On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Pollak, Melissa F. <[email protected]>wrote:
> Based on what I've read here, the only meaningful comparison that can be > made is > Leno vs. Conan in 18-49 at 11:35 p.m. (although if I were doing the numbers > crunching, I would not dismiss any information provided by total viewers, > not just 18-49). > > Everything else seems to be a stretch to prove a point, and I don't > believe *the numbers* support the conclusion that the main reason Conan's > 11:35 ratings were down was because Jay's 10 p.m. ratings were down. It's > really not a strong argument. > > When a hugely major switch is made (Conan for Leno) one cannot expect there > to be no impact on the ratings. The ratings would either go up or down. > Sure, you can make the (valid) argument that NBC should have given Conan > more time to build an audience, but the bottom line is that the switch in > hosts is a far more likely explanation for the ratings decline at 11:35 than > the ratings decline in the 10 p.m. hour. > > BTW, Zucker is still an asshole. > I guess it seems like we are talking past each other - and pretty much saying the same thing while doing so. I agree with you that the meaningful comparison is Leno vs Conan at 11:35 (though at similar points in the evolutions of their show, not when Leno was mature and Conan just starting). The reason Aaron dismissed total viewers is that NBC itself has long argued that total viewers is meaningless, since their ad rates are based to a large extent on the 18-49 demo. When I started tracking the Jay Leno Show I only reported total viewers, since I am not an ad company and was interested in what people were watching - but after about a month I started adding the Demo rating as well, since I think Aaron is right that, at the level the real decisions are made by TV executives, they are what count. The "everything else" you refer to was started by NBC and Leno, who have been giving odd comparisons to support their conclusion that Conan was a ratings failure. The response from Aaron is not that the main reason Conan's ratings were down is that Leno's were down; rather, the response is, how can you say Conan's ratings are more of a failure than Leno's, when Conan was down (in the demo) by the same percentage as Leno was? (comparing each program what NBC was getting in the same time slot one year ago). Further, if one were to speculate as to the reason for Conan's decline, wouldn't you at least include the fact that he had a lower rated lead in (coincidentally, but the same margin) than Leno had when he was at the Tonight Show? -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en
