'

Wednesday Final Ratings:'The X Factor', 'Survivor' Adjusted Up; 'Animal Practice', 'Guys With Kids' & 'The Neighbors' Adjusted Down Plus Final Debate Numbers

Categories: '

Written By

October 4th, 2012

 

The X Factor and Survivor were each adjusted up a tenth while Animal Practice and Guys With Kids were adjusted down two tenths and The Neighbors was adjusted down one tenth  among adults 18-49 versus the preliminary Wednesday broadcast ratings. Nielsen is not releasing final numbers for the actual Presidential Debate because it aired without commercials, but final numbers for the post-debate coverage are below.

 

Final broadcast primetime ratings for Wednesday, October 3, 2012:

Time Net Show 18-49 rating/Sh Viewers (millions)
8:00 FOX The X Factor 3.5/11 9.71
CBS Survivor: Philippines 3.0/9 10.38
ABC The Middle 2.2/7 7.72
NBC Animal Practice 1.3/4 4.56
CW Oh Sit! 0.3/1 0.91
8:30 ABC The Neighbors 1.9/5 6.32
NBC Guys With Kids 1.6/5 4.76
9:00 NBC Presidential Debate (9-11PM) Live NA NA
CBS Presidential Debate (9-11PM) Live NA NA
ABC Presidential Debate (9-11PM) Live NA NA
FOX Presidential Debate (9-11PM) Live NA NA
CW Supernatural (Season Premiere) 0.8/2 1.85
10:30 NBC Post-Debate Coverage 2.8/7 8.72
ABC Post-Debate Coverage 2.5/6 8.86
CBS Post-Debate Coverage 2.1/5 7.01

-

 

Nielsen TV Ratings: ©2012 The Nielsen Company. All Rights Reserved.

 
  • Silvio

    @Geordiegirl1967
    and other crazy Supernatural fans (I like Supernatural, but not crazy)
    … how comes you don’t understand viewership yesterday was much bigger than on a “normal” day, thanks to a big political event? Most of those debate viewers didn’t came from ABC/CBS/FOX/NBC/cable networks, but from “thin air” just because of debate.

    And in such circumstances with many ratings points left on the table by big 4, and with no scripted competition at all, viewers still decided to:
    - watch marginal reality cable shows like Sons of Guns
    - watch various syndicated repeats, hell even “Full House” at Nick at Nite (who’d now someone still airs it) was among top watched shows and got more total viewers than SPN
    - watch debate after all when “there’s nothing on”

    Epic fail. As 0.8 doesn’t have same weight as it would have on “regular” Wednesdays. Wait and see ratings go downhill from here.

  • John_M

    @Bill

    I wrote more about ION after perusing their web site, and they don’t fit my definition of broadcast network obviously any more the channel 29 17 or 48 did when i was growing up in the suburbs of philadlephia :)

    (Channel 29 at one point was the fox affiliate in philadelphia, but i’m talking about before fox existed) :)

  • DKD

    “2) Cablevision is 3% of households. 0.8 rating = 1-of-125 people watched Supernatural in rest of U.S. 3% divided by 125 is 0.024 rating points lost. So only if SPN already was at 0.825 to 0.849 it would be 0.9 in finals. 75% chance it would still be at 0.8.”

    While seemingly correct, there are a few other things to account for:

    1. CW is not available to all US households. Its usual coverage of the country is 94%. That’s because it doesn’t have affiliates in smaller markets.

    2. It’s not just what percentage of the country to account for, but percentage of the network’s usual ratings. If CW normally gets higher ratings in NY than in other markets, then losing Cablevision would have a bigger impact on their ratings than by merely counting the percentage of the population. Some networks, like Fox, skew to the top markets. That’s why the initial Major Market ratings always are higher than the national ratings.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Bill Gorman

    WGN9 was a single station. ION is a “network” of broadcast stations. It used to be called PAX.

    Wikipedia provides all. 60 stations, 99 million households, all of the top 20 markets.

  • Silvio

    @Ultima
    Nonsense, PUT levels were much higher yesterday, and there’s little overlapping between audiences of shows I’m speaking about. So 17.8 as such speaks nothing. Your point makes almost as little sense as correlating FoxNews and Nickoledeon, next thing you’ll say those influence each other.
    As usual, you’re missing the point completely.

  • John_M

    WGN9 was a single station. ION is a “network” of broadcast stations. It used to be called PAX.

    I remember PAX – I never considered them a broadcast network myself – it’s the original programming thing I think – I get how ‘in theory’ they qualify as a broadcast network – but in my mind they don’t meet the qualifications

  • DKD

    “2. It’s not just what percentage of the country to account for, but percentage of the network’s usual ratings. If CW normally gets higher ratings in NY than in other markets, then losing Cablevision would have a bigger impact on their ratings than by merely counting the percentage of the population. Some networks, like Fox, skew to the top markets. That’s why the initial Major Market ratings always are higher than the national ratings.”

    Just to be clearer. I don’t know how many DMA’s Cablevision is a big part of. I used New York as an example because I know they are big in NY.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Bill Gorman

    “While seemingly correct, there are a few other things to account for:

    1. CW is not available to all US households. Its usual coverage of the country is 94%. That’s because it doesn’t have affiliates in smaller markets.

    2. It’s not just what percentage of the country to account for, but percentage of the network’s usual ratings. If CW normally gets higher ratings in NY than in other markets, then losing Cablevision would have a bigger impact on their ratings than by merely counting the percentage of the population. Some networks, like Fox, skew to the top markets. That’s why the initial Major Market ratings always are higher than the national ratings.”

    Nitpicky, and likely inaccurately so.

    Vampire Diaries ratings in NYC are below the national average for Vampire Diaries in other cities.

    While that’s just a single data point, it’s one more data point than you have.

    If anything, the Cablevision effect may be a bit less than 3%.

    And its irrelevant to the future of individual CW shows, they all suffer from the same handicap.

    Or are you just a “Supernatural should be doing better dammit!!!!” fan, and are looking for excuses why it is?

  • Trey

    [i]The comparison to television shows doesn’t doesn’t hold water as the medium and intents are different.[/i]

    What do you mean by this? What matters is they ask us to invest in the show’s story and that’s what we do. We expect it to be a complete story and if it’s not, then they failed us. It doesn’t matter if it’s a book, movie or TV show, they are telling a story and I’m not about to watch something that I know isn’t going to be completed. The intents are in now way different, an incomplete TV show is an incomplete book/movie.

  • Trey

    Let’s try that again

    The comparison to television shows doesn’t doesn’t hold water as the medium and intents are different.

    What do you mean by this? What matters is they ask us to invest in the show’s story and that’s what we do. We expect it to be a complete story and if it’s not, then they failed us. It doesn’t matter if it’s a book, movie or TV show, they are telling a story and I’m not about to watch something that I know isn’t going to be completed. The intents are in now way different, an incomplete TV show is an incomplete book/movie.

  • Nick

    What the bleep happened to The Middle?????
    I blame The Neighbors.

  • http://tvbythenumbers.com Bill Gorman

    “I remember PAX – I never considered them a broadcast network myself – it’s the original programming thing I think – I get how ‘in theory’ they qualify as a broadcast network – but in my mind they don’t meet the qualifications”

    I see, you set your own definitions of what is or isn’t. Carry on.

    Edit: Even under your incorrect definition they are now a broadcast network, since they do that WWE show.

  • Db

    I wouldn’t be jumping on ABC yet – last night was atypical as far as scheduling goes. Wait and see what happens next week with MF back in the mix. One data point does not make a trend.

  • John_M

    @Trey

    Sorry – you want to use , not [ and ] – otherwise your set up was perfect.

    Movies and books have beginnings middles and ends – movies don’t last more than 2-3 hours unless they really want to bore you – books have an end – tv shows aren’t always created with an end – and most tv shows don’t get to finish telling all the stories they want to tell.

    TV shows are created to be cancelled – at some point they all will end – most end without a chance to wrap up whatever they planned to wrap up.

    And again – whens the last time someone cancelled a book or movie on you?

    It’s ridiculous to limit yourself based on what you think might mor might not survive

    I knew firefly was going to be canceled the first time I saw that fox’s big promotional idea was ‘space hooker and girl in a box’ – that didn’t stop me from watching and svaoring every episode.

    Maybe your experience is different – i’m used to shows i enjoy being cancelled before they’re done

  • Rooks

    @Trey

    You pretty much answered your own question…it’s just a matter of whether or not you know ahead of time which kind of show it’s going to be. There are some shows I regret watching because they ended unresolved…Alcatraz, Sarah Connor Chronicles, Carnivale. But there are others that work as a self contained story in one season that I’m very glad to have watched…Awake, Wonderfalls, Dead Like Me (The first season, anyhow)

    For some people the satisfying viewing experience outweighs the negatives…and sometimes you evens strike gold in those canceled shows. Long before the movie was even a possibility, I had watched the entire run of Firefly at least half a dozen times, enjoying each and every episode thoroughly. That’s a lot more than I can say for many shows that got to have their full runs and final episodes.

  • Silvio

    @thesnowleopard

    This was just premiere, and it happened in super-favorable counterprogramming slot. Nevertheless, you’re jumping to conclusion that Supernatural season average is going to be 0.8. Yes, that would be good, very good. But logical conclusion would be: in less good circumstances show’s ratings for next episodes are bound to go down. With consequence of season average being much down despite show getting better timeslot this season. Ultimately show going to Friday, not cancelled cause CW somehow always picks enough shows with even worse ratings.

  • Ultima

    @John M
    ION is a broadcast network with how much national penetration?

    According to wikipedia, ION reaches 70.8 million households (62%).

  • luisl

    @Silvio

    Super-favorable counterprogamming? LOL. The people who watched yesterday it’s the same people that’s been always watching. No one is going to jump into S8 of a serialized show.

    Even if Supernatural keeps at 0.7 that’s a lot better than almost everything CW has. And the next week it’s going to have Arrow as a lead-in.

  • Rooks

    Honestly, the SPN rating barely matter by themselves. They’re almost sure to be better than most of the rest of the CW, and the show will absolutely get it’s full 22 episode order.

    As for another season, IMO it will rest more on whether or not the cast wants to continue (mostly Jensen Ackles, since the show could run with Dean solo and get the same ratings, IMO not so with Sam) It’s pretty obvious that they’re setting up a series ending plot line anyhow, and are getting ready to end it themselves this season or the next whether or not the CW pulls the plug.

  • thesnowleopard

    @Silvio

    It’s sweet that you think SPN fans have mental health issues when clearly, you are posting from Silvio’s World, where the sanity of someone saying about a good rating, “Hey, that rating’s good,” is determined by a complex alchemy of the rating, the competition on other networks, the age of the show, how much the person likes the show, and how much you hate it.

    No wonder you get so confused.

© 2014 Tribune Digital Ventures