|
|
Post by Diana on Oct 13, 2011 13:42:34 GMT -5
And here is the other thing, it is not just the numbers that go into deciding whether a show is renewed or not. Nina Tassler and the other CBS exec's personal opinions about a show also play apart. If they like a particular show it is going to get more of a chance than say a show they don't. Also, they look at a lot more numbers than just the overall viewers and the demo. They look at male versus female viewship, who watches what in different parts of the country, etc. The reality is we can debate the numbers all day long, but until we can crawl into Nina Tassler's brain all our prediction are just educated guesses.  PS - Welcome to the board Holly!  |
|
|
|
Post by Dannos Dani on Oct 13, 2011 13:48:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I thought that too. That's why these execs get the job, right? They have to have some sort of gut feeling, otherwise they could just let the computers pick and choose. There has to be a human component. So let's show the human component that we love our show! Just not Lori.
|
|
|
|
Post by hollyladyyb on Oct 13, 2011 14:00:38 GMT -5
Hi Di! My worry is that they will get back to what we love. They cannot have not noticed the fan reaction but that it will take some time. Lenkov has admitted they are so far ahead of shooting and writing etc that they can't just turn things around really quickly. My ultimate fear is they know now what they need to do but for us it will be another four eps or more away and then people might switch off.
That is what scares me the most. I mean I am dreading next week because I saw your spoilers here and thought 'what?' when I saw them 'interrogating' Kono - I hope that is NOT what it is but sure looks like it.
I read an interview with Alex last week where he says this season the team is fractured and its all about how they work there way back to being a family again and get back together. Fine - but they WAY they are doing some of it sucks. I just hope they don't take so long that too many people bail. It would be awful if it got back to what we love about 12 eps in to have permanently lost some fans!
I for one will wait it out because even just a bit McDanno tides me over and I love Alex so much I'd honestly watch that man read the phone book lol. But others might feel very differently.
And I agree with you Di about shows that execs like. Look at the Good Wife. No way that show would still be on air if it weren't for the fact that CBS love the Emmy awards etc that it gets.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dannos Dani on Oct 13, 2011 14:12:12 GMT -5
Hopefully after the Kono arc is over the family will get back together. Kono gets shot, Steve will feel terrible about not keeping tabs on her, they'll all see how great she is, how they need each other, and we're back.
They just have to start scaling Lori back so that Steve and Danno can have more time together too. At least there was a bit more of that last week.
Since Malia is in next week's ep, and I had guessed she'd probably be back in the one after, since Kono would be in the hospital, I wonder then if kono gets shot earlier in the ep - but it would have to be after the interrogation scene (finally some anger over Kono's treatment from Steve - he and Fryer should have a doozy of an argument).
In any case, other than the prefight moment which is going to make me and all Dannoettes barf, I think it'll be a great episode again, so let's hope the ratings stay good.
|
|
|
|
Post by darksea on Oct 13, 2011 14:20:40 GMT -5
From Nina Tassler:
- The 18-49 demographic is not as important as overall viewers. The only thing that is of utmost importance is 'butts in seats', which is not so easy to determine using the current ratings system but we do what we can with what we have. My company is not concerned with how old the participants are, but that there are people watching, which is how you have quality television.
Source: Symposium on Quality Television, New York City, March 2011
"Moonlight had great demographical scores, there were plenty of the right demographic watching, but the ad returns and total viewers declined so badly that my wish to keep the show just wasn't feasible. It sustained a good 2.7 throughout its run, but 2.7 of a small audience is not viable.
- Letter to the Moonlight fans, 2009
I don't really put out opinions, unless I start it with IMO. But hey, I'm just a liar.
|
|
|
|
Post by Diana on Oct 13, 2011 14:44:55 GMT -5
Hey DarkSea - I can't speak for anyone else but I for one don't think you are a liar. My only point was that if a show is borderline in the numbers that how the exec's feel about the show and their belief in whether or not a show can improve their numbers do come into play as to whether it is given a chance or not. Honestly, knowing that at the end of the day that CBS is greedy and ultimately wants both high overall and high demo I worry about any show that isn't delivering both, because I don't doubt for a minute that CBS would yank any show including NCIS if they thought they had new show that would deliver everything for them. |
|
|
|
Post by darksea on Oct 13, 2011 14:56:03 GMT -5
I was just trying to make the point that the demographic isn't as important as overall vieweres for the broadcast individuals who put the shows on.
This is how the ratings game from a TV Exec's point of view was demonstrated to me from a friend:
Five little viewers sat down to watch the show. One was a woman, 39. One was a man, 42. One was a girl, 12. One was a woman, 61, and one was a man, 62. The 12 year old got up from the seat and went into the kitchen mid-way through the program. The 39 year old woman soon followed.
The moral to the story: just because two people were in the right demographic doesn't mean they represented the entire show's viewership.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dannos Dani on Oct 13, 2011 15:04:22 GMT -5
Even though I still don't begin to understand ratings, it kind of makes sense. The ad sellers will be interested in the demographic because that tells them what they can hope to sell and to who. The people that decide the fate of a show would be interested in overall viewers. And of course, both are important and have to be considered, but ultimately, you need a high volume of viewers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Diana on Oct 13, 2011 15:07:18 GMT -5
I was just trying to make the point that the demographic isn't as important as overall vieweres for the broadcast individuals who put the shows on. This is how the ratings game from a TV Exec's point of view was demonstrated to me from a friend: Five little viewers sat down to watch the show. One was a woman, 39. One was a man, 42. One was a girl, 12. One was a woman, 61, and one was a man, 62. The 12 year old got up from the seat and went into the kitchen mid-way through the program. The 39 year old woman soon followed. The moral to the story: just because two people were in the right demographic doesn't mean they represented the entire show's viewership. DarkSea - I agree totally with you no one demo is ever going to represent the whole viewing audience. But there is one thing that all the demos do seem to be agreeing about and that the show we are getting this season is not the show we feel in love with last season and it showing in the fact that H50 numbers across the board are falling which not good from any perspective. |
|
|
|
Post by Musicfreak on Oct 13, 2011 15:07:36 GMT -5
So the way that I'm seeing this is the demographics are important for advertisers, but the overall viewers are what's important to the network.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dannos Dani on Oct 13, 2011 15:08:34 GMT -5
oh, and one more thing I just realized.... there's a high probability I'm wrong, because I truly suck at math.... but did you say the demographics figure (ie the 2.7 for Moonlight) is calculated off the overall viewers?
So if you have a low overall figure to begin with, wouldn't your demographics figure probably be kind of high, since the 18-49 age group pretty well covers most everyone that watches???
So of course what you said makes sense - 2.7 of not that many people would not compare to say 2 of a much a higher overall viewership.
Sorry, just trying (don't know why) to understand all of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by twassbrake on Oct 13, 2011 15:40:10 GMT -5
All these ratings and the ways to determine them make my head hurt - a lot!
|
|
|
|
Post by sportsmom8 on Oct 13, 2011 15:51:57 GMT -5
So the way that I'm seeing this is the demographics are important for advertisers, but the overall viewers are what's important to the network. Yep, that about sums it up. And the whole goal of the network, like any business, is to make money. So the higher a show's ratings, the more money they make in the longrun. Unfortunately, it's an imperfect science, but the only methodology that is around at the moment. I was and still am one who even though I looked at numbers, my ratings estimates were also based on my gut feelings. After all, human emotion to me is a large component as to how well a show will do. Talk to me someday about buying America's Funniest Home Videos on ABC and how I got calls every Monday morning from the GSM at the ABC affilliate in Atlanta begging me to give him back some of the time I bought - because he gave them to me at a dirt cheap price(and I was able to give it a lower rating as a result) and the ratings for that show went through the roof. That program over delivered for me week after week (I got more rating points out of it than I had estimated) and helped me with other shows where I underdelivered(my estimate larger than what the actual rating turned out to be). My gut told me the show would have appeal but I kept my mouth shut and negotiated to the lower number - and they gave me a great rate.. (Yep, that's what buyers do. ) |
|
|
|
Post by Dannos Dani on Oct 13, 2011 16:12:58 GMT -5
All these ratings and the ways to determine them make my head hurt - a lot! |
|
|
|
Post by Musicfreak on Oct 13, 2011 16:13:55 GMT -5
I think I'm actually starting to understand this stuff. I'm not a fan of numbers, so this is big for me |
|
