It’s the Nielsen ratings, people, not the census.
Sarahfeena, exactly what catastrophic results can we expect to see here? They’ve already uncanceled 7th Heaven. I think it may have gotten as bad as it’s going to.
There’s nothing wrong with making money. But I have no obligation to help you do so when your interests (i.e. making sure that I don’t get access to the media I want, as far as I can tell,) don’t get with mine.
If I didn’t have so many neutral or negative experiences with polling I’d agree with you
You mean, focus group participants, which is another story entirely. In addition, you may be righter than you realize in claiming that the results come from the opinions of “consumers”: i.e. consumers of that particular medium. If I don’t listen or watch due to the crappiness, I have as valid an opinion as the next person but typical I am not listened to. Well, they won’t win me back by only listening to the people they already have successfully marketed to, that’s for sure. Heck you could say they should be focusing on me even more than average since there is so much potential that is untapped.
Not in my experience. Also, while I have somewhat of a problem with the emphasis on quantitative analysis being used to measure qualititative success, I mainly fault the researchers for not measuring my actual tastes rather than selecting from a pallette of 20 or so equally horrid options. It’s sort of like not being able to enter a write-in candidate in an election.
I never said anything about catastrophic results. But, this kind of thing does affect the validity of the results, no question. Neilsen realizes this, of course, and I’m sure they have their ways of mitigating the effects of this kind of stuff.
It just really irks me when research is treated as a joke. This is how companies determine what kind of products to bring to market. If you aren’t going to follow the participation rules, then don’t bitch about what’s on TV.
Of course you have no obligation to help. We ask you to help, and if you want to, you agree. If you agree, then you DO have an obligation to be honest. If you don’t agree, then we go away, and you lose the chance to offer your opinion.
I design qualitative studies for a living, and it’s a little more complex than what you describe. Sometimes, yes, we talk to product users about the product. Sometimes we don’t. It depends on the study and what the goals are.
As I said, you can write in an answer. That answer will be coded in the results with the pre-listed answers. This is a standard methodology used in every quantitative study I have ever worked on. Which is a lot. There is almost invariably a space for “other.” If enough people mention the “other,” it will show up in the data. So, you seem to get your feelings hurt easily that market researchers are not interested in you, Ludovic, as an individual, I can assure you that if you participate honestly, your voice is heard.
Your first paragraph is probably correct.
Your second is spurious, at best.
Bullshit. Illegal? Are you smoking something?
I love how the market research industry not only expects people to give up their free time to help companies make money, but also seems to insist that we have some ethical obligation to be honest to these money-grubbing firms. When corporations all begin to advertise their products honestly and without any attempt to deceive or mislead, then maybe i’ll concede that we consumers have an obligation to reciprocate.
Until then, they’ll get as good as they give.
Never noticed anyone “expecting” someone to give up their free time. We ask if people are willing to do it. In qualitative research, it is unheard of for people not to be compensated monetarily for it. So, I don’t feel really bad about taking away peoples’ free time. Usually, they enjoy it. And they get paid. Sounds like we are really taking advantage of them. :rolleyes:
I love the characterization of companies as “money-grubbing.” Yes, they like to turn a profit. They do this by trying to put products on the market that people want to buy. They do THIS by doing research. If you want good products, it’s smart to cooperate in producing good research. It’s not that complicated of a concept. If good products are produced, people will buy them, and by doing this they add money and jobs to the economy. You may not like it, but this benefits YOU, in more ways than one.
Wow, an economics lesson. Please, teacher, tell me about the intersection of supply and demand curves and the significance of the equilibrium point. :rolleyes:
I said nothing about the products themselves, nor am i opposed to companies turning a profit.
But your point, such as it was, related to issues of honesty. And companies spend millions of dollars producing advertising that has nothing to do with the quality of the product, and that in many cases is misleading or dishonest. I’m just saying that consumers are likely to be as honest with them as they are with us.
Yep, you—or at least many market research companies—ask them by calling their houses. Which is intrusive and obnoxious, and annoys people who may decide not to participate in your surveys. Market research is no different from telemarketing.
We’ve had market research people call here before, and when i tell them i’m not interested they always start with a spiel about how they’re not selling anything, nor asking me to buy anything. Sorry, but the net effect is no different. You’re asking me to give up my time in order to contribute to the profit-making enterprise of your market research company, and the company/ies for whom you are doing your research.
Oooooh kay. So, don’t participate. It’s really quite all right with us.
One more plea for some love for Veronica Mars (UPN, Channel 12, 9PM). I mean really, Hugh Laurie is a fine actor and all that, but House is rolling in happy right now. Give those ratings points to the show that really needs it. Thank you.
If it’s done with the idea of figuring out what TV to watch, then I’d say it’s fine because it’s not different than what actual people would do in the situation who didn’t have diaries to fill out. When done to game the system, though, then it’s gaming the system. The less a measuring model distorts otherwise normal conduct, the better it is as a measuring tool.
There are two relevant meanings of illegal here. I agree with you that the first – in violation of statute or law, criminal – probably does not apply. (Although certainly some state legislature could make it so, and neither of us know for sure that no legislature has in fact done that.) But there’s a weaker sense of “illegal” that means in violation of legal obligations that a person has volunteered to assume, usually for consideration. In this weak sense of the word, the actions are illegal.
If in fact the OP is receiving consideration ($$) for her participation, then by taking the money and refusing to play by the rules that she has accepted, she is in violation of her legal obligations. (And yeah, I think I would call this a fiduciary duty, Ludovic’s assertion to the contrary.)
In what way does this have anything to do with the discussion at hand? I think I’m pretty safe in my assumption that nobody’s threatened to kill the OP’s grandmother if she refused to fill out her diary. If the grandmother is in fact in jeopardy, I take it all back. But otherwise the OP can simply refuse to participate. Plus, it’s possible she’s receiving money to provide a service which she’s corruptly refusing to provide. That’s despicable. If she’s not getting paid, maybe it’s not despicable, but it’s still unethical, and a violation of the terms of her agreement.
Shit. Rumbled.
:rolleyes: Nielsen doesn’t have any opinion about whether you should be getting the media you want or not. They’re certainly not hunched over a conference table somewhere enacting elaborate schemes to prevent you from enjoying TV programs.
I suppose, mhendo that there is a possible universe in which garbage ratings data leads to good TV. But that would demand either an incalculable stroke of luck or a vast conspiracy upon the part of many Nielsen families. Considering that those folks could in fact just sit on their asses, watch the program in question, and then achieve the same result, it seems like an awful lot of trouble. But mostly, bad data is just going to be schizophrenic. And if the data gets so bad, it’s going to make advertisers lose confidence in the system completely; even popular shows will start losing sponsors. And you can’t possibly think that is a recipe for keeping Freaks and Geeks on the air.
If we’re still talking about the Nielsens, then you’re laboring under a misconception. They’re not trying to measure qualitative success. They’re measuring whether enough people will watch a program to justify the cost to create it. No one promised you a rose garden.
–Cliffy
You must be unfamiliar with certain types of research. I was asked my opinion on certain songs and which radio stations out of a list I listened to. I didn’t like any of the songs and I didn’t listen to any of the radio stations, despite the fact that I like that genre of music.
But I still responded for awhile, since I still listened to those stations about once a month or so, figuring that the songs being played on the radio would eventually catch up to my tastes, since the songs played on Internet college radio were. But they didn’t and eventually when they called me I had to honestly answer that I didn’t listen to those stations at all because they had consistently sucked for 5 years. (The 3 stations, btw, were owned by 3 different companies AFAIK. And one of the stations I did listen to which was never included in the survey not only played that style of music but was owned by the same company as one of the other stations! But they actually had a Program Manager who knew from good music so they didn’t have to rely on blandification to make decent radio.)
They weren’t interested in what songs or (sub)styles of music I like, they were just interested in which of the corporate-sponsored hits of the day they should play and in what order.
Now, if they just happened to play lame music and didn’t really care, I’d just not listen to those stations. But when they insult my intelligence by pretending to listen to my preferences and just listing the same dull crap, that’s when I actively avoid them. (Then again if they magically started playing good stuff I’d listen to them grudgingly, but that’s highly unlikely.)
Nielsen doesn’t but American Idol, and before them, “independent researchers” do. They are actively involved in limiting which stations play what type of music. The types of music that go through them are limited to what corporate execs think will sell. Corporate execs make extremely conservative decisions in order to keep their jobs. If the corporate execs make sure only the “safe” songs make it into the rotation, their job is secure.
Therefore, the stuff that makes it into the MSM is, in effect, deliberately chosen by corporate execs to be as bland as possible. This is reflected in the limited selection of choices available to preference polls.
It’s breach of contract. I think that that’s illegal, but I’m not sure. That’s why I said “may be illegal.” If I was wrong, forget I said it. I know very little about the law, so I’m hardly an authority. I stand by “dishonest” and “unethical,” however.
OK, I’ll buy that. I’ve never been a Nielsen family but ages ago my family used to get radio diaries from someone (Arbitron?). I think they just sent them out and asked us to send them back, as opposed to contacting us specifically. Usually the diaries had, like 50 cents taped to it as compensation for our time and trouble. Luckily for me I was a minor so I could lie with impunity (even though I never did).
BTW, the poker show is actually on Saturday, not Sunday.
hmm, a train wreck. I never dreamed.
do I have a contract with Nielsen? There is no spot on my diary that says anything like “I solemly aver and affirm that this diary accurately reflects the viewing habits of this household”…signature line follows.
When I agreed to take the diary there was no mention of money, though when it came, it came w/five crisp one dollar bills.
There IS a spot where I list all the people in the house and then spots for visitors so I can check who was watching what. What if I considered you all virtual visitors to my house?
I DO have an interest in high quality TV being produced…then it will go to DVD and I can get it from Netflix and watch it as time permits without having to program a VCR et al.
carlotta
who is enjoying this rare occasion of being a bad girl
PLEASE put down all of these Major League Soccer broadcasts:
Sat July 15: Chicago v Dallas 1PM ESPN2
Sat July 15: New York v Colorado 4:30 HDNet
Sat July 22: Columbus v LA 1PM ESPN2
Sat July 22: New York v KC 4:30 HDNet
Sat Aug 5 in Chicago!: MLS v Chelsea FC 3:30 ESPN
Sat Aug 19: DC v Colorado 1PM ESPN2
Sat Aug 26: Chivas v Houston 8AM ESPN2
Sun Sep 17: Chicago v DC 1PM ESPN2
Sun Oct 15: DC v Chicago 2PM ESPN2
Sun oct 22 (Playoffs - teams to be determined) 12PM ESPN2
Sun Oct 29: (Playoffs - teams to be determined) 3PM ESPN2
Sun Nov 5: (Playoffs - teams to be determined) 1PM ESPN2
All times Pacific. Sorry.
I don’t like MLS, the soccer isn’t great, but it needs the ratings to grow and get better, which will in turn strengthen the American national team.
Also put down the hockey games.
Forgive the exclamation point on that MLS vs Chelsea FC one. I copied and pasted that list from personal notes and stuck that exclamation point in there for my own purposes.
(I know the thread turned into a trainwreck, but I still want you to write those down. :D)
Since you are evil and going to TV Hell anyway, I’ll put my vote in for my favorites.
Project Runway, Bravo @ 10 PM Weds
Big Love, HBO @ 9 PM (not on right now as it’s Deadwood’s season, which I would have requested but see that it’s already been mentioned.)
Dirty Jobs, Discovery @ 9 PM Tues
Save me a seat on the couch in front of the big screen tv in TV Hell. 