Re: If you don\'t have a Nielsen box
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by bakana:
Marty, these days, the Satellite & Cable audience comes close to Being the population.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Remember, we were talking about
digital cable, not just cable. The problem with attempting to measure "standard" cable in this way is that there are too many people who don't use a measurable cable box to tune channels.
There are some other issues here as well. For instance, what about the people (like me
)who leave the box turned on all the time, and simply switch the television off? You'd be overstating their viewing unless you came up with some methodology for estimating how long they were
really watching.
Then, of course, there's the fact that the providers of the data are companies who have a vested interest in making the numbers come out higher, particularly when so many cable providers are also cable channel owners. Whether or not they'd fudge things, the conflict of interest would make people less willing to rely on those numbers.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, arial">quote:</font><HR>
The advantage, for the marketing people, is that the data from Cable or Satellite viewers wouldn't BE a Sample. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
True, and a good point. But, even aside from the issues I mentioned above, you're talking about
a lot of data, requiring
a lot of computing power to process it into any kind of usable numbers. From a theoretical standpoint this would be a huge benefit; from a practical standpoint I'm not sure it'd work out that way.
------------------
-- Marty
"Always do what you're good at," they tell me.
So I go around annoying people.