We're occasionally asked why we don't have ratings for PBS shows (except for special events like a Presidential addresses). The reason was that PBS shows were not rated by Nielsen (or to put it otherwise, PBS had not paid for them to be rated by Nielsen).
Now, to provide more information to the sponsors of its shows it has signed up with Nielsen for its shows to be rated and appear in the weekly ratings reports. So while we will not see them in our Overnight ratings reports, presumably their ratings will be in the weekly TV ratings reports we receive on Tuesdays.
The public broadcaster will announce on Monday that, for the first time, it has subscribed to full-time television ratings from the Nielsen Company. The subscription provides PBS sponsors with detailed information about the audiences for “Antiques Roadshow,” “Frontline,” “Sesame Street” and dozens of other programs
[...]
The deal with Nielsen does not entirely level the playing field between PBS and commercial networks. PBS isn’t signing up for overnight ratings; it won’t be comparing “Masterpiece Theatre” with “The Mentalist” anytime soon. Instead, it is ordering weekly ratings, because some of the programs it provides to member stations are shown at different times.
via NYTimes.com.
Wow…I’ve seen a lot of PBS over the years. I think they’re gonna be disappointed to know how few people line up for Masterpiece Theatre.
Case in point: Anyone *ever* seen a torrent for Masterpiece Theatre?
Might this not be a matter of lifting an expense from the backs of the affiliates?
So they’re using my pledge money to sign up for ratings? Is this a good idea? They already run in the red most of the time. Besides, I thought a lot of the shows were presented,at lease in part, due to grants from whatever foundation or company and done for the tax write off? Maybe it’s not such a great plan to show the corps, foundations, supporters and the government how few people are watching Nova and This Old House.
“Case in point: Anyone *ever* seen a torrent for Masterpiece Theatre?”
No, but for good reason: Masterpiece Theatre is entirely comprised of rebroadcasts of British programming. Have I downloaded programming that later turned up on PBS? Absolutely yes.
This evening, Masterpiece Classic rebroadcast “Cranford”… and I’ll bet you a C-note that torrents of that *are* available.
I have seen torrents for Are You Being Served? and Sesame Street though. Both shows PBS shows and were pretty much all I watched other than Mr. Rogers on the station.
Boris, to my knowledge no PBS shows were being rated (or paid to be rated, if you will), so I don’t think it was an expense at all previously.
Cimmer, I interned this summer with an ad sales team at a (non-PBS) TV station. One of the salespeople told me how she used to work for the PBS in town. She said that they call it “sponsorships” or “grants” but it really works exactly the same as selling ads for a for-profit station. Only difference was they had less data to offer the clients.
There have definitely been PBS shows rated outside of presidential debates. Ken Burns stuff for example. My guess is that at least the bigger PBS affiliates are paying, but it is just a guess.
I suppose it is also possible that PBS could’ve ordered up special ratings runs for the Burns’ stuff, but Nielsen doesn’t seem very big on a la carte reporting.
I think the PBS member stations rely on member surveys to decide what shows to keep airing as the shows that get people to actually donate money are all they care about.
PBS getting ratings data for their sponsors makes sponsorship kind of dangerously close to advertising though. What makes PBS any different than say a season premiere of 24 presented commercial free by Ford?
Perhaps PBS is signing up for Nielsen information at the urging of these “sponsors”? Perhaps they want to know what their money is buying? It is already generally accepted that PBS does not attract a large audience (or even a small cable channel audience), but the “sponsors” want the information and this is PBS’s way of giving it to them.
I think this is a very good thing. This is the first step for PBS to finally address the programs that are way outdated and very few have interest in watching. Its unfortunate that they need ratings to tell them that their shows minus a few (NOVA Sciene Now, etc) aren’t great.
The shame is that NPR has already modernized its programs and has a pretty big audience, and its publicly financed with grants/underwriters.
@Cimmer: They aren’t using your pledge money for the ratings. Your pledge money goes to employ people at your local stations, pay the rent and upkeep costs, and purchase rights to air the programs that people watch. Also, I’m almost 99% positive that the money you pledge will not be enough to sign up for ratings.
I see this as essentially a way for PBS to promote their shows.
Without the numbers out there, places like this website and other media don’t really talk much about PBS shows.
Bill Gorman says:
“Boris, to my knowledge no PBS shows were being rated (or paid to be rated, if you will), so I don’t think it was an expense at all previously.”
I could swear that I read a news story in the past week about a PBS affiliate dropping their Neilsen subscription as a cost-cutting measure, with some caveat that more value was really to be had on the comment line, etc.
The vector must have been Current.org; I’ll try to dig it up.
And, yes, that’s not a typo, I put it there.
Oh I guess the CW has competition for the bottom of the barrel then! haha
Aha: http://www.current.org/audience/aud0913notbelievable.shtml
Why TRAC is the middleman I find perplexing, but hence the original question.
Boris, good information, that was news to me.
I wonder though, if that’s talking about local ratings only, and this story is about national ratings only. That would make sense in a “local stations were getting Nielsen ratings” in the past situation, but nationally Nielsen shows were not rated.
PBS would probably be 4th place above the CW and behind NBC once they sign up.
AtCat, I doubt it. My guess is that PBS’ national ratings are tiny.
That’s what you think. But I’d willing to see such a surprise to see that the CW has even less viewers than a boring public TV station.