• by April 12, 2005

AN ACTION WORD - There are many things we've heard Nielsen blamed for in our years of covering the couch potato counter, but the ones invoked Monday during Don't Count Us Out's one-year anniversary press briefing surprised even us. It covered everything from Dr. Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement to New York's Crown Heights riots. We were surprised, because all this time we thought the issue was about whether Nielsen was using the most accurate audience measurement methods and whether they could or should be held accountable to that. As it turns out, we were wrong. It's not about how well Nielsen counts TV viewers - of every race, color, or creed. It's about a different kind of counting altogether.

When the coalition uses the word "count," they don't mean the transitive verb commonly utilized by Nielsen, Madison Avenue, the TV industry, or anyone directly involved in the TV ratings business itself, where it is used in a mathematical context, as in, "Let's figure out a way to accurately count the number of people watching TV."

The coalition, it seems, is using it as an intransitive verb, which Merriam-Webster defines as: "to have value or significance count."

In other words, in the eyes of DCUO's organizers, "count" has become a metaphor for, "How can we leverage this debate to make up for hundreds of years of social oppression?" And what better way to do that than to stack the media deck, even if it is only television.

It was Ron Hasson of the Beverly Hills chapter of the NAACP and a member of the coalition who made us realize this Monday when he told reporters, "Folks in the community, people of color out there are really trying to understand why Nielsen has not through the years... figured out how to clearly include them in the process. How to clearly come up with the count."

While Hasson acknowledged that the people meter represented a move "forward" in the technology of audience measurement, he nonetheless maintained that, "it still possesses many of the inaccuracies in count that" was part of the old meter/diary system the people meters are replacing. While many people on Madison Avenue might argue that point - privately, not in any politically charged public forums - we're beginning to think that the two Nielsen stakeholders are talking about different things when they use the word "accuracy."

Explains Hasson: "This is the thing that people of color are looking at and saying, 'How is it that Nielsen spends all this money, but does not give us any greater accurate count?'"

Thank you Mr. Hasson. You've finally explained something that's been puzzling us for nearly a year now, which is how a system of measurement that has been proven to more accurately represent all people - not just people of color - than the one it was replacing could possibly be such a politically charged issue. Now we understand.

Unfortunately, some members of the consumer and trade press still do not. During the DCUO press conference, they poked at the organization's ties to News Corp. They sniffed at the objectivity and openness of the coalition's agenda. And, they demanded to know how it was financed and how much it was spending.

Weren't they listening when Richard Willis Jr., executive producer and CEO of Mozell Entertainment Group, founding member of the Harlem Arts Alliance, and an outspoken member of DCUO, admonished them for focusing too much on the money and the News Corp. connection when the real issue is the "civil rights movement"?

Equating the local people meter debate to New York's Crown Heights riot, Willis explained, "It has frequently been the case that when it is time to discuss what the issue is, which is the victimization of our community, then the discussion changes to how much money we're spending to fight this victimization of the community. Frequently, in the civil rights movement, Dr. King was asked, 'Who are your partners and who are your funders?' as opposed to why are thousands of people being denied the right to vote, or being denied access to equality and such in America?"

Thank you Mr. Willis. You've clarified the matter entirely. Up until now, we thought it was simply about having the most accurate TV ratings system. Now we know it's something far bigger than that.

HEROES REPRESENTED, BUT WHAT ABOUT HOAGIES, GRINDERS, WEDGES, AND SUBS? - The Riff has a soft spot for many things, and the latest Weather Channel stunt combined two of them: guerrilla marketing and hero sandwiches.

To promote "Heroes of the Storm, " a 10-episode series of programs honoring real heroes who have helped others in devastating weather conditions, The Weather Channel took to the streets of New York and delivered hero sandwiches to firehouses around town to show their appreciation to these real-life risk takers. The Weather Channel's meteorologist Nicole Mitchell accompanied actual "Heroes" clad in capes and spandex pants to deliver the goods. These heroes also performed random acts of kindness - such as opening doors and hailing cabs - for the people of New York.

These "heroes" didn't just shower firefighters with hearty hero sandwiches, they even stopped by The Riff's office with a tray chock full of sandwiches. The Riff and coworkers also received a large bag of snacks containing miniature bags of Cheetos, Fritos, Lays, and Doritos (regular and cool ranch!).

This campaign got the Riff thinking: most guerrilla campaigns are executed in top U.S. markets, and The Weather Channel is clearly playing on the word hero here. But what happens if The Weather Channel went to Philadelphia with the very same campaign? Philly doesn't have hero sandwiches - they have hoagies. Hoagies for Heroes sounds more like a '60s television show than a clever marketing stunt. And what about grinder and subs? New England states might have a difficult time figuring out the connection between a real life hero and a meatball grinder. Don't hit Louisiana either. It calls its sandwiches po' boys. New Jersey calls sandwiches wedges. And we certainly don't want to give heroes wedges now, do we?