'

Samantha Who? Tops New Shows, Nov 19-25

Categories: '

Written By

November 28th, 2007

Samantha Who? Wins Holiday Week

Christina Applegate ABC's Samantha Who? with a Live+SD viewership of 14.38 million and adult 18-49 viewership of 6.01 million for the week of November 19-25 lead all new shows and increased its viewership by 5% over the previous week. Read on for the rest of the data.

Since the holiday week was so mixed up, with many new shows not airing, many in different time slots, and some in reruns, I'm going to refrain from any analysis and just let the data speak for itself.

111907topnewshows2.gif

New this week! Bubble width = adults 18-49 viewership

Never let it be said that TVbytheNumbers.com doesn't listen. After reader suggestions, we will now include the 18-49 demo viewer data in our table and charts for the new shows. For example, note the differences between Chuck and Cane. Their total viewership is similar, but Chuck has a much larger 18-49 demo viewership. You can see that clearly in our chart.

Our chart shows not only the viewership of the top 20 new shows, but also their week to week ratings momentum: shows gaining viewers [momentum > 1] and shows losing viewers [momentum < 1] over their last non-rerun airing. The bubble width is proportional to the 18-49 viewership.

 

Top 20 New Shows, Week of November 19-25

RANK PROGRAMS Network # OF PERSONS (LIVE+SD) (million) Week over Week Momentum Prior Week # OF PERSONS (LIVE+SD) (million) # of PERSONS 18-49 Live+SD (million)
1 Samantha Who? ABC 14.38 1.05 13.70 6.01
2 Private Practice ABC 8.54 0.74 11.48 3.48
3 Chuck NBC 7.79 1.03 7.56 4.03
4 Women's Murder Club ABC 7.58 0.85 8.91 2.03
5 Cane CBS 7.54 1.03 7.29 2.59
6 The Big Bang Theory CBS 7.51 0.81 9.32 3.84
7 Pushing Daisies ABC 7.48 0.85 8.83 2.94
8 Moonlight CBS 7.32 0.90 8.16 2.89
9 Kid Nation CBS 6.95 0.94 7.42 2.51
10 Dirty Sexy Money ABC 6.38 0.81 7.90 2.63
11 Phenomenon NBC 6.16 1.01 6.10 2.43
12 October Road ABC 6.00 1.00 debut 2.76
13 Journeyman NBC 5.62 0.92 6.09 2.91
14 Kitchen Nightmares FOX 5.35 0.77 6.95 2.98
15 Back to You FOX 5.27 0.72 7.31 1.94
16 K-ville FOX 4.69 0.99 4.72 1.76
17 Next Great American Band FOX 2.58 1.07 2.41 1.44
18 Reaper CW 1.77 0.72 2.46 1.02
19 Aliens in America CW 1.37 0.69 1.99 0.66
20 Gossip Girl CW 1.21 0.41 2.95 0.70

11/28 UPDATE: Next Great American Band was inadvertently omitted from the initial data in this post. It has been corrected.

These shows did not make the Top 20 :

Life is Wild CW 1.09m
CW Now CW 0.75m
Carpoolers ABC not aired
Cavemen ABC not aired
Big Shots ABC not aired
Life NBC not aired
Bionic Woman NBC not aired

Nielsen TV Ratings Data: ©2007 Nielsen Media Research, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 
  • Rena Moretti

    Please do not fall into the 18-49 demo trap. Demographic info is used by the networks so they can spin low-rated shows into perceived hits.

    It's also very ageist: just imagine if the all-important demo was “White males”.

  • Rena Moretti

    The “hit” status of Samantha Who? is vastly exaggerated. It loses a huge chunk of its lead-in and likely would be very low-rated without it.

    The networks are doubtlessly rationalizing their horrible Fall as caused by the internet or whatever other element that's out of their control.

    The reality is that they put on really bad shows.

    Bionic Woman is probably the worst of the bunch, but Chuck, Journeyman, Moonlight, Viva Laughlin, K-Ville and Gossip Girl are not far behind.

    One of the only shows that improves steadily on its (admittedly bad) lead-in is Women's Murder Club, and as much as I like it, it's not exactly smoking the ratings (at least yet – maybe ABC will deign promote it at some point when they realize Pushing Daisies is not a hit).

  • Rena Moretti

    The “hit” status of Samantha Who? is vastly exaggerated. It loses a huge chunk of its lead-in and likely would be very low-rated without it.

    The networks are doubtlessly rationalizing their horrible Fall as caused by the internet or whatever other element that's out of their control.

    The reality is that they put on really bad shows.

    Bionic Woman is probably the worst of the bunch, but Chuck, Journeyman, Moonlight, Viva Laughlin, K-Ville and Gossip Girl are not far behind.

    One of the only shows that improves steadily on its (admittedly bad) lead-in is Women's Murder Club, and as much as I like it, it's not exactly smoking the ratings (at least yet – maybe ABC will deign promote it at some point when they realize Pushing Daisies is not a hit).

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    Rena, all the information we receive leads us to believe that whether we like it or not (and neither Bill or I will BE in the demo all that much longer) advertising sales are in fact ageist. I don't think it's a trap, I think it's the way it is.

    I buy into “numbers”. And so, among all new shows Samantha Who has consistently performed “the best” — though it will be interesting to see how it does in its new time slot.

    I persist in my belief that focusing on lead-in retention is worthless because of ubiquitous remote control. So many shows lose 50% (or more) or build on their lead-in by 50% or more that it just really doesn't seem to be a factor anymore.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    Rena, all the information we receive leads us to believe that whether we like it or not (and neither Bill or I will BE in the demo all that much longer) advertising sales are in fact ageist. I don't think it's a trap, I think it's the way it is.

    I buy into “numbers”. And so, among all new shows Samantha Who has consistently performed “the best” — though it will be interesting to see how it does in its new time slot.

    I persist in my belief that focusing on lead-in retention is worthless because of ubiquitous remote control. So many shows lose 50% (or more) or build on their lead-in by 50% or more that it just really doesn't seem to be a factor anymore.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Bill Gorman

    Let me add that we are unlikely to present *only* age demo numbers in any general analysis like this. (Of course, you can find that information in our Top Broadcast by Age posts)

    We added 18-49 demo numbers because some find it useful, but we will keep the average viewer numbers as well.

    If we reasonably have the space/time we will always fall on the side of more information presented vs. less.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Bill Gorman

    Let me add that we are unlikely to present *only* age demo numbers in any general analysis like this. (Of course, you can find that information in our Top Broadcast by Age posts)

    We added 18-49 demo numbers because some find it useful, but we will keep the average viewer numbers as well.

    If we reasonably have the space/time we will always fall on the side of more information presented vs. less.

  • Rena Moretti

    Please do not fall into the 18-49 demo trap. Demographic info is used by the networks so they can spin low-rated shows into perceived hits.

    It’s also very ageist: just imagine if the all-important demo was “White males”.

  • Rena Moretti

    The “hit” status of Samantha Who? is vastly exaggerated. It loses a huge chunk of its lead-in and likely would be very low-rated without it.

    The networks are doubtlessly rationalizing their horrible Fall as caused by the internet or whatever other element that’s out of their control.

    The reality is that they put on really bad shows.

    Bionic Woman is probably the worst of the bunch, but Chuck, Journeyman, Moonlight, Viva Laughlin, K-Ville and Gossip Girl are not far behind.

    One of the only shows that improves steadily on its (admittedly bad) lead-in is Women’s Murder Club, and as much as I like it, it’s not exactly smoking the ratings (at least yet – maybe ABC will deign promote it at some point when they realize Pushing Daisies is not a hit).

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    Rena, all the information we receive leads us to believe that whether we like it or not (and neither Bill or I will BE in the demo all that much longer) advertising sales are in fact ageist. I don’t think it’s a trap, I think it’s the way it is.

    I buy into “numbers”. And so, among all new shows Samantha Who has consistently performed “the best” — though it will be interesting to see how it does in its new time slot.

    I persist in my belief that focusing on lead-in retention is worthless because of ubiquitous remote control. So many shows lose 50% (or more) or build on their lead-in by 50% or more that it just really doesn’t seem to be a factor anymore.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Bill Gorman

    Let me add that we are unlikely to present *only* age demo numbers in any general analysis like this. (Of course, you can find that information in our Top Broadcast by Age posts)

    We added 18-49 demo numbers because some find it useful, but we will keep the average viewer numbers as well.

    If we reasonably have the space/time we will always fall on the side of more information presented vs. less.

  • Rena Moretti

    Thank you Bill and Robert for your kind and interesting responses.

    I disagree with Robert as it comes to lead-ins. People still tend to stay with the same channel if it presents a series of programs they like. They'll stay tuned for shows they wouldn't look to see if they weren't next to a favorite.

    I do agree that it's a lessening factor, but it still applies. Look to the Fox Sunday ratings results and you can see how The Simpsons leading into Family Guy helps Family Guy and how a decent lead-in helps The Simpsons. (not that I understand it because you'd have to pay me to watch another Family Guy!)

    But it's pretty clear to me when and next to what you program a show still matter, albeit less than before.

    Maybe it's that “next on ___” ad that makes people carry over.

  • Rena Moretti

    Thank you Bill and Robert for your kind and interesting responses.

    I disagree with Robert as it comes to lead-ins. People still tend to stay with the same channel if it presents a series of programs they like. They'll stay tuned for shows they wouldn't look to see if they weren't next to a favorite.

    I do agree that it's a lessening factor, but it still applies. Look to the Fox Sunday ratings results and you can see how The Simpsons leading into Family Guy helps Family Guy and how a decent lead-in helps The Simpsons. (not that I understand it because you'd have to pay me to watch another Family Guy!)

    But it's pretty clear to me when and next to what you program a show still matter, albeit less than before.

    Maybe it's that “next on ___” ad that makes people carry over.

  • Rena Moretti

    On ageism:

    There clearly is a lot of ageism on television. No doubt there also is some on Madison Avenue. After all, movie studios are huge advertisers!! And movie studios think anyone over 25 is not their target market!!

    But it doesn't mean that the press has to abide by this prejudice, especially that it's generally used by the networks as a way to spin bad results. And lord knows there is too much spin around.

  • Rena Moretti

    On ageism:

    There clearly is a lot of ageism on television. No doubt there also is some on Madison Avenue. After all, movie studios are huge advertisers!! And movie studios think anyone over 25 is not their target market!!

    But it doesn't mean that the press has to abide by this prejudice, especially that it's generally used by the networks as a way to spin bad results. And lord knows there is too much spin around.

  • Rena Moretti

    Thank you Bill and Robert for your kind and interesting responses.

    I disagree with Robert as it comes to lead-ins. People still tend to stay with the same channel if it presents a series of programs they like. They’ll stay tuned for shows they wouldn’t look to see if they weren’t next to a favorite.

    I do agree that it’s a lessening factor, but it still applies. Look to the Fox Sunday ratings results and you can see how The Simpsons leading into Family Guy helps Family Guy and how a decent lead-in helps The Simpsons. (not that I understand it because you’d have to pay me to watch another Family Guy!)

    But it’s pretty clear to me when and next to what you program a show still matter, albeit less than before.

    Maybe it’s that “next on ___” ad that makes people carry over.

  • Rena Moretti

    On ageism:

    There clearly is a lot of ageism on television. No doubt there also is some on Madison Avenue. After all, movie studios are huge advertisers!! And movie studios think anyone over 25 is not their target market!!

    But it doesn’t mean that the press has to abide by this prejudice, especially that it’s generally used by the networks as a way to spin bad results. And lord knows there is too much spin around.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    The question for me is this: does demo performance matter when it comes to advertising sales? My conclusion is that it does and therefore it is not a number that is exclusively PR spin, it's something that actually matters.

    Advertisers are much more interested in advertising to someone who is 35 than 60. There are a lot of people aged 55 and over still watching television, but they don't matter as much to advertisers.

    As for lead-in, we just disagree. My view is lead-in already doesn't matter nearly as much as it used to. In the coming years as more people utilize DVRs, on-demand, etc., it will matter even less.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    The question for me is this: does demo performance matter when it comes to advertising sales? My conclusion is that it does and therefore it is not a number that is exclusively PR spin, it's something that actually matters.

    Advertisers are much more interested in advertising to someone who is 35 than 60. There are a lot of people aged 55 and over still watching television, but they don't matter as much to advertisers.

    As for lead-in, we just disagree. My view is lead-in already doesn't matter nearly as much as it used to. In the coming years as more people utilize DVRs, on-demand, etc., it will matter even less.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    The question for me is this: does demo performance matter when it comes to advertising sales? My conclusion is that it does and therefore it is not a number that is exclusively PR spin, it’s something that actually matters.

    Advertisers are much more interested in advertising to someone who is 35 than 60. There are a lot of people aged 55 and over still watching television, but they don’t matter as much to advertisers.

    As for lead-in, we just disagree. My view is lead-in already doesn’t matter nearly as much as it used to. In the coming years as more people utilize DVRs, on-demand, etc., it will matter even less.

© 2014 Tribune Digital Ventures