Around the Net

Report: U.S. Viewers Still Watching Only 17 Out Of 100s Of Channels

The Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, May 7, 2014 9:23 PM

Seventeen remains the magic, consistent numeral, "as the average number of [TV] channels [U.S.] viewers actually tune in to" -- though the average number of channels consumers actually receive has grown from 129 in 2008 to 189 in 2013, according to a Nielsen report, writes Steven Perlberg. “This data is significant in that it substantiates the notion that more content does not necessarily equate to more channel consumption,” says the report.

Read the whole story at The Wall Street Journal »

3 comments about "Report: U.S. Viewers Still Watching Only 17 Out Of 100s Of Channels".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Tim Brooks from consultant, May 8, 2014 at 2:56 p.m.
I don't know why reporters read so much into this misleading statistic. It's obviously a different 17 channels for everyone. If the suggestion is true a la carte (everyone picks their own 17), wait until you see what channels will cost under that scenario. Or even if many of them will even exist to choose (bye bye ethnic and minority channels). It will be 1960s one-size-fits-all TV all over again.
Reply

Mike Einstein from the Brothers Einstein, May 8, 2014 at 10:04 p.m.

I remember when it only had three channels and was already being called an idiot box.

Doug Garnett from Protonik, LLC, May 9, 2014 at 4:50 p.m.

Agree with Tim Brooks. And am not surprised by this finding. We build relationships with our primary viewing channels no one can have a huge number of those channel relationships. This human/cognitive limitation isn't new. Designing command driven user interfaces for software we noted that users had a core 5-8 commands they used with another 5-8 used more rarely. When it comes to stores, online services, etc we all work with similar limitations. And the beauty of today's TV is we can all pick our 17 from a wider variety of options - a win-win for the consumer.