The February '08 TV Ratings: Last of a Breed
By Brian Lambert
I was reminded that TV's Nielsen ratings system begins a possibly significant evolution this May. That's when the new, so-called "People Meter" finally arrives in the Twin Cities. Here's a story on the system from the Seattle-area Business Journal. (A similar high-tech device for the even more anachronistic radio ratings—"Personal People Meter"—is scheduled for arrival here in late 2009.)
The People Meter's arrival makes the recently concluded February "sweeps" the last of their kind, where roughly 400 clunky set-top devices and a few hundred diaries written four times a year compiled all the numbers for determining winners and losers in a local TV market as well as the all-important ad rates associated with winning and losing.
Because this new gizmo can deliver every sort of demographic information instantly—it requires individual viewers already ID'ed by age and gender and ethnicity to sign in every fifty-two minutes and can be passed around to anyone else watching to log their personal particulars, it might—might—eventually eliminate the need for "sweeps months"—you know, those months (February, May, and November) where the networks pile in all the good stuff for twenty-eight days then leave you with pretty much bupkis for the rest of the year while cable networks eat the networks' lunch.
That, anyway, is what May will bring. For the moment, the story is what February brought, and that was some encouraging news for FOX 9. KMSP sent out an e-mail blast crowing about overtaking KARE—KARE, for God's sake—as the second most-watched station in the market.
Here are a couple graphs at a glance:
Late News February 2008 Monday–Friday (Five-Day Average)
| Newscast | HH Rtg |
| KMSP "FOX 9 News at 9:00" | 9.5 |
| WCCO | 11.5 |
| KARE | 9.2 |
| KSTP | 6.2 |
| KMSP "FOX 9 News at 10:00" | 4.5 |
Late News Monday–Sunday (Seven-Day Average)
| Household Data | Rtg/Shr | Rtg/Shr | Yr-Yr % |
| Station | Feb’08 | Feb’07 | Change |
| WCCO+ | 11.6/21 | 12.5/23 | -7% HH Rtg/-9% HH Share |
| KARE | 9.3/17 | 11.1/20 | -16% HH Rtg/-15% HH Share |
| KSTP+ | 6.6/12 | 6.6/12 | FLAT HH Rtg/FLAT HH Share |
| KMSP 9pm | 9.3/15 | 8.7/15 | +7% HH Rtg/FLAT HH Share |
| KMSP 10pm (6-day avg M-F/Su) | 4.6/8 | 4.0/7 | +15% HH Rtg/+14% HH Share |
Since I expect to hear from the usual purists demanding to know why I waste any time at all on this, let me say how much I enjoy a good ratings spin.
TV stations live and die by these numbers. (They actually live and die by the demographics numbers that will be out next week, but these are good for brawling over.) For years at the Pioneer Press, I'd get these ratings, make a few calls, and listen to everyone, even those dead last and choking on dust, tell me how the numbers were actually showing great things for them (provided you held them over your head, chanted in Aramaic and spun like a dervish until you fainted from dizziness). They also told me how "key demos" were turning their way; how the other guys' demos were a sham and worthless; and how by this time next year, Paul Magers would be living in a box under a bridge, and they'd be eating his regular lunch of caviar and dulce de leche.
Very little of that ever happened. For twenty years, WCCO and KARE have battled back and forth over these so-called household numbers (total audiences with no breakdown according to age, gender, etc.). KARE always wins the key demographics, mainly women twenty-five to fifty-four and, therefore, makes more money in this market.
But these numbers don't bode well for KARE's long-term dominance and do suggest that FOX 9 is making some kind of inroads with viewers. (Full disclosure: My old radio partner Sarah Janecek and I are doing some—currently unpaid—political punditry for FOX 9. So if you want to think I'm blowing smoke up their tuckuses—tucki?— go right ahead.)
KARE's GM, John Remes, who is as wily as they get when it comes to parsing ratings numbers, authorized a press release arguing that KARE will again win the February demos, had won the January demos, is the only station broadcasting its news in high-def, and that everyone at his station is better looking than everyone at FOX 9. (I made that last one up.) His basic explanation for what looks like bad news for his shop is that, "you're comparing apples to oranges here" (meaning FOX 9's 9 p.m. show to his 10 p.m. news) and that the writer's strike had an unusually negative impact on NBC programming, giving viewers more reason to switch away . . . to FOX 9's news, perhaps.
Remes's "apples to oranges" complaint has some validity. But it strikes me as more as a comparison of separate but mostly equal varieties than completely different fruit. Kind of like a Honey Crisps to Zestars comparison, if you want to stick with the apples analogy.
FOX 9 news director Bill Dallman argues, "It's our marquee news against their marquee news."
In a brief conversation with WCCO-TV GM Susan Loyd at Bill Carlson's visitation yesterday, she was more willing to acknowledge FOX 9's audience growth than Remes, complimenting KMSP on its appeal to younger viewers before quickly asserting her station's long-standing appeal to hard news audiences.
I could go on with this, but I won't. The bottom line here is that WCCO still leads in total audience, FOX 9 is having a good run, and KARE is suffering unusual audience erosion, which, if it is reflected in the demographic ratings to be released next week, could begin a long-awaited realignment in revenue among the local news stations. Beyond that, technology-driven refinements in measurement might—might—soon bring even bigger shifts.
© 2008 MSP Communications, Inc. All rights reserved
Ah. Digging for rating comments at a visitation. You are always on duty Brian.
LAMBERT: It's sick. What can I say? Bill would have understood.
Posted by: jim on March 6, 2008 at 5:08 PM
I think the apple cart should be completely upset -- and cable/satellite (and TIVO cohorts) may very well soon allow this.
Imagine the statistics that are being - or could be - gleaned every time I change channels on my cable network. They have the ability to track when I'm watching, what I'm watching and for how long.
In fact, if you have Internet access through your broadcast provider, they will be able to glean information on your viewing habits there as well.
That's exceptionally powerful and precise information.
While my TV viewing may be currently focused on BBC America, I check a number of foreign and domestic news web sites multiple times throughout the day. Domestic includes CNN down to my local newspaper and local civic blog.
Oh, yeah, I hardly ever watch the "local news" broadcasts anymore. Why should I bother? What are they offering that I'm not getting already from other sources? And without the commercial interruptions (AdBlock on my browser) or feel-good filler fluff (love that alliteration)?
I imagine and hope for the day when I can even tell my cable company exactly what channels I want and will pay for and those that I don't.
News channels is one area I think should have a wide variety and where I don't think we should be able to "pick and choose" for service (although we can choose to view or not view). After all, who knows what new things dear Bertram Jr. might be exposed to while flipping between various Fox channels...
I want a full spectrum of news broadcasts, including Al Jazeera in English. I want more public educational access. I think QVC and HSN are utterly useless. So is the SOAP channel.
Oh, and I want a *choice* of cable/satellite providers. Competition is healthy, especially for consumers.
"Regular broadcasting" better get ready. The times they are a'changin'.
LAMBERT: The "Great Convergence" of internet and TV is only good news for avid/compulsive news consumers. Most of my favorite sites -- listed on my page here -- are beginning to offer some kind of video, albeit a lot of talking heads. But what else is FoxNews, MSNBC and CNN? The Big Brother potential is worrisome, but since I've always been far more concerned over what the credit card companies know about me -- driven by their profit motive -- as opposed to government bureaucrats, I don't lose a lot of sleep worrying that some spook at the NSA has the ability to note that I watched 45 minutes of "Modern Marvels" last night. I am also fascinated by the reluctance of affiliate news broadcasters to so much as test a new range and model of news delivery.
Posted by: Tuned In on Washington on March 7, 2008 at 9:43 AM
"The great convergence" is good news for porn users, too.
As always, they will lead any upshift in technology.
Just sayin'.
LAMBERT: You and your (much too) close friend bertram jr are clearly experts on the topic.
Posted by: Jenna Jameson on March 7, 2008 at 12:31 PM
Normally you'd have to go all the way to Las Vegas and endure a broadcast and cable executives convention for this sort of soporific analysis of TV ratings. All that's missing are the shrimp cocktails. Special thanks.
LAMBERT: "Soporific"? Did you miss the three graphs ripping Mendicant Pauper Radio and Gary Eichten?
Posted by: Jim Leinfelder on March 7, 2008 at 1:24 PM
Would you be willing to do your next blog only in Yiddish? Oy Vay!!!
LAMBERT: I learned a lot in those months on the kibbutz. A simple Catholic boy amidst so many daughters of Zion.
Posted by: Mr. Monster on March 7, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Lambert,
I am watching less and less local TV news. Do you think local TV news is slowly going the way of the printed newspaper? A friend who works at one of the top 3 stations over heard an exec. there commenting that they were a "website that happens to be a TV station". If that is the route, there appears a less and less need for high-buck celebrity talent, NPPA photogs and expensive facilities.
LAMBERT: "Slowly" or "slower" might be the operative words. You are not alone in watching less and less of the 10 pm news. The stations are always quick to point out that they control the lion's share of viewers at 10, but they are, I think, concerned about erosion of what I'd call the young/sophisticated demo. I may post a ranking of 10 pm viewing habits, which shows the popularity of Jon Stewart, etc. (There really isn't that much "etc."). Local TV news is playing with a treadworn format, much like Classic Rock, it still turns a profit, but is not experimenting and testing at the margins like I think it should to guarantee itself a number of options in the event of accelerating erosion.
Posted by: KTG on March 9, 2008 at 3:49 PM
It's not just the 10pm news. Even traditional "print" media has to change.
For example, when I find out about that Mike Ciresi is withdrawing from the Fox9 and Minnesota Monitor Twitter streams (I subscribe to all kinds of media...) before the news even hits the StarTribune front page or Twitter stream, there's something changing.
Speaking of Twitter -- where's your stream, Mr. Lambert?
LAMBERT: You can sign up for the RSS feed.
Posted by: Tuned In on Washington on March 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM
Bri, I know you are wrestling with how to talk about (read: dismiss) Spitzer, so here is your opening:
http://www.anti-strib.blogspot.com/
The Strib "forgot" to mention his party affiliation.
Then they "remembered".
Interesting isn't it?
LAMBERT: I keep forgetting, this is all about team sports to you. My side: Goodness handed down from God. Your side: Roaches, vermin and the spawn of Satan. the only difference between Spitzer and your average Republican scandal is that he was caught boinking women, not men.
Posted by: bertram jr on March 11, 2008 at 11:56 AM