"You just made a fool out of yourself in front of T Bone"...siiiiiiiiiiiighMost people who know anything about TV shows know that the measure of a show's popularity is determined by something called the "Nielsen ratings". Apparently, advertisers rely on these ratings to determine whether or not to spend the money to run commercials for products and services during a given TV show. I think that these ratings also claim to provide information to the advertisers incredibly detailed information like "Show X is only watched by 4 million people each week, but it's the 3rd most popular among hyperactive teenagers named Stephen". But I have no idea what they claim to do, or what they actually do, and that's my point. The success or failure of TV shows is being largely determined by this mysterious ratings system that I hereby proclaim to be a total sham.
I spent a few minutes researching the Nielsen Ratings at their website (www.nielsenmedia.com) before writing this irresponsible article, but since that is more time than the NY Times would spend fact-checking anything, I think that's fair. We can at least agree it is unquestionably WAY more time than the NY Post would spend. Anyway, their website claims that they "select households through one of two different methods: geographic selection (area probability sampling) in the national sample and larger markets, and randomly-generated telephone numbers (Total Telephone Frame) in smaller markets." Bullshit, I say. If Nielsen really did this kind of random population sampling, I'm sure I would know SOMEONE who at least knows someone else who has been asked to participate in the Nielsen ratings. But I've never met anyone who has.
Now admittedly, I am not the most popular person alive. I do, however, know a lot of people. Not millions of people, but I do know a lot of interesting people, and through them, people who know other interesting people. I know someone whose sister's best friend is the personal assistant for a well-known Hollywood star. I know someone whose old co-worker was a consultant for Major League Baseball and is single-handedly responsible for MLB's decision to start charging for the formerly free Internet radio broadcasts of all games (and I swear if I ever meet this guy I am slashing his tires SO FAST...). I know someone who spent over $20 to purchase a DVD of Superman Returns, when in fact it is one of the worst movies of all time. And yet I do not know a single person who knows someone who knows someone who KNOWS someone who has a Nielsen ratings box.
If you look at the terrible shows that the Nielsen Ratings declare a "success" and the awesome shows that the Nielsen Ratings declare a "failure", it suggests two possibilities: 1) 90% of America is outrageously stupid, or 2) the Nielsen Ratings aren't truly capturing the viewing habits of a lot of us. Just to help me sleep better at night, I have to believe it's Option 2.
For those times when you're sitting around thinking, "Gosh, I wish a terrible sitcom that insults my intelligence were on right now"According to the Nielsen Ratings, Two and a Half Fucking Men (which actually would be a much funnier title) is the most popular comedy on TV. Meanwhile, I don't know a single person that watches this show. Not one. And in the interest of scientific research, I decided to try to watch one time. Jon Cryer is up on the roof fixing the satellite dish, and Charlie Sheen is holding the ladder. Jon Cryer says something like "Now Charlie, make sure to hold that ladder steady." "Of course I will hold the ladder steady, what am I an idiot?" asks Charlie to raucous fake laughter. Well, you will never believe this, but a hot chick comes by and asks to borrow some sugar (as hot chicks are wont to do) , and Charlie lets the girl into his house and LETS GO OF THE LADDER!!!! AND THEN JON CRYER FALLS OFF THE ROOF!!!!!!!! This joke might have been hilarious in 1919, before like, um, dialogue, and before people had ever seen a moving picture. But if I'd written this joke in 2007, and actually pitched it to a group of presumably accomplished writers, and they LIKED it, I think I would go home every night and drink myself into a stupor.
Conversely, low Nielsen Ratings led to the cancellation of Arrested Development, one of the funniest shows of all time that was watched by a lot of people I know personally. Two years ago, weak Nielsen Ratings led to the cancellation of Jericho, prompting enraged viewers to send 40,000 lbs of nuts to CBS (which would make sense if you'd ever watched the show). Although nobody I knew watched this show, there were clearly hundreds of thousands of fans out there who were watching and liked the show. Possibly millions, when you factor in people like me who were too lazy to actually send in nuts in protest (I think I just sent a polite email to CBS explaining that if they were to cancel Jericho I would appreciate it if they would all rot in Hell)
I also can't believe that Nielsen Ratings are taking into account DVR-d or TIVO-d programs. Most people that are smart and would appreciate good TV are probably too busy to put their lives on hold for 30-60 minutes and watch a TV show when it airs. Why should I have to alter my life to make time for TV when I can DVR a show and watch it whenever I feel like? Stupid people, on the other hand, are either unemployed or working a job that allows them to leave at 4:59 pm every day (that's right, I'm looking at you, lady at the Santa Ana office of the California Alcoholic Beverage Control Board). That still leaves you with plenty of time to eat your McDonalds and make a quick run to your meth dealer so that you can sit down at 8:00 pm to enjoy your favorite show.
I also can't believe that Nielsen Ratings take into effect people who watch sporting events or certain other major TV events like the Olympics or the season finale of The Apprentice: Season 1 (Kwame was hosed, BTW). I'd estimate that over 1 million people watched the 2008 World Series at a bar - are those people being included in the estimates of record-low ratings? If they're being included, how does that work?? Is the bartender/bar owner supposed to be doing a headcount and emailing that info to the Nielsen people?
And even if the magical Nielsen box that is transmitting information from your TV to a central headquarters really exists and is capable of doing that, in order to provide the detailed information the Nielsen Ratings claim they have, such as how many viewers aged 14-23 watch a particular show, it would still require the viewer to take some action to identify himself. Maybe it's as easy as pushing a button marked "Dad" or "Sister" when you're watching a show. And yet, I still insist that most people are SO lazy, they wouldn't even do this. Plus there are probably a lot of people who don't want to admit to watching certain shows. I know if I were watching Gossip Girl (simply by way of example, not like I'd ever actually, I mean...um, never mind) and could blame it on my little sister by pushing a button, I'd do that. Preserve my street cred.
Wait, the Nielsen box says I was watching what?? Oh, um, that was, uh, somebody else.I guess the good news is that as DVRs are becoming more prevalent, people are cutting out the commercials, which will soon force TV to move to a new pay-per-view or subscription system, similar to ITunes. Then, I can just pay for the quality shows I want to watch (as well as any non-quality shows that I want to watch but not admit to), and the rest of America can go on watching "So You Think You Can Dance with America's Favorite Kitten XII". Until then, I'm on a quest to find all the people with Nielsen boxes (if there are any) who refused to watch Arrested Development and literally beat some sense into them.
