Nielsen Struggles To Track Modern Viewing Habits 248
RobotRunAmok writes "The Nielsen Company has been the principal entity tracking TV shows' popularity, and, by extension, their potential profitability. But as our media consumption practices change, some believe that Nielsen's methods have not kept pace. A new consortium including networks owned by NBC Universal, Time Warner, News Corp, Viacom, CBS, Discovery, and Walt Disney — along with major advertisers — is calling for the creation of a new audience measurement service, and planning to solicit bids from outside firms by the fourth quarter of this year. Nielsen says they're not worried about so many of their customers ganging up on them, having just invested more than a billion dollars in research to stay modern. Except that today Nielsen announced they would pointedly not be adding weights to DVR households, and that adding weights for the presence of a personal computer or Internet access in under-represented households would provide 'no significant change or enhancement' to its national TV ratings sample. The pundits deride Nielsen's 'archaic' methodology and 'disco-era tactics,' but others scoff that such a consortium will only 'put the foxes in charge of the henhouse.' Stay tuned..."
Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, is there anyone under the age of 40 who DOESN'T use a DVR anymore? And I don't mean the "I don't even *OWN* a TV!" snobs, I'm talking about average people. I can't imagine going back to watching live TV, and can't believe that Nielsen is still not taking me adequately into account. I think they do finally factor in some DVR's now (contrary to the summary), but only one per household and only under weirdly strict conditions (like having to watch the show within 24 hrs. of its airing).
Okay, I can understand them not weighing us DVR watchers as much as grandma watching her stories on live TV (since we're a lot less likely to actually watch the ads that the Nielsens are all about). But to only count us under a few conditions is to ignore the reality that we're in the 21st century (some of us are even watching *gasp* HD content, which Nielsen is also still undervaluing).
Come on, I'm tired of seeing crap network shows that my great-aunt watches in the top ten and the shows *I* like getting shitcanned for "low ratings." I would even be willing to "opt-in" to a DVR viewing log system if it meant that my viewing habits could save a few decent shows.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, I'm tired of seeing crap network shows that my great-aunt watches in the top ten and the shows *I* like getting shitcanned for "low ratings." I would even be willing to "opt-in" to a DVR viewing log system if it meant that my viewing habits could save a few decent shows.
Preach it, brother. ABC is especially notorious about coming up with interesting new shows (that probably appeal to the 18-34 audience that has almost universally adopted DVRs), and then canceling them because the numbers appear
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:4, Interesting)
One thing to consider is that advertisers are already adapting to the use of DVRs. Yes, they still have commercials, but there is also a considerable amount of product placement. Consider the NBC show "Chuck" [nbc.com] and its Subway product placement. Before the "Save Chuck" campaign even started, Subway maintained that this was their best product placement/commercial deal in years. [chucktv.net] It was well placed and quite amusing.
And guess who saw it. It wasn't just the old fogies who refuse to move into the modern age, but also the younger generation with our newfangled DVRs and PCs.
This is why having ALL of the ratings is important. Just because DVRs exclude most of the commercials, that doesn't mean that these viewers aren't important to the show's advertisers. The advertisers would just have to push into new ways of advertising outside of the standard commercial.
PS. I'll gladly sacrifice 2 minutes an episode to gain the 58 minutes of hilarity that is Chuck.
PPS. I know that the episode isn't really an hour long and that a bunch of time is cut out for commercials, but that's not the point.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:5, Interesting)
Want to just watch the show? Hey, it's commercial free, brought to you by Amazon.com - enjoy!
Think of the money that could be made on these types of impulse purchases?!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sadly, this doesn't seem to be an option anymore, since advertisers have decided to 'GET IN YOUR FACE'. I sometimes have the radio turned on in the background, but you always notice when the ads come on, because for some reason, the sound becomes much louder.
Same with TV ads. Sometimes when going to the computer to look something up, I leave the TV on, which isn't bothering me, until the commercials start, and because of the increased volume and flashy lights, I am unable to concentrate on what I was doing,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Along with this, I don't even have my television hooked up. I only subscribe to the most basic cable because it makes my internet cheaper (which is retarded - my internet should be cheaper without any TV at all). All the television I do watch is via Hulu or through a broadcaster's website. So, they aren't counting me correctly as well.
The convenience of watching what I want, when I want is too good for me to maintain a full-time television connection. I still wait for the day when I can pay for only spe
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
What filtering?
I just set up for cable internet...TV (extended basic, and unscrambled HDTV) is free...just put a splitter on the wire.
Re: (Score:2)
DVR? I don't think they ever took the VCR into account, let alone a DVR.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a DVR but don't use it since the Super VHS VCR provides better quality video. And yes Nielsen DOES measure "same day viewing" to include people who watch using DVRs. Nielsen also monitors internet viewing, and reports those stats as a separate number.
I don't understand what the TV companies are whining about - Nielsen's already monitoring these new media forms.
Re: (Score:2)
And yes Nielsen DOES measure "same day viewing" to include people who watch using DVRs.
Same day viewing? Does that really matter? I record lots of shows and rarely watch them the same day they air. Hell, I'm watching shows that are 3 weeks old right now since I just got back from vacation.
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest two differences is that DVR picture quality is far better, and DVRs are more versatile. But everyone I knew used VCRs to record one show ehile watching another, or to record a show when they were at work, etc. Women in my office always taped the soaps.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, I know I am outside the age range you describe, but to be honest with you, I have never actually *seen* a DVR, or know anyone that uses one. And I am a serious TV watcher - at least 8 hours a day.
Everyone either watches stuff when it's on (and most shows are repeated 10 times a week anyway - I can want Law and Order:CI 5 times a day, and 3 of them will be the same episode, so who needs to record it?), or they watch on the computer. DVR is sort of an in-between solution.
Re:Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:5, Interesting)
But I think most people who watch TV 8 hours a day will have pretty small disposable income. For a family of four, going from 25K a year income to 50K a year income, the total income ratio is just 2, but the disposable income ratio is going to be something like 4 or even 8. The profit margins are huge in the disposable income expenditure. When it comes to bread, milk and gas, the profit margins are very tight. That means, it is better to snag 1 hour of a family with large income than to fight to get 8 hours from a low wage earning family.
Re: (Score:2)
No insult perceived.
It may be a good point, but the people I am referring to (and myself) have plenty of disposable income. DVRs just seem to be a "in between" solution to the problem that I haven't seen a lot of people use. That may indeed be an outlier statistically, but it would surprise me a bit.
Brett
Re: (Score:2)
I love having a DVR because without one I could never keep up with shows. I certainly love to watch TV, but I watch it on my schedule and not its. So, if something comes up, I go.
But if you are getting in 8 hours a day of TV time, well, you're available to watch it when its on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:4, Interesting)
If your viewing habits include skipping all (or timeshifting beyond a couple days) the commercials that pay for the show I don't see why they should give DVR viewers much weight.
It's the eyeballs on commercials that count, not how many people like the show (but not enough to watch it realtime or to watch the commercials). If you like the show but don't want to watch it when it is broadcast watch it off the company's site. Then at least you'll get counted in a way that matters.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see why watching a show live means I like it more than watching it delayed, or how a week delay reduces the effectiveness of (most) advertisements. Frankly I'd only watch a show in realtime if I *didn't* like it, because without the ability to rewind and pause I'm likely to miss at least some of the show.
And while streaming flash video is a handy alternative it's not at all like having a real recording. For one thing it requires using your computer, which in most cases is not hooked up to the same d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It doesn't matter if you like the show.
What matters is that you are seeing the ads. If you're watching it as it is broadcast you can't skip past the commercials. You can leave the room (which is why they crank the volume up for ads) or you can turn the channel (good luck since most other channels will be on a commercial break). So you sit there and watch the ads (that pay for the show) or you somehow respond to the ads (turning the channel, leaving the room).
Let's say there's a new show on Fox with Nathan F
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:4, Informative)
Come on, I'm tired of seeing crap network shows that my great-aunt watches in the top ten and the shows *I* like getting shitcanned for "low ratings." I would even be willing to "opt-in" to a DVR viewing log system if it meant that my viewing habits could save a few decent shows.
Nielsen is NOT about how many people watch a show. It's about how many people watch the COMMERCIALS. DVR folks generally skip past those. People who watch broadcast TV cannot. Although they can get up and make a sandwich, or whatever.
Re: (Score:2)
Nielsen is NOT about how many people watch a show. It's about how many people watch the COMMERCIALS. DVR folks generally skip past those. People who watch broadcast TV cannot. Although they can get up and make a sandwich, or whatever.
True.
But just because they do not focus on who is using a DVR does not mean that the big cable companies have no data to sell.
The cable boxes can be polled remotely to determine what channel it is tuned to.
A comcast or a quest can and does make a tidy profit by simply adding a little software to their head end and selling the anonymous aggregate data.
Further, they can poll before a commercial, poll after a commercial and tell you how many people switched away during the commercial, which speaks to the quali
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What cable box?!?!?
My DVR setup needs no cable box...
It's not about how many people use a DVR ..... (Score:4, Insightful)
Let me first say I totally agree with your point. But really, I think this is about something different than what most of us logically think it should be about.
I suspect the networks and advertisers are interested, primarily, in who is tuning in to the provided programming in "real time". Even if they find out that a certain TV series is wildly popular with people who recorded it to watch later? They may still be most fixated on the numbers who thought it was worth interrupting their day or night to watch it, as soon as it hit the airwaves.
I'm not in this industry, but I can see how an advertiser would place a lot of value on knowing their commercial is being viewed in a prompt manner by viewers. (EG. If you want to run an ad talking about a special sale "this weekend only!" at your local sandwich shop or car dealership, the ad is rendered useless to anyone who "gets around to watching it" on their DVR the following week.)
Re: (Score:2)
Why pay for Sat or Cable when I can watch Hulu for free? Before that I bought seasons on iTunes. Honestly, for the 3 - 4 TV shows I liked to watch, it was cheaper to buy from iTunes than paying for cable for a year. Much cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
DVR, is that like an Torrents, NZBs and an HTPC?
After getting that of which we do not speak I'm never going back to torrents. I can Max out my Cable connection have a 30 minute show in a few minutes, an hour show in twice that.
HellaNZB is... just wow.
"Hey we missed the Daily Sow last night."
"Ok, it'll be here in a few, lets go get drinks"
ssh htpc.local;mplayer The.DailyShow.....avi
It's not use friendly yet but I like it better than XBMC.
Plus with VDPAU I can watch movies in all their HDTV glory.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, I *actually* don't even own a TV for a decade, you insensitive clod!
And so do my friends! ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
MythTV [mythtv.org]...it takes a bit of patience and effort, but, well worth it in the in and will do what you want.
If you google around a bit, I believe you can fin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Even with a PVR I find myself watching alot of live television for two reasons. One, you really need to watch sports live. Two, my cable signal is garbage and if watching live a sudden drop out for a second
Re:Who is running Nielsen anyway, Leslie? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm an average person under 40. I watch TV, but I don't use a DVR. Most of my friends don't either. This is a big country. I don't think you can make generalizations based on your own demographic.
??? ;)
Re:Wow, you are a young one (Score:4, Funny)
Bittorrent (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Its an extrapolation sure, but you shouldn't dismiss it because of that. It is a statistically sound extrapolation.
Bad headline? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not at all surprised that they are laying back and enjoying incumbency, rather than bothering with hard work; but not even pretending seems a bit odd.
Re: (Score:2)
Merely efficient. Why spend money to update your model when there's no effective competition? Bear in mind that their customers are advertising executives.
Mature companies spend ~15% of their budget on advertising. That's a given. All they care about is that the marketing department make a token effort to not completely waste that budget. And how does an advertising executive show that they're spending their budget effectively? No, it's not increased co
Re: (Score:2)
If they asked me to track my surfing habits, I would explain that I spend all of my time on NY Times Culture, no time at all on pR0n sites nor slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Not only that, but a waste of money. They sent me a booklet like that with a 5 dollar bill inside. I promptly pocketed the money and trashed the booklet. Take that, marketing execs.
Frequently it's 5 crisp 1-dollar-bills.
Personally I know the system is broken.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Nielson doesn't count anybody that they haven't contracted to keep a diary of their viewing habits.
Re: (Score:2)
Correct me if I'm wrong but don't they have an agreement with TiVo to see the viewing data that TiVo collects?
Re: (Score:2)
You'd Think (Score:2)
You'd think that Nielsen would be more willing to compromise on the DVR issue, since all the "big spending" demographic groups use them heavily.
Missed opportunity (Score:4, Funny)
Stay tuned
Should have read "don't touch that dial!"
Damn kids, get off my lawn!
Re: (Score:2)
"don't touch that dial!"
I wonder what's on the other channel.
*clunk, clunk, clunk* [adjusts rabbit ears]
You know, ever since June 12 I Love Lucy has looked really staticy.
Foxes in charge of the henhouse... makes sense (Score:2)
The media companies have a vested interest in getting the best audience data they can, so I'd say the "foxes...henhouse" argument is flawed in this case.
On a tangent - normally I watch shows on my Tivo, but lately I've used Hulu a few times to watch shows that aren't currently running "on the air". I'll tell you, it's reminded me of why I hate commercials (since you can't skip Hulu's) - it's because they are, for the most part, insipid at best! I don't actually mind smart, engaging, or funny commercials - b
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not entirely true--- the media companies make no actual money from audience figures directly, only from advertising. So their vested interest is in getting the best-looking audience data that still looks plausible to advertisers. That's one reason advertisers want a 3rd party to collect the audience data, not the networks; it's less believable for a network
Re:Foxes in charge = will advertisers pay? (Score:2)
Right on - Neilson's customers really aren't the broadcasters or the producers. It is the advertisers. If the people paying have to rely on the broadcasters for figures without absolute transparency, well they won't pay. That is the card Neilson is playing here. They are independent and conservative in their estimates of audience. I bet they have real good models that track their current methodology to actual sales for major advertisers.
Re: (Score:2)
The media companies have no such interest. The *customers* of the media companies (the advertisers) have that interest. The media companies have a vested interested in prying as much money as they can out of the advertisers. Which they can do by getting large audience numbers...or by forging large audience numbers. This is very much the foxes guarding t
That's why I still use iTunes for shows (Score:2)
Hulu is a nice idea but given the option I'll pay $2 an episode just not to watch ads, which as you are just insipid. Or like you say, use a DVR and just skip over commercials rapidly.
If you drop extras on your cable (or cable TV altogether) and only watch a few shows, iTunes is still cheaper than cable. And I get to watch things at my own pace.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
$2/episode is a lot of money. If you watch an hour of TV a night(way below average), that's about 3 shows once you cut out the ad time. Even if you only do that on week nights, that's $30 a week or $120 a month. Way too much to spend on TV.
Re: (Score:2)
How about a change back to the advertising format of Jack Benny? [youtube.com] :)
What's so hard about it (Score:4, Insightful)
All in all, I think we would all benefit because the networks would know which shows no one cares about and could adjust their programming quicker and the advertisers would have a better idea of how to reach their target demographic and how much they should be paying to do so.
Easy peasy.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Some people.
This comes as no surprise. (Score:3, Interesting)
As a consequence, Nielsen will do whatever it can to stonewall, obfuscate, and generally hide the obvious: the day of Network hegemony is coming to a close.
This doesn't mean the Networks are going to disappear. What it does mean is that the Network business model of delivering motion picture, and the techniques, methods, aesthetics, and processes developed to support that system, is no longer the complete hegemonic force it used to be. In 1948 there was radio and TV and movies and... ummmm... not much else. Today there is broadcast TV, Cable TV, online video, radio, satellite radio, computer games, game consoles, Web2.0 social networks and similar systems (viz 2nd life), podcasts, etc. etc. etc.
The last actual advertisement I paid attention to AT ALL was last week (well, actually this morning - the girl on the billboard was f*cking hott. don't know what she was selling, but damn she was cute...) when I actually clicked on an advert to find out more about a certain brand of eReader (no, not the kindle...) So, that particular advert was successful, and it was online. Not on TV.
That's the mindshare competition TV is dealing with, and what Nielsen refuses to deal with. TV could actually GROW in size, and still be increasingly marginalised by the explosion of all the other media.
RS
Re: (Score:2)
don't know what she was selling, but damn she was cute...
Really effective, wasn't it? I've noticed a lot of commercials like that, you remember the commercial but not the product. Good ads are like the Budweiser frog commercials, or about any Geico commercial. You remember the product.
Others are even worse than your not remembering the product; the commercials are so bad you remember the commercial, the product, and studiously avoid actually buying the product because the ad pissed you off.
Nielson isn't nee
Re: (Score:2)
Others are even worse than your not remembering the product; the commercials are so bad you remember the commercial, the product, and studiously avoid actually buying the product because the ad pissed you off.
No shit. When I was living in the States, I refused to eat at Carl's Junior because the commercials were so disgusting. It was usually some macho douchebag chowing down on a burger in slow motion making hideous slurping sounds and bits of it dripping on his shirt, and the announcer com
Re: (Score:2)
The last actual advertisement I paid attention to AT ALL was last week (well, actually this morning - the girl on the billboard was f*cking hott.
You know, this is the future. As long as most DVRs make you at least skim the commercials, the best way for ads to get seen is for them to be something you want to watch, themselves. The easiest way is skin, of course, probably followed by food close-ups. The harder way is to develop a reputation for being entertaining, so you'll stop fast-forwarding when you se
Hulu is more accurate (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't subscribe to cable, and don't really watch "over-the-air" TV, mostly because I don't really feel like fiddling with the antennae. I do watch lots of shows on Hulu [hulu.com], which is great from the network standpoint
It's really great from their standpoint, all the way up to the point where people realize that you don't really need "networks" anymore when everyone is watching their shows on services like Hulu. Or at least you don't really need to worry about channels, what channel a show is on, what time it airs, or anything of that sort. The only purpose the channel will have is as an investor who puts up the money for a show to be produced, and anyone willing to put up enough money to produce a show will be able to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My Pet Peeve (Score:2)
Why isn't Panasonic introducing the next gen DVR? Is it possible to use TiVO without a monthly fee? Is it possible to edit clips in a TiVO and burn it off to a DVD
Re: (Score:2)
A Tivo without a subscription operates like old VCRs do. You can schedule recordings based on channel/time/duration. With a subscription, you can do it based on the name of the show instead.
Re: (Score:2)
mythtv. $20 a year for the listings from datadirect. Problem solved.
Re: (Score:2)
There is currently no DVR that requires no monthly fees that has at least some rudimentary capability to acquire the listings.
Moxi [moxi.com]
Windows Media Center [microsoft.com]
Beyond TV [snapstream.com]
SageTV [sagetv.com]
MythTV [mythtv.org]
None of these require any subscription for guide data or functionality, and the top two even have CableCard support so you can enjoy your HD content fix. TiVo Series2 units with DVD burners often come with a free "limited" subscription to TiVo's guide data, lacking the recommendations and ability to look more than three days in to the future IIRC.
Of course it's all bullshit (Score:2)
Neither the networks (cable of otherwise) nor Neilson have any interest in accurate reporting. Accurate reporting would show that more and more people are using their DVRs to fast forward through pretty much all the commercials. And make no mistake, ratings are entirely and only about ratings, or, rather, the advertising rates that are based on ratings. Nothing else matters in the least. The day advertising rates are based on something else, we will never see another ratings list again.
And everyone, even th
Well, if Fox uses them (Score:2)
If Fox uses them to determine what shows to keep, either they are flawed, or the general population is retarded. Oh. Wait.
Perhaps executives should troll popular websites and such to see what the viewers themselves have to say instead?
This will be fixed soon enough (Score:2)
Most over-the-air television will be a think of the past. The external receivers / and servers for online viewing will measure this and Nielsen will be out of a job.
And how does this effect me? (Score:2)
So...tv networks decide on their own what to show and no show. This effects me how, exactly? They'll still kill intelligent shows in favor of the window-licker specials, so why do I care?
Who watches live TV anymore? (Score:2)
VERY rarely do I watch live TV. Mostly, I TiVO everything, and fast forward through the commercials(I know advertisers don't want to hear that). I'm guessing I'm not alone and, contrary to Nielsen's thinking, we probably represent a statistically significant group.
Re: (Score:2)
... and fast forward through the commercials ... we probably represent a statistically significant group.
Which means Neilson SHOULD be ignoring you. Ratings for eyeballs watching commercials. Popularity of a show doesn't really mean anything to the advertisers (buyers of the numbers); it's the number of eyes on the advertisements that Neilson measures.
Re: (Score:2)
That's fine for the old method of TV advertising, the 30 second commercial. However, companies are getting wise to the impact product placement can have. See: "Chuck" and Five Dollar Footlong Mondays.
I will sit through 30 second advertising breaks, like on-demand service or Hulu, however.
Two things (Score:2)
As a former TV repair tech, I've seen how Nielsen rigs sets to track users; It's not just a set-top box that tracks your channel, but is WAY more intrusive than that.
Speaking of CRT TVs, they cut holes in the TV cabinet with leads from that box; these leads were wired to the V sync of the TV (don't know why, maybe verify the TV is on?) and the speakers (presumably to monitor volume and muting habits) and other places I c
We were a Nielsen family. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, my parents were a Nielson family for about 2 years (about a year ago). What Parent described is exactly correct. They physically take apart ALL of your TVs/cable boxes to tap into them. Just crazy.
extinction (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems to me that Nielsen's metrics are just about useless these days.
How many people actively watch television without a DVR? Wouldn't it be fairly easy for those DVRs to simply report back what shows you're watching? Yeah, I know, privacy and all that... But your average person is just renting it from their cable/dish provider and doesn't have much say in what the box does anyway.
And folks watching television programs through on-line services like hulu or whatever can easily be tracked as well. Just record the number of views a given show's gotten - much like the counters on YouTube.
Hell, even folks who don't use a DVR typically have some kind of cable/dish de-scrambler box... Those could report viewing habits as well.
I certainly understand the appeal of having an impartial party responsible for the data... But it doesn't seem like this kind of data collection should be terribly difficult to do these days. Seems like the bigger challenge would be for viewers who don't want to participate to keep their usage private.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, but those guys aren't sharing the data with Neilsen. They probably don't want to share it with anyone or the popular channels will start claiming they need to get paid more for allowing their stuff to be carried by Cable/Sat companies.
Why is Nielsen relevant? (Score:2)
First questions on Neilsen Questionaire (Score:5, Funny)
1. Do you like Science Fiction Stories? (Y/N)
(Note to test processor, if the answer to question 1 is Y then discard survey immediately)
2. Do you like Matlock and/or HeeHaw? (Y/N)
(Note to test processor, if the answer to question 2 is N then discard survey immediately)
Re: (Score:2)
HeeHaw is not science fiction? They all look like aliens to me.
The best answer is probably low-tech (Score:2)
SURVEYS. Seriously, there would be very few reasons to lie about what you are watching but screening the survey participants can serve to limit that anyway. "When do you watch entertainment video? What were you watching during this time slot? What about the next?" The results should pay the same whether or not they even watched TV or other video entertainment at all leaving less incentive to be "inventive." So if I downloaded an episode of Weeds from The Pirate Bay and watched it this morning, that wo
foxes and hens (Score:2)
from slashdot summary
A new consortium including networks owned by NBC Universal, Time Warner, News Corp, Viacom, CBS, Discovery, and Walt Disney â" along with major advertisers â" is calling for the creation of a new audience measurement service, and planning to solicit bids from outside firms by the fourth quarter of this year.
from Deadline Hollywood Daily
This sounds a lot like putting the foxes in charge of the hen house starting in September. The very idea that NBC Universal, Time Warner, News Corp/Fox, Viacom/MTV, CBS, Disney/ABC and Discovery are forming a consortium to challenge the dominant force in TV audience measurement gives rise to all sorts of scenarios.
The first quote is excerpted from the slashdot summary and lists the parties participating in the consortium. The second quote is excerpted from an editorial at something called Deadline Hollywood Daily and is used to support an allegation that network executives will conspire to deliberately manipulate ratings. Note that the portrayal within the opinion piece omits two crucial facts: 1) The consortium includes advertisers. Advertisers presumably have a fi
Nielsen, struggling? (Score:2)
Shouldn't he be doing Naked Gun 4.0 instead of that tracking thing?
From the inside... (Score:5, Informative)
Biggest problem Nielsen really has is internet usage. They just (like 3 years ago) started tracking internet sites with their A2M2 program. The sample is very very small, about 1/5th the size of a TV sample. And a lot of the households are former TV sample homes. (they offer them the I2 program as the home comes out of the LPM sample) They also now are able to track distance family members, like kids at college are counted now away from home, but count as part of the household. (figure that one out if the parents live in Minneapolis, and the kid goes to school in LA?)
As for people wondering why Nielsen is a viable company in this digital age? Simple demographics. Nielsen has every household members income, job title, where they work, shopping habits, age, etc. The cable company can find out what a person is watching through an STB, but doesn't have ANY of the demographics of the household. Nielsen using LPM systems can tell you EXACTLY who was watching what at a specific time, including the persons age, wine buying habits, primary shopper in the home or not, and what kind of car(year, make, model) they drive. (yes, these were the questions i had to ask households every 3 months) Obscene target audiences. Even with the old NSI sample, Nielsen had more data than the cable companies. (NSI is total household data, LPM is persons data)
For those really wondering, Nielsen does track homes that pirate satellite/cable. They just don't show that number anywhere.
Networks are Obsolete (Score:2)
Or soon will be.
Sell shows on Hulu, iTunes and what not. Let me buy X credits for Y dollars and let me pick what to watch. If i want commercial free i pay more, if i want HD i pay more. The more credits i buy the cheap each credit will be. Maybe "watching" commercials gives me credits.
Timeslot becomes irrelevant - All you need to know is *ding* there is a new episode, my account knows to buy it and download it. Maybe premium subscribers get things first.
Seasons becomes irrelevant - Just upload the next
Nielsen DOES use DVR... somehow (Score:2)
How do I know?
I'm a TiVo-Nielsen family. There was a specific enrollment they had about 5 years ago for Nielsen to use TiVo data from selected households, and I was chosen & signed-up. Now, what Nielsen and TiVo do with that information, if your Nielsen-family status is based on your location or your account or your physical DVR... or if Nielsen/TiVo are even still collecting the data -- I don't
Foxes in the henhouses, indeed! (Score:2)
And I thought I was bad at wielding metaphors.
About Time (Score:4, Insightful)
The studios have to do something sooner or later. The Nielsen way of tracking things sucks. For certain genres of television, the viewing habits of it's audience will tend to shift. If it shifts in a way not tracked by Nielsen, an otherwise good show may be canceled. Science fiction in particular is hurt here as it's audience tends to be the technophile crowd who are just not as likely to watch it broadcast at primetime.
For example, Terminator The Sarah Connor Chronicles (which as a series I enjoyed far more than the latest movie) showed terrible Nielsen ratings, yet it's DVR numbers were good, it's foreign market numbers were excellent, and week after week it was among the top downloads at the iTunes store. It was doing good in other areas, just not in the over the air live audience arena, and so it got canned. Hopefully we'll see less of this as studios start tracking things more accurately.
Product placement (Score:2)
An episode of My Name Is earl used the Klondike Bar very effectively, with Randy soing all sorts of embarrassing things for one, and it was hilarious. I can see The Simpsons replacing Duff Beer with Miller -- product placement paid by Anheiser Busch.