Professional Documents
Culture Documents
April 21, 2008 Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain
Questions the Nielsen Company Would Prefer Went Unanswered
From the moment I stumbled onto the television audience measurement industry in 1999,
what I have found utterly unexplainable is not how Nielsen maintains its stranglehold on
the industry—with that I am well acquainted. No, what has perplexed me is how Nielsen
manages to never talk about how they do what they do. More than a billion dollars a year
in revenue (not to mention the $250 Billion or so spent in Los Angeles and New York
chasing Nielsen’s approval) and virtually no published analysis concerning changes in data
collection technologies, ascription policies, and weighting or stratification of the sample?
Zip. Zero. Nothin’. Nada. It would be comical were it not so fiendishly frightening.
Anticipating Nielsen’s cry of, “The MRC knows everything,” I refuse to concede that point.
As someone who is forbidden from joining, participating in or observing the MRC, I have
no idea if the MRC knows how Nielsen behaves. I have recently spoken with members of
the audit committee who say they have been waiting years for answers to basic questions.
Having only one entity aware of Nielsen’s “secrets” does not sit well with me. It is my
opinion that Nielsen’s secrets are kept secret because if the information became public,
the industry would demand change. I can see no scenario in which secrets should be an
integral part of television ratings, especially when a single entity garners more than 99%
of the revenue associated with the industry. I would suggest that the only organization
that benefits from secrets is … drum roll please … the company that raises prices every
year despite record profits … the company that routinely acquires potential competitors …
the company that signs its broadcast clients to long‐term staggered contracts … the
company that ignores the MRC when it suits them … wait for it … Nielsen.
So what to do? Well here’s a start. While sitting at lunch the other day with several
people who work for an agency—I will not name names lest Nielsen use their relationship
with me against them in some way—I was asked , “If you were a Nielsen client, what ten
questions would you ask Nielsen concerning ratings?”
Here’s my list of eleven questions (when possible I try to give my clients more than they
pay for) aimed at uncovering some of what is assumed, ignored or swept under the rug
related to local television ratings. Any Nielsen customer should feel free to forward this
list to their representative. As a bonus, I will pay $100 to the first person, Nielsen
employees not excluded, who sends me an answer in writing—just tell me who gave you
the answers. I will either cite the source or withhold the identity (responder’s choice) and
post the reply on this blog. As always, please feel free to contact me with better
questions, any comments or criticisms.
1. During the 2006‐2007 television season—in Nielsen’s “best” market—what
percentage of the households contacted were put in the panel and remained in
the panel for at least six months? How about the “worst?”
1 | P A G E
646.435.1568 New York info@evadconsulting.com
312.285.0751 Chicago
www.evadconsulting.com
813.571.7830 Tampa
EVADCONSULTING
Audience Measurement Insight, Opinion and Analysis
April 21, 2008 Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain
Questions the Nielsen Company Would Prefer Went Unanswered
2. How is the method of television distribution [cable (analog/digital/advanced
services), satellite (DirecTV/Echostar), over air, telco] reflected in the panel?
3. How many variables are involved in local sample stratification? How is
stratification validated?
4. Why is it necessary to weight a local sample and how is the weighting
accomplished?
5. Do local television ratings for a given period ever reflect that more than 100% of
the television households are watching? How does this happen and does it occur
for all three local data collection methods?
6. Now that Nielsen has transitioned a large number of markets from tuner meter &
diaries to local people meter data collection, will Nielsen publish direct
comparisons for the time periods when both methods were deployed
concurrently? If not, why?
7. For local ratings in a tuner meter & diary market, what is the error associated with
programs with a 20 household rating? A 2.0 rating? A 0.2 rating? How about
Males 18‐34? How are the errors calculated and what assumptions must be made
for the calculation to be valid?
8. What is Nielsen’s rough estimate for error attributed to bias associated with panel
recruitment, weighting and local data collection technologies? Have Nielsen
break it down by individual bias.
9. What television technologies disqualify a household from being in the panel
today? Are there any technologies that do not disqualify a household but are not
measureable?
10. On a typical day, what percentage of deployed active/passive meters identify miss
identify content be it network, program or commercial or fail to recognize a
content signal? (e.g. what percentage of the meters deliver completely clean data
without need for ascription or error correction?)
11. On what dates were the following television technologies fully supported,
measured and reported in local television ratings reports such as the VIP?
a. High Definition broadcast networks
b. High Definition cable and satellite networks
2 | P A G E
646.435.1568 New York info@evadconsulting.com
312.285.0751 Chicago
www.evadconsulting.com
813.571.7830 Tampa
EVADCONSULTING
Audience Measurement Insight, Opinion and Analysis
April 21, 2008 Pay No Attention to that Man Behind the Curtain
Questions the Nielsen Company Would Prefer Went Unanswered
c. Video on Demand
d. Consumer electronics based household DVRs
e. Television service provider based household DVRs
f. Sling Box style services
3 | P A G E
646.435.1568 New York info@evadconsulting.com
312.285.0751 Chicago
www.evadconsulting.com
813.571.7830 Tampa