Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Friday July 07 2017, @10:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the watts-in-a-name? dept.

If I mistakenly write "NBC Nitely News," you can probably still tell what program I'm talking about. Nielsen's automated system can't, however, and a report Thursday in The Wall Street Journal details how networks are taking advantage of that fact to disguise airings that underperform with viewers.

It's described as a common practice in the world of TV ratings, where programs with higher ratings can charge advertisers more to run commercials. When an episode performs poorly with viewers, the networks often intentionally misspell the show title in their report to Nielsen, according to the Journal. This fools the system into separating that airing out as a different show and keeping it from affecting the correctly-spelled show's average overall rating.

The report says the practice was initially used sparingly -- for instance, when a broadcast would go up against a major sporting event. But it has now grown fairly common, with NBC misspelling the title of "NBC Nightly News" 14 times since the current TV season began last fall. At one point, that reportedly included an entire week of broadcasts.

[...] Such a practice might be largely for the sake of marketing, with networks typically looking to boast publicly about show performance however possible. Still, it seems odd that Nielsen would allow them to do so with any sort of regularity, given that it ultimately calls the accuracy of its numbers into question.

Source: CNet


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 07 2017, @11:06PM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 07 2017, @11:06PM (#536304)

    Only 50s and over watch TVs these days. I'm in my 50's, and I don't watch TV except for live sport games.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   0  
       Disagree=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Disagree' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   0  
  • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Friday July 07 2017, @11:18PM (2 children)

    by mhajicek (51) on Friday July 07 2017, @11:18PM (#536309)

    We let the TV run cartoons and the like for the kids during the day, and sometimes use on-demand for ourselves in the evening. If I ever bothered hooking the computer up to the TV we could probably drop the cable, I just haven't gotten around to it.

    --
    The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
    • (Score: 2) by Spamalope on Friday July 07 2017, @11:54PM (1 child)

      by Spamalope (5233) on Friday July 07 2017, @11:54PM (#536323) Homepage

      I moved, built a media center PC and never sign up for cable at the new place.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 08 2017, @01:42AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 08 2017, @01:42AM (#536358)

        I moved and got cable. It came with the apartment. Get it for 'free' still dont watch it.

  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 08 2017, @12:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 08 2017, @12:04AM (#536327)

    I'm over 60, haven't watched TV in ages, and think professional sports are for vicarious morons.

  • (Score: 5, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday July 08 2017, @12:06AM (2 children)

    by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Saturday July 08 2017, @12:06AM (#536328) Homepage

    Titles don't have to be misspelled to be misleading. I was looking forward to watching the Dick Van Dyke show expecting a lot of dicks and a lot of dykes, but only got a greyscale dipshit tripping over a piece of furniture.

    If it were a movie I would've angrily demanded my money back.

    • (Score: 3, Funny) by chromas on Saturday July 08 2017, @01:02AM

      by chromas (34) Subscriber Badge on Saturday July 08 2017, @01:02AM (#536341) Journal

      Was there at least a van?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 08 2017, @03:43AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 08 2017, @03:43AM (#536394)

      Holy crap, an Ethanol-fueled post that was actually worth my time to read.

  • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday July 08 2017, @10:35PM

    by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Saturday July 08 2017, @10:35PM (#536667) Homepage Journal

    I hate to tell you this, but we don't make TV for you. We make it for advertisers. Because advertisers write the checks. The advertisers pay. And what they're paying for is to reach the 18-49 demographic. They covet it. If you've ever wanted something so much that you couldn't think about anything else, couldn't do anything else, but you had to grab, grab, grab for it? That's what it is to covet something. And that's how our great advertisers are about the 18-49 demographic. Nothing else matters. Once you hit 50, I'm sorry to tell you, you're nothing to them. Dead to them. They do not want to reach you. And believe me, the networks covet advertisers. So when we make the shows, we make them for the 18-49s, not for you. If you asked the networks, should I take down my aerial? They'd say yes, do it. Because your 18-49 neighbor can get a better signal. A little better. Because TV, the new TV, isn't for you. I mean, sure, they'll put on some reruns for you. The Dick Van Dyke Show, as my friend said. Something from when you were an 18-49. On a secondary channel. Because that costs them very little. They make a little money that way. Why throw away money? But the main channels, the new TV, the hi def, it's all for the 18-49 demo. #TrumpTV