Subject: Re: Unfair TV Ratings - Lousy choices
From: bitbug@public.BTR.COM (James Buster bitbug@btr.com)
Date: 1991-08-29, 14:10
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv,alt.tv.twin-peaks

In article <1991Aug29.174139.11037@cs.umn.edu> rjg@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Robert J. Granvin) writes:
> >Also, when referring to a sample size of 4,000, it must be remembered
> >that the 4,000 households are not permanent Neilson-family households.
> >The sample base is constantly changing.  By the end of several months
> >we are talking about a much larger sample size than just 4,000.  Also,
> >since the stats appear to hold true for various samples, it tends to
> >further the claim that the ratings system _is_ accurate to an acceptable
> >degree.  It's not as representative as anyone would like, but it does
> >do a good job of it.

What do they (Nielsen) mean by household? When I think of household,
I think of one or two parents with one or more kids, living in a single-family
home. There are certainly other large segments of the population that this
does not represent. I'd like to know how the Nielsen people choose the
demographics of its sample population, and if they are biased to any
particular portion of the population.

> >(Not that the networks haven't been known to
> >hose a show - by constantly moving its time slot for one example...)

Which show would this be? Also, I have noticed the tendency of the
networks to destroy shows by doing the following: the show does ok,
but isn't #1 so it isn't good enough, cancel the show, and bring back
reruns on Friday nights to see if they should continue. That the show
does even worse than on its original time slot is of course a self-fulfilling
prophecy, so the show gets permanently cancelled. I suspect that the
network execs do this to kill shows they don't like, but I cannot prove this.
-- James Buster bitbug@btr.com