The Fallacy of Soap Opera Ratings
By
Theresa Chaze
The cancellation of Guiding Light only proves that the network executives don’t understand their own industry. Soap operas are the only genre where they have a true monopoly. It is the single aspect of programming that independent and cable networks simply don’t have a way to compete. To say that the soaps were grandfathered into our lives is into an understatement. Before VCRs or DVR’s, viewers planned their schedules around their favorite TV shows, including soap operas. If they were forced to miss, they found a fellow addict to catch them up or waited for the rerun. Soaps by their very nature don‘t rerun episodes, therefore their viewers became the most loyal and reliable in the industry, making them also a consistent form of income for the networks with their own built in sponsorship consortium.
During television’s infancy, most people only had access to three stations. Competition for viewers was low in comparison to today. This was the era that soap operas were born and their fan base established. It was the guilty pleasure that no one would admit to watching, yet everyone knew what was happening. After school and on vacations, children watched and became addicted to the shows their mothers and grandmothers watched. It is a legacy of fond memories that the children of the 1960s forward have carried into their adulthood.
Although viewership has always been consistent and loyal, it has always been also under reported by Nielsen; people simply didn’t always want to admit they watched soap operas. Even through society and technology has changed, Nielsen’s way of reporting has not. They do not acknowledge delayed viewing, which has become the primary means of watching daytime programming for those who work from 9 to 5. Instead of upgrading their accounting systems to more accurate methods, they continue to use the diaries and equipment that fail to account for delayed or remote viewing.
This statistical over sight has made it appear that the genre is no longer an asset to the networks. This is far from the truth. One would only have to look at the popularity of the fan events, the merchandizing and the demand for interviews with the soap stars to see that their fan base is not only enthusiastic, but actively growing. Fans love their soaps and their stars enough to spend their time, their money and their energy on them. The peripheral businesses make hundreds of million dollars from around the world from fans that simply cannot get enough of their favorite soap.
Yet the sponsor and the networks look only at the ratings without putting them into proper context. The ratings of the past were higher due to the lack of competition for viewers. When the pie is only split three ways, all the pieces are bigger. Cable and satellite networks now give viewers more options for programming, thereby increasing the number of slices in the pie. So the question that must be both asked and answered is--are the lower rating for soap operas just a natural result of the increased division of viewers or is the genre run its course? As long as the comparisons aren’t made on a level playing field, the information they yield cannot be accurate. Before a network makes the irreversible decision to cancel a soap opera, thereby infuriating the fans base, it really needs to compare the ratings across the board for that day part. To do less could very easily cost them a valuable asset.
Showing posts with label ratings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ratings. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Where Viewers go Advertisers Follow
Where Viewers go Advertisers Follow
Technology has given the big networks, ABC, NBC, and CBS a wake up call. During the early years there was little competition or diversity in television programming. Coverage was limited. A lucky viewer had access to the three networks and the PBS station. Viewers at few options and little control over what they watched. Modern technology in the form of cable, satellite and the internet revolutionized the television industry, changing the balance of power; however, there are still network executive who don't realize that ship has sail. They were left waiting on the docks, wondering what happened to their revenues.
Broadcast transmitters had limited range and were easily obstructed. Signals were transmitted by line of sight or by occasionally being bounced of the atmosphere. Taller broadcast towers or home antennas received better reception from greater distances. Over air signals simply didn’t travel well. Back then the mail man might deliver in rain, sleet or hail, but most viewers saw mostly snow on their screens. Satellite technology and later cable not only expanded a station’s coverage area, but it also made the signal stronger and more reliable. Computers and the internet built an entertainment highway that carried traffic both ways. No longer were viewers limited to just receiving; instead, they have become active participates not long by voicing their opinions but in creating their news and entertainment as well
The three big networks originally had more control over the content and availability. With the limited access, the network executives knew they had a captive audience. The viewer had few options: ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS or nothing. With the pie sliced four ways, with PBS stations receiving the smallest piece, the networks were insured a steady income. Using their own measuring sticks, the network execs control which programs were aired and when. News, entertainment and sports programming was decided not on quality, but on sponsorship. The networks had a monopoly and they liked it that way.
Technology was a double-edged sword for the networks. It increased the quality of their signal, thereby increasing the number of their affiliates and revenues. However, it also further divided the advertising dollars and viewers. Revenues dropped. In the 80’s and 90’s, the response was to invest in quality programming. The networks that kept their production standards set high both on and off the screen kept their audience; those who chose to cut costs and lower their standards also saw their profit margin decline.
In the early years, the networks were known for their big-named stars and elaborate specials, while the independents stations were left with sloppy-second programming and cheaply produced shows. Now, the networks are the one who are unwilling to pay for quality entertainment. Cheesy reality and talk shows have become the main course on the networks’ buffet. Instead, well thought out entertainment with professional talent, they chose to air every day people humiliating themselves--The Gong Show goes prime time. The cheaper the better--quality be damned has become the motto. Yet, quality entertainment is available; it is now found on the independent stations and cable networks. Big named stars in well written series have move quickly to the networks that are willing to pay for them, taking with them both the viewers and the advertising dollars. The original networks still have control over their programming, but the viewers have control over the remote. With the hundreds of channels at their fingertip, they don’t have to settle for the updated version of the Gong Show. There is quality entertainment, news, and sports just a click away.
Technology has given the big networks, ABC, NBC, and CBS a wake up call. During the early years there was little competition or diversity in television programming. Coverage was limited. A lucky viewer had access to the three networks and the PBS station. Viewers at few options and little control over what they watched. Modern technology in the form of cable, satellite and the internet revolutionized the television industry, changing the balance of power; however, there are still network executive who don't realize that ship has sail. They were left waiting on the docks, wondering what happened to their revenues.
Broadcast transmitters had limited range and were easily obstructed. Signals were transmitted by line of sight or by occasionally being bounced of the atmosphere. Taller broadcast towers or home antennas received better reception from greater distances. Over air signals simply didn’t travel well. Back then the mail man might deliver in rain, sleet or hail, but most viewers saw mostly snow on their screens. Satellite technology and later cable not only expanded a station’s coverage area, but it also made the signal stronger and more reliable. Computers and the internet built an entertainment highway that carried traffic both ways. No longer were viewers limited to just receiving; instead, they have become active participates not long by voicing their opinions but in creating their news and entertainment as well
The three big networks originally had more control over the content and availability. With the limited access, the network executives knew they had a captive audience. The viewer had few options: ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS or nothing. With the pie sliced four ways, with PBS stations receiving the smallest piece, the networks were insured a steady income. Using their own measuring sticks, the network execs control which programs were aired and when. News, entertainment and sports programming was decided not on quality, but on sponsorship. The networks had a monopoly and they liked it that way.
Technology was a double-edged sword for the networks. It increased the quality of their signal, thereby increasing the number of their affiliates and revenues. However, it also further divided the advertising dollars and viewers. Revenues dropped. In the 80’s and 90’s, the response was to invest in quality programming. The networks that kept their production standards set high both on and off the screen kept their audience; those who chose to cut costs and lower their standards also saw their profit margin decline.
In the early years, the networks were known for their big-named stars and elaborate specials, while the independents stations were left with sloppy-second programming and cheaply produced shows. Now, the networks are the one who are unwilling to pay for quality entertainment. Cheesy reality and talk shows have become the main course on the networks’ buffet. Instead, well thought out entertainment with professional talent, they chose to air every day people humiliating themselves--The Gong Show goes prime time. The cheaper the better--quality be damned has become the motto. Yet, quality entertainment is available; it is now found on the independent stations and cable networks. Big named stars in well written series have move quickly to the networks that are willing to pay for them, taking with them both the viewers and the advertising dollars. The original networks still have control over their programming, but the viewers have control over the remote. With the hundreds of channels at their fingertip, they don’t have to settle for the updated version of the Gong Show. There is quality entertainment, news, and sports just a click away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)