From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nielsen ratings
Nielsen ratings
Nielsen ratings are audience measurement systems de- Ratings/share and total viewers
veloped by Nielsen Media Research, in an effort to de-
The most commonly cited Nielsen results are reported
termine the audience size and composition of television
in two measurements: ratings points and share, usually
programming in the United States. Nielsen Media Re-
reported as: "ratings points/share". As of September 1,
search was founded by Arthur Nielsen, who was a market
2010, there are an estimated 115.9 million television
analyst whose career had begun in the 1920s with brand
households in the United States. A single national ratings
advertising analysis and expanded into radio market
point represents one percent of the total number, or
analysis during the 1930s, culminating in Nielsen ratings
1,159,000 households for the 2010–11 season.[2] Nielsen
of radio programming, which was meant to provide sta-
re-estimates the number of TV-equipped households
tistics as to the markets of radio shows. In 1950, Nielsen
each August for the upcoming television season.
moved to television, developing a ratings system using
Share is the percentage of television sets in use tuned
the methods he and his company had developed for ra-
to the program. For example, Nielsen may report a show
dio. That method has since become the primary source of
as receiving a 9.2/15 during its broadcast, meaning that
audience measurement information in the television in-
on average 9.2 percent of all television-equipped house-
dustry around the world.
holds were tuned in to that program at any given mo-
ment, while 15 percent of households watching TV were
Measuring ratings tuned into that program during this time slot. The differ-
ence between rating and share is that a rating reflects the
Nielsen television ratings are gathered in one of two
percentage of the total population of televisions tuned to
ways:
a particular program while share reflects the percentage
1. Viewer "diaries", in which a target audience self-
of televisions actually in use.[3]
records its viewing or listening habits. By targeting
Because ratings are based on samples, it is possible
various demographics, the assembled statistical
for shows to get 0.0 share, despite having an audience;
models provide a rendering of the audiences of any
the CNBC talk show McEnroe was one notable example.[4]
given show, network, and programming hour.
Another example is The CW Television Network show,
2. A more technologically sophisticated system uses Set
CW Now, which received two 0.0 ratings in the same sea-
Meters, which are small devices connected to
son.
televisions in selected homes. These devices gather
the viewing habits of the home and transmit the
information nightly to Nielsen through a "Home
Demographics
Unit" connected to a phone line. The technology- Nielsen Media Research also provides statistics on spe-
based home unit system is meant to allow market cific demographics as advertising rates are influenced by
researchers to study television viewing habits on a such factors as age, gender, race, economic class, and
minute to minute basis, seeing the exact moment area. Younger viewers are considered more attractive for
viewers change channels or turn off their TV. In many products, whereas in some cases older and wealthi-
addition to set meters, individual viewer reporting er audiences are desired, or female audiences are desired
devices, such as people meters, have allowed the over males.
company to separate household viewing information In general, the number of viewers within the 18–49
into various demographic groups, but so far Nielsen age range is more important than the total number of
has refused to change its distribution of data of viewers.[5][6] According to Advertising Age, during the
ethnic groups into subgroups, which could give more 2007–08 season, Grey’s Anatomy was able to charge
targeted information to networks and advertisers. $419,000 per commercial, compared to only $248,000 for
Changing systems of viewing have impacted Nielsen’s a commercial during CSI, despite CSI having almost five
methods of market research. In 2005, Nielsen began mea- million more viewers on average.[7] Due to its strength
suring the usage of digital video recordings such as TiVo. in young demos, Friends was able to charge almost three
Initial results indicate that time-shifted viewing will have times as much for a commercial as Murder, She Wrote,
a significant impact on television ratings. The networks even though the two series had similar total viewer num-
are not yet figuring these new results into their ad rates bers during the seasons they were on the air together.[5]
due to the resistance of advertisers.[1] Glee and The Office drew fewer total viewers than NCIS
during the 2009–10 season, but earned an average of
1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nielsen ratings
Nielsen Sweeps Periods
Season November February May July
2008–2009 30 October – 26 November 2008 5 March – 1 April 2009 23 April – 20 May 2009 2–29 July 2009
2009–2010 29 October – 25 November 2009 4 February – 3 March 2010 29 April – 26 May 2010 1–28 July 2010
2010–2011 28 October – 24 November 2010 3 February – 2 March 2011 28 April – 25 May 2011 30 June – 27 July 2011
$272,694 and $213,617 respectively, compared to moved to June 12, the "February" sweeps period for 2009
$150,708 for NCIS.[8] remained in March.
Commercial ratings Criticism of ratings systems
Nielsen also provides viewership data calculated as the There is some public critique regarding accuracy and po-
average viewership for only the commercial time within tential bias within Nielsen’s rating system. In June 2006,
the program. This "Commercial Ratings" first became however, Nielsen announced a plan to revamp its entire
available on May 31, 2007. Additionally, Nielsen provides methodology to include all types of media viewing in its
different "streams" of this data in order to take into con- sample.
sideration delayed viewing (DVR) data, at any interval Since viewers are aware of being part of the Nielsen
up to seven days.[9] C3 was the metric launched in 2007. sample, it can lead to response bias in recording and
C3 refers to the ratings for average commercial minutes viewing habits. Audience counts gathered by the self-re-
in live programming plus three days of digital video porting diary methodology are sometimes higher than
recorder playback.[10] those gathered by the electronic meters which eliminate
any response bias. This trend seems to be more common
Sweeps for news programming and popular prime time program-
Electronic metering technology is the heart of the ming. Also, daytime viewing and late night viewing tend
Nielsen ratings process. Two types of meters are used: to be under-reported by the diary.
set meters capture what channel is being tuned, while Another criticism of the measuring system itself is
People Meters go a step further and gather information that it fails the most important criterion of a sample: it is
about who is watching in addition to the channel tuned. not random in the statistical sense of the word. A small
Diaries are also used to collect viewing information fraction of the population is selected and only those that
from sample homes in many television markets in the actually accept are used as the sample size. In many local
United States, and smaller markets are measured by pa- areas of the 1990s, the difference between a rating that
per diaries only. Each year Nielsen processes approxi- kept a show on the air and one that would cancel it was
mately 2 million paper diaries from households across so small as to be statistically insignificant, and yet the
the country for the months of November, February, May, show that just happened to get the higher rating would
and July—also known as the "sweeps rating periods.
sweeps" survive.[11] And yet in 2009 of the 114,500,000 U.S. tele-
Seven-day diaries (or eight-day diaries in homes with vision households[12] only 25,000 total American house-
DVRs) are mailed to homes to keep a tally of what is holds (0.02183% of the total) participated in the Nielsen
watched on each television set and by whom. Over the daily metered system.[13] In addition, the Nielsen ratings
course of a sweeps period, diaries are mailed to a new one TV per household three perhaps four network model
panel of homes each week. At the end of the month, all of encouraged a strong push for demographic measure-
the viewing data from the individual weeks is aggregat- ments. This caused problems with multiple TV house-
ed. holds or households where viewers would enter the sim-
This local viewing information provides a basis for pler codes (usually their child’s) raising serious questions
program scheduling and advertising decisions for local to the quality of the demographic data.[14] The situation
television stations, cable systems, and advertisers. further deteriorated as the popularity of cable TV ex-
In some of the mid-size markets, diaries provide panded the number of viewable networks to the point
viewer information for up to three additional “sweeps” that the margin of error has increased due to the sam-
months (October, January, and March). pling sizes being too small.[15][16] Compounding matters
is the fact that of the sample data that is collected, adver-
Note: The February 2009 sweeps period was moved to tisers will not pay for time shifted (recorded for replay at
March so that the ratings would not be affected by any a different time) programs,[17] rendering the ’raw’ num-
problems created by the February 17th switchover of the bers useless.
USA’s analog broadcast television signals to digital. A related criticism of the Nielsen ratings system is its
When, in early February, the digital transition date was lack of a system for measuring television audiences in
environments outside the home, such as college dormi-
2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nielsen ratings
tories, transport terminals, bars, and other public places
where television is frequently viewed, often by large
See also
numbers of people in a common setting. In 2005, Nielsen • Appreciation Index
announced plans to incorporate viewing by away-from- • Broadcasters’ Audience Research Board (BARB) (UK)
home college students into its sample. Internet TV view- • C. E. Hooper
ing is another rapidly growing market for which Nielsen • Crossley ratings
Ratings fail to account for viewer impact. Apple iTunes, • List of most watched television broadcasts
atomfilms, Hulu, YouTube, and some of the networks’ • List of television stations in North America by media
own websites (e.g., ABC.com, CBS.com) provide full- market
length web-based programming, either subscription- • List of US daytime soap opera ratings
based or ad-supported. Though web sites can already
track popularity of a site and the referring page, they
can’t track viewer demographics. To both track this and
References
expand their market research offerings, Nielsen pur- [1] Levin, Gary (2006-10-12). "Playback time for
chased NetRatings in 2007.[18] Nielsens". USA Today. p. 1D.
After Nielsen took over the contract for producing [2] "Number of U.S. TV Households Climbs by One
data on Irish advertising in 2009, agencies said that they Million for 2010-11 TV Season". 2010-08-27.
were "disastrous" and claimed that the information pro- http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/
duced by them is too inaccurate to be trusted by them or media_entertainment/number-of-u-s-tv-
their clients.[19] households-climbs-by-one-million-for-2010-11-tv-
In 2004, News Corporation retained the services of season/. Retrieved 2010-09-08.
public relations firm Glover Park to launch a campaign [3] Baker, Frank (2009-02-12). "What is a RATING".
aimed at delaying Nielsen’s plan to replace its aging Media Literacy Clearinghouse.
household electronic data collection methodology in http://www.frankwbaker.com/ratingshare.htm.
larger local markets with its newer electronic People Retrieved 2009-03-02.
Meter system. The advocates in the public relations cam- [4] de Moraes, Lisa (2004-08-13). "Where’s the Love?
paign charged that data derived from the newer People CNBC Scrambles to Woo Viewers for ’McEnroe’".
Meter system represented a bias toward underreporting The Washington Post.
minority viewing, which could lead to a de-facto discrim- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
ination in employment against minority actors and writ- articles/A61516-2004Aug12.html. Retrieved
ers. However, Nielsen countered the campaign by reveal- 2007-06-08.
ing its sample composition counts. According to Nielsen [5] ^ Storey, Michael (2009-04-23). "THE TV COLUMN:
Media Research’s sample composition counts, as of Not in 18–49 age group? TV execs write you off".
November 2004, nationwide, African American House- Arkansas Democrat Gazette.
holds using People Meters represented 6.7% of the http://www2.arkansasonline.com/news/2009/
Nielsen sample, compared to 6.0% in the general popu- apr/23/tv-column-not-18-49-age-group-tv-execs-
lation. Latino Households represent 5.7% of the Nielsen wr-20090423/. Retrieved 2008-05-02.
sample, compared to 5.0% in the general population. By [6] Carter, Bill (April 6, 2010). "An ‘Idol’ Ratings Loss,
October 2006, News Corp. and Nielsen settled, with but Not in Its Pocketbook". The New York Times.
Nielsen agreeing to spend an additional $50 million to en- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/business/
sure that minority viewing was not being underreported media/07adco.html. Retrieved April 8, 2010.
by the new electronic people meter system.[20] [7] Santiago, Rosario (2007-10-03). "For Advertising
Purposes, ’Grey’s Anatomy’ May Well be Colored
Nielsen began compiling ratings for television nationally Green". BuddyTV. http://www.buddytv.com/
beginning in 1950. Before that year, television ratings articles/greys-anatomy/for-advertising-purposes-
were compiled by a number of other sources, including C. greys-11849.aspx. Retrieved 2009-05-03.
E. Hooper and Variety. Hooper was bought out by Nielsen [8] Steinberg, Brian (October 18, 2010). "Simon Who?
in February 1950. ’Idol’ Spots Still Priciest in Prime Time". Advertising
Age. http://adage.com/
Most watched TV shows article?article_id=146495#tues. Retrieved October
28, 2010.
This table lists all the TV shows with the highest average
[9] Holmeys, Gary (2006-01-16). "Nielsen Announces
Nielsen rating for each television season:[21][22][23][24]
Schedule And Plan For Commercial-Minute
Ratings". http://www.nielsenmedia.com/nc/
portal/site/Public/
menuitem.55dc65b4a7d5adff3f65936147a062a0/
3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nielsen ratings
Season TV Show Network Estimated Viewers
1950–1951 Texaco Star Theater NBC 6 million[25]
1951–1952 Arthur Godfrey’s Talent Scouts CBS 8 million[26]
1952–1953 I Love Lucy 14 million[27]
1953–1954 15 million[28][29]
1954–1955
1955–1956 The $64,000 Question 17 million[30][31]
1956–1957 I Love Lucy
1957–1958 Gunsmoke 18 million[32]
1958–1959 17 million[33]
1959–1960 18 million[34][35]
1960–1961
1961–1962 Wagon Train NBC 16 million[36]
1962–1963 The Beverly Hillbillies CBS 18 million[37]
1963–1964 20 million[38]
1964–1965 Bonanza NBC 19 million[39]
1965–1966 17 million[40]
1966–1967 16 million[41][42]
1967–1968 The Andy Griffith Show CBS
1968–1969 Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In NBC 19 million[43]
1969–1970 15 million[44]
1970–1971 Marcus Welby, M.D. ABC 18 million[45]
1971–1972 All in the Family CBS 21 million[46]
1972–1973 22 million[47]
1973–1974 21 million[48][49][50]
1974–1975
1975–1976
1976–1977 Happy Days ABC 22 million[51]
1977–1978 Laverne & Shirley 23 million[52][53]
1978–1979
1979–1980 60 Minutes CBS 22 million[54]
1980–1981 Dallas 28 million[55]
1981–1982 23 million[56]
1982–1983 60 Minutes 21 million[57]
1983–1984 Dallas 22 million[58]
1984–1985 Dynasty ABC 21 million[59]
1985–1986 The Cosby Show NBC 29 million[60]
1986–1987 31 million[61][62]
1987–1988
1988–1989 23 million [63]
4
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nielsen ratings
1989–1990 Roseanne (tie)[23] ABC 21 million[64]
The Cosby Show (tie)[23] NBC
1990–1991 Cheers 20 million[65][66][67][68][69]
1991–1992 60 Minutes CBS
1992–1993
1993–1994
1994–1995 Seinfeld NBC
1995–1996 ER 21 million[70][71][72]
1996–1997
1997–1998 Seinfeld
1998–1999 ER 18 million[73]
1999–2000 Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? ABC 29 million[74]
2000–2001 Survivor: The Australian Outback CBS 30 million[75]
2001–2002 Friends NBC 25 million[76]
2002–2003 CSI: Crime Scene Investigation CBS 26 million[77][78]
2003–2004 American Idol Fox
2004–2005 27 million[79]
2005–2006 31 million[80]
2006–2007 30 million[81]
2007–2008 28 million[82]
2008–2009 26 million[83]
2009–2010 23 million[84]
2010–2011 26 million[85]
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/05/
?allRmCB=on&newSearch=yes&vgnextoid=264b66f7e2c20110VgnVCM100000ac0a260aRCRD&searchBox=media.
Retrieved 2007-07-02. business/techbrief.php. Retrieved 2008-10-10.
[10] Lafayette, Jon (2007-10-07). "Commercial Ratings [19] Noonan, Laura (2010-02-04). "Media agencies losing
Shuffle the Deck". http://www.tvweek.com/news/ trust in Nielsen for supply of critical data".
2007/10/commercial_ratings_shuffle_the.php. Independent.ie. http://www.independent.ie/
Retrieved 2008-05-13. business/media/media-agencies-losing-trust-in-
[11] "Can You Believe TV Ratings?". Nova / Horizon. PBS. nielsen-for-supply-of-critical-data-2047454.html.
1992-02-18. Retrieved 2011-06-17.
[12] TVB.org [20] Learmonth, Michael (2006-10-26). "Rupe ends
[13] EN-US.nielsen.com Nielsen tiff". http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/
[14] "Can You Believe TV Ratings?". Nova / Horizon. PBS. 1G1-154755762.html. Retrieved
1992-02-18. 2009-04-20. (subscription required)
[15] "Can You Believe TV Ratings?". Nova / Horizon. PBS. [21] McNeil, Alex (1996). Total Television, 4th ed.. New
1992-02-18. York: Penguin. pp. 1143–1161. ISBN 0-14-024916-8.
[16] Segal, Andrea (2007-04-26). "Nielsen Ratings: An [22] "2003-04 Season To Date Program Rankings from
Inaccurate Truth". The Cornell Daily Sun. September 22, 2003 Through May 30, 2004". ABC
http://cornellsun.com/node/23180. Retrieved Medianet. 2004-06-02. Archived from the original
2008-01-19. on 2007-02-08. http://web.archive.org/web/
[17] Levin, Gary (2007-04-25). "Networks’ top shows at a 20070208132303/http://www.abcmedianet.com/
rating Loss". USA Today. p. 1D. pressrel/dispDNR.html?id=060204_11. Retrieved
[18] "Briefing: Nielsen to purchase all NetRatings 2006-11-24.
shares". International Herald Tribune. 2007-02-05.
5
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Nielsen ratings
[23] ^ Brooks, Tim and Earle Marsh (1997). The Complete [62] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1987-1988
Directory to Prime Time Network and Cable TV Shows, [63] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1988-1989
1946-Present, p. 1692. ISBN 9780345497734 [64] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1989-1990
[24] Andreeva, Nellie (May 27, 2011). "Full 2010-11 [65] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1990-1991
Season Series Rankers". Deadline Hollywood. [66] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1991-1992
http://www.deadline.com/2011/05/ [67] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1992-1993
full-2010-11-season-series-rankers/. Retrieved May [68] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1993-1994
27, 2011. [69] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1994-1995
[25] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1950-1951 [70] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1995-1996
[26] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1951-1952 [71] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1996-1997
[27] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1952-1953 [72] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1997-1998
[28] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1953-1954 [73] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1998-1999
[29] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1954-1955 [74] ’Millionaire’ leads network to season Nielsen crown
[30] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1955-1956 [75] Miso - Survivor: The Australian Outback
[31] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1956-1957 [76] Complete Nielsen Ratings List for 2001-2002 Season
[32] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1957-1958 [77] TV Season Wraps; "CSI" Rules
[33] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1958-1959 [78] ABC Medianet: 9/22/03-5/30/04
[34] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1959-1960 [79] ABC Medianet: 9/20/04-5/29/05
[35] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1960-1961 [80] ABC Medianet: 9/19/05-5/28/06
[36] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1961-1962 [81] Ratings Wrapup: CBS and FOX Win, Again
[37] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1962-1963 [82] Final 2007-8 Season To Date Broadcast Shows By
[38] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1963-1964 Viewers
[39] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1964-1965 [83] American Idol, Dancing With The Stars Top
[40] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1965-1966 Average Viewership For 2008-9 Season
[41] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1966-1967 [84] Final 2009-10 Broadcast Primetime Show Average
[42] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1967-1968 Viewership
[43] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1968-1969 [85] Full 2010-2011 Season Rankers
[44] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1969-1970
[45] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1970-1971
[46] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1971-1972
Further reading
[47] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1972-1973 • Anthony Bianco and Ronald Grover. "How Nielsen
[48] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1973-1974 Stood Up to Murdoch" BusinessWeek. September 20,
[49] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1974-1975 2004.
[50] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1975-1976
[51] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1976-1977
[52] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1977-1978
External links
[53] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1978-1979 • Nielsen Media Research website
[54] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1979-1980 • Nielsen Media: FAQs – About the "Sweeps"
[55] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1980-1981 • Slate: How Does "Sweeps" Week Work? (February 16,
[56] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1981-1982 2004)
[57] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1982-1983 • Nielsen Global Technology and Information Center
[58] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1983-1984 website
[59] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1984-1985 • Information on Nielsen’s Anytime Anywhere Media
[60] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1985-1986 Measurement Initiative.
[61] Classic TV Hits - TV Ratings: 1986-1987
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nielsen_ratings"
Categories: Advertising terminology, Marketing terminology, Television terminology, Mass media rivalries, Kohlberg
Kravis Roberts companies
This page was last modified on 28 July 2011 at 12:18. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-
ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. See Terms of use for details. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of
the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.Contact us
Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Mobile view
6