Text 7000, 83 rader
Skriven 2006-08-27 12:18:00 av Robert E Starr JR (7497.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: SG-1 Ratings...Measur
=================================
* * * This message was from Joseph DeMartino to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <1156626822.632989.287830@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
@REPLY: <1156557052.183696.116330@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
John wrote:

> Evidentally the SG1 people made a big appeal for fans to watch *live*
> and boost the ratings at Comic Con.

Since most people who time-shift a show also fast forward through the
commercials, those viewers a obviously useless to advertisers, and
hence  don't count for much.

> Secondly, I've NEVER been asked about what I watch on TV.  Seems to me
> that the ratings system is an awfully poor way to gauge what people are
> REALLY watching.

*Shrug*.   I went something like15 years from the time I first
registered to vote until the time I was first called for jury duty.
That hardly proves there is something fundamentally wrong with the
system for calling jurors it just means that I happened not to be
picked. Similarly I've never been contacted by any of the major
national political polling organizations - Gallup, Roper, network or
news affilated ones or major universities - but I don't deny that there
can be some validity to public opinion polling.  (I think some of the
polls are deeply flawed because of the way the questions are phrased,
but because their sampling, demographic or statistically models are
terrible.)   Sometimes it really is the luck of the draw

If you live in one of the largest TV markets, chances are that the bulk
of ratings are recorded via electronic devices, not by paper diaries or
telephone polls.  (Actually I don't think telephone surveys are *ever*
used for ratings per se, only for more general information gathering
about TV viewing habirts, etc.)   The irony is that you probably have
*less* individual chance of participaing in the TV ratings if you live
in a high-population area than in a smaller town or rural area.

I've been sent paper diaries from different ratings companies for both
radio and television in the past.  Such diaries are really only used to
set advertising rates for local broadcasters on the TV side.  TV
Network and cable/satellite ratings and ad rates are based on
electronic numbers collected overnight in the major markets.  (I'm not
sure how all this works for radio where there is no equivalent of
either the "Neilsen box" or "People Meter" as far as I know.  I guess
the paper diaries are *it*, since so much radio listening takes place
in the car where the kind of technology that would be needed to monitor
it in realtime only just came onto the scene.)

> Now I know the purpose of TV is t sell add time....but man....seems the
> industry is failing to keep up with how viewers are being encouraged to
> view by new technologies.

As I noted above, the problem is that the new technologies enable
people to get the shows without watching the ads.  Yet the ads are
supposed to pay for the shows.  "Free" TV is supported by those
"annoying" commercials.  We pay for TV one way or another.  Remember
all those PBS pledge drives that try to guilt you into coughing up by
calling you a freeloader for watching while others pay?  There
commercial TV equivalent is the guy who never watches anything "live"
but instead happily zaps through all those commercials on his DVR.  He
has the "luxury" of doing this while the poor proles who can't avoid
commercials are, in effect, subsidizing his TV habit.  The model can't
be sustained.  Either a way is going to be found to stop commerical
zapping or TV is going to shift to a pay-per-view or subscription model
because the advertisers aren't going to spend the money if they aren't
getting butts-in-seats and eye-balls-on-the-screen in return.  And
they'll turn to even *more* obnoxious ways of getting our attention and
selling their products.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.  The only way the TV industry
can "keep up" is by finding new sources of revenue.  "B5: TLT" is an
interesting toe in that particular water.  But how easy would it be to
do that with purely *original* programming that isn't building off
millions of viewers from a previous life on broadcast or cable?

Regards, 

Joe
                             
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)