I do believe for their show ratings data they do have ways for folks to specify who is actually watching the show at the time, either via the people meter or via the diary.

I do believe for their show ratings data they do have ways for folks to specify who is actually watching the show at the time, either via the people meter or via the diary.

Gareth, other than retinal implants, I’m with you. People do many things while the TV is turned on — eat dinner, talk to family, talk on the phone, text message, surf the Internet. There’s a lot of multi-tasking and it isn’t a zero sum game.

Gareth, other than retinal implants, I'm with you. People do many things while the TV is turned on — eat dinner, talk to family, talk on the phone, text message, surf the Internet. There's a lot of multi-tasking and it isn't a zero sum game.

thx….I think.

Sociologically speaking it’s amazing that changes in family size, women in the work force, non-TV entertainment outlets have had so little impact on viewership. I’d hypothesize that the “lower” demos are more representative of the daytime audience than they were when I was a kid watching TV…all the time.

I am also interested in the impact on local station economics and audience demographics as higher income viers drain away to network direct (eg HULU) distribution. This doesn’t seem like the audience that supports a high quality news product.

thx….I think.

Sociologically speaking it's amazing that changes in family size, women in the work force, non-TV entertainment outlets have had so little impact on viewership. I'd hypothesize that the “lower” demos are more representative of the daytime audience than they were when I was a kid watching TV…all the time.

I am also interested in the impact on local station economics and audience demographics as higher income viers drain away to network direct (eg HULU) distribution. This doesn't seem like the audience that supports a high quality news product.

The 1:10 minute figure IS for viewers not households. The household primetime figure was 1:52 (down from 1:54).

The 8:14 figure is for households — the average time spent by viewer for the day was 4:34 (down from 4:35).

Remember, “Viewer” here = anyone age 2 and over, and includes everyone watching Sponge Bob and Hannah Montanna, etc. age 2 and above.

The 1:10 minute figure IS for viewers not households. The household primetime figure was 1:52 (down from 1:54).

The 8:14 figure is for households — the average time spent by viewer for the day was 4:34 (down from 4:35).

Remember, “Viewer” here = anyone age 2 and over, and includes everyone watching Sponge Bob and Hannah Montanna, etc. age 2 and above.

I thought it was number of TV hours on per day per household not people * hours/avg. household.

I am still dubious about the intensity of TV watching in non-prime time. a) Only 1 out of 8 hours is consumed in prime time? and b)Is TV usage for both non-prime time and prime time 35%?

Just doesn’t seem logical with so many 2-income families, smaller family size, non-TV diversions.

1.1 hours of primetime implies about 30-35 cum Nielsen rating points for all TV. That seems on the high end but OK. Let’s spread the other 7 hours over 14 hours (sleep, etc). That means higher CUM TV ratings in non-primetime!

If you can answer this question I would appreciate it.

Still learning.

I thought it was number of TV hours on per day per household not people * hours/avg. household.

I am still dubious about the intensity of TV watching in non-prime time. a) Only 1 out of 8 hours is consumed in prime time? and b)Is TV usage for both non-prime time and prime time 35%?

Just doesn't seem logical with so many 2-income families, smaller family size, non-TV diversions.

1.1 hours of primetime implies about 30-35 cum Nielsen rating points for all TV. That seems on the high end but OK. Let's spread the other 7 hours over 14 hours (sleep, etc). That means higher CUM TV ratings in non-primetime!

If you can answer this question I would appreciate it.

Still learning.

If your point is that the numbers are somehow incorrect, remember that that 8:14 is not for a single person, it’s for an entire household. 4 different people watching at different times for 2 hours each would do it and use far less than 70% of their free time.

Our friends at Nielsen are far from infallible, but with a number this basic, I think they are likely very close to the mark.

If your point is that the numbers are somehow incorrect, remember that that 8:14 is not for a single person, it's for an entire household. 4 different people watching at different times for 2 hours each would do it and use far less than 70% of their free time.

Our friends at Nielsen are far from infallible, but with a number this basic, I think they are likely very close to the mark.

I think these numbers SUCK.

Primetime @ 1:10 implies about 35% of primetime.

8:14-1:10 = 7:04 of 21 non-primetime or again 35%.

So Americans watch TV as much in non-primetime as primetime.

If we assume 11 hours for sleep, bathroom, school, work, that leaves 10 hours for TV.

7/10 = 70% of all free time (on average) used watching TV?

Wrong.

I think these numbers SUCK.

Primetime @ 1:10 implies about 35% of primetime.

8:14-1:10 = 7:04 of 21 non-primetime or again 35%.

So Americans watch TV as much in non-primetime as primetime.

If we assume 11 hours for sleep, bathroom, school, work, that leaves 10 hours for TV.

7/10 = 70% of all free time (on average) used watching TV?

Wrong.