CNN All Screen Taps Nielsen For OOH Metrics

by Wayne Friedman , January 12, 2015

Turner Broadcasting’s CNN, fusing efforts around in-home and out-of-home viewing, has received the blessing of the independent Media Rating Council.

CNN’s viewing data of its special efforts, “CNN All Screen,” combines in-home and out-of-home TV viewing by “fusing” data from different samples — Nielsen’s National People Meter panel and local Portable People Meter (PPM) panels.

There is an increasing focus on out-of-home viewing for CNN — which it says contributes an incremental 18% on a total day adult 25-54 basis. CNN — and other cable networks — have been under pressure when it comes to traditional TV viewing, which has seen eroding viewership over the last few years.

Howard Shimmel, chief research officer of Turner Broadcasting System, stated: “We look forward to using the MRC’s evaluation to implement changes to improve All Screen, and to Nielsen’s efforts to build upon this methodology and create a syndicated service that includes all out-of-home viewership in national television measurement.”

Some TV research executives have called the fusing of different TV samples controversial.

Recently, CNBC’s daytime programming said it would drop Nielsen as its viewer metric TV research service because of what it believed was under-representing of key business viewers during the daytime viewing — viewers who are in offices or on trading floors or elsewhere during the daytime hours.

CNBC is replacing Nielsen with Cogent Reports, a research service catering to the business community.

Nielsen has been subject to criticism that it has been slow to make for a more seamless approach to account for all out-of-home viewing, including digital.

advertising, cable tv, media measurement, metrics, nielsen, out-of-home, tv

7 comments about "CNN All Screen Taps Nielsen For OOH Metrics".

Check to receive email when comments are posted.

Nicholas Schiavone from Nicholas P. Schiavone, LLC, January 12, 2015 at 1:53 p.m.
TERRIBLY MISLEADING REPORTING & PRESS RELEASE:
The MediaDailyNews reporting on this story inadvertently gives the wrong impression. Apparently, Mr. Friedman relied largely on a potentially misleading Turner Press Release that was put out 2 hours (7:32 AM) (01.12.14) before the MRC Position Statement was released at 9:38 AM.
Moreover, Mr. Friedman failed to quote the crucial footnote concerning the limitations of the MRC work cited at the bottom of the Turner Press Release:
"*The MRC’s evaluation does not represent a full-scope MRC accreditation audit and when completed this evaluation process was not designed to lead to MRC accreditation. Turner Broadcasting System, Nielsen and the MRC are collaborating to explore the extent to which validation of fusion methods can be attained and set precedence for increased transparency of fusion products in general."
In the next Comment, I shall supply the full Public Statement by the MRC transmitted at 9:38 AM (01.12.14) to All Members of the MRC.
Reply

Nicholas Schiavone from Nicholas P. Schiavone, LLC, January 12, 2015 at 2:34 p.m.

MRC Statement – CNN/Headline News TV Data Fusion
January 12, 2015, 9:38 AM Transmittal

Nielsen and Turner Broadcast System, Inc. (Turner) engaged the Media Rating Council (MRC) to perform an evaluation of Nielsen's Data Fusion process as it relates to television measurement within the CNN/Headline News All Screen Report. The sources of television data for this fusion are Nielsen's National People Meter Service, which is accredited by MRC, and Nielsen Audio’s PPM television data, which has not been submitted to the MRC for accreditation consideration.

The evaluation focused solely on the television aspect of the All Screen Report and specifically whether the in-home/out-of-home television data fusion process and associated validation contained the components specified in the MRC’s Guidelines Concerning Data Integration, and did not encompass the Mobile and Online components.

This evaluation did not represent a full-scope accreditation examination; additionally this evaluation was not intended to lead to MRC accreditation, primarily because the underlying PPM television information has not be examined by MRC, and because of the custom nature of Nielsen’s fusion process for the CNN/Headline News All Screen Report.

MRC’s evaluation procedures verified the reasonableness of the design of the fusion by Nielsen and the application of the methodology in production, as well as obtaining an understanding of Nielsen’s approach for validating the fusion. While Nielsen completed the required validation, MRC made recommendations about the need to update certain validation analyses, retain documentation, routinize certain quality control processes, and add several disclosures; Nielsen has committed to address these matters early in 2015.

Additionally, as noted above, the evaluated fusion process was specially customized for CNN/Headline News and will need significant methods changes and more intense validation in certain areas if Nielsen were to report on additional programming sources or if similar processes are implemented in Nielsen’s syndicated measurement services.

Based on our evaluation, the design, development and validation of the fusion methodology as it relates to in-home/out-of-home television information was executed as designed by Nielsen and aligns with the MRC’s Guidelines Concerning Data Integration. The MRC and Nielsen continue to discuss the fusion process and potential steps that could improve the process as specified above.

Questions on this matter should be directed to: George W. Ivie, CEO and Executive Director Media Rating Council, Inc.

Nicholas Schiavone from Nicholas P. Schiavone, LLC, January 12, 2015 at 3:08 p.m.

In summary, 5 critical MRC qualifications regarding the Turner Press Release and the MediaDailyNews article published 1.12.14:

1.) "Nielsen Audio’s PPM television data not been submitted to the MRC for accreditation consideration."

2.) "The (MRC) evaluation focused solely on the television aspect of the CNN/Headline News All Screen Report"

3.) (MRC's) "evaluation did not represent a full-scope accreditation examination; additionally this evaluation was not intended to lead to MRC accreditation."

4.) "The (MRC) evaluated fusion process was specially customized for CNN/Headline News and will need significant methods changes and more intense validation in certain areas if Nielsen were to report on additional programming sources or if similar processes are implemented in Nielsen’s syndicated measurement services."

5.) "Questions on this matter should be directed to: George W. Ivie, CEO and Executive Director Media Rating Council, Inc."

Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, January 12, 2015 at 3:19 p.m.

Nick is right to keep pointing out some of the disparities between the headlines in press releases of this sort and the reality. Moreover, the TV industry has yet to sit down and take a long, hard look at the validity of the PPM methodology as it applies to viewing measurements. Just because a PPM panelist's portable peoplemeter can "hear" an audio signal from a nearbyTV receiver that doesn't mean that the person carrying the PPM is "viewing" in the true sense of the word. The chances for a significant overstatement of audience in many out-of-home locations where people are just passing by a TV set that happens to be in use or are not paying any attention should be obvious to all.

Nicholas Schiavone from Nicholas P. Schiavone, LLC, January 12, 2015 at 3:30 p.m.

Media Rating Council Website
At 3:30 PM, Monday, January 12, 2015

http://mediaratingcouncil.org/

"The objective or purpose to be promoted or carried on by Media Rating Council is:

● To secure for the media industry and related users audience measurement services that are valid, reliable and effective.

● To evolve and determine minimum disclosure and ethical criteria for media audience measurement services.

● To provide and administer an audit system designed to inform users as to whether such audience measurements are conducted in conformance with the criteria and procedures developed."

**** Recent News ****

"January 12, 2015 - MRC issues a statement regarding its evaluation of Nielsen’s Data Fusion process as it relates to Linear Television measurement within Turner’s CNN/HLN All Screen Report. The evaluation did not represent a full-scope audit examination, and did not encompass the Mobile and Online components of the product. ... The assessment was not intended to lead to an accreditation decision."

Nicholas Schiavone from Nicholas P. Schiavone, LLC, January 13, 2015 at 1:22 p.m.

BY JANUARY 13, IT'S BROKEN NEWS; NOT BREAKING NEWS!
DO NOT FORGET YESTERDAY'S LIMITATIONS & FOOTNOTES FOR NIELSEN, TURNER, FUSION & CON'FUSION.'
From The MRC Statement dated 01.12.15
– "CNN/Headline News TV Data Fusion:
... the evaluated fusion process was specially customized for CNN/Headline News and will need significant methods changes and more intense validation in certain areas if Nielsen were to report on additional programming sources or if similar processes are implemented in Nielsen’s syndicated measurement services. ...This evaluation did not represent a full-scope accreditation examination; additionally this evaluation was not intended to lead to MRC accreditation... ."
Let's all move on. Shimmel's Sham Won't Fly ... yesterday, today or tomorrow.
Onwards & upwards!

Nicholas Schiavone from Nicholas P. Schiavone, LLC, January 13, 2015 at 2:20 p.m.

NO MRC "BLESSING" EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.
George Ivie is a good man. In his way, I'd even say he was a holy man. However, George Ivie's title is CEO & Executive Director of the Media Rating Council, Inc. (MRC) Thus, George is not a Priest, Rabbi or Imam. In fact, George would be quick to reject any religious honorific, given in jest or in praise. Hence, it would be good from here on for MediaPost never to suggest that the MRC has given its "blessing" to any measurment service or research methodology. Technically, a blessing is seeking "help and approval from God." I do not see that within the mission of the MRC. (Let's have no pointless etymological debates or discussions of literary license.)
Research professionals and the business people that depend on them would be satisfied simply with "valid, reliable and effective" measurments and methodologies. There's no need for divine intervention. At least, not yet. Onwards & upwards.