According to this article, 25,000 people are being polled for the ratings. That’s 1/4 of 1% of the 100,000,000 TV Households.
That’s not an accurate sampling. It sounds like a joke. (via NewTeeVee)
So is the MPAA rating system. How many board members does it have now? 10? 12?
Listen, TV/Movie market research has always been smoke and mirrors; there’s really no such thing as an “accurate sampling”. It has no basis in fact either for that 1% or for the extrapolation of that data into the greater audience. In fact, market research has shown that companies who don’t use market research are more successful.
Nielsen’s reasoning for not pulling data from cable boxes boils down to inaccuracy from losing the demographics, but that’s precisely what we should hope for: that one day we can all be lumped into the demographic of ¨people¨ (or more likely ¨widgets¨ or ¨units¨), instead of these made up racist, agist, and sexist categories ad agencies are so salacious for.
It has always bothered and confused me that so much cultural zeitgeist and marketing money is balanced on top of imprecise and narrow-minded systems.
(via ericmortensen)
The math involved here is really interesting and non-intuitive, as evidenced in the dichotomy of the comments/notes. The...
Amazing. We could even take that metaphor as far as the book The Jungle!
These comments are wildly off base. With a population of 100,000,000, you can poll fewer than 2,000 people to get...
Pet peeve. Puce ribbon and all that. The accuracy of a sampling is based on population distribution and the size of the...
Yeah I didn’t see any structural issues with the sampling (although I’m totally willing to believe there might be!) and...
A truly random sample of 1000 is enough to get an accurate reading.
Too bad their isn’t a more accurate medium where you could spend your advertising dollars :p
I’ll only agree with this if you also adhere to the opinion that every single political poll ever released is a joke....