Welcome to the blog of Dr. Lisa Burns' Media Studies senior capstone class (Section B) at Quinnipiac University. If you're looking for the latest on media industry trends and insightful media analysis, you've come to the right place.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Advertising, Ratings & Audiences Blog 2, Question 2 (Feb. 7th)
Given the changes in
how audiences consume media, do ratings still matter? Why or why not? And are
there alternative ways to track media consumption? Limit:
11 responses
Given the changes in how audiences consume media—technological advances and change of media platforms—ratings still matter. “Nielsen ratings are a way of measuring how many viewers are watching a TV show live” (Meriwether, 1). Since not too many people use televisions to watch shows and programs anymore, producers and directors still need to find out how many people are watching the television shows they produce and people’s thoughts and responses to television shows and programs. On Aug. 3, 2016, Nielsen released “Social Content Ratings.” Social Content Ratings are, “the most comprehensive measure of program-related social media activity across both Facebook and Twitter” (Nielsen.com). Now, instead of Nielsen getting feedback from television shows and programs the day after they are aired, Nielsen can go online to inquire information. Online, social media users can write and mention their likes, dislikes, thoughts, and opinions about television shows and programs. “Developing a comprehensive classifier set of keywords, phrases, names, hashtags and accounts that people could mention while posting about a particular program is one of the keys to capturing total social TV activity” (Nielsen, 1). Television shows and programs (as well as streaming networks such as Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu) can create official program hashtags for their shows and programs. When an audience uses “official hashtags” (Nielsen.com), producers and directors can see consumers’ thoughts and opinions on television programs and shows. Through owned and original tweets, television show directors and producers can examine the good or bad quality of shows. If the show receives good reviews online, then directors and producers can strive to make it better. If the show receives bad reviews or bad tweets/retweets online, the producers and directors can work to change qualities of the show to make the audience want to continue watching. “Measuring the social media response to TV programs holistically across social media networks is critical to connecting with audiences week after week” (Ziangas, 2). However, not everyone owns a Twitter or always tweets about a favorite television show or program. Thus, Nielsen will have to find more ways to measure audience’s responses to shows: finding key words for a television show other than the official hashtag; retweets, quotes, etc. The convergence of technology to different platforms means that Nielsen can no longer receive show/program ratings the next day, but will end up having to wait a longer time. “The rapid rise of nontraditional viewing platforms such as Netflix and video on demand means networks now operate in a world where viewers increasingly wait days, weeks, or months to watch even their favorite shows” (Adalian, 1). The bright side to waiting longer for ratings to come in is that shows have a longer period to acquire a cornucopia of great reviews. The shows that were previously struggling with the traditional Nielsen ratings, day-to-day, can now have a chance to boost their ratings and viewings by having a longer wait period. The downfall to waiting longer is that shows will simply have to wait longer and will not know how they are doing until their results come in. The shows that have done well with traditional Nielsen ratings will need patience—just like any show. As time goes on, technology will continue to change. As technology continues to change, Nielsen will continue to change to be sure it can acquire ratings and reviews from shows’ audiences in different ways other than waiting a day later and going to social media.
References: Adalian, Josef. “Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive.” 30, Nov. 2015.
Meriwether, Liz. “What It’s Like to Live and Die by TV Ratings.” 30, Nov. 2015.
Nielsen.com. “Methodology Matters- The Key to Social TV Measurement is in the Details.” 5 Dec. 2016.
Nielsen.com. “Nielsen’s Social Content Ratings Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter.” 3 Aug. 2016.
Ziangas, Tom. Nielsen.com. “Nielsen’s Social Content Ratings Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter.” 3 Aug. 2016.
Watching the trends in the way media and all forms of entertainment are consumed has become increasingly interesting in the recent years. We have been able to see audiences being more involved, having a clearer voice, and having more of a say in the programs that are being shared to them. Beyond that, businesses have been able to cater further to their audiences- with things like over the top (OTT) services (B). Services like this have been one of the driving factors in the updated rating terminology, which now includes terms like Live+7 (the views of a show as it comes on live, and seven days after the live broadcast (B). With the way content delivery changed, it was only right that the rating is measured changes also. I believe that ratings matter; however, it is the way that we track ratings that need to be improved. Economically speaking, it is not feasible to keep producing shows that do not do well with many audiences (no matter what Netflix’s ambiguous system implies). Speaking of business, the Nielsen Company kept their role in the ratings business since their conception. In 2016, they reported measuring “more than 40% of the world’s viewing behavior” (Nielsen). This means that the ads and shows that “happened” to pop up on your screen were not accidental, and were actually targeted due to the trends that the company has observed. Keeping in mind that regular television watching has changed, the Nielsen Company kept up too. They were able to measure the content on mobile devices; they “expanded [their] panels to incorporate census-style data from third parties in order to capture the breadth and depth of consumer usage.” This is one alternative (or rather additive) method of being able to track ratings in today’s multi-device world. Another alternative that Nielsen is utilizing as of 2016 is their Social Content Ratings. Meaning, besides the tracking services through TV networks, OTT streaming providers, there will now be a tracking of media activity on Facebook and Twitter. (Nielsen)
I believe this was a strategic and innovative move by the Nielsen Company. When looking at their company and brand, I liken them to what Blockbuster could have been if they were more open to adaptation. Instead of choosing to stick with what they knew (television), they saw that the trends of the consumer were moving beyond the standard TV, and gravitated towards it. When we think about most trendy shows and high profile award games or shows, they are accompanied with a hashtag surrounding the event. The case became however, that viewers were not always using the hashtags provided by the networks. (Nielsen) Nielsen was able to provide a clear, analytical way to track the data received from twitter and Facebook to get a much more comprehensive image than one hashtag. The networks and show producers want to have a way to see how the audiences are receiving their content, and now that Nielsen offers social media tracking, this gives companies, viewers, and curators more reason to pay attention to them. Rating will always matter- it’s how you justify putting more/less money into a show, renewing/cancelling a show, or even just figuring out what people are interested in at a certain point in time. Nielsen has done a great service by adding social media to their tracking services, which is precisely the alternatives to TV and OTT services we needed. Works Cited B, Media Trends and Forecasting Section. "Media Trends and Forecasting 450 B." Hamden, 2017. Nielsen. METHODOLOGY MATTERS: THE KEY TO SOCIAL TV MEASUREMENT IS IN THE DETAILS. 05 December 2016. Web. February 2017. —. Nielsen's Social Content Ratings™ Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter. 08 March 2016. Web. February 2017. —. Solutions- TV Ratings. 2016. Web. February 2017.
Ratings are important to television networks one whether a television show gets renewed or not. The question is, how accurate are these ratings and do they even matter? There are tons of ways to watch these shows and you definitely do not have to do it when it is live on air. Many people are choosing to watch these shows when they have free time or wait until the whole season is released to binge watch it in one sitting. Regardless of how it is watched, it is still being watched.
Ratings meant much more in the past because more people were watching live because that may have been their only opportunity to watch. For example, classictvhits.com estimated that there were 95.9 million households with TVs in 1995-1996. Compare that to today with Nielsen estimating, 118.4 million households with TVs in 2016-2017. Though there are more households with TVs today, estimated audiences have shrunk. The largest audience in 1995-1996 was the television show, ER, with an estimated audience of 21.1 million (classictvratings.com). The largest audience for the most recent week in 2017 was NCIS with an audience of 16.2 million (Nielsen). There may be more households with televisions, but it doesn’t mean more people are watching.
Because of these new ways to watch, ratings are becoming more obsolete. In such a diverse media landscape of how we watch our shows now, Nielsen ratings trying to adapt, but I do not think they should define if a show remains on the air or not. In an article on Vulture, Liz Meriwether talks about the impact these ratings have on a creative development of a show, “Those numbers go out, and then almost all creative decisions about network television in America are made based on them.” There are other ways to define if a show should continue or not, which networks should pay attention to.
One of my favorite shows, Community, had a large battle with remaining on the air because of ratings. This show had a niche audience, and did receive some critical acclaim, but being in the 8pm slot on NBC it did not serve as a good lead in to other NBC comedies. That does not mean it deserved to be taken off the air though. Community worked really hard to stay on even after some of the cast had left. Community even had a season without its creator Dan Harmon at the helm. Sometimes having a niche audience can be good, like in podcasting. Podcasts can be successful because they can get ads that are relevant to their audience. Since Community had this audience, NBC could’ve sold their ads based on who their audience was. It would’ve been a win-win for the audience because they are seeing ads that are relevant to them, the companies buying the ad time know who exactly is watching the ad, and NBC knows who to market their ads to.
In today’s “peak TV” world there is always an opportunity to get a show on air. Josef Adalian in Vulture said, The upside for audiences: Shows that once might have suffered premature deaths due to low tune-in may now be able to hang on, and even thrive, in a universe no longer wholly ruled by the tyranny of instant Nielsen judgment.” Shows that don’t do well live can have a second life on-demand or getting on a streaming service. If Community came out today, it probably would have thrived compared to 8 years ago.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Meriwether, Liz. "What It's Like to Live and Die by TV Ratings." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
"Nielsen Estimates 118.4 Million TV Homes in the U.S. for the 2016-17 TV Season." Nielsen Estimates 118.4 Million TV Homes in the U.S. for the 2016-17 TV Season. The Nielsen Company, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
"TopTen." Top 10s. The Nielsen Company, 23 Jan. 2017. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
(1/2) Unlike Netflix and other streaming services cable networks are literally unable to keep every show on the air. There are just not enough time slots for the amount of shows that are created. In order for these big networks to make decisions they need something to help display a shows ability to make money. Until everyone unplugs their cable the big advertisers are looking to spend big money only on shows with big ratings. According to an article from 2015, “At least in the near term, ad-supported networks, both broadcast and cable, will continue to prefer programs that command big same-day ratings, if only because they represent the easiest path to profitability” (Adalian). If more people watch the show live, then more people will see the commercials. This tactic is still a problem today but we are seeing less and less thanks to online streaming services. The Neilson ratings are not an accurate representation of who is watching the show. There are so many different platforms that give access to a show. Neilson has started to take to social media to help create viewing data. These days the “buzz” on Twitter and Facebook could be more valuable to a producer than just mere viewership statistics (Hogan). It can show the potential of a show and help decide if the show is worth continuing because now advertisements aren’t the only way to make money.
(2/2) If a show is fending well in the media and on social media streaming services like Netflix and Amazon may want to invest in the streaming rights. Advertisements aren’t the only way to make a profit on a show. Adalian also mentions that, “beyond the money networks get from airing episodes on Hulu immediately after they premiere on TV, certain shows fetch big bucks by selling rights to full seasons to Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu.” This new strategy focuses on building a brand for a show instead of only focusing on one episode at a time. Netflix is paving the way for a ratings free production. They believe that the ratings seriously affect the creative process and also creates unwanted competition within the company. While Netflix doesn’t reveal their numbers people are skeptical of what they do in secret. Occasionally Ted Sarandos will throw out numbers about some of their originals when the timing is right.That being said the information is still very important to know and monitor but it should never make or break a show. As we are finding more and more ways to measure a shows potential we will see a new type of way to put a value on a show. After all, we judge most things by their reviews and ratings like restaurants, movies, and even travel destinations (O’Connell).
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Hogan, Dwayne. "How Do Nielsen Ratings Work?" The CableTV Blog. N.p., 19 Feb. 2013. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
O'Connell, Michael. "Netflix's Ted Sarandos Reacts to NBC Outing His Ratings: "Remarkably Inaccurate Data"." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 17 Jan. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Personally I think due to the fact that media consumers are constantly changing the outlets in which we use media, ratings are not always an efficient way to see popular vs. non-popular television. The reason why I believe in this idea is because ratings most of the time measure live television viewings and since we are moving further and further away from the idea of viewing live television, this rating system cannot accurately measure what audiences are tuning in to. I could agree that the rating system could be updated, such as mentioned in Adalian’s article “Getting viewers to tune in immediately was pretty much the only way to succeed in TV, networks understandably put a premium on noisy, mass-appeal concepts and star-driven vehicles-anything to get you to watch right now.” (Adalian). The idea of live viewing has changed since people are not able to pick and choose times when they want to watch the shows they want to watch and it is because of this, most shows that would not have lasted in the standard rating system, are being kept around for a longer time. In How Hollywood Gossips About Newflix’s Hidden Ratings it is mentioned that ratings are based on advertising time, something that Netflix does not have. I began thinking about ways that advertisements are sold and began thinking about a “click system” for ratings. For example, Advertisements that are online get money based on the amount of “hits” they get or how many times they get clicked on. What if Netflix or VOD outlets used the same idea, and monitored how many “hits” or times a show is getting watched by users and how many users continue with it. However, I think Netflix has been lucky in the sense that it has not necessarily needed a “rating system”, because they have been putting out shows that have been talked about and have been so popular amongst audiences. Another plus that Netflix has that other television outlets do not have is a subscription count, and the amount of subscribers shows the popularity of the outlet. Since, Subscription outlets have become so popular I think it is extremely important for there to be different “rating systems” other than the live audience system, due to the fact that media outlets are constantly modernizing themselves.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Meriwether, Liz. "What It's Like to Live and Die by TV Ratings." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
(1/3) Despite the change in how audiences are able to consume media, ratings are still an important factor for many of these television stations and networking companies. Before the streaming of shows via Netflix or Amazon, Nielsen reports would record how many people tuned in for that certain show at it’s set time during the week. This allowed the producers of the show to get feedback on how it’s doing, and gave the station some perspective of how much the show may be worth. Ratings are also important, as Josef Adalain explains in his article Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive as, “They are primarily a tool for selling advertising time, or convincing cable operators to pay networks more in subscription fees” (Adalain, 1). With this, it is clear that rating are still important for those who depend on advertising time or when dealing with certain networks, however, with streaming websites such as Netflix and Amazon, it does not seem as necessary, Not depending on advertisers, Netflix has made numerous statements about not revealing any of their viewer numbers (Jarvey, 1). This has caused some tension among many of these networks and media companies as rating isn’t just about the bragging rights for the success of their shows, but actual money is on the line. As Adalain mentions in his article Hollywood Gossips About Netflix’s Hidden Ratings, “While ratings are mostly used to set ad rates, they’re also often key in determining the monetary value of a show”, he then goes on, “It also makes it very difficult for actors and writers to know whether they’re being fair compensated for their should their Netflix series last several seasons” (Adalain, 3). Ratings are clearly important in this aspect, yet there is not as much on the line for the Netflix company itself than for the individuals behind each of the show by not showing the ratings.
Overall, ratings are still important, regardless of the different ways that people are now able to consume media. Ratings provide a basis of what the producers and networks need to know in order to improve the show and the ensure everyone is being compensated for it. In saying this, new streaming platforms such as Netflix and Amazon are able to get away with not sharing their ratings for their different television shows. The importance of ratings hugely relates to how dependent these networks and programs are to advertisements and getting time on air, explaining why companies like Netflix does not find it necessary to release that kind of information.
References:
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Jarvey, Natalie. “NBC vs. Netflix: Why a Ratings ‘Reveal’ Matters.” 20, Jan. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Ziangas, Tom. Nielsen.com. “Nielsen’s Social Content Ratings Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter.” 3 Aug. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
As technology and content delivery systems continue to evolve it is becoming increasingly difficult to track viewership. Nielson’s old model of reporting the ratings has become problematic, so where does the media world turn to for ratings statistics. Maybe a better question is “do ratings still matter?” I think the answer is yes and no, because like the content delivery systems, ratings have also evolved. When we think of ratings we often think of immediate feedback for shows, how many people in one moment were watching a given piece of content. However viewing habits of Americans have changed, people often wait days or even weeks before watching the newest episode. This phenomenon has been observed by major networks as some “have seen significant spikes in ratings weeks after an episode of a show premieres due to the growth of streaming” (Adalain 2). Thus gauging the amount of people watching in a certain time span doesn’t give you the best indicator of ratings. This new trend has affected networks so much that some have changed their fundamental ratings practices. “Many cable networks, including FX, HBO and Discovery, have stopped reporting overnight viewership numbers, instead preferring to wait for at least three days of delayed playback.” (Guthrie 1). This is why ratings as we knew them don’t matter, however the new delayed version might be the more statistically valuable.
The biggest gold mine for the newest form of ratings might be within Netflix’s extensive database. Netflix has been very secretive with their data and hardly discloses the numbers the different shows are getting. In this scenario Netflix holds all the cards since they are the distributer of the popular streaming service. The issue is that companies want this info to better gear their shows toward the audiences they are more popular with. We live in an age of niche audiences; no longer are there huge numbers of people sitting down to watch the same show at the same time. Thus the information that Netflix holds is what can make or break a show. Netflix has the right to keep this information, but it may not be long until a new way is conceived to track Netflix ratings without Netflix being involved. Thus big networks can handle not have this information “because some believe Netflix and other streaming services won’t be able to live in their metric-free bubble for long” (Adalain 3). There will be a new type of way to track ratings and many networks can tap into this gold mine of user data. One new way to track amazon viewing habits includes Nielson Buyer Insights, which can track debit card purchases for certain shows. This helps track amazon video purchases, but is still problematic for Netlfix and Hulu streaming practices. Until an accurate way to measure streaming habits is created, Netflix can flaunt its autonomy and position as a revolutionary service.
Work Cited Adalian, Josef. "How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix's Hidden Ratings." Vulture. N.p., 01 Dec. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2017.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. N.p., 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2017.
Guthrie, Marisa. "The Battle to Build a Better TV Ratings System: 6 Alternative Ways to Measure Viewing." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 12 May 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2017.
Given the changes in how audiences consume media—technological advances and change of media platforms—ratings still matter.
ReplyDelete“Nielsen ratings are a way of measuring how many viewers are watching a TV show live” (Meriwether, 1). Since not too many people use televisions to watch shows and programs anymore, producers and directors still need to find out how many people are watching the television shows they produce and people’s thoughts and responses to television shows and programs.
On Aug. 3, 2016, Nielsen released “Social Content Ratings.” Social Content Ratings are, “the most comprehensive measure of program-related social media activity across both Facebook and Twitter” (Nielsen.com).
Now, instead of Nielsen getting feedback from television shows and programs the day after they are aired, Nielsen can go online to inquire information. Online, social media users can write and mention their likes, dislikes, thoughts, and opinions about television shows and programs.
“Developing a comprehensive classifier set of keywords, phrases, names, hashtags and accounts that people could mention while posting about a particular program is one of the keys to capturing total social TV activity” (Nielsen, 1).
Television shows and programs (as well as streaming networks such as Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu) can create official program hashtags for their shows and programs. When an audience uses “official hashtags” (Nielsen.com), producers and directors can see consumers’ thoughts and opinions on television programs and shows.
Through owned and original tweets, television show directors and producers can examine the good or bad quality of shows. If the show receives good reviews online, then directors and producers can strive to make it better. If the show receives bad reviews or bad tweets/retweets online, the producers and directors can work to change qualities of the show to make the audience want to continue watching.
“Measuring the social media response to TV programs holistically across social media networks is critical to connecting with audiences week after week” (Ziangas, 2).
However, not everyone owns a Twitter or always tweets about a favorite television show or program. Thus, Nielsen will have to find more ways to measure audience’s responses to shows: finding key words for a television show other than the official hashtag; retweets, quotes, etc.
The convergence of technology to different platforms means that Nielsen can no longer receive show/program ratings the next day, but will end up having to wait a longer time.
“The rapid rise of nontraditional viewing platforms such as Netflix and video on demand means networks now operate in a world where viewers increasingly wait days, weeks, or months to watch even their favorite shows” (Adalian, 1).
The bright side to waiting longer for ratings to come in is that shows have a longer period to acquire a cornucopia of great reviews. The shows that were previously struggling with the traditional Nielsen ratings, day-to-day, can now have a chance to boost their ratings and viewings by having a longer wait period.
The downfall to waiting longer is that shows will simply have to wait longer and will not know how they are doing until their results come in. The shows that have done well with traditional Nielsen ratings will need patience—just like any show.
As time goes on, technology will continue to change. As technology continues to change, Nielsen will continue to change to be sure it can acquire ratings and reviews from shows’ audiences in different ways other than waiting a day later and going to social media.
References:
DeleteAdalian, Josef. “Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive.” 30, Nov. 2015.
Meriwether, Liz. “What It’s Like to Live and Die by TV Ratings.” 30, Nov. 2015.
Nielsen.com. “Methodology Matters- The Key to Social TV Measurement is in the Details.” 5 Dec. 2016.
Nielsen.com. “Nielsen’s Social Content Ratings Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter.” 3 Aug. 2016.
Ziangas, Tom. Nielsen.com. “Nielsen’s Social Content Ratings Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter.” 3 Aug. 2016.
Nyarko 1
ReplyDeleteWatching the trends in the way media and all forms of entertainment are consumed has become increasingly interesting in the recent years. We have been able to see audiences being more involved, having a clearer voice, and having more of a say in the programs that are being shared to them. Beyond that, businesses have been able to cater further to their audiences- with things like over the top (OTT) services (B). Services like this have been one of the driving factors in the updated rating terminology, which now includes terms like Live+7 (the views of a show as it comes on live, and seven days after the live broadcast (B). With the way content delivery changed, it was only right that the rating is measured changes also. I believe that ratings matter; however, it is the way that we track ratings that need to be improved. Economically speaking, it is not feasible to keep producing shows that do not do well with many audiences (no matter what Netflix’s ambiguous system implies).
Speaking of business, the Nielsen Company kept their role in the ratings business since their conception. In 2016, they reported measuring “more than 40% of the world’s viewing behavior” (Nielsen). This means that the ads and shows that “happened” to pop up on your screen were not accidental, and were actually targeted due to the trends that the company has observed. Keeping in mind that regular television watching has changed, the Nielsen Company kept up too. They were able to measure the content on mobile devices; they “expanded [their] panels to incorporate census-style data from third parties in order to capture the breadth and depth of consumer usage.” This is one alternative (or rather additive) method of being able to track ratings in today’s multi-device world. Another alternative that Nielsen is utilizing as of 2016 is their Social Content Ratings. Meaning, besides the tracking services through TV networks, OTT streaming providers, there will now be a tracking of media activity on Facebook and Twitter. (Nielsen)
Nyarko 2
DeleteI believe this was a strategic and innovative move by the Nielsen Company. When looking at their company and brand, I liken them to what Blockbuster could have been if they were more open to adaptation. Instead of choosing to stick with what they knew (television), they saw that the trends of the consumer were moving beyond the standard TV, and gravitated towards it. When we think about most trendy shows and high profile award games or shows, they are accompanied with a hashtag surrounding the event. The case became however, that viewers were not always using the hashtags provided by the networks. (Nielsen) Nielsen was able to provide a clear, analytical way to track the data received from twitter and Facebook to get a much more comprehensive image than one hashtag. The networks and show producers want to have a way to see how the audiences are receiving their content, and now that Nielsen offers social media tracking, this gives companies, viewers, and curators more reason to pay attention to them.
Rating will always matter- it’s how you justify putting more/less money into a show, renewing/cancelling a show, or even just figuring out what people are interested in at a certain point in time. Nielsen has done a great service by adding social media to their tracking services, which is precisely the alternatives to TV and OTT services we needed.
Works Cited
B, Media Trends and Forecasting Section. "Media Trends and Forecasting 450 B." Hamden, 2017.
Nielsen. METHODOLOGY MATTERS: THE KEY TO SOCIAL TV MEASUREMENT IS IN THE DETAILS. 05 December 2016. Web. February 2017.
—. Nielsen's Social Content Ratings™ Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter. 08 March 2016. Web. February 2017.
—. Solutions- TV Ratings. 2016. Web. February 2017.
Ratings are important to television networks one whether a television show gets renewed or not. The question is, how accurate are these ratings and do they even matter? There are tons of ways to watch these shows and you definitely do not have to do it when it is live on air. Many people are choosing to watch these shows when they have free time or wait until the whole season is released to binge watch it in one sitting. Regardless of how it is watched, it is still being watched.
ReplyDeleteRatings meant much more in the past because more people were watching live because that may have been their only opportunity to watch. For example, classictvhits.com estimated that there were 95.9 million households with TVs in 1995-1996. Compare that to today with Nielsen estimating, 118.4 million households with TVs in 2016-2017. Though there are more households with TVs today, estimated audiences have shrunk. The largest audience in 1995-1996 was the television show, ER, with an estimated audience of 21.1 million (classictvratings.com). The largest audience for the most recent week in 2017 was NCIS with an audience of 16.2 million (Nielsen). There may be more households with televisions, but it doesn’t mean more people are watching.
Because of these new ways to watch, ratings are becoming more obsolete. In such a diverse media landscape of how we watch our shows now, Nielsen ratings trying to adapt, but I do not think they should define if a show remains on the air or not. In an article on Vulture, Liz Meriwether talks about the impact these ratings have on a creative development of a show, “Those numbers go out, and then almost all creative decisions about network television in America are made based on them.” There are other ways to define if a show should continue or not, which networks should pay attention to.
One of my favorite shows, Community, had a large battle with remaining on the air because of ratings. This show had a niche audience, and did receive some critical acclaim, but being in the 8pm slot on NBC it did not serve as a good lead in to other NBC comedies. That does not mean it deserved to be taken off the air though. Community worked really hard to stay on even after some of the cast had left. Community even had a season without its creator Dan Harmon at the helm.
Sometimes having a niche audience can be good, like in podcasting. Podcasts can be successful because they can get ads that are relevant to their audience. Since Community had this audience, NBC could’ve sold their ads based on who their audience was. It would’ve been a win-win for the audience because they are seeing ads that are relevant to them, the companies buying the ad time know who exactly is watching the ad, and NBC knows who to market their ads to.
In today’s “peak TV” world there is always an opportunity to get a show on air. Josef Adalian in Vulture said, The upside for audiences: Shows that once might have suffered premature deaths due to low tune-in may now be able to hang on, and even thrive, in a universe no longer wholly ruled by the tyranny of instant Nielsen judgment.” Shows that don’t do well live can have a second life on-demand or getting on a streaming service. If Community came out today, it probably would have thrived compared to 8 years ago.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Meriwether, Liz. "What It's Like to Live and Die by TV Ratings." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
"Nielsen Estimates 118.4 Million TV Homes in the U.S. for the 2016-17 TV Season." Nielsen Estimates 118.4 Million TV Homes in the U.S. for the 2016-17 TV Season. The Nielsen Company, 26 Aug. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
"TopTen." Top 10s. The Nielsen Company, 23 Jan. 2017. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
"TV Ratings > 1990's." ClassicTVHits.com: TV Ratings > 1990's. ClassicTVHits.com, n.d. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
(1/2)
ReplyDeleteUnlike Netflix and other streaming services cable networks are literally unable to keep every show on the air. There are just not enough time slots for the amount of shows that are created. In order for these big networks to make decisions they need something to help display a shows ability to make money. Until everyone unplugs their cable the big advertisers are looking to spend big money only on shows with big ratings. According to an article from 2015, “At least in the near term, ad-supported networks, both broadcast and cable, will continue to prefer programs that command big same-day ratings, if only because they represent the easiest path to profitability” (Adalian). If more people watch the show live, then more people will see the commercials.
This tactic is still a problem today but we are seeing less and less thanks to online streaming services. The Neilson ratings are not an accurate representation of who is watching the show. There are so many different platforms that give access to a show. Neilson has started to take to social media to help create viewing data. These days the “buzz” on Twitter and Facebook could be more valuable to a producer than just mere viewership statistics (Hogan). It can show the potential of a show and help decide if the show is worth continuing because now advertisements aren’t the only way to make money.
(2/2)
DeleteIf a show is fending well in the media and on social media streaming services like Netflix and Amazon may want to invest in the streaming rights. Advertisements aren’t the only way to make a profit on a show. Adalian also mentions that, “beyond the money networks get from airing episodes on Hulu immediately after they premiere on TV, certain shows fetch big bucks by selling rights to full seasons to Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu.” This new strategy focuses on building a brand for a show instead of only focusing on one episode at a time.
Netflix is paving the way for a ratings free production. They believe that the ratings seriously affect the creative process and also creates unwanted competition within the company. While Netflix doesn’t reveal their numbers people are skeptical of what they do in secret. Occasionally Ted Sarandos will throw out numbers about some of their originals when the timing is right.That being said the information is still very important to know and monitor but it should never make or break a show. As we are finding more and more ways to measure a shows potential we will see a new type of way to put a value on a show. After all, we judge most things by their reviews and ratings like restaurants, movies, and even travel destinations (O’Connell).
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
DeleteHogan, Dwayne. "How Do Nielsen Ratings Work?" The CableTV Blog. N.p., 19 Feb. 2013. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
O'Connell, Michael. "Netflix's Ted Sarandos Reacts to NBC Outing His Ratings: "Remarkably Inaccurate Data"." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 17 Jan. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Personally I think due to the fact that media consumers are constantly changing the outlets in which we use media, ratings are not always an efficient way to see popular vs. non-popular television. The reason why I believe in this idea is because ratings most of the time measure live television viewings and since we are moving further and further away from the idea of viewing live television, this rating system cannot accurately measure what audiences are tuning in to. I could agree that the rating system could be updated, such as mentioned in Adalian’s article
ReplyDelete“Getting viewers to tune in immediately was pretty much the only way to succeed in TV, networks understandably put a premium on noisy, mass-appeal concepts and star-driven vehicles-anything to get you to watch right now.” (Adalian). The idea of live viewing has changed since people are not able to pick and choose times when they want to watch the shows they want to watch and it is because of this, most shows that would not have lasted in the standard rating system, are being kept around for a longer time.
In How Hollywood Gossips About Newflix’s Hidden Ratings it is mentioned that ratings are based on advertising time, something that Netflix does not have. I began thinking about ways that advertisements are sold and began thinking about a “click system” for ratings. For example, Advertisements that are online get money based on the amount of “hits” they get or how many times they get clicked on. What if Netflix or VOD outlets used the same idea, and monitored how many “hits” or times a show is getting watched by users and how many users continue with it. However, I think Netflix has been lucky in the sense that it has not necessarily needed a “rating system”, because they have been putting out shows that have been talked about and have been so popular amongst audiences. Another plus that Netflix has that other television outlets do not have is a subscription count, and the amount of subscribers shows the popularity of the outlet. Since, Subscription outlets have become so popular I think it is extremely important for there to be different “rating systems” other than the live audience system, due to the fact that media outlets are constantly modernizing themselves.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
DeleteMeriwether, Liz. "What It's Like to Live and Die by TV Ratings." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
(1/3)
ReplyDeleteDespite the change in how audiences are able to consume media, ratings are still an important factor for many of these television stations and networking companies. Before the streaming of shows via Netflix or Amazon, Nielsen reports would record how many people tuned in for that certain show at it’s set time during the week. This allowed the producers of the show to get feedback on how it’s doing, and gave the station some perspective of how much the show may be worth. Ratings are also important, as Josef Adalain explains in his article Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive as, “They are primarily a tool for selling advertising time, or convincing cable operators to pay networks more in subscription fees” (Adalain, 1). With this, it is clear that rating are still important for those who depend on advertising time or when dealing with certain networks, however, with streaming websites such as Netflix and Amazon, it does not seem as necessary, Not depending on advertisers, Netflix has made numerous statements about not revealing any of their viewer numbers (Jarvey, 1). This has caused some tension among many of these networks and media companies as rating isn’t just about the bragging rights for the success of their shows, but actual money is on the line. As Adalain mentions in his article Hollywood Gossips About Netflix’s Hidden Ratings, “While ratings are mostly used to set ad rates, they’re also often key in determining the monetary value of a show”, he then goes on, “It also makes it very difficult for actors and writers to know whether they’re being fair compensated for their should their Netflix series last several seasons” (Adalain, 3). Ratings are clearly important in this aspect, yet there is not as much on the line for the Netflix company itself than for the individuals behind each of the show by not showing the ratings.
Overall, ratings are still important, regardless of the different ways that people are now able to consume media. Ratings provide a basis of what the producers and networks need to know in order to improve the show and the ensure everyone is being compensated for it. In saying this, new streaming platforms such as Netflix and Amazon are able to get away with not sharing their ratings for their different television shows. The importance of ratings hugely relates to how dependent these networks and programs are to advertisements and getting time on air, explaining why companies like Netflix does not find it necessary to release that kind of information.
DeleteReferences:
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. New York Media, 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Adalian, Josef. “Hollywood Gossips About Netflix’s Hidden Ratings.” 01, Dec. 2015. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Jarvey, Natalie. “NBC vs. Netflix: Why a Ratings ‘Reveal’ Matters.” 20, Jan. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
Ziangas, Tom. Nielsen.com. “Nielsen’s Social Content Ratings Launches to Become First Standardized Measurement Across Facebook and Twitter.” 3 Aug. 2016. Web. 07 Feb. 2017.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs technology and content delivery systems continue to evolve it is becoming increasingly difficult to track viewership. Nielson’s old model of reporting the ratings has become problematic, so where does the media world turn to for ratings statistics. Maybe a better question is “do ratings still matter?” I think the answer is yes and no, because like the content delivery systems, ratings have also evolved. When we think of ratings we often think of immediate feedback for shows, how many people in one moment were watching a given piece of content. However viewing habits of Americans have changed, people often wait days or even weeks before watching the newest episode. This phenomenon has been observed by major networks as some “have seen significant spikes in ratings weeks after an episode of a show premieres due to the growth of streaming” (Adalain 2). Thus gauging the amount of people watching in a certain time span doesn’t give you the best indicator of ratings. This new trend has affected networks so much that some have changed their fundamental ratings practices. “Many cable networks, including FX, HBO and Discovery, have stopped reporting overnight viewership numbers, instead preferring to wait for at least three days of delayed playback.” (Guthrie 1). This is why ratings as we knew them don’t matter, however the new delayed version might be the more statistically valuable.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest gold mine for the newest form of ratings might be within Netflix’s extensive database. Netflix has been very secretive with their data and hardly discloses the numbers the different shows are getting. In this scenario Netflix holds all the cards since they are the distributer of the popular streaming service. The issue is that companies want this info to better gear their shows toward the audiences they are more popular with. We live in an age of niche audiences; no longer are there huge numbers of people sitting down to watch the same show at the same time. Thus the information that Netflix holds is what can make or break a show. Netflix has the right to keep this information, but it may not be long until a new way is conceived to track Netflix ratings without Netflix being involved. Thus big networks can handle not have this information “because some believe Netflix and other streaming services won’t be able to live in their metric-free bubble for long” (Adalain 3). There will be a new type of way to track ratings and many networks can tap into this gold mine of user data. One new way to track amazon viewing habits includes Nielson Buyer Insights, which can track debit card purchases for certain shows. This helps track amazon video purchases, but is still problematic for Netlfix and Hulu streaming practices.
ReplyDeleteUntil an accurate way to measure streaming habits is created, Netflix can flaunt its autonomy and position as a revolutionary service.
Work Cited
Adalian, Josef. "How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix's Hidden Ratings." Vulture. N.p., 01 Dec. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2017.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. N.p., 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2017.
Guthrie, Marisa. "The Battle to Build a Better TV Ratings System: 6 Alternative Ways to Measure Viewing." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 12 May 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2017.