Official TV Ratings Thread

The greatest TV in history is being made right now. The worst TV in history is being made right now.

Television Ratings and Ratings Accessories.

Postby Fried Gold on Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:56 am

EDIT: Split off a from a the Heroes Season 2 thread, eh?

Leckomaniac wrote:On the business side of Heroes...it looks like the season premier ran dead even with the series premier, however, NBC is going to exploit a new loophole to bump up the ratings. Heroes faired well amongst 18-49 year olds, but was trounced overall by DANCING WITH THE STARS.

NBC's Heroes was the night's highest-rated show among 18- to 49-year-olds who don't particularly care if Marie Osmond can fox-trot or not. But audience-wise, the show failed to build on its first-season buzz. Monday's opener was no bigger than its first-season premiere: an estimated 14.1 million viewers.

Publicly, NBC was upbeat about the show's premiere. But its atypical request of Nielsen seemed to speak louder than its press release.

NBC has asked the ratings service to hold off on compiling final numbers for Heroes until the network reairs the premiere on Saturday night, Nielsen confirmed Tuesday.

A "newish" rule, dating back to 2006, allows networks to combine a show's ratings from multiple broadcasts, as long as the same commercials are aired each time, Nielsen Media Research's Gary Holmes said.

As a result, barring a Saturday-night blackout across the nation, Heroes will not go down in the books as having run even with its first-season premiere; it'll go down as averaging more—thanks to people who tuned in on Monday, plus however many million tune in over the weekend.

Holmes said he believes at least one other broadcast network has taken advantage of the double-your-fun rule. As to whether it'll become a numbers-crunching trend, he said, "I think it'll depend on how the industry reacts to this."

According to an NBC spokesperson, the Nielsen loophole likely will be used sparingly because of the commercial sponsorship rule. Monday's Heroes' was a candidate for it because the show aired with limited commercials supplied by one sponsor, Nissan, who also signed on for Saturday.

Per the network spokesperson, NBC decided to combine Heroes' Monday and Saturday numbers before the Monday numbers were released.

Technically that ruling makes some sense, and might even lead to more realistic viewing figures, as they're taking into account that people don't all watch things on the same night. Lots of shows have been cancelled as a result of people ignoring such things.
Last edited by Fried Gold on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13929
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:14 am

I don't think it makes sense at all. How is it any different from saying 'Gee, let's run the same show two different times on two different nights, compile the ratings from BOTH nights, and then tell everyone that that's how well the show did on a single night?'

It's a lie. Fuck the goddamned commercials.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby TonyWilson on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:31 am

But why does it matter when the show's watched? Surely they want to know how many like and watch the show, whether it's on a monday or a saturday or even off itunes and the website those people are al still fans.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:35 am

TonyWilson wrote:But why does it matter when the show's watched? Surely they want to know how many like and watch the show, whether it's on a monday or a saturday or even off itunes and the website those people are al still fans.


For instance, I did not watch the premier on TV because I live abroad. Normally, I would have been among the viewers. I would like to download the episode off of iTunes but with the rift between Apple and NBC it looks like that isnt going to happen. Nor can I stream it off of NBCs website because I live abroad.

So the number are not really reflective of the actual numbers. And they are still trying to find a proper way to factor in TiVo.

I think that the ratings should reflect the number of people that ended up watching the show...not the people that watched it live. Much more reflective of the actual audience.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby CeeBeeUK on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:36 am

If they could factor in bittorrent they might get a nice surprise :D
User avatar
CeeBeeUK
WAIRWOLF GAME
 
Posts: 2060
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 4:47 am
Location: nodnoL

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:44 am

CeeBeeUK wrote:If they could factor in bittorrent they might get a nice surprise :D


Isnt that right. People are watching television still (despite what the numbers say) but increasingly they are watching them on their own time. Something that frightens the networks. They want total control over your viewing habits.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:47 am

Leckomaniac wrote:I think that the ratings should reflect the number of people that ended up watching the show...not the people that watched it live. Much more reflective of the actual audience.


Well, sure, but for two different nights at two different times? That's crap. What's next - figuring out when people actually watched it on their DVRs and figuring in that, too? What about multiple DVR viewings? Why not throw that in, as well?

This is a candy-ass loophole ratings grab, and I think it sucks. The show didn't get as many viewers as they'd hoped, so they're covering their ass.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:49 am

Zarles wrote:
Leckomaniac wrote:I think that the ratings should reflect the number of people that ended up watching the show...not the people that watched it live. Much more reflective of the actual audience.


Well, sure, but for two different nights at two different times? That's crap. What's next - figuring out when people actually watched it on their DVRs and figuring in that, too? What about multiple DVR viewings? Why not throw that in, as well?


Um, yes. That is what they are doing (or trying to do). That is the goal. Just because they dont watch it live doesnt mean that they arent watching it.

zarles wrote:This is a candy-ass loophole ratings grab, and I think it sucks. The show didn't get as many viewers as they'd hoped, so they're covering their ass.


I would argue that it is a more accurate picture of the ratings instead of the archaic sytem in place at the moment.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:55 am

So if someone watches the show twice - once on both nights - you think it's fair that NBC should be able to compile those ratings in with those from the first night and call it as the results?

I agree that the networks still have to figure out what to do about TiVo and the like, but airing a show twice and then compiling the ratings as your net results with the excuse of 'oh, but we'll show the same commercials, so it's the same thing' is complete bullshit, and should not in any form be a model of what needs to be done about the use of DVRs. It's little more than book-cooking at its finest.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:28 am

Zarles wrote:So if someone watches the show twice - once on both nights - you think it's fair that NBC should be able to compile those ratings in with those from the first night and call it as the results?

I agree that the networks still have to figure out what to do about TiVo and the like, but airing a show twice and then compiling the ratings as your net results with the excuse of 'oh, but we'll show the same commercials, so it's the same thing' is complete bullshit, and should not in any form be a model of what needs to be done about the use of DVRs. It's little more than book-cooking at its finest.


On the flip side, do you think its fair that a viewer that misses the first night, but catches the second night is not counted? The argument goes both ways. Some people will be counted twice and some people will be counted only once. The bottom line is that it is common practice for a show to air twice in one week when it premiers. For the longest time, that second airing was not calculated. If you offer people a second chance to see something, they arent going to work as hard to catch the first airing. They will think "well I will just catch it on Saturday instead". Those people should be counted.

Its the same block of programming (commercials included) so it SHOULD count. End of story.

The ratings sytem is flawed to begin with. This is the best way to do it under our current sytem.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby TonyWilson on Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:40 am

I'm with Lecko on this. The system is far from perfect but it should be swayed in favour of the viewers.
With interactive TV using fibre optics there must be a way to scrap Nielsen altogether and have a much larger base to survey automatically - with the viewers consent of course.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby Fawst on Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:42 am

Zarles wrote:
Leckomaniac wrote:I think that the ratings should reflect the number of people that ended up watching the show...not the people that watched it live. Much more reflective of the actual audience.


Well, sure, but for two different nights at two different times? That's crap. What's next - figuring out when people actually watched it on their DVRs and figuring in that, too? What about multiple DVR viewings? Why not throw that in, as well?

This is a candy-ass loophole ratings grab, and I think it sucks. The show didn't get as many viewers as they'd hoped, so they're covering their ass.


And exactly HOW does this affect you? Did you watch the show? Did you enjoy it? Do you want more episodes of this show to be produced? Do you want more shows LIKE this to be produced? This isn't a sleight against you, the viewer. This is NBC trying to line their pockets with advertising revenue. The higher the ratings for their show (artificially bumped by this rule, or not), the more they can make by selling advertising. Which most of us fast forward through anyways! So in the end, does this really affect you in an adverse way?
Prince of the Land of Stench!
User avatar
Fawst
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3088
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:11 pm
Location: MacLaren's

Postby stereosforgeeks on Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:45 am

What they need to do is make sure every show is counted the same way whether or not they include second viewings or not.

I never watch anything live. Everything is only on my DVR they should be counting that stuff as well even though DVR viewers typically skip commercials. Honestly I think we got enough advertising in the form of that Versa crap.
User avatar
stereosforgeeks
Re-Wound
 
Posts: 7857
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:46 pm
Location: DCish

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:19 am

Fawst wrote:
Zarles wrote:
Leckomaniac wrote:I think that the ratings should reflect the number of people that ended up watching the show...not the people that watched it live. Much more reflective of the actual audience.


Well, sure, but for two different nights at two different times? That's crap. What's next - figuring out when people actually watched it on their DVRs and figuring in that, too? What about multiple DVR viewings? Why not throw that in, as well?

This is a candy-ass loophole ratings grab, and I think it sucks. The show didn't get as many viewers as they'd hoped, so they're covering their ass.


And exactly HOW does this affect you? Did you watch the show? Did you enjoy it? Do you want more episodes of this show to be produced? Do you want more shows LIKE this to be produced? This isn't a sleight against you, the viewer. This is NBC trying to line their pockets with advertising revenue. The higher the ratings for their show (artificially bumped by this rule, or not), the more they can make by selling advertising. Which most of us fast forward through anyways! So in the end, does this really affect you in an adverse way?


So now I need something to directly affect me in order for it to piss me off? I'll be pissed off at whatever I please, thanks. White-collar crime doesn't affect me all that much, either, but it still makes me angry.

Leckomaniac wrote:On the flip side, do you think its fair that a viewer that misses the first night, but catches the second night is not counted? The argument goes both ways. Some people will be counted twice and some people will be counted only once. The bottom line is that it is common practice for a show to air twice in one week when it premiers. For the longest time, that second airing was not calculated. If you offer people a second chance to see something, they arent going to work as hard to catch the first airing. They will think "well I will just catch it on Saturday instead". Those people should be counted.

Its the same block of programming (commercials included) so it SHOULD count. End of story.

The ratings sytem is flawed to begin with. This is the best way to do it under our current sytem.


In answer to your first question, sure, each airing should be counted as ratings, but not compiled as a single airing afterwards. That's what I really don't agree with here. It says in the initial press release thingy up there that NBC is asking Nielsen to hold off on compiling its final numbers until the re-run airs. Why? So they can add up the two showings and post THAT number as its official result. So in effect, two showings of the same show, airing five days apart, will be counted as the same thing thanks to some legal loophole that's only been around for a year or so. To me, that sucks. Sure, it's the same block of programming with the same adspace, but so what? It's being shown twice but counted only as once.

Yes, the ratings system is flawed, but combining multiple showings of it thanks to some loophole doesn't really seem to be the answer. Why can't they track what people record on TiVo? Wouldn't that be a more viable answer to Nielsen's problems than writing some by-law that allows number fudging? Seems to me they're just causing more problems for themselves by doing it that way.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:25 am

The way I see it, if it is the same show, with the same adspace than it is fine. The ratings should be for the ORIGINAL PROGRAMMING for that week. If they air the show once (and compile big numbers) or if they show it twice should not matter.

It is the ratings for that week. If you want to make special note (by way of an asteric or something) of shows that had multiple airings that is fine. But the numbers are the numbers.

Heroes still lost the Monday night time slot, that isnt going to change, this is going to effect the weekly ratings reports (as far as I can tell).

And I do not see that as a problem.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:30 am

I still see it as number fudging, but whatever. As long as it doesn't start to become the standard, (let's air the same show four nights in a row, compile the ratings, and hike our ad rates because of it! Yay us!) then I suppose it's not any huge injustice or anything. I'm just skeptical that any half-assed by-law is going to fix a flawed system that probably wasn't all that accurate to begin with.

I mean, really - what if you fall asleep with the TV on? Should that count? You're not really SEEING the adspace then, are you?

:lol:
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby stereosforgeeks on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:34 am

Zarles wrote:I still see it as number fudging, but whatever. As long as it doesn't start to become the standard


It would be better if there was one STANDARD. Whatever it is. Not this lets fudge our number but not let others do the same. What about shows that only air once a week, as well.
User avatar
stereosforgeeks
Re-Wound
 
Posts: 7857
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:46 pm
Location: DCish

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:36 am

Zarles wrote:I still see it as number fudging, but whatever. As long as it doesn't start to become the standard, (let's air the same show four nights in a row, compile the ratings, and hike our ad rates because of it! Yay us!) then I suppose it's not any huge injustice or anything. I'm just skeptical that any half-assed by-law is going to fix a flawed system that probably wasn't all that accurate to begin with.

I mean, really - what if you fall asleep with the TV on? Should that count? You're not really SEEING the adspace then, are you?

:lol:


Well, that will not be economically practical Zarles, because the commercials need to be the same. The way I understand it, that is why most shows do not take part in this practice. Heroes, had the benefit of having limited commercials and one major sponsor. This has enabled them to do a repeat viewing with the same ads. It will not get up to "4 repeat viewings" as you suggested, because networks have original programming almost every night. Saturday is usually the only exception. So that is the only logical place to air a repeat viewing. There is also the added problem of securing the same ads for two nights in a row.

So this may become commonplace for premiers and/or finales...but you wont see this balloon into what you are suggesting.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:36 am

Stereos - Absolutely. EVERY show aired during the week should be held to the same standard of ratings accumulation, no matter what its popularity or ability to get huge ad deals from Nissan may be. :D

Lecko - I was being sarcastic with the "4 showings a week" thing. I just really have a problem with the idea of this sort of practice becoming more commonplace, that's all. I mean, come on - it's Hollywood we're talking about. You will not find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
Last edited by Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby stereosforgeeks on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:38 am

Zarles wrote:Stereos - Absolutely. EVERY show aired during the week should be held to the same standard of ratings accumulation, no matter what its popularity or ability to get huge ad deals from Nissan may be. :D


Thats all Im saying.
User avatar
stereosforgeeks
Re-Wound
 
Posts: 7857
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 3:46 pm
Location: DCish

Postby Leckomaniac on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:39 am

Zarles wrote:Stereos - Absolutely. EVERY show aired during the week should be held to the same standard of ratings accumulation, no matter what its popularity or ability to get huge ad deals from Nissan may be. :D


But they are. This option is open to everybody. It isnt some secret. Every network was aware of this and had the option to use it. So they ARE held to the same standard. There are set rules. NBC isnt cheating. They are operating well within their rights. If the option was only open to NBC...well that is one thing. But it isnt.

I dont see how that is wrong. Just because no one else chose to do it? Fuck that.
Image
User avatar
Leckomaniac
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 11031
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 9:32 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Postby Fawst on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:41 am

Zarles wrote:So now I need something to directly affect me in order for it to piss me off? I'll be pissed off at whatever I please, thanks. White-collar crime doesn't affect me all that much, either, but it still makes me angry.


NO, you will be mad ONLY WHEN I TELL YOU, dammit!!!

lol seriously, go ahead and be mad all you want, I'm just pointing out that I think it's silly to get worked up over it. This isn't crime, this isn't cheating the viewer out of anything, shit it's not even breaking any rules! I don't understand why you'd be upset at a station providing a show that you watch getting more money, legally. Ratings for a show's premiere should include every viewing in the first week, nevermind the first timeslot. At this point, technology has made the current way of rating things obsolete. I mean, I wouldn't accept it if they suddenly started re-running Encounter at Farpoint with the same commercials to artificially bump the ratings it got, but that's totally different.

But whatever floats your boat, if you want to cling to an archaic system, feel free :D

For the record, I dislike white collar crime as well. *fist tap*
Prince of the Land of Stench!
User avatar
Fawst
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3088
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:11 pm
Location: MacLaren's

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:55 am

Leckomaniac wrote:
Zarles wrote:Stereos - Absolutely. EVERY show aired during the week should be held to the same standard of ratings accumulation, no matter what its popularity or ability to get huge ad deals from Nissan may be. :D


But they are. This option is open to everybody. It isnt some secret. Every network was aware of this and had the option to use it. So they ARE held to the same standard. There are set rules. NBC isnt cheating. They are operating well within their rights. If the option was only open to NBC...well that is one thing. But it isnt.

I dont see how that is wrong. Just because no one else chose to do it? Fuck that.


Seems kinda slanted towards the channels/shows that are able to get big-money ad deals from companies like Nissan to me, actually, but again - whatever. The by-law states that you can only do this kind of compiling stuff when you have the exact same ads running during the repeat showing(s), which makes me think that it may have been written with marketing campaigns like the Nissan ads in mind all along.

Fawst, I ain't mad. (EXCEPT AT YOU!!!!1!) I just think it's odd that the Nielsen peeps seem to think they can fix an inherently flawed system by writing some by-law. That makes no sense to me at all. Do the research into seeing how you can honestly and accurately record what people are recording on their TiVos and when they're doing it instead. Doesn't that seem like it would be a little more accurate in the end? On the contrary, I don't support any archaic system at all.

Didn't mean to threadjack here. If someone wants to break this off into its own thread, by all means.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:27 am

Look, it alla comes a down to a the fact that a the Nielson Ratings, they are a becoming inna'creasingly irrelevant inna the modern media, eh? They have a not a kept uppa with a the technology viewing outlets for alla the peoples, anna so's a they write inna the loophole a so's a the networks, they can a boost a their ratings share anna tray anna get a the better ad revenue, eh?

It's a to give a the meaning where a the meaning, she has a ceased a to exist, no?
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:39 am

To me, it just seems like a big fancy excuse to gouge more money from advertisers. That's really all I'm saying.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby The Todd on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:43 am

Zarles wrote:Do the research into seeing how you can honestly and accurately record what people are recording on their TiVos and when they're doing it instead.


That info should already be out there. Tivo knows exactly what I watch and when. If I cancel a showing of any new episode of a show, say so I can watch football, my Tivo automatically picks another airing and records it for me.

If the numbers are out there for say, all the people who Tivo'ed Heroes, then Nissan knows exactly how many people are fast-forwarding through their commercials and can use that to try to negotiate smaller prices for ad space. The networks don't want that.
i reject your reality and substitute my own
User avatar
The Todd
AIRWOLF
 
Posts: 2486
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 11:40 am
Location: surgery

Postby Fried Gold on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:47 am

I don't remember making this thread.
User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13929
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:48 am

Fried Gold wrote:I don't remember making this thread.


But you did, paisan.... you DID.
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby bluebottle on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:50 am

Zarles wrote:To me, it just seems like a big fancy excuse to gouge more money from advertisers. That's really all I'm saying.


boo hoo. the poor advertisers.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:53 am

I donna remember titling this thread, eh?
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:56 am

The Todd wrote:
Zarles wrote:Do the research into seeing how you can honestly and accurately record what people are recording on their TiVos and when they're doing it instead.


That info should already be out there. Tivo knows exactly what I watch and when. If I cancel a showing of any new episode of a show, say so I can watch football, my Tivo automatically picks another airing and records it for me.

If the numbers are out there for say, all the people who Tivo'ed Heroes, then Nissan knows exactly how many people are fast-forwarding through their commercials and can use that to try to negotiate smaller prices for ad space. The networks don't want that.


And voila - the clusterfuck continues. Nielsen wants information on who's TiVoing what, but at the same time, they don't want the networks to get that information because they can use it to haggle for better advertising rates. Hence, they write bullshit little by-laws to further confuse the issue and drive up ad rates.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Fried Gold on Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:08 pm

The audience measurement system in the UK is completely pointless. It samples an amazing ~0.02% of the tv viewing population.

Meaning there are loads of channels with, according the system, get 0 viewers.
User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13929
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby Keepcoolbutcare on Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:34 pm

Bluebottle wrote:
Zarles wrote:To me, it just seems like a big fancy excuse to gouge more money from advertisers. That's really all I'm saying.


boo hoo. the poor advertisers.


but advertisers are peop...well, maybe not people, but they have feeli...ok, maybe not feelings, but...

have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up!
Personally, I'm an atheist in the voting booth and a theist in the movie theatre. I separate the morality of religion with the spirituality and solace of it. There is something boring about atheism.
User avatar
Keepcoolbutcare
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 9407
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:14 am
Location: Blacktionville

Postby tapehead on Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:39 pm

The nielson ratings are for tv sales teams, so that they can sell airtime to the advertisers.

Generally speaking, people who use PVRs like tivo expose themselves to more commercial content than people who watch live free-to-air.

Excellent thread you've kicked off here FG - always with your eye on the bottom line...
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 12:48 pm

Keepcoolbutcare wrote:
Bluebottle wrote:
Zarles wrote:To me, it just seems like a big fancy excuse to gouge more money from advertisers. That's really all I'm saying.


boo hoo. the poor advertisers.


but advertisers are peop...well, maybe not people, but they have feeli...ok, maybe not feelings, but...

have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up!


Oh come on. This isn't some Bill Hicks fantasy world we live in. No matter what you think about advertisers, they still have a job to do, and it's shitty that their rates go up because of some loophole.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Keepcoolbutcare on Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:12 pm

other people with jobs to do...

Republicans. Nazis. Rectal probers.

the point being that TV uses an antiquated, dead system to get their revenue, a system which is crashing around them and how do they respond?

much like the music biz...poorly.

now pull that camera back and get that coke bottle in the snatch, stat!
Personally, I'm an atheist in the voting booth and a theist in the movie theatre. I separate the morality of religion with the spirituality and solace of it. There is something boring about atheism.
User avatar
Keepcoolbutcare
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 9407
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:14 am
Location: Blacktionville

Postby Zarles on Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:20 pm

Keepcoolbutcare wrote:the point being that TV uses an antiquated, dead system to get their revenue, a system which is crashing around them and how do they respond?

much like the music biz...poorly.


That's been my point all along. Hurray!
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby tapehead on Thu Sep 27, 2007 1:25 pm

Keepcoolbutcare wrote:the point being that TV uses an antiquated, dead system to get their revenue,a system which is crashing around them and how do they y
respond?


very, very slowly.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby bluebottle on Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:38 pm

You guys forget that advertising pays for most television. No ad revenue, no television programs.

An expensive show needs more viewers so the advertising can pay for it.

Now, obviously I'm being general and simplistic here. Lot's of people are making lots of money, it's not all going into the programing.

But in a very general sense, advertising drives television.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:15 pm

Bluebottle wrote:But in a very general sense, advertising drives television.


Anna inna the future, the television, she's a gonna to drive HERSELF, eh?


With a the MAGNETS!
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby bluebottle on Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:26 pm

i'm not buying your moon man magnets.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Fried Gold on Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:55 pm

DinoDeLaurentiis wrote:
Bluebottle wrote:
But in a very general sense, advertising drives television.


Anna inna the future, the television, she's a gonna to drive HERSELF, eh?


With a the MAGNETS!

Have you been reading lots of science textbooks recently, or has Adam Balm stolen your login details?
User avatar
Fried Gold
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 13929
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:28 pm
Location: ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░

Postby papalazeru on Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:20 pm

Does that mean that a show can be show 4 times a week with the same ads and it will be counted as one?

Nissan = High school musical 2

I would like to say that I'm one of those Cúnts in the UK that has a viewing box and I relish in turning off shit TV. I've even left it on BBC2 open university learning (the stuff where they show advanced maths (you only really understand it on the way back from the pub)) just to show my disdain at Big Brother - oh! and I always turn the tv over during shit adverts and I mostly turn over during ads anyway.


nuff said!
Papa: The musical!

Padders: "Not very classy! Not very classy at all!"
So Sorry "I'll give you a word to describe it: classless."
Cptn Kirks 2pay: ".....utterly unclassy....."
DennisMM: "...Decidedly unclassy..."
User avatar
papalazeru
Not very classy! Not very classy at all!!
 
Posts: 11474
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:26 am

Postby DinoDeLaurentiis on Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:25 am

Fried Gold wrote:Have you been reading lots of science textbooks recently, or has Adam Balm stolen your login details?


Bah! Teh Balm, he is a just a the goddamn poser. The Dino, he's onna the goddamn CUTTING EDGE!
User avatar
DinoDeLaurentiis
SHE'S A THE SARAH SILVERMAN
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 12:15 pm
Location: Private Villa inna Santorini

Postby Zarles on Fri Sep 28, 2007 10:34 am

Bluebottle wrote:You guys forget that advertising pays for most television. No ad revenue, no television programs.

An expensive show needs more viewers so the advertising can pay for it.

Now, obviously I'm being general and simplistic here. Lot's of people are making lots of money, it's not all going into the programing.

But in a very general sense, advertising drives television.


So in other words, you'd say that advertisers have a job to do, no matter what you think of them? Sounds familiar...
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby bluebottle on Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:25 am

Look, I admit that although I hate the idea of advertising, I respect that advertising companies employ a lot of people who are not in themselves evil.

I also respect the idea that if the company looses money, it's not the executives that are going to feel the pinch, it's going to be the people at the bottom.

So, when I said, "Boo Hoo" at the idea of the advertising companies not turning a profit - i'm well aware of everything that implies.

I was just making an off hand glib remark. Sorry if I think the world would be better off with advertising, lawyers and parking enforcers.

And when I said that television is driven by advertising, I was trying to point out that it's a necessary evil in television and there a lot of people who complain about the ads, but without them there'd be no network shows.

It's all about the advertising, and yes, that means people have jobs to do, but if you stop and think about it, the fact that television, at the end of the day, is nothing more than a vessel for advertising, is a frightening and disgusting thought.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby magicmonkey on Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:31 am

Not PBS or the BBC!!!!!
magicmonkey
I AM fucking Zen
 
Posts: 6031
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:26 am
Location: Shanghizzo

Postby TonyWilson on Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:39 am

Ah, the Beeb it has many many flaws but it's still fucking brilliant. I'm immediately distrustful of anyone who doesn't at least like the idea of the BBC. For many years until recently it produced the best TV in the world and it still leads the way in many areas of programming if not drama and comedy.

Anyway, what I meant to say was that Bill Hicks was goddamn right about advertising and to pretend we live in a world without is indeed a fantasy but that doesn't mean I don't think we should do everything we can to both avoid it and limit it's influence.
Elitism is positing that your taste is equivalent to quality, you hate "Hamlet" does it make it "bad"? If you think so, you're one elite motherfucker.
User avatar
TonyWilson
No Less Liquid Than His Shadow
 
Posts: 9155
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:45 am
Location: A Drained Swimming Pool

Postby tapehead on Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:52 am

Sure - but tell 'em about the tv licences.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:58 am

Bluebottle wrote:Sorry if I think the world would be better off with advertising, lawyers and parking enforcers.


:P
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Next

Return to Coaxial

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron