The Current And New Television Data Currency

by Charlene Weisler, May 15, 2009, 1:00 PM

• Comment
• Recommend (16)
• Tweet
• 

Although it happens occasionally, when a giant stumbles, he causes the ground to shake for all. So when Nielsen Media Research has problems with processing its audience data, the entire media industry is put on hold... and shakes.

This is a crucial time of year for the broadcast and cable networks. Not only are they embarking on the next upfront sales season, many networks are considering the fate of their original series for possible renewal or cancellation. Without the Nielsen ratings currency, no one feels comfortable making any important program-related decisions.

This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, we expect, for this company to experience server and delivery problems. In fact, Nielsen's track record is fairly good, compared to other consumer and B-to-B companies. But because Nielsen is the dominant player when it comes to television currency, any blip in data delivery, processing or collection is potentially catastrophic to its clients.

For the common good, the current currency must expand beyond Nielsen. It is up to the industry -- broadcast, cable, advertisers, agencies, satcasters, telcos, etc. -- to decide and agree on the expansion of data providers, processors and metrics.

Currently there are many streams of new set-top-box-based viewership data available from various DMAs and footprints. There is nothing, at this time, totally replicating Nielsen's national footprint -- but collectively, all this set-top-box data can be nationalized to form a fairly good national footprint in the future.

There are companies out there such as TNS, TRA, Rentrak, TiVo and the telcos, all of whom have data. A company like TNS with Direct View data has an extensive footprint that spans a range of markets with the potential to be nationalized. TNS has graciously provided me with performance data for comparison purposes to Nielsen -- for days where there was no Nielsen data problem and the days where Nielsen had to reprocess their data.

While there is a very strong correlation between the TNS Direct View and Nielsen ratings (+0.96) for the days examined, the two services will report different levels due to underlying differences in sample compositions and the fact that Direct TV homes have many more available channels than the average Nielsen home. With that in mind, we compared Direct View set top box data ratings to Nielsen Live ratings as a percentage of gross rating points based on household primetime performance for the five broadcast networks for April 27, 28, 29 and May 4, 5, 6, 2009 - three days of delayed data vs week ago.

 

Source: Nielsen, NTI Galaxy, as dated. Live TNS, as dated, second by second ratings projected to DIRECT TV's digital residential household universe

*According to TNS, ABC received 30% of the total 5 Broadcast network primetime household gross rating points on Monday, April 27, 2009.

Despite the sample differences, the two services report similar share of grps by broadcast network indicating that set-top-box data can help yield similar competitive standing results to the current currency. This is an encouraging first step in helping to establish a relationship between set-top-box data and the current currency. Obviously much more research is needed in this area.

But should future data delivery problems occur, we are not without resources. In this case, Direct View percentages could be applied against an established (and agreed upon) gross rating point universe to get a sense of the possible ratings level. Or, a grp share metric might be established to be used in lieu of ratings to glean performance.

• Comment
• Recommend (16)
• Tweet
• 

0 comments on "The Current And New Television Data Currency ".

1. John Grono from GAP Research
   

   commented on: May 15, 2009 at 4:10 p.m.

   I'm sorry to be finicky, but can I point out a few things.

   First, "Currently there are many streams of new set-top-box-based viewership data available...". I am unaware of any set-top-box-based data that reports viewing - they report tuning. While these can be close, more so in single-person households than family homes for the obvious reasons, they can often be poles apart and most often in the larger heavier viewing homes which tends to magnify the difference.

   Second, the data analysis relates to network shares and not to ratings. Any statistician will tell you that the standard error of share is a lot lower than the standard error of level. I know of no original series deals that are based on network shares and not on individual programme performance. It would be illuminating if the TNS data was compared at a programme level and then the correlation reported.

   Despite the above, I agree that there is "room for everyone" in the future ratings system that we need for a fragmented market. However, media buyers and advertisers will still need some form of agreed 'currency' on which to trade - whoever may hold that currency. That currency will be a hybrid of data sources, STB data from a multitude of sources, panel data from a research company, maybe processed by yet another entity, all capped off with an open software market for ratings analysis software (again using an agreed set of data processing rules to ensure that all software produces the same audience data).

   Food for thought.

   John Grono, GAP Research, Sydney Australia

2. Charlene Weisler from Writer, Media Consultant: WeislerMedia.blogspot.com
   

   commented on: May 18, 2009 at 10:33 a.m.

   Hi John,
   Thank you for your comments. My article is a first attempt at comparing set top box data to the current currency. There is much more we can do as an industry and much more data comparisons on many levels to be made.

   A couple of comments -

   I guess, to your point, all "viewing" data is tuning since Nielsen too has difficulty ascertaining attention to the set when tuning is indicated.

   Yes, I looked at a share metric because of the great differences in the sample universes which made ratings uncomparable. However I hope to continue with a follow-up article examining not only program comparisons for stb data and Nielsen but also measured cable networks/programs and services currently unmeasured by Nielsen.

   My hope here is to open the lines of communication, spur thoughts and ideas and come to some consensus for standard metrics - at very least standard definitions of metrics. I welcome your input as we go forward.

Leave a Comment