERIC.

My wife was a little reluctant, and I convinced her with two words: Pushing Daisies.

Too bad they didn't recruit me (and about a thousand more people like me) a year ago. That was by far my favorite show of the last two seasons, and also one of the few that I managed to catch on broadcast TV most of the time.

Generic wrote:On a tangential note, why do networks even need survey companies to measure online viewing? They can get absolute numbers of viewers plus geographical data from their web server alone, and some of the legal online viewing sites (Hulu, for instance) have user registration, through which they collect other demographic data (sex and age).

I attended a session two weeks ago at Nielson concerning desk-top box data and reporting formats. You would think cable boxes know what buttons you push and how long it sat there, and what time it was and what advertisements played and everything...but nooooo. They all capture different stuff, save it in different data models, and report it in different ways. (of course DVRs don't help things) Still, it's insane. Online reporting is not that different. There is little transparency in the process so ad buyers have to guess about effectiveness and the channels can control their slot value (stop it, BLT!) Hulu isn't going to share detailed data openly, even for a price.

Apparently... I wasn't supposed to tell you guys all that.

So yeah. Just pretend this thread doesn't exist.

(also, thanks for the insights, Roy)