I was sure there would be a thread on this in the archive, but if there is I sure as
hell cannot find it. So, how exactly do they arrive at these figures they quote for
big tv events?
I came here to ask you because I wanted it plain and simple actually. Do you
do that here?
tanstaafl just gave you a link to a page that explains the entire process in great detail straight from the horse’s mouth. What more information did you want?
NEIGH! Thou dost protest too much.
[/QUOTE]
What more information did you want?
[/QUOTE]
tHE SIMPLE ANSWER WOULD HAVE BEEN, “They take samples from representative households.”
Thank you for your help!
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. 
They take data from ocular implants via the metacog. The calculations from there are fairly simple.
I guess we didn’t know this was a test.
Alright smart-ass, you want something to answer? How reliable are said
statistics…as reliable as you lot are for jumping in with a snjde comment,
for example?
How reliable? How would anybody know? Wouldn’t they have to do a better job of collecting data than the Nielsen people in order to tell?
Of course, there are critiques of Nielsen. You can find a summary of them at this obscure little site called Wikipedia.
Since you apparently won’t go there for yourself, a summary might be that a) it is difficult to get a true random selection of the population to agree to be in the survey; b) the numbers needed to get a breakdown of sub-groups (black males over 55, for example) requires a larger number of overall respondents than they can afford to maintain; c) time-shifting is just beginning to be properly addressed; d) group facilities such as bars, colleges, prisons, hospitals, etc. are not surveyed; e) self-reporting in diaries is inherently subject to error.
The counter to this is that absolute numbers are not required. What matters for the advertisers, who are the true customers, are relative numbers. As long as the entire survey maintains an equal skewing then it shouldn’t affect the relative ranking of programs. Again, there is a critique that the skewing is not equal, but now we’re back to the beginning: how exactly do you know this?
The system works for the people who spend money for the results. Beyond that the question of reliability has no real meaning.
Ha! They are not nearly that reliable.
I’m sorry, but that answer has an extraneous pronoun, verb and preposition, making it needlessly difficult to no discernible purpose. Why complicate things when people are in a hurry, have short attention spans, and, with IM speak taking over the world, may be confused by the syntax of a complete English sentence? Is there any reason to throw up such barriers to understanding? I have noticed often at this message board, using six words when three will do just as well. There is nothing more irritating. The best answer would have been:
“Representative household samples.”
Many of the vowels could even be removed without making the answer incomprehensible:
“Reprsntativ househld sampls.”
Sufficiently.
Succintly stated.
thx
Almost never. You’ve come to the wrong place if you want simple answers (or ones free of smart-assedness). We can easily generate a five-page thread on almost any subject, no matter how apparently straightforward it is.