One quick note: there is a difference between the “Nielsen Box” (which is called a PEOPLEMETER and a “Household Nielsen box” that just measures if your TV is on…but not who is watching it demographically…which leads to a whole different discussion on Nielsen’s accuracy.

I really appreciate the research that you put into this and I also want to applaud you for taking this discussion to such a deep level. I would almost suggest you forwarding this to your local TV station (KOHD and KTVZ) and let them know your thoughts! Change starts with you!

~Jeff

And, of course, the whole DVR scene is skewing things dramatically. It may also take some of the edge off Nielson’s stranglehold on ratings. For example, there’s this challenge from TiVo. But… I’m guessing Nielson won’t be giving up their position anytime soon.

As an interesting aside, our household was a Nielson Internet household for a while (they monitored our internet usage to see what websites we use). And that experience certainly didn’t convince me they were getting accurate data either. The way it works, Nielson sends you a CD with some software to install (an HTTP proxy that gathers info about your browsing habits), and in exchange they pay you $100/month. If you don’t participate (e.g. you upgrade your computer and don’t reinstall the software), you’re implicitly “opted out” of the program. All of which makes for the following biases:
- Low income families are more incentivized to remain in the program
- Families that update computers more often (i.e. high-income families, or more tech-savvy families) tend to get opted-out sooner.
- Users with concerns about privacy and security will not participate.
- Households with multiple computers (not uncommon these days) will put it on the computer that least used for important or sensitive stuff.
- It’s trivial to hack their monitoring software… if, for example, you wanted them to think you were participating, even when you weren’t.

The way it works (and I’m not making this up.)

1.) Nielsen finds a viewing household by land line (they cannot call cell phones so there goes a whole demographic)

2.) Nielsen sends a household a diary (this is a book for you to WRITE in)

3.) You the viewer (who obviously lives in the dark ages because you still have a land-line) are supposed to WRITE DOWN the television you watch. This is divided into 7.5 minute intervals per hour.

4.) Your family or housemates are also supposed to fill out their own book every time they watch TV.

5.) At the end of the week you are supposed to send in your Diaries back to Nielsen.

6.) Nielsen will send you a gift card (up to $20 for your participation…you get more if you are an ethnic household.)

7.) Nielsen processes these diaries and determines who is watching what in the Bend Designated Market Area (DMA)

By now, you sharp folks’ wheels are already spinning (I’m guessing. . .)

What really happens (and I know…because I have been a television research director and visited the Nielsen Headquarters to complain and only came back more discouraged)

1.) Nielsen has a hell of a time finding a fair sample of respondents that match the census demographics for the Central Oregon region (especially Men 18-34) SO they find households where the “family” has an 18-34 who attends college and “might” be home during the sweep period or they give a lot of weight to the handful of respondents that are in an elusive demographic.

2.) People fill out diaries not on what they really watch but in one or more of the following ways: 1. They write down the programming they think they are going to watch (and never revisit the diary when they are watching it.) 2. They write down shows that they really want to succeed (like 30 Rock) regardless if they watch it or not (like they are doing these programs a favor and/or 3.) They write down all the programming they think reflects well on them (PBS and the like) as if Nielsen is going to give them a citizenship award.

3.) Nielsen receives these diaries and (as a rule) objectively analyzes them to determine who has what rating.

There are many more Nielsen flaws…but that is just an overview. . .

Additionally, I can tell you that the only people that fill out diaries correctly are retired women (they are extremely accurate and honest..think crossword addicts) and Hispanic/non-white respondents (I’m not sure why this is true…but I’ve seen the diaries and they write down everything!) Of course in Diary markets shows like Jerry Springer get 0 (ZERO) ratings because no one will write down that they watch them (C’mon…we all watch train wreck tv from time to time.) The same goes for a lot of local news. PLENTY of people are (were) watching KOHD and KTVZ newscasts, but few fill out the diaries…except those not so key 60+ age groups (there rating points are worth far less than an 18-34 year old)

Long story short: It’s the Nielsen Ratings system that is flawed (and is largely why TV sucks these days)

Now take a moment to reflect on the above and know this:
1. Stations make programming decisions based on these (incorrect) rating numbers
2. Stations get PAID based on the (incorrect) rating numbers
3. More than anything in the WORLD a TV news station would love to be YOUR news source…but they can’t do it because they can’t generate the money (see 2)

I could go on and on…but I think you get the idea…

What I’d like to see from you, in addition to simply pooh-pooh’ing my ideas, are some ideas of your own. E.g. If you were in charge of KTVZ today, what would you do? Your only competitor, KOHD, who by some accounts was doing an as good or better job than you, has just cried, “Uncle”, as a result of viewers turning to other news outlets (namely, the Internet). That would seem to bode ill. So how do you prevent the same from happening to you? What changes would you make stay to relevant? How do you make sure you retain your audience and advertisers? For KTVZ, the demise of KOHD could be a perfect opportunity to effect some big changes; they now have a captive TV audience who are unlikely to go anywhere (for now.)

… or are you saying there’s nothing wrong with the status quo? That KOHD was an aberration, and that doing a “decent job” of providing a traditional local news program is all that’s required?

P.S. Please note that I don’t think of Mr. Lerten as a “pretty face” I’ve exchanged a few comments with him here and on other websites, and been impressed by him. I’m not familiar with Lee or Ted, so can’t offer up opinions there, but sounds like you think they’d fall into a similar mold, so I won’t disagree.