New Show Season-to-Date Performance

Categories: Nielsen Broadcast TV Show Ratings Adults 18-49

Written By

December 6th, 2007

New show season-to-date 18-49 rankings through 12/02/07:

RANK PROGRAMS ORIG # OF PERSONS 18-49 (MOST CURRENT) (000) HH rating (MOST CURRENT) HH SHARE (MOST CURRENT) HH RATING RANK (MOST CURRENT)
1 Private Practice ABC 6,225 8.6 13 19
2 SAMANTHA WHO? ABC 6,054 9.5 14 12
3 BIONIC WOMAN NBC 5,185 6.1 9 41
4 PUSHING DAISIES ABC 4,796 6.7 11 35
5 Big Bang Theory, THE CBS 4,756 5.6 8 47
6 BIG SHOTS ABC 4,623 5.8 10 45
7 CHUCK NBC 4,496 5.1 8 57
8 DIRTY SEXY MONEY ABC 4,335 6.2 10 39
9 LIFE NBC 3,924 5.2 9 55
10 Kitchen Nightmares FOX 3,879 4.0 6 82
11 JOURNEYMAN NBC 3,847 4.6 7 67
12 CARPOOLERS ABC 3,524 4.7 7 64
13 NOTES FROM THE UNDERBELLY ABC 3,506 5.1 8 57
14 BACK TO YOU FOX 3,331 4.6 8 67
15 MOONLIGHT CBS 3,321 5.4 9 52
16 CAVEMEN ABC 3,247 4.4 7 72
17 KID NATION CBS 3,188 4.7 8 64
18 CANE CBS 3,116 6.0 10 42
19 WOMENS MURDER CLUB ABC 3,089 7.0 12 31
20 PHENOMENON NBC 3,078 4.1 7 78

 

All results above are season-to-date. "Most Current" is a weighted average of all the LIVE+7 data for the weeks it is available and LIVE+SD for the weeks where it isn't (usually the last 2-3 weeks).

Episodes the networks designate as "special" do not roll-up into the season-to-date numbers.  For example, CBS and ABC designated the Thanksgiving airings of new episodes of CSI and Grey's Anatomy as "special".  While these episodes pulled record low numbers, they do not count in the numbers above.  I don't make these rules up, I just report them.

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

 
  • Rena Moretti

    Two problems with that list:

    1. The overall number of viewers is glaringly absent.

    2. The ranking should be in overall number of viewers, not the ageist and spin-prone 18-49 demographic.

    You're making it look like Women's Murder Club is a complete bomb when it's the #3 most watched new show (granted it's a back-handed compliment this year).

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    Rena we post viewer information in plenty of places. Nielsen unfortunately doesn't provide us with season-to-date total viewer information, which is why it is glaringly absent.

    Nielsen does however provide the overall HH rating where you can see that WMC is the #31 show on a season-to-date basis.

    Your opinion may be that it shouldn't matter, but whether you like it or not, it matters. Pushing Daisies will generate more advertising revenue than WMC (based on the current #s) even though it has fewer total viewers. That's not PR spin, it's just how it is.

  • Rena Moretti

    I'm sorry to be disagreeable, but how exactly does everyone “know” that 18-49 brings in so much more revenue?

    Please don't take this personally as you are not the only person making that assumption and you are quite kind to have responded and I very much appreciate it.

    The networks rarely publish numbers and when they do (I recall seeing a list on Broadcast and Cable) they are a complete work of fiction.

    I have no doubt that there is ageism on Madison Avenue (after all one of their main customer is the movie studios) but to what extent is extremely debatable given that there is absolutely no reliable data available.

    In other words, we have to take the word of people doing the spin that their spin is accurate.

    But for some reason, everyone just buys into it without ever checking on the source of information.

    Another “fact” is that richer audiences command more advertising dollars for the networks. It may be true, or it may not, but somehow we never hear about the “all-important” $200,000 and above demographic.

    Why? Because it's politically incorrect. But somehow it's politically correct to dump on older people and do PR spin at their expense.

    I'm quite appalled that Nielsen is giving the data in that way by the way. I'm glad to see you are not the ones making that choice.

  • Rena Moretti

    And now just to show I can say nice things:

    I didn't know that the networks excluded “special” shows from season averages.

    Amazing! It means season averages are almost meaningless.

    Another meaningful bit of data that never sees the light of day is how shows re-run. Shows cost so much, the networks can't make money unless they re-run them, but a lot of shows don't re-run all too well. It means, there's a high premium of shows that re-run well (like NCIS or CSI). Those shows are of course ones that are well-loved and high quality since you can watch them several times and enjoy them.

    Yet, I never read anything about that (I guess because really successful shows don't do so much spin and PR).

    But again, thanks for the info. It was very much appreciated.

  • Rena Moretti

    Two problems with that list:

    1. The overall number of viewers is glaringly absent.

    2. The ranking should be in overall number of viewers, not the ageist and spin-prone 18-49 demographic.

    You’re making it look like Women’s Murder Club is a complete bomb when it’s the #3 most watched new show (granted it’s a back-handed compliment this year).

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Robert Seidman

    Rena we post viewer information in plenty of places. Nielsen unfortunately doesn’t provide us with season-to-date total viewer information, which is why it is glaringly absent.

    Nielsen does however provide the overall HH rating where you can see that WMC is the #31 show on a season-to-date basis.

    Your opinion may be that it shouldn’t matter, but whether you like it or not, it matters. Pushing Daisies will generate more advertising revenue than WMC (based on the current #s) even though it has fewer total viewers. That’s not PR spin, it’s just how it is.

  • Rena Moretti

    I’m sorry to be disagreeable, but how exactly does everyone “know” that 18-49 brings in so much more revenue?

    Please don’t take this personally as you are not the only person making that assumption and you are quite kind to have responded and I very much appreciate it.

    The networks rarely publish numbers and when they do (I recall seeing a list on Broadcast and Cable) they are a complete work of fiction.

    I have no doubt that there is ageism on Madison Avenue (after all one of their main customer is the movie studios) but to what extent is extremely debatable given that there is absolutely no reliable data available.

    In other words, we have to take the word of people doing the spin that their spin is accurate.

    But for some reason, everyone just buys into it without ever checking on the source of information.

    Another “fact” is that richer audiences command more advertising dollars for the networks. It may be true, or it may not, but somehow we never hear about the “all-important” $200,000 and above demographic.

    Why? Because it’s politically incorrect. But somehow it’s politically correct to dump on older people and do PR spin at their expense.

    I’m quite appalled that Nielsen is giving the data in that way by the way. I’m glad to see you are not the ones making that choice.

  • Rena Moretti

    And now just to show I can say nice things:

    I didn’t know that the networks excluded “special” shows from season averages.

    Amazing! It means season averages are almost meaningless.

    Another meaningful bit of data that never sees the light of day is how shows re-run. Shows cost so much, the networks can’t make money unless they re-run them, but a lot of shows don’t re-run all too well. It means, there’s a high premium of shows that re-run well (like NCIS or CSI). Those shows are of course ones that are well-loved and high quality since you can watch them several times and enjoy them.

    Yet, I never read anything about that (I guess because really successful shows don’t do so much spin and PR).

    But again, thanks for the info. It was very much appreciated.

© 2014 Tribune Digital Ventures