I wonder what happened on Thursday of last week to boost the audience to 700,000 - whatever it was GMB should keep it !
According to Twitter they had a guy on who had been on the Long lost family the night before, Laura Tobin was broadcasting from the Hovis advert Village, FIfa story had legs, summer babies struggling at school feature but nothing really obvious that stands out. Maybe the figures just an outlier? It would be interesting to have the shares and particularly BBC Breakfast figures for last Thurs.
Hopefully we still see plenty of Kate and especially Ranvir when Charlotte returns. Even though I like Charlotte, the programme, has imo, felt slightly better with Kate and Ranvir.
According to Twitter they had a guy on who had been on the Long lost family the night before, Laura Tobin was broadcasting from the Hovis advert Village, FIfa story had legs, summer babies struggling at school feature but nothing really obvious that stands out. Maybe the figures just an outlier? It would be interesting to have the shares and particularly BBC Breakfast figures for last Thurs.
I can't find Bushmills' figures now but I think it was 1.4 million for BBC Breakfast
I can't find Bushmills' figures now but I think it was 1.4 million for BBC Breakfast
Even more strange then why GMB hit 700k? maybe just a good day at the office for them and of course BARB although normally statistically accurate can on occasions go a wonky.
This a interesting read about BARB, from Oct 2012 but still relevant
BARB – the organisation that measures ratings for UK TV channels – has admitted that there were errors in its tracking system, and as a result some Channel 4 and ITV shows have ended up with false ratings. Broadcast Magazine’s article says that one of the programmes given false ratings was ITV’s X Factor – their highest rating show, and one of the biggest advertising targets in broadcast television:
“The entertainment show originally recorded an overnight audience of 8.96m (33.6%) on ITV1 and ITV1 HD in figures released last Monday, but this has now grown to 9.84m (36.91%) under the revised data. Meanwhile, C4 shows including 999: What’s Your Emergency and Grand Designs have also experienced audience uplifts. However, others have fallen, such as the 22 September episode of The Comedy World Cup, which dropped from 1.8m (7.9%) to 631k (2.76%) on the back of the gaffe.”
How can mistakes like this happen in a multi-billion pound industry reliant on accurate audience metrics? Looking for an answer to that question opens up lots more questions about why such a huge and influential industry relies on relatively crude measuring techniques that haven’t changed much in decades.
TV ratings are measured using mechanical devices that record the presence of viewers in the room when the TV is on, usually by the viewers pressing a button to register that they’ve entered the room. So it really registers presence, rather than attention – the viewer could be reading a newspaper, doing the ironing or using their iphone, but for the sake of the ratings they count as an avid viewer.
Ratings technologies have been refined over time, but the basic concept hasn’t changed since it was invented by Arthur C Nielsen to measure radio audiences in the 1930s. BARB is the UK version of TV ratings, using a panel of 5,100 homes to represent the UK TV viewing public. So each percentage point in the examples above stand for a measurement sample of just 51 homes. The amount of people in these homes is around 11,300, so each percentage point stands for a maximum of 113 people pressing their buttons when they walk into the living room. It’s often a lot less, as the percentages above are share of the total viewing audience (BARB calls this the ‘universe’) at that time – many BARB panellists might be out of their homes, or might not have the TV on at that time.
If we take the numbers of viewers in the sample above, we can work out the size of the TV viewing universe watching when these errors occured. For example, the 8.9m audience originally reported for X Factor was 33.6% of total viewers that night, so one percentage of that audience is 8.9m/33.6% – 264,880 viewers. This means that the BARB’s estimate for the total UK TV viewing audience on a Saturday night is around 26.4m people, which is 39% of the UK population of 62m people. So we could transfer this to roughly work out that the number of BARB Panellists registering themselves as viewers that night is 39% of 11,300 – 4,407 people.
Still with me? Lets now take the share of X Factor’s reported viewing to work out how many BARB panellists registered themselves as watching that programme. The original share reported was 33.6% of total viewers. We know the total BARB panellists watching TV was 4,407, so the number watching X Factor according to the original report was 33.6% of 4,407 – 1,481 people. So BARB measures 1,481 people watching a TV programme, and extrapolates that number to report an audience rating of 8.96m viewers. No matter how scientific and representational the survey, is remarkable to think that multi-billion pound creative decisions are made on such a small sample size.
Now lets look at the error size. BARB under-represented X Factor’s ratings by 3.31 percentage points, which was a difference of 880,000 viewers in the reported ratings. Again, if we take the total panellists viewing X Factor that night as 1,481 people, 3.31% is 49 people.
An error in measuring 49 people pressing a button when they walk into a room means that one of the UK’s largest media businesses under-represented the performance of their most important programme by 880,000 viewers. Is it just me, or is that completely insane?
After reading that, I'm confident that ITV have ratings information that we don't. Especially as Susanna Reid commented that ratings were steadily improving. She couldn't simply lie, because if the tabloids picked up on it, ITV/Susanna wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
After reading that, I'm confident that ITV have ratings information that we don't. Especially as Susanna Reid commented that ratings were steadily improving. She couldn't simply lie, because if the tabloids picked up on it, ITV/Susanna wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
And don't you think that, by now, someone would have leaked that information to the papers? And that the ITV Press Office would have trumpeted those same figures rather enthusiastically?
The lack of such figures seem to indicate that your hypothesis does not hold water.
After reading that, I'm confident that ITV have ratings information that we don't. Especially as Susanna Reid commented that ratings were steadily improving. She couldn't simply lie, because if the tabloids picked up on it, ITV/Susanna wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
Susanna Reid exposed as a desperate lier in the Sun, Daily Mail and Express is the last thing ITV need. Despite it being a small thing, the awful tabloids will pick it up and run with it.
Between 6/9/10 & 6/9/11 the Chiles & Bleakley fronted Daybreak drew 715,000 (17.6%) for which they were sacked.
GMB first 12mths was 574,000 (15.4%), which was 6% down on the 609,000 (16.1%) Daybreak secured the same 12 mth period April 2013-14. However Good Morning Britain drew 618,000 (16.2%), Jan –March 2015. March was the best month averaging around 650k but things tailed off again in April which is not unusual because of Easter Hols etc..
Going by Bushmills recent figures the average for the 9 days he gave was 620k so despite a decent March the current GMB average figure for 2015 would seem to be around the 620k mark. That's a possible nominal Increase of 11k on the last 12mths of Daybreak. So for once Susanna/Lorraine etc are not telling whoppers (depending on when they were quoted and also your own personal viewpoint of what a lie is or is not) but it seems more likely they are gilding the lily making a tiny increase sound better than it really is.
Hopefully we still see plenty of Kate and especially Ranvir when Charlotte returns. Even though I like Charlotte, the programme, has imo, felt slightly better with Kate and Ranvir.
I was never particularly a fan of Kate whilst she was on Daybreak but her presence on GMB has really lifted the show. It just flows a lot better when she's on, there's good humour and its clear that she gets on really well with Susanna and Ben.
What will be interesting to see is whether Kate is still kept as prominent figure on the programme and she'll continue to lead the show on either Wednesday or Friday, or if Charlotte will pretty much just be slotted into the role Kate was doing, leaving Kate to just be newsreader relief, one or two days a week. I can't see Charlotte/Susanna on a Wednesday and Charlotte/Ben on a Friday working quite as well.
Charlotte is back tomorrow, I presume she'll just do headlines, maybe the odd one to one interview. Then she will be on the sofa on Wednesday (with Susanna) and Friday (with Ben). Basically everything Kate was doing. Kate will only be on once a week and so will Ranvir.
GMB has tweeted it's Susanna, Ben, Charlotte, Sean & Laura tomorrow. In other words back to the original A team. It will be interesting to see how Charlotte approaches it, knowing some have preferred the so called fun approach from Kate.
I'm backing Charlotte to get the balance right. I think viewers will be happy.
GMB has tweeted it's Susanna, Ben, Charlotte, Sean & Laura tomorrow. In other words back to the original A team. It will be interesting to see how Charlotte approaches it, knowing some have preferred the so called fun approach from Kate.
I'm backing Charlotte to get the balance right. I think viewers will be happy.
Four presenters plus a weather presenter ? Bonkers
I wish they had itv news breakfast at weekend 6:8:30am
It be good if they did that but citv takes that session but I hope anyone agrees there needs to be some news on weekends at 6:00am BBC ONE Has BBC breakfast
Comments
I can't find Bushmills' figures now but I think it was 1.4 million for BBC Breakfast
Even more strange then why GMB hit 700k? maybe just a good day at the office for them and of course BARB although normally statistically accurate can on occasions go a wonky.
This a interesting read about BARB, from Oct 2012 but still relevant
http://test.org.uk/2012/10/03/barb-and-the-bizarre-world-of-tv-ratings/
BARB – the organisation that measures ratings for UK TV channels – has admitted that there were errors in its tracking system, and as a result some Channel 4 and ITV shows have ended up with false ratings. Broadcast Magazine’s article says that one of the programmes given false ratings was ITV’s X Factor – their highest rating show, and one of the biggest advertising targets in broadcast television:
“The entertainment show originally recorded an overnight audience of 8.96m (33.6%) on ITV1 and ITV1 HD in figures released last Monday, but this has now grown to 9.84m (36.91%) under the revised data. Meanwhile, C4 shows including 999: What’s Your Emergency and Grand Designs have also experienced audience uplifts. However, others have fallen, such as the 22 September episode of The Comedy World Cup, which dropped from 1.8m (7.9%) to 631k (2.76%) on the back of the gaffe.”
How can mistakes like this happen in a multi-billion pound industry reliant on accurate audience metrics? Looking for an answer to that question opens up lots more questions about why such a huge and influential industry relies on relatively crude measuring techniques that haven’t changed much in decades.
TV ratings are measured using mechanical devices that record the presence of viewers in the room when the TV is on, usually by the viewers pressing a button to register that they’ve entered the room. So it really registers presence, rather than attention – the viewer could be reading a newspaper, doing the ironing or using their iphone, but for the sake of the ratings they count as an avid viewer.
Ratings technologies have been refined over time, but the basic concept hasn’t changed since it was invented by Arthur C Nielsen to measure radio audiences in the 1930s. BARB is the UK version of TV ratings, using a panel of 5,100 homes to represent the UK TV viewing public. So each percentage point in the examples above stand for a measurement sample of just 51 homes. The amount of people in these homes is around 11,300, so each percentage point stands for a maximum of 113 people pressing their buttons when they walk into the living room. It’s often a lot less, as the percentages above are share of the total viewing audience (BARB calls this the ‘universe’) at that time – many BARB panellists might be out of their homes, or might not have the TV on at that time.
If we take the numbers of viewers in the sample above, we can work out the size of the TV viewing universe watching when these errors occured. For example, the 8.9m audience originally reported for X Factor was 33.6% of total viewers that night, so one percentage of that audience is 8.9m/33.6% – 264,880 viewers. This means that the BARB’s estimate for the total UK TV viewing audience on a Saturday night is around 26.4m people, which is 39% of the UK population of 62m people. So we could transfer this to roughly work out that the number of BARB Panellists registering themselves as viewers that night is 39% of 11,300 – 4,407 people.
Still with me? Lets now take the share of X Factor’s reported viewing to work out how many BARB panellists registered themselves as watching that programme. The original share reported was 33.6% of total viewers. We know the total BARB panellists watching TV was 4,407, so the number watching X Factor according to the original report was 33.6% of 4,407 – 1,481 people. So BARB measures 1,481 people watching a TV programme, and extrapolates that number to report an audience rating of 8.96m viewers. No matter how scientific and representational the survey, is remarkable to think that multi-billion pound creative decisions are made on such a small sample size.
Now lets look at the error size. BARB under-represented X Factor’s ratings by 3.31 percentage points, which was a difference of 880,000 viewers in the reported ratings. Again, if we take the total panellists viewing X Factor that night as 1,481 people, 3.31% is 49 people.
An error in measuring 49 people pressing a button when they walk into a room means that one of the UK’s largest media businesses under-represented the performance of their most important programme by 880,000 viewers. Is it just me, or is that completely insane?
The lack of such figures seem to indicate that your hypothesis does not hold water.
GMB first 12mths was 574,000 (15.4%), which was 6% down on the 609,000 (16.1%) Daybreak secured the same 12 mth period April 2013-14. However Good Morning Britain drew 618,000 (16.2%), Jan –March 2015. March was the best month averaging around 650k but things tailed off again in April which is not unusual because of Easter Hols etc..
Going by Bushmills recent figures the average for the 9 days he gave was 620k so despite a decent March the current GMB average figure for 2015 would seem to be around the 620k mark. That's a possible nominal Increase of 11k on the last 12mths of Daybreak. So for once Susanna/Lorraine etc are not telling whoppers (depending on when they were quoted and also your own personal viewpoint of what a lie is or is not) but it seems more likely they are gilding the lily making a tiny increase sound better than it really is.
I was never particularly a fan of Kate whilst she was on Daybreak but her presence on GMB has really lifted the show. It just flows a lot better when she's on, there's good humour and its clear that she gets on really well with Susanna and Ben.
What will be interesting to see is whether Kate is still kept as prominent figure on the programme and she'll continue to lead the show on either Wednesday or Friday, or if Charlotte will pretty much just be slotted into the role Kate was doing, leaving Kate to just be newsreader relief, one or two days a week. I can't see Charlotte/Susanna on a Wednesday and Charlotte/Ben on a Friday working quite as well.
I'm backing Charlotte to get the balance right. I think viewers will be happy.
Yes, the viewers that they have got.:D
What- both of them.
I suppose Ben and Charlotte will be gushing over each other, but never mind.:D
Ben, Susanna and Ranvir Thursday
Charlotte, John and Ranvir Friday
IMO!
Four presenters plus a weather presenter ? Bonkers
Bit like saying Bill, Louise, Sally, Steph and Carol is bonkers too.
It be good if they did that but citv takes that session but I hope anyone agrees there needs to be some news on weekends at 6:00am BBC ONE Has BBC breakfast