I have no personal axes to grind. Really. My extensive background in media spans newspapers, broadcast television, Cable television, and now the Internet. I am proud to have commercially pioneered two of the four. I have a fondness for each, but it is nearly impossible to avoid comparisons. As the Internet is proving to be, by far, the most measurable, trackable medium in the history of media, I have to wonder how it is that the expectation of knowing every possible intricate detail of data leads to constant questions about the efficacy of the medium while practically ignoring what should be glaring shortcomings of other media.
Don't misunderstand. All media has its place and purpose. I would never, for example, encourage any business to take television out of its media mix. There is a real good reason companies like The Ladders and Autotrader are running large television schedules. The emotional connection television provides is better done through television than the current Web experience. That may one day change.
My real problem is the double standard. Why is it that the most measurable medium is held to a much higher standard than all other media? Why do all other media get a pass on their really questionable method of projecting their audience--since tracking the audience is rarely an option? Anyone who has a first-year marketing education can see the obvious flaws. If I were contracted to conduct an unbiased, mathematically and statistically valid research project on television viewing habits--and if I were to present my methodology to my client that said I would use a sample that is far less than representative, that I would be informing those I am seeking to measure so they would know exactly when they should be expecting to be measured, and finally, that I would allow those surveyed to complete their own surveys according to their recollection, I would be considered nuts. I wouldn't have a good idea of the viewing habits of the mass audience, and the measurement period would be anything but representative of the actual programming over the long run. But that's what happens four times a year in what is an obviously incestuous relationship between Nielsen and the broadcast industry.
How is it that Nielsen can still provide such an imperfect system of measurement and get away with it? Why is there a sweeps week anyway? All that does is let the television stations know when they can be on top of their games and when they can let down their guard and provide sub-standard programming. So that's what they do. And the crazy thing is--millions upon millions of dollars worth of decisions are being made on the basis of research that anyone with any knowledge of marketing research would say is invalid.
I like to imagine a television experience when the stations have no idea when they'll be measured. How good would television stations be if they had to go to the station every day with the notion that this could be the day when they are going to measure audience and viewership? How good would the networks be? How good would local news be? I truly believe that the viewership of television would skyrocket if broadcasters-both network and local, had to live their lives as though every week were sweeps week. In many ways, the current method for measuring broadcast viewership is the broadcasters' worst enemy. Consumers are aware too. We all tune in during sweeps week and know that the weeks following will hardly be worth watching. In effect, we're all in on the same stupid game. But the networks and local stations need not care, really. All advertising rates are set on the basis of that one, lone week of programming. There's little need to have an audience until the next sweeps week. How crazy is that?
Instead, because the web is the most measurable medium, it is measured and scrutinized. It is second guessed and questioned. Television and newspapers, the least measurable media which uses an invalid measurement is considered gospel. There's not an advertiser in the world who can say with absolute (I'd settle for a rough approximate) certainty the audience was actually delivered to the market they were trying to reach.
Heaven help them when television over TCP/IP allows for the same kind of delivery measurement. They will either get better quickly or they may see rates for their advertising services continue to erode. My bet is on increasing the level of quality. One thing is for certain: the emporer will be asking for a towel.
Neil - the truth hurts but you aren't afraid to say it anyway. I love it. Keep posting the truth!
Posted by: Jay Friedman | March 17, 2009 at 06:25 PM