Now if you'll excuse me am off to find EE's history on BBC Iplayer for viewing figures
EastEnders tends to get around 500k requests per episode. Although we can't really include iPlayer figures. So lets not go there!
iPlayer figures released by BBC iStats are the total number of requests per show/episode. They don't tell us if the whole programme was watched and don't indicate the number of actual viewers watching a particular stream/download. BBC iStats (the internal data warehouse who collect the data) count all successful requests where a stream/download actually starts. They don't, however, count the number of “clicks” which can be repeated several times if the user does not see an immediate reaction.
The BBC Live +7 figures give us a more accurate weekly reach total and also indicate how many are actually watching via iPlayer. The new system applies an estimated factor based on other survey data to account for how many are watching/number of unique viewers etc.
Here is an example (Episode 4 of Doctor Who, May, 2011).
- The Total weekly reach for Episode 4 was 10.38m. (Not accounting for repeat viewers etc.)
- Episode 4 had an adjusted Live+7 weekly reach of 9.9m. (Accounting for repeat viewers etc.)
Around 0.1m were repeat viewers watching on BBC3 and of the total weekly iPlayer requests, approx 0.4m requests were not counted.
Total Audience: The Doctor's Wife
Final BARB (7.97m) + first week BBC3/HD repeats (1.31m) + first week iPlayer requests (1.10m) = 10.38m
Adjusted Live +7:
Final BARB (7.97m) + first week BBC3/HD repeats* (1.21m) + first week actual iPlayer views (0.72m) = 9.9m
* according to BBC research, between 5/10% watching recently repeated programmes on BBC3 are repeat viewers.
It looks like The Royal Bodyguard won't be recommissioned but the BBC are desperate to keep David Jason on side and will be discussing other projects with him, according to the Express today (Monday).
Yes, because the BBC always scrap 7m-rated sitcoms after the first episode. :rolleyes:
also the fact that they dont is not a conspiracy against either BBC or ITV, its just how quickly the news cycle moves on, no one cares what happened last week
Absolutely.
It's only Broadcast these days that report on officials.
Although the BBC will be delighted that they rushed out their 'Xmas victory' press release on Boxing Day.
I suspect they'll be oddly quiet about it today.
It was hardly "rushed out" isn't it always released on Boxing Day with the overnights, just like the papers always report on the overnights since by time the officials are released it's old news, not that many viewers aren't particularly bothered about ratings.
I was right about this thread being unbearable, but I was wrong about it being confined to certain posters.
Personally I stand by my no repeats view, with Downton topping Christmas (I wasn't keen on the episode, still at series 2 standard not series 1, but there's no denying that timeshift) and The Royal Wedding topping 2011(deservedly so.)
Does anybody know when the Voice is going to start. I suppose it can't start until at least March because of the Six nations so my prediction is it will start on the 24th
Are ITV1 trying to hang Dancing On Ice out to dry? It has a tough enough opposition; a realtively low key line up; a presenter that many think has got above her station and a judge that quite a few want to slap. Now they've allowed any hype that they may be able to create for the show to be taken by the panel announcement for Britain's Got Talent. The only thing I can think of is BBC declared it's intention to announce Alesha's departure which forced ITV's hand.
Of course, Syco's approach could be an attempt to disrupt Strictly Come Dancing - IIRC they had said they weren't planning to change the panel after seeing how it hurt The X Factor. Alesha shouldn't damage Britain's Got Talent in anyway, and I can see there being good chemistry between the four judges. But how will Strictly replace her? Obviously a female judge, but will it be a former winner (Jill/Kara), a former professional (Karen/Camilla) or another dancer (Darcey Bussell). I don't think they'll bring Arlene back, though there is a new producer in charge of the show next year so anything could happen.
That's a stupendous timeshift for Downton Abbey but rather typically the overall winner of Christmas Day couldn't be clear cut, could it? :rolleyes: I think I'll just say BBC One will be relatively satisfied and ITV1 will be pleased with their performances.
While the officials may have bought some cheer to ITV1, the overnights are absolutely dire for Harry Potter and The Unforgettable. I expect a quick turn around for the Half Blood Prince, and it being shoved onto a free Wednesday night within the next couple of months.
BBC One had a brilliant night. Maybe EastEnders would've rated higher in one of it's usual slots but it still did very well and assisted Sherlock which also recorded a fantastic figure. Absolutely Fabulous also did very well to round off a superb evening for the channel.
Although the BBC will be delighted that they rushed out their 'Xmas victory' press release on Boxing Day.
I suspect they'll be oddly quiet about it today.
if we are going to criticise the BBC for acting on overnights, then maybe we shouldn't discuss them ourselves.
I dont think anyone saw that DA time shift coming, so its not like the BBC put it out knowing that Downton would timeshift ahead of EE. Also DA os the only show that timeshifted by such a massive amount, its not like all the ITV line up timeshifted that much, the rest timeshifted about the same as the BBC line up did.
Does anybody know when the Voice is going to start. I suppose it can't start until at least March because of the Six nations so my prediction is it will start on the 24th
TBH I think the BBC's planning for The Voice has been dire. They've basically opened it up for a very bitter ITV1 (who are already annoyed with the BBC clashing Strictly with The X Factor) to play havoc with Britain's Got Talent. They should've started The Voice on the 7th January and ran it through to be finished in time for, say, Let's Dance for Sports Relief to start. Then they'd have the summer of Olympics and Euro 2012 to disrupt schedules before Strictly's launch in late September.
The Alesha move has been on the cards for a very long time. Alesha met the Talkback Thames bosses on 4th May 2011 to discuss jumping ship - although the press speculated, perhaps rightly, she was discussing X Factor at the time.
It's also worth pointing out the BBC wouldn't let Alesha perform anything on Strictly, unless it was for charity. Whereas ITV will positively encourage it. That will have been a big part of her decision - if she is to resurrect her solo career, guest spots on BGT and X Factor are crucial and this deal almost secures both for her.
Official from Alesha Dixon's website...
"Alesha has decided not to return to Strictly Come Dancing after a successful three-series run and will instead be joining the Britain's Got Talent panel, alongside Simon Cowell, Amanda Holden and David Walliams."
To try and keep this ratings-related, wasn't Kelly Brook sacked after less than a week from BGT because Simon Cowell said that 4 judges on that show didn't work? So if that was the case then, why should the British public be asked to believe that it would work now?
2009: Amanda Holden “Kelly’s a lovely girl, but it doesn’t work with four people, it doesn’t. Because when you get two buzzes, and then two non-buzzes, Ant and Dec and everyone was going, ‘What does that mean?’…and it was so ridiculously confusing.
Piers Morgan "Kelly was a nice girl, and a good laugh, and doesn’t deserve the bitchy comments she has been getting. But as you’ll see, having a fourth judge just all seemed a bit weird.”
Official from Alesha Dixon's website...
"Alesha has decided not to return to Strictly Come Dancing after a successful three-series run and will instead be joining the Britain's Got Talent panel, alongside Simon Cowell, Amanda Holden and David Walliams."
To try and keep this ratings-related, wasn't Kelly Brook sacked after less than a week from BGT because Simon Cowell said that 4 judges on that show didn't work? So if that was the case then, why should the British public be asked to believe that it would work now?
2009: Amanda Holden “Kelly’s a lovely girl, but it doesn’t work with four people, it doesn’t. Because when you get two buzzes, and then two non-buzzes, Ant and Dec and everyone was going, ‘What does that mean?’…and it was so ridiculously confusing.
Piers Morgan "Kelly was a nice girl, and a good laugh, and doesn’t deserve the bitchy comments she has been getting. But as you’ll see, having a fourth judge just all seemed a bit weird.”
(Quotes from the website unrealitytv)
Was that not just to sugar coat the fact Kelly Brook was shit so they fired her?
It was hardly "rushed out" isn't it always released on Boxing Day with the overnights, just like the papers always report on the overnights since by time the officials are released it's old news, not that many viewers aren't particularly bothered about ratings.
But the story on the BBC website, which is accessible from the Entertainment home page - isn't accurate any more (the headline certainly isn't). It mattered less when yesterday's news was wrapped around today's chips but web pages are accessible after the fact, unless taken down.
I don't expect the final ratings to be reported, though - unless they go on the angle of record timeshifting figures.
2009: Amanda Holden “Kelly’s a lovely girl, but it doesn’t work with four people, it doesn’t. Because when you get two buzzes, and then two non-buzzes, Ant and Dec and everyone was going, ‘What does that mean?’…and it was so ridiculously confusing.
for two people who own a TV production company, they are not very smart, im sure Syco will have considered what will the show do, if its 2 votes for, and 2 votes against.
But the story on the BBC website, which is accessible from the Entertainment home page - isn't accurate any more (the headline certainly isn't). It mattered less when yesterday's news was wrapped around today's chips but web pages are accessible after the fact, unless taken down.
but it was correct as of the date it was published which is all you can ask. Did the article mention that it was based on overnights?
for two people who own a TV production company, they are not very smart, im sure Syco will have considered what will the show do, if its 2 votes for, and 2 votes against.
They made it clear in the first audition show which included Kelly - there had to be a majority vote for an act to go through.
EastEnders has won the Christmas Day TV ratings war for the third year running, overnight figures show.
....
All the figures are based on overnight average figures produced by BARB, which do not take into account viewers who will watch shows at a later date on the BBC iPlayer or the ITV Player, or other catch-up services.
but it was correct as of the date it was published which is all you can ask. Did the article mention that it was based on overnights?
The article mentions overnights - the headline doesn't.
I'm afraid the "correct at time of going to press" doesn't apply to the internet. They have every opportunity to correct the headline or, better still, publish a new story which can be seen as an update to the previous one. Any news organisation that leaves an incorrect story online when they know it's wrong is on a slippery slope.
But the headline is inaccurate. The same laws apply to headline as body copy.
It needs amending. The BBC couldn't come up with any suitable argument for not amending the headline (except they'd rather the fact Downton outperformed EastEnders was kept a secret of course .
Let's imagine if it had been the other way round. I think we know the BBC would have run a story saying "EastEnders the most watched programme at Christmas. Despite trailing in the overnights, the BBC soap blah blah".
The article mentions overnights - the headline doesn't.
I'm afraid the "correct at time of going to press" doesn't apply to the internet. They have every opportunity to correct the headline or, better still, publish a new story which can be seen as an update to the previous one. Any news organisation that leaves an incorrect story online when they know it's wrong is on a slippery slope.
But the story is not incorrect - EastEnders won Christmas Day based on the overnights, which is what the article states.
And headline's cannot contain everything. They're supposed to be sharp and to draw attention - not list every detail from the story.
I do agree that they should possibly publish another story based on the officials. I wonder if they would've done already had Downton won on the overnights but EastEnders overtook it in the officials...
for two people who own a TV production company, they are not very smart, im sure Syco will have considered what will the show do, if its 2 votes for, and 2 votes against.
Presumably exactly the same as X Factor when they get two nos.
Kelly said in her book that she did not get on with Ant and Dec at all and that Cowell told her directly the reason she was off the show was because she got high profile people off-side early on.
Cowell did say at the time he would never introduce 4 judges to any Got Talent show around the world. And I don't think he ever has.
There were of course 4 judges during the live shows last year - and its probably worth waiting until midnight to see if that is the case again.
Comments
EastEnders tends to get around 500k requests per episode. Although we can't really include iPlayer figures. So lets not go there!
iPlayer figures released by BBC iStats are the total number of requests per show/episode. They don't tell us if the whole programme was watched and don't indicate the number of actual viewers watching a particular stream/download. BBC iStats (the internal data warehouse who collect the data) count all successful requests where a stream/download actually starts. They don't, however, count the number of “clicks” which can be repeated several times if the user does not see an immediate reaction.
The BBC Live +7 figures give us a more accurate weekly reach total and also indicate how many are actually watching via iPlayer. The new system applies an estimated factor based on other survey data to account for how many are watching/number of unique viewers etc.
Here is an example (Episode 4 of Doctor Who, May, 2011).
- The Total weekly reach for Episode 4 was 10.38m. (Not accounting for repeat viewers etc.)
- Episode 4 had an adjusted Live+7 weekly reach of 9.9m. (Accounting for repeat viewers etc.)
Around 0.1m were repeat viewers watching on BBC3 and of the total weekly iPlayer requests, approx 0.4m requests were not counted.
Total Audience: The Doctor's Wife
Final BARB (7.97m) + first week BBC3/HD repeats (1.31m) + first week iPlayer requests (1.10m) = 10.38m
Adjusted Live +7:
Final BARB (7.97m) + first week BBC3/HD repeats* (1.21m) + first week actual iPlayer views (0.72m) = 9.9m
* according to BBC research, between 5/10% watching recently repeated programmes on BBC3 are repeat viewers.
Absolutely.
It's only Broadcast these days that report on officials.
It was hardly "rushed out" isn't it always released on Boxing Day with the overnights, just like the papers always report on the overnights since by time the officials are released it's old news, not that many viewers aren't particularly bothered about ratings.
I was right about this thread being unbearable, but I was wrong about it being confined to certain posters.
Personally I stand by my no repeats view, with Downton topping Christmas (I wasn't keen on the episode, still at series 2 standard not series 1, but there's no denying that timeshift) and The Royal Wedding topping 2011(deservedly so.)
The Voice UK starts in March. Good deduction.
Of course, Syco's approach could be an attempt to disrupt Strictly Come Dancing - IIRC they had said they weren't planning to change the panel after seeing how it hurt The X Factor. Alesha shouldn't damage Britain's Got Talent in anyway, and I can see there being good chemistry between the four judges. But how will Strictly replace her? Obviously a female judge, but will it be a former winner (Jill/Kara), a former professional (Karen/Camilla) or another dancer (Darcey Bussell). I don't think they'll bring Arlene back, though there is a new producer in charge of the show next year so anything could happen.
That's a stupendous timeshift for Downton Abbey but rather typically the overall winner of Christmas Day couldn't be clear cut, could it? :rolleyes: I think I'll just say BBC One will be relatively satisfied and ITV1 will be pleased with their performances.
While the officials may have bought some cheer to ITV1, the overnights are absolutely dire for Harry Potter and The Unforgettable. I expect a quick turn around for the Half Blood Prince, and it being shoved onto a free Wednesday night within the next couple of months.
BBC One had a brilliant night. Maybe EastEnders would've rated higher in one of it's usual slots but it still did very well and assisted Sherlock which also recorded a fantastic figure. Absolutely Fabulous also did very well to round off a superb evening for the channel.
I dont think anyone saw that DA time shift coming, so its not like the BBC put it out knowing that Downton would timeshift ahead of EE. Also DA os the only show that timeshifted by such a massive amount, its not like all the ITV line up timeshifted that much, the rest timeshifted about the same as the BBC line up did.
TBH I think the BBC's planning for The Voice has been dire. They've basically opened it up for a very bitter ITV1 (who are already annoyed with the BBC clashing Strictly with The X Factor) to play havoc with Britain's Got Talent. They should've started The Voice on the 7th January and ran it through to be finished in time for, say, Let's Dance for Sports Relief to start. Then they'd have the summer of Olympics and Euro 2012 to disrupt schedules before Strictly's launch in late September.
It comes out the day after Christmas Day. The same as every other year.
Oh of course, but overnights are becoming increasingly irrelevant...
"Alesha has decided not to return to Strictly Come Dancing after a successful three-series run and will instead be joining the Britain's Got Talent panel, alongside Simon Cowell, Amanda Holden and David Walliams."
To try and keep this ratings-related, wasn't Kelly Brook sacked after less than a week from BGT because Simon Cowell said that 4 judges on that show didn't work? So if that was the case then, why should the British public be asked to believe that it would work now?
2009: Amanda Holden “Kelly’s a lovely girl, but it doesn’t work with four people, it doesn’t. Because when you get two buzzes, and then two non-buzzes, Ant and Dec and everyone was going, ‘What does that mean?’…and it was so ridiculously confusing.
Piers Morgan "Kelly was a nice girl, and a good laugh, and doesn’t deserve the bitchy comments she has been getting. But as you’ll see, having a fourth judge just all seemed a bit weird.”
(Quotes from the website unrealitytv)
I'm playing devil's advocate, but you're very welcome to put me on ignore if you find me so unbearable.
Oops lol
Was that not just to sugar coat the fact Kelly Brook was shit so they fired her?
But the story on the BBC website, which is accessible from the Entertainment home page - isn't accurate any more (the headline certainly isn't). It mattered less when yesterday's news was wrapped around today's chips but web pages are accessible after the fact, unless taken down.
I don't expect the final ratings to be reported, though - unless they go on the angle of record timeshifting figures.
but it was correct as of the date it was published which is all you can ask. Did the article mention that it was based on overnights?
They made it clear in the first audition show which included Kelly - there had to be a majority vote for an act to go through.
EastEnders
2006- 11.56m, 2007- 14.38m, 2008- 11.34m, 2009- 11.67m, 2010- 12.61m, 2011- 11.33m
Doctor Who
2006- 9.35m, 2007- 13.31m, 2008- 13.10m, 2009- 12.04m, 2010- 12.11m, 2011- 10.77m
Coronation Street
2006- 10.20m, 2007- 9.40m, 2008- 7.98m, 2009- 8.72m, 2010- 10.40m, 2011- 10.51m
Emmerdale
2006- 7.69m, 2007- 6.19m, 2008- 5.06m, 2009- 5.62m, 2010- 8.24m, 2011- 7.11m
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16332285
so the article is correct
The article mentions overnights - the headline doesn't.
I'm afraid the "correct at time of going to press" doesn't apply to the internet. They have every opportunity to correct the headline or, better still, publish a new story which can be seen as an update to the previous one. Any news organisation that leaves an incorrect story online when they know it's wrong is on a slippery slope.
But the headline is inaccurate. The same laws apply to headline as body copy.
It needs amending. The BBC couldn't come up with any suitable argument for not amending the headline (except they'd rather the fact Downton outperformed EastEnders was kept a secret of course
Let's imagine if it had been the other way round. I think we know the BBC would have run a story saying "EastEnders the most watched programme at Christmas. Despite trailing in the overnights, the BBC soap blah blah".
But the story is not incorrect - EastEnders won Christmas Day based on the overnights, which is what the article states.
And headline's cannot contain everything. They're supposed to be sharp and to draw attention - not list every detail from the story.
I do agree that they should possibly publish another story based on the officials. I wonder if they would've done already had Downton won on the overnights but EastEnders overtook it in the officials...
Kelly said in her book that she did not get on with Ant and Dec at all and that Cowell told her directly the reason she was off the show was because she got high profile people off-side early on.
Cowell did say at the time he would never introduce 4 judges to any Got Talent show around the world. And I don't think he ever has.
There were of course 4 judges during the live shows last year - and its probably worth waiting until midnight to see if that is the case again.
Amanda is pregnant - she may miss the auditions.