We’re living in the heart of
an evolving media landscape, and it’s rather fascinating. The number of digital
devices and elaborate technologies seems to grow exponentially every year,
continuing to transform the way we consume media. Timeshifting has become a popular
practice around the world as over-the-top services become available. While this
may be beneficial to America’s user-oriented media consumption habits, the TV
studios may disagree as ratings endure harsh declines – but are these ratings
actually declining? Or are they just shifting?
In an age of PCs, tablets
and smartphones to watch our favorite shows and movies, traditional TV ratings
just aren’t an accurate representation of media consumption anymore. The
newfound love of the second screen is what media researchers should be focusing
on, as users crave constant connectivity and instant gratification through
social media as they watch their TV shows.
According to the CEO of CBSCorporation, social buzz is crucial. “Overnight ratings are virtually useless
right now. The idea of success or failure is very different. Social networking
becomes a metric that is very, very important” (Bergen). As audience numbers go down, social media
buzz is soaring. For example, in an article published by Broadcasting &
Cable, Ellen averages at about 4
million viewers per episode, but that’s incomparable to the show’s 17.4 million
Facebook likes, 37.3 Twitter followers, or 10.6 million YouTube subscribers
(Albiniak 8).
This new era of television is
redefining how a show is ranked, as opposed to the traditional overnight
ratings that have reigned over the years.
Nielsen, the expert company in media research, launched “Social ContentRatings” in 2013. This new metric system measures online chatter about TV shows
on social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. In a timeshifted age
where viewers are so eager to share their thoughts and feelings online with
others, it only makes sense to track the conversation to get a sense of the successes
and failures of a show through the eyes of the audience.
A big challenge that media professionals
face today is the number of devices that is available for consumers to use to
watch their shows. According to past Nielson studies, consumers have more media
options than ever before, and there is a continued, steady increase in TV
device usage. This has made it more difficult to track ratings for the company,
as they do not have the all the resources to accurately measure cross-platform
viewership. According to Fox TV Group CEO Dana Walden, “The challenge for us,
and what we’re trying to process, is where different viewers are consuming our
content …The good news is, when you look at viewership over a 30-day period, a
lot of people are watching our shows” (Adalian).
One company in particular
has proven that ratings are no longer relevant to the success of a TV show.
Netflix, one of the world’s leading providers of on-demand streaming, is
notoriously known to keep their ratings private, forcing traditional networks
to compete with secrecy and non-transparency – the complete opposite of what
we’ve grown familiar with. The Content Chief of Netflix, Ted Sarandos, explainsthat it is not at all in the company’s interest to release rating statistics.
“There’s no business reason for us to … other than to create artificial
pressure on a show to perform on a short timeframe. We don’t need to add that
to the mix. There’s enough pressure in creating television as it is” (Adalian).
 |
| PHOTO: Google Images. While much conversation stems from live broadcast TV, nearly HALF of interactions occur after the original broadcast dates on social platforms. |
Despite the drop in past
years, TV viewing continues to remain at a historic high – but online streaming
on multimedia devices is displacing normal TV viewing (Nielsen). It is
inexpensive, convenient for the users, and it allows viewers to post about it
online as they watch. We have to take
step back and view the TV show as a whole, rather than just the overnight
ratings that the networks seem to have been born and raised on. Streaming
statistics show us when and how often viewers watch their shows and social buzz
provides raw, opinionated insight from viewers. “A huge amount of time goes
into, before a second of content [is] shot, what the digital engagement was
going to be across all the platforms,” says Keith Hindle, chief executive of
digital and branded entertainment behind The X Factor (Williams). Fans can
interact with one another to share ideas and predictions; hashtags are used to
easily organize thoughts; actors and producers can directly interact with fans
to spark conversation.
It’s safe to say that most
people are connected to social media of some sort. If a show does really well,
viewers post about it online. The buzz builds, the publicity rises, and the
show obtains national attention. It’s
the new rating system – written by the media audiences – paving the road for
measuring success in 21st century television.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION:
(1)
Do you believe
that the measurement of social buzz is an accurate representation of TV
popularity and success? Why or why not?
(2)
Netflix has
proven to be the “top dog” in the service of streaming content, raking in
millions of dollars each year from network rights and subscription dues. This
business model embraces ad-free entertainment, creating a more pleasant viewing
experience for audiences, who are constantly working to eliminate advertisements
from their screens. Considering this, what do you think the future holds for
advertising companies?
(3)
As ratings and
social interaction continue to gravitate to the Internet, do you believe the
future of television will be entirely on the Internet? Are we witnessing the
demise of live broadcast television, as we know it?
Works Cited
Adalian,
Josef. "How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix's Hidden Ratings." Vulture.
01 Dec. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2016.
<http://www.vulture.com/2015/12/netflix-ratings-how-hollywood-gossips.html>.
Adalian,
Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows
Might Survive." Vulture. 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2016.
<http://www.vulture.com/2015/11/tv-ratings-why-more-of-your-favorite-tv-shows-might-survive.html>
Albiniak, Paige. "Why
Your TV Show Needs To Always Be On. (Cover Story)." Broadcasting
& Cable 145.3 (2015): 6-10. Communication & Mass Media
Complete. Web. 5 Feb. 2016.
Bergen,
Mark. "CES: CBS CEO Moonves Calls Overnight Ratings 'Useless,' Defends
Streaming Service." Advertising Age Consumer Electronics Show RSS.
Advertising Age, 8 Jan. 2015. Web. 06 Feb. 2016.
<http://adage.com/article/consumer-electronics-show/cbs-leslie-moonves-ott-service-medialink-ces-keynote/296506/>.
Nielsen Holdings N.V. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en.html
Williams,
Oscar. "Social Engagement More Important than TV Ratings, Says Fremantle
Boss." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 21 Jan. 2015.
Web. 06 Feb. 2016.
<http://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2015/jan/21/social-media-engagement-tv-ratings-fremantle>.
Anne Noordsy
ReplyDeleteAs we all know, the importance of social media activity continues to rise. We utilize social media to express ourselves, maintain relationships with friends and family, among other uses. In recent years, being active on social media during live television programming has gained popularity but it is debatable whether or not the measurement of “social buzz” accurately portrays TV shows popularity and success.
Nielsen recently created the Social Content Ratings, which hopes to prove successful in measuring popularity of TV shows. Director of media partnerships for Facebook, Nick Grudin, stated "As more and more of our TV partners explore new and creative ways to engage with fans during and after the broadcast, it’s critical that they are able to measure and analyze their efforts” (Jarvey 1). “This standardized measurement will help our partners create even better experiences for their most passionate fans, and that’s really exciting to us,” Grudin also said (Jarvey 1). However, is everyone on Facebook updating their statuses about what just happened on Scandal or Orange is the New Black as much as Nielsen would like us to be?
Personally, when I am watching a show, I shut out social media apps such as Facebook and Twitter so I can really focus on what is happening on the show. I am concerned that if I check my Facebook or Twitter notifications while the show is on, that I may miss something important that happened on the show. Yes, it’s innovative to measure a show’s popularity through people’s Facebook statuses or tweets about the show but I do not think that everyone is wanting to update the social media realm about Olivia Pope’s outfit or who was sent home on The Bachelor. Posting a Facebook status or tweet during the show can also “spoil it” for everyone else who isn’t able to watch live which can lead to frustration.
Noordsy Works Cited
ReplyDeleteAdalian, Josef. "How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix’s Hidden Ratings." Vulture 1 Dec. 2015. Web
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture 30 Nov. 2015. Web.
Jarvey, Natalie. "Nielsen Adds Facebook to Social TV Ratings." The Hollywood Reporter 20 Jan. 2016. Web.
Jared Demel
ReplyDeleteAs the age of technology continues to evolve, it seems as though every avenue of media is becoming somewhat individualized. When it comes to ratings, the effects of evolution are clearly echoed throughout the industry; in some ways, more than others. As stated by Josef Adalian, “Almost every artistic endeavor in Hollywood comes attached to a ranking of some sort, a numerical report card that allows the town to declare said project a success or failure – and then gossip about it endlessly.”
While in most instances, ratings tend to deem the longevity of certain shows or creative aims, that’s not always the case. “The one exception to this Tinseltown truism: Netflix.” (Adalian 1). The question is, why would a company such as Netflix neglect to utilize a rating system? The answer may lie in its efficient platform model offered to consumers.
“Netlix’s public silence on numbers has always had a certain logic to it. Ratings are primarily a tool for selling advertising time, or convicing cable operators to pay networks more in subscription fees. Netlix, which draws almost all of its income from that monthly fee it quietly deducts from your checking account each month, doesn’t have to worry about it either.” (Adalian 3).
As a user of Netflix myself, I can certainly advocate for the service it provides. With limited advertising and a plethora of shows available to stream, there’s no question for me to buy into the service. I think the ‘redefining’ of ratings is a perfect terminology for what kind of shift is occurring. Essentially, consumers are becoming less obligated to care about ‘societal’ ratings, as entertainment media is changing into a more individualized process.
It’s clear that social ‘buzz’ is having some huge impacts on media as a whole, as well as the multitude of devices now available for streaming, time-shifting, etc. Some have actually gone as far as to say that these changes are beneficial for the entertainment industry (mainly television series). With less interference on the creative process as well as pressure from advertising, we may be fortunate enough to see an increase in the quality of certain shows.
“Sarandos also emphasized that he thought public ratings interfere with the creative process andthat he didn’t want the peole behind his different series to feel as though they’re in competition with one another. He also took a swipe at the current ad-supported model by noting that the quest to always be in pursuit of the biggest audience has had a negative effect on the quality of shows.” (O’Connell 9).
I think this change creates a strong and beneficial future for the industry. However, I do believe that advertising companies will take a fairly substantial blow, and they may even have to restructure their entire model of business. Still, if an industry is strong enough, it will adapt. Advertising has been around for decades and continues to find ways to cling onto the ongoing changes in each industry. Just like the newspaper industry, societal processes change. While many people still use newspapers as their news reference, a large majority tends to go to online sources. It’s in transitions like this that I think we’ve seen the advertising community adapt, and we will continue to see these adaptions again and again.
Works Cited
Adalian, Josef. "How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix’s Hidden Ratings." Vulture 1 Dec. 2015. Web
O’Connell, Michael. “Netlix’s Ted Sarandos Reacts to NBC Outing his Ratings: Remarkably Inaccurate Data.” Hollywood Reporter 17 Jan. 2016. Web
Kevin Pollard
ReplyDeleteSocial media has continued to evolve over the years far beyond sharing pictures of family members and pets. Today, social media holds within it a power that data and statistical moguls like Nielson once had sole proprietorship over. People now have the ability to share their thoughts about television shows and networks by simply logging onto their favorite social media sites and giving their input with 140 characters or less. Although these people may not be world-renowned television critics, their opinions can have a huge affect on how these shows operate and change.
Although I am certainly not the kind of person that is constantly posting about things I like and dislike about the shows I am watching, I would be naïve to ignore the fact that many people care very much about sharing their opinions on social media. From my experience with this subject, I have noticed that a lot of my family members (aunts, uncles, cousins, etc.) who are around the ages of 30-65 will take to social media to voice their opinions about the latest Sons of Anarchy episode as opposed to friends that are closer to my age.
According to an article from the “Hollywood Reporter”, Nielson has recently implemented a newly updated system designed to monitor social media conversation surrounding shows. The Nielson Content Ratings began in 2013 to monitor Twitter and will now include Facebook. “Broadening its social data offers a more complete picture about the people who are engaging with a particular show, which can be useful to both network marketers as well as advertisers” (Jarvey). It is very interesting to see how researchers like Nielson are continuing to adjust their approaches to find new ways to collect and interpret data. However, in my opinion, Nielson is still relatively behind when it comes to monitoring how people consume media content.
It is becoming more and more clear that the days of being able to “just look at the numbers and say, ‘That show is worthy, and that show is not” (Adalian) are over.
One question that comes to mind regarding this subject is where Nielson will go next in their quest to accurately depict which shows are being watched and on what platform. An example that I immediately think of is that of a former show on Comedy Central called Key and Peele. The show featured two comedians who would take part in several short sketches per episode. According to an article from “The Verge”, one sketch in particular called “Substitute Teacher” has been viewed 80 million times on YouTube. This is in comparison to the viewership of the original episode, which came in at 1.16 million people. “It’s all further proof that Nielsen ratings just aren’t the useful metric they once were — especially when it comes to the shows that are popular across multiple platforms” (Opam). This article also makes reference to another Comedy Central show called Inside Amy Schumer. The show features a now “comedy icon” in Amy Schumer whose program “generally has softer ratings than Key and Peele” (Opam). If people were solely relying on Nielson to try and assess how these shows were fairing in terms of popularity, they would most likely consider them mediocre at best. However, if platforms like YouTube are assessed, the look of a “successful” show is now not so clear. Until Nielson is able to analyze data from all of these platforms, their results are may not be as accurate as once thought.
Works Cited
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture 30 Nov. 2015. Web.
Jarvey, Natalie. "Nielsen Adds Facebook to Social TV Ratings." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 20 Jan. 2016. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.
Opam, Kwame. "Key & Peele Proved the Internet Is Leaving Traditional TV behind." The Verge. N.p., 09 Sept. 2015. Web. 08 Feb. 2016.
Hally Gordon
ReplyDeleteIts funny, before this class I thought when I watched my favorite television show live that night that I would count as one of the eight million people in the ratings and by watching it live I would help keep the show on air because I was participating in the overnight ratings. Clearly that is not the case because I have now learned that in order for my live viewing to count I would have to be a Nielsen home, which I am not.
That is why I think it is a great idea for social media to have an influence on the ratings and the popularity of a television show. It was very smart of Nielsen to start Nielsen’s Twitter Ratings in 2013 and now they want to expand “its Twitter TV Ratings to include data from Facebook and, eventually Instagram.” (Jarvey)
I would call my self an avid television watcher. I actually used Vultures “winter tv commitment calculator” and this winter I will be watching twelve television shows. One thing in recent years that I have started to notice more and more as social media is becoming more popular is the use of hashtags on the screen during and important or intense scene of a show. For example in the show Pretty Little Liars, which airs on ABC Family, now known as Freeform, they have multiple hashtags come up on the screen during different moments of the episode, like #FitzFindsOut or #PoorSpencer. When these hashtags get used in a Facebook post or a Twitter post it is a great why of tracking how many people are watching the show live. On one of the seasons finales there was a #IsEzraAlive this hashtag “drove PLL’s highest tweet volume for the year with 1.45 million. The finale is the top tweeted television episode on Twitter to date for 2014.” (Ng)
I was one of the “modest overall audience of barley 4 million viewers” who watched Scream Queens on “traditional TV or on a DVR, this past Fall. I also hit the demographic of young female under 35 that the show did extremely well with (Adalian). To continue on why I think social media platforms like Instagram, Twitter and Facebook could be very helpful in finding out how popular a television show is, this past Halloween my friends and I dressed up as the Chanel’s from Scream Queens. We all posted our picture on our Instagram accounts. I used #screamqueens so did both of my friends along with the #chaneloween (which is something from the show). We all used the #screamqueens and #chaneloween to A. make it clear what we were being for Halloween and B. to gain the attention of other Scream Queen fans by using that hashtag.
I think that social media buzz and hashtags or any other way shows are being discussed on social media should be highly considered along with the ratings because the viewing ratings might not always match how many people are actually watching and talking about the show.
Work Cited
Jarvey, Natalie. "Nielsen Adds Facebook to Social TV Ratings." The Hollywood Reporter 20 Jan. 2016. Web.
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture 30 Nov. 2015. Web.
Ng, Philiana. “Pretty Little Liars: Inside the Bold Strategy of Getting Teens to Watch TV.” The Hollywood Reporter 7 July. 2014. Web
Erin McCann
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that we are living in a world where the media and technology is constantly evolving. The practice of timeshifting in my opinion has been the biggest advancement in the media realm. I do not agree with the notion that television ratings are declining it has been increasing. Since there has been a shift in the technology we use, the way in which many of us consume television has shifted as well.
I was relatively late with jumping on the bandwagon of timeshifting, but now that I have started the practice I love it. When my family switched to Comcast where we can use dvr and on demand services along with streaming services like Netflix the way we watched television changed radically. There was no longer a need for any of us to stay up late anymore to catch a particular show or miss a show because we decided to watch a different one that night.
Because of the time shifting it would look as if our television consumption had decreased but it was the exact opposite. The use of our television, computers, and tablets if anything had increased the amount of television watched. This is not a phenomenon that only occurs in my household, but in households across America. This is why there has been such a debate on weather or not television ratings have declined.
As you noted in your post there has been a steady rise in the usage of multiple devices to watch television. People are now using their phones and tablets to watch shows that they may have miss the night before, or even month or years ago. It is important for these types of television consumption to be monitored otherwise it will reflect a decline in television ratings when that is simply not the case. The article, Nielsen Solutions-What We Measure exemplifies the notion that Nielsen recognizes the importance of timeshifitng. “Electronic and proprietary metering technology is at the heart of Nielsen audience measurement. In addition to capturing what channels viewers are watching on each television set in the home, our meters can identify who is watching and when, including “time-shifted” viewing—the watching of recorded programming up to seven days after an original broadcast.” (Nielsen)
As timeshifting continues to grow, companies that measure television ratings are expanding their monitoring reach. The Nielsen company who’s mission it is to monitor television rating has taken notice of this, “Nielsen's Twitter TV Ratings launched in 2013 to provide insight into the number of people talking about a show as well as the total reach of that tweet.” (Jarvey) Many people, especially those who are in their teens or twenties will often take to social media to talk about the shows they currently like and watch. Therefore it is important for this media activity to be monitored. By not only monitoring television and other devices and expanding to social media it will be even more apparent that television ratings have just shifted, not declined.
It is now more important than before to pay close attention when it comes to monitoring television consumption and ratings. The simplistic days of only watching a show when it is on are long gone; there are many more factors to take into account now. If they are overlooked the data being collected will be extremely inaccurate.
Works Cited
Jarvey, Natalie. "Nielsen Adds Facebook to Social TV Ratings." The Hollywood Reporter 20 Jan. 2016. Web.
“Nielsen Solutions – What We Measure.” Nielson.com 23 Jan. 2016. Web.
Erin Murphy
ReplyDeleteYou make some great points. I do believe that social media is a great representation of TV success and ratings. The first thing that comes to mind is the phenomenon that was “Sharknado.” While the franchise was tragic when it came to pretty much every aspect of the films- writing, acting, production value- there was no doubt that good or bad, the internet was alive with how many people were buzzing about it. “The original in July 2013 drew a modest 0.4 demo rating and 1.37 million viewers for its premiere, but social media helped turn into a minor cultural phenomenon and a couple of replays actually fared better in the ratings” (Kissel, Variety). While a minor phenomenon there is no doubt that it gave SyFy a boost in their ratings. Syfy went on to create multiple installments of the movie. Ultimately, by the time the third movie had release, “Sharknado: Oh Hell No” fans had already lost their passion for the show which was clearly shown through social media. “The year-to-year ratings decline largely mirrored the social media activity for “Sharknado 3.” According to Nielsen Twitter TV Ratings, “Sharknado 3: Oh Hell No” topped all programs on Wednesday with 360,000 event-related Tweets — down from the 581,000 Tweets that were sent for “Sharknado 2.” On the night of the original “Sharknado” in 2013, roughly 318,000 Tweets were sent about the movie.” (Kissell, Variety). Eventually, the show died out following the rapid decline in ratings and was pulled.
Social media allows for more transparency with television studio executives and their demographic more than ever. Social media may not solely decide what executive will air on their networks but it certainly has influence as Adalain says, “TV shows are able to run 100 episodes based on little more than critical raves and amazing Twitter buzz.” (Vulture). No longer do you only have to interpret arbitrary figures with ratings, instead you now can bring a personality to ratings and better understand your audience. However, I can’t seem to commit to the idea that the old system of rating is completely obsolete which can be seen in the industry’s frustration with Netflix refusing to release their ratings. Since 2013 there has “been raising concerns about the fundamental unfairness of a major industry player avoiding any sort of independent assessment of its performance.” (Adalian, Vulture). Netflix has become the “bad boy” of the industry by not conforming to any of the social norms when it comes to traditional advertising and ratings. They’ve built an empire off of syndication of shows and then to add on top of it creating a phenomenal line up of original series. Netflix has the ultimate mic drop on everyone in the industry and it’s clear, everyone is panicking. So, how do we balance social media with traditional ratings system in a symbiotic relationship? Time will only tell.
Works Cited
Adalian, Josef. "Why the New Era of TV Ratings Means More of Your Favorite Shows Might Survive." Vulture. N.p., 30 Nov. 2015. Web. 09 Feb. 2016
Adalian, Josef. "How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix's Hidden Ratings."Vulture. N.p., 01 Dec. 2015. Web. 09 Feb. 2016.
Kissell, Rick. "'Sharknado 3' Ratings Down From Last Year's 'Sharknado 2'"Variety. N.p., 23 July 2015. Web. 09 Feb. 2016.
Alex Williams
ReplyDeleteNow, the age of technology has evolved so much to the point where another paradigm shift is at hand. Frontrunner rating and advertising companies such as Nielsen and Publicis will have to adapt to this paradigm shift. In response to this, these companies will have to make drastic changes if they wish to continue to provide the kind of analytics and data that media buyers use to determine where and when to spend their marketing/advertising dollars. Online streaming networks such as Netflix (serving as the prime example), Hulu, and others are creating this change for advertising and rating companies.
Nielsen, the worlds largest rating system, have been trying to assimilate to this new shift that services like Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon are creating. Using the innovative tech corridor in Tel Aviv Israel, Nielsen has already funded 12 startups focused on designing and implementing systems to deliver ratings on content from online streaming networks. (d’Estries).
“These investments are a critical part of the company’s future as it moves to carve out the same dominating niche it’s enjoyed in traditional media. The current challenge? Implementing a system to deliver ratings on content from online streaming networks.” (d’Estries).
Like Nielson, many other companies are trying to seek out information regarding ratings and views from content on Netflix. Due to the fact that Netflix keeps its ratings and audience viewing private, companies like Nielson can’t get their hands on any vital information.
Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos believes that not sharing ratings with the public will benefit producers, screenwriters, actors, viewers, etc.
“There’s no business reason for us to … other than to create artificial pressure on a show to perform on a short timeframe. We don’t need to add that to the mix. There’s enough pressure in creating television as it is.” (Sarandos).
As stated by Josef Adalian, “Almost every artistic endeavor in Hollywood comes attached to a ranking of some sort, a numerical report card that allows the town to declare said project a success or failure- and then gossip about it endlessly.”
I couldn’t agree with Adalian more on behalf of the fact that ratings could and do put an enormous amount of pressure on the networks, writers, producers, actors, but also the viewers. By not sharing ratings, this could lead to a more stable atmosphere leading to better content. Furthermore, the discussion on multiple media platforms brings much advertisement to those platforms, such as Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. Due to the rise of social media buzz, I personally believe that ratings should be accounted for on these social media platforms where in depth discussions about shows and networks are being held. Nielsen has entered into this realm by beginning to monitor Face and twitter, “Broadening its social data offers a more complete picture about the people who are engaging with a particular show, which can be useful to both network marketers as well as advertisers.”(Jarvey).
If companies like Nielsen truly innovate they will survive, but, if they fail to form the partnerships they will require to mine the data they will need, they will fail. As for television, I believe that live events will always have a place. However, a failure to include social media conversations about each and every program will result in inaccuracies in engagement.
Works Cited:
Adalian, Josef. “How Hollywood Gossips About Netflix’s Hidden Ratings.” Vulture 1 Dec. 2015. Web.
Jarvey, Natalie. “Nielsen Adds Facebook to Social TV Ratings.” The Hollywood Reporter 20 Jan 2016. Web.
D’Estries, Michael. “How Will Nielsen Measure Ratings in the Future?” From the Grapevine. 28 Sept. 2015. Web.
As technology advances and evolves by the minute, it is evident that social media is becoming an increasingly influential part of our lives. Many people think of their phones, tablets, laptops, etc. as extensions of themselves and are constantly craving connectivity with other people in their social sphere. As time shifting devices and OTT services become more and more popular in our everyday life, it is important to incorporate them in television ratings. Although some services do not release their information, such as Netflix, television networks can look at social media to determine if their show is popular. As of recent years, it is common to see people expressing themselves through their social media networks. As a result of this, if a person enjoys a television show, there is a huge possibility that they will post about it online and partake in the “social buzz”.
ReplyDeleteDue to the huge impact of social media on our everyday lives, Nielsen has created the “The Nielsen Social Content Ratings” in attempts to measure the social media buzz and conversation that occurs while a show is actually being aired (Jarvey). I personally think that incorporating the social media content into the ratings will be extremely beneficial for both Nielsen and advertisers because they will be getting a more accurate feel to exactly who is watching their shows. If the show’s demographic is teenage girls, it’s predicted that there will be a lot of buzz about it on social media because that demographic is very active on social media. However, if it was a show aimed at older adults, it may be predicted that there will be less social buzz surrounding it because adults tend to be slightly less active on social media. Now, shows are even creating their own Twitter hashtags and Facebook pages in order to create more buzz about the show. This feature also allows Nielsen to track the conversation much easier. Facebook media partnership director Nick Grudin stated, “As more and more of our TV partners explore new and creative ways to engage with fans during and after the broadcast, it’s critical that they are able to measure and analyze their efforts," (Jarvey). Nielsen’s Social Content Rating strives to measure the audience across all services and devices in order to get the most accurate ratings that it can.
Although ratings and social interaction is slowly becoming more and more digital, I do not believe that television will eventually completely move to the Internet. Although in recent years the use of television has slowly been declining, television viewership is still at an all time high and I think it will be a medium that will never completely go away. I believe that, if anything, social media and the social media buzz that surrounds it, is encouraging people to watch more live TV so they can become part of this online conversation. Nielsen stated, “Social media is re-energizing TV—acting like a shot of pure adrenaline that’s fueling millions of digital conversations. In 2013 alone, 36 million people sent 990 Million Tweets about TV, according to Nielsen Social. Those conversations have created a digital dialogue we’ve come to know as social TV” (Nielsen Solutions). Television fans see this live interaction being done on social media and want to join the fun.
Works Cited
Jarvey, Natalie. "Nielsen Adds Facebook to Social TV Ratings." The Hollywood Reporter 20 Jan. 2016. Web.
“Nielsen Solutions – What We Measure.” Nielson.com 23 Jan. 2016. Web.