Nielsen ratings system - flawed?

Richard Dower

It seems in this day and age of HD internet streaming, DVR, Tivo, xvid or other forms of downloadable media the US ratings system seems...outdated?

It dosen't seem to take into consideration these forms of viewing stated above, should there be a radical overhaul of how "well" a show is doing and how many people are watching it based on some "sample" of US homes that are earmarked as a Nielsen rating home?

Elmo

Richard Dower wrote: »

It seems in this day and age of HD internet streaming, DVR, Tivo, xvid or other forms of downloadable media the US ratings system seems...outdated?

It dosen't seem to take into consideration these forms of viewing stated above, should there be a radical overhaul of how "well" a show is doing and how many people are watching it based on some "sample" of US homes that are earmarked as a Nielsen rating home?

All statistics are flawed, it doesn't take into account numbers watching TV on the Internet either etc etc. or how many people are ironing while they watch daytime TV are they paying attention to the ironing or the TV. Etc Etc

How are the JNLR statistics carried out.

The stats only relate to live TV and the numbers watching live TV. People going to the cinema are not included.

How many people use recorders (tape harddrive etc).

Are the numbers of Radio Listeners down due to MP3 players because they aren't included in Radio Listenership.

L31mr0d

It is outdated, I was actually thinking about this this morning about how many great shows wouldn't of gotten cancelled if the ratings where more reliable. But I'm wary about the proposed alternatives that I've heard of. The new system that I've been reading about was 100% on demand TV (i.e. you choose your programs when you want to watch them, and you only pay for what you watch) However, for ratings, they will record your viewing history and time spent watching a program. They will also tailor advertisements for you depending on your preferences for shows and ads you watch.

I don't have a problem with this recording, if its anonymous. But as the tailoring is done on a customer per customer basis I can't see how it could be.

For reliable ratings and an a la carte viewing experience the advertisers are going to want something in return.

To get accurate ratings, the viewer has to be prepared to give up their privacy in regards to their viewing history.

Elmo

L31mr0d wrote: »

I don't have a problem with this recording, if its anonymous. But as the tailoring is done on a customer per customer basis I can't see how it could be.

The tailoring wouldn't help some shows get produced you would end up the the lowest common denominator stuff being produced because "thats what the audience wants". It could be detrimental to creativity, which is currently lacking in TV at the moment. (With a few notable exceptions).

I would say they are quite good in suggesting what is being watched live but other forms of media and viewing habits are excluded. It has been the way since the introduction of VHS.

The real question is how many people are still watching live TV and for how many hours?

mknotaro

You also need to look at what the Nielsen rating system is used for.

Shows don't get cancelled because they have low ratings.

Shows get cancelled because they have low ratings thus advertisers don't (a) want to advertise in that time slot or (b) the network can't charge as much for that time slot.

American TV networks are, unfortunately, not patrons of the arts. They are commerical enterprises.

A cable channel, HBO/Showtime/FX/Sci-Fi, take into account different types of revenue - subscriptions, etc. Thus why the stronger programmes in recent times are coming out of cable channels, but i've read interviews with industry people who say that there's less money to be made in producing cable shows, but you get a lot more freedom, which i presume is creative freedom.

As people have stated before me - Nielsen ratings don't take into account other methods of viewing programmes - many of which means the ability of by-passing the ads.

Like Richard's other topic -product placement- it's a sure-fire way of getting any person who watches the programme to see the product, by whatever method live, DVR, DVD... So if the Neilsen ratings were used to create the rate for product placement, then most certainly it'd be flawed.

Elmo

mknotaro wrote: »

As people have stated before me - Nielsen ratings don't take into account other methods of viewing programmes - many of which means the ability of by-passing the ads.

Lets point out now that the ratings are only for as live TV, not for recordings. I am sure extravision could tell the numbers of people renting DVD boxsets of TV shows however the question is when do they watch these boxsets? and does it interrupt their Live TV viewing?

The ratings are only their to say how many people are watching live TV at any given time. Advertisers don't care about the rest since they cannot advertises on recorded shows or boxsets, unless the DOG becomes the new advert break.

We are to assume that 1,000,000* people on average in Ireland are watching live TV, we could careless what the other 3.2million are doing.

TvWatcher

The Nielsen system, which also operates in Ireland, is not flawed in that the universe (or sample) it draws data from is monitored exclusively on its terrestrial or digital live television content consumption.

As such, there isn't a flaw there. There is, rather, a limitation.

However, it would be possible to gain a broader picture of the platforms through which an audience have accessed live content by collating, say, live web data from the relevant provider (eg RTÉ.ie; BBc, both of which have watch-live functions on-line), or live mobile TV data from the relevant provider.

For it to be truly meaningful the data would need to be compiled on the same statistical basis off the same or equivalent universe.

As yet, the commercial imperative for broadcasters is how many people are watching a live transmission at any given moment. People watching on-line post-TX are not an identifiable revenue stream and until they can be quantified and spoken to as such, no broadcaster will invest in the type of 360 degree research you're advocating. In short, it might be interesting to know what you want to know, but that's all it would be at this stage.

The JNLRs are compiled off a standard sample verbal survey, "did you listen to yesteday?"

rovert

It is flawed but media outlets dont want the current system changed as it may disrupt the status quo. The lag in adapting to more accurate methods isnt Nielsen's fault.

Elmo

rovert wrote: »

It is flawed but media outlets dont want the current system changed as it may disrupt the status quo. The lag in adapting to more accurate methods isnt Nielsen's fault.

This is true to a certain extent but the flaw is not with what they are measuring. Their are various other statistics that other forms of Entertainment publish: -

1. Concert/Theatre Sales
2. DVD/Blueray rentals/purchases
3. Website Traffic
4. Newspaper Readership
5. Magazine Readership
6. Book Charts
ETC ETC

The question now is what are people doing and when are they doing it? In actually fact Neilsen is far more sucessful at providing minute by minute use of a Television Broadcasts than anyother form of research, and there is alot to be said for that.