...and only 3.6 million for Casualty and 2.4 million for Live at the Apollo.They are also awful ratings for prime time Saturday night. Remember when Bill Cotton was in charge and BBC1 "owned" Saturday nights?
Is Casualty going on for ever or will they give it a rest one day?
...and only 3.6 million for Casualty and 2.4 million for Live at the Apollo.They are also awful ratings for prime time Saturday night. Remember when Bill Cotton was in charge and BBC1 "owned" Saturday nights?
Is Casualty going on for ever or will they give it a rest one day?
Yes because we had excellent comedies like The Two Ronnies and dramas like All Creatures Great and Small. Apart from SCD and TXF, which I can put up with background noise, Saturdays are hopeless now.
As for Casualty, rather like dear old Corrie, I think this could go on forever.
2.99m opposite Strictly versus 6m where it followed straight after The X Factor final when it was at it's peak and with nothing of note on BBC1 at the same time.
You don't seem to be mentioning all the ITV ratings, just a few, do you know how I'm a Celeb is getting on this year, or do you have Thursday's soap ratings?
2.99m opposite Strictly versus 6m where it followed straight after The X Factor final when it was at it's peak and with nothing of note on BBC1 at the same time.
You don't seem to be mentioning all the ITV ratings, just a few, do you know how I'm a Celeb is getting on this year, or do you have Thursday's soap ratings?
Celeb has been pulling in 8-9 million. You don't have to be a fan to appreciate the ratings, which are remarkable for such an old show.
corrie on friday was up against the massive bandwagon that is children in need that raises good money for a good cause and delivers a good viewership as well. in terms of daytime crime stories may have got better figures starting at 3 not 2 well clear of established doctors but 0.8 million is better than they usually get and is second best in the slot after all for a first series of an experimental programme isnt bad - im a celebrity sand football continue to deliver good ratings and the x factor still makes money and collects viewerson all showings of which there are many in acweek strictly only has the one other than the internet of course, total all figures up from all screenings and you will have a different scenario. viewing habits change watch what you want when you want to do not necessarily saturday night when forced to by the broadcaster like in the bbc case
corrie on friday was up against the massive bandwagon that is children in need that raises good money for a good cause and delivers a good viewership as well. in terms of daytime crime stories may have got better figures starting at 3 not 2 well clear of established doctors but 0.8 million is better than they usually get and is second best in the slot after all for a first series of an experimental programme isnt bad - im a celebrity sand football continue to deliver good ratings and the x factor still makes money and collects viewerson all showings of which there are many in acweek strictly only has the one other than the internet of course, total all figures up from all screenings and you will have a different scenario. viewing habits change watch what you want when you want to do not necessarily saturday night when forced to by the broadcaster like in the bbc case
Viewers loyalties have changed. There aren't many viewers now who would sit through an entire night of BBC or ITV programmes like they used to. I was in the pub tonight and it was Sky all the way.
Viewers loyalties have changed. There aren't many viewers now who would sit through an entire night of BBC or ITV programmes like they used to. I was in the pub tonight and it was Sky all the way.
Yes. I was in two pubs on Friday night and one had a Sky channel on and the other pub looked like it had Freesat the way they was going though the channels..
Yes. I was in two pubs on Friday night and one had a Sky channel on and the other pub looked like it had Freesat the way they was going though the channels..
Darren
My local splits its Sky, we had F1 on one channel and darts on the other.
Viewers loyalties have changed. There aren't many viewers now who would sit through an entire night of BBC or ITV programmes like they used to. I was in the pub tonight and it was Sky all the way.
Whereas in the past people used to go to the pub and watch Downton Abbey or EastEnders??? What are you talking about.
The pub I go in always has Sky Sports News on, funnilly enough
Whereas in the past people used to go to the pub and watch Downton Abbey or EastEnders??? What are you talking about.
The pub I go in always has Sky Sports News on, funnilly enough
Actually televisions in pubs were never a big deal until Sky arrived. You would see a portable in the corner that was only switched on for MOTD or the news and that was it. Also the old licencing laws would have meant Sunday football was a no go area as pubs closed at 2.00.
You cant just add in Itv1+1 viewers because that's an unfair comparison to make to BBC1 who dont have their own +1 channel. Without Itv1+1, they had less than 16pct.
If being second behind BBC1 is a crisis then you are right, ITV are in a crisis.
You cant just add in Itv1+1 viewers because that's an unfair comparison to make to BBC1 who dont have their own +1 channel. Without Itv1+1, they had less than 16pct.
Before when Itv used to be 2nd, it wasnt far off BBC1. Now it's really far behind BBC1, about 5% or 6% behind which is very bad.
the +1 is fair this watching things on there is splitting the audience and making itv look like it basically losing to the bbc when it is not as clear cut as that, if the bbc had a +1 than your thread would be correct however the existende of itv1+1 greys that completely and mkes this thread invalied in my opinion as it completely misunderstands the modern tv landscape a bit like the broadcasters do as well, therefore the thread is flawed.
Seems to me there are 3 ways to approach the +1 issue:
1 ignore it and just use the main channel (+HD simulcast showing)
2 Add the main channel and +1s together on a programme-by-programme basis
3 Add the main channel and +1s together on a timeslot basis
1 is patently unfair to the commercial channels as having the +1 available undoubtedly dilutes their audience for the main channels.
2 overemphasises the commercial ratings somewhat because peaks tend to get added to peaks, and troughs get added to troughs (but the troughs rarely get reported)
3 would seem to be a reasonable "3rd way" but is difficult to analyse because of the piecemeal way the ratings get reported.
Seems to me there are 3 ways to approach the +1 issue:
1 ignore it and just use the main channel (+HD simulcast showing)
2 Add the main channel and +1s together on a programme-by-programme basis
3 Add the main channel and +1s together on a timeslot basis
1 is patently unfair to the commercial channels as having the +1 available undoubtedly dilutes their audience for the main channels.
2 overemphasises the commercial ratings somewhat because peaks tend to get added to peaks, and troughs get added to troughs (but the troughs rarely get reported)
3 would seem to be a reasonable "3rd way" but is difficult to analyse because of the piecemeal way the ratings get reported.
K
Its only the ratings thread league table anoraks that get upset by +1 channels. Its not "Queensbury rules" apparently. The rest of the tv and ad industry seem to understand it ok.
Hi, just came across this thread, having only recently found out how channel 5 work out program popularity, which I assume is the same thing as 'ratings', so if I'm wrong please feel free to correct me. Anyway I was astounded to find out that the figures were based on a very small cross section of monitoring, which I don't think can be accurate at all. Am I missing something? Is this actually how figures are worked out.
I can only speak for myself, but I rarely watch program's live, I record most things on freesat pvr, quite often 2 at once, and watch later, especially channels with adverts, so I can skip them. So based on that, would I be counted or not as a viewer???
Hi, just came across this thread, having only recently found out how channel 5 work out program popularity, which I assume is the same thing as 'ratings', so if I'm wrong please feel free to correct me. Anyway I was astounded to find out that the figures were based on a very small cross section of monitoring, which I don't think can be accurate at all. Am I missing something? Is this actually how figures are worked out.
I can only speak for myself, but I rarely watch program's live, I record most things on freesat pvr, quite often 2 at once, and watch later, especially channels with adverts, so I can skip them. So based on that, would I be counted or not as a viewer???
Thanks for that. I still don't see how a panel selection can give even vaguely accurate figures for the whole of the UK though, as everyone has different tastes (even taking households of similar sizes and ages). I would have thought in this day and age there would be a better way of working it out.
Thanks for that. I still don't see how a panel selection can give even vaguely accurate figures for the whole of the UK though, as everyone has different tastes (even taking households of similar sizes and ages). I would have thought in this day and age there would be a better way of working it out.
The system as it exists is statistically valid (in that it tries to minimise "systematic error" by ensuring that a demographically representative sample is used). The sample size gives a reasonable level of accuracy - remember that quadrupling the sample size to 20000 homes would only halve the error - at a reasonable cost.
Comments
It's a shame as this is one of the few ITV entertainment shows that I watch now. I suppose they'll replace it with yet more You've Been Framed.
...and only 3.6 million for Casualty and 2.4 million for Live at the Apollo.They are also awful ratings for prime time Saturday night. Remember when Bill Cotton was in charge and BBC1 "owned" Saturday nights?
Is Casualty going on for ever or will they give it a rest one day?
Yes because we had excellent comedies like The Two Ronnies and dramas like All Creatures Great and Small. Apart from SCD and TXF, which I can put up with background noise, Saturdays are hopeless now.
As for Casualty, rather like dear old Corrie, I think this could go on forever.
2.99m opposite Strictly versus 6m where it followed straight after The X Factor final when it was at it's peak and with nothing of note on BBC1 at the same time.
You don't seem to be mentioning all the ITV ratings, just a few, do you know how I'm a Celeb is getting on this year, or do you have Thursday's soap ratings?
Celeb has been pulling in 8-9 million. You don't have to be a fan to appreciate the ratings, which are remarkable for such an old show.
Darren
Viewers loyalties have changed. There aren't many viewers now who would sit through an entire night of BBC or ITV programmes like they used to. I was in the pub tonight and it was Sky all the way.
Yes. I was in two pubs on Friday night and one had a Sky channel on and the other pub looked like it had Freesat the way they was going though the channels..
Darren
My local splits its Sky, we had F1 on one channel and darts on the other.
I have seen some pubs in town do that but not offen.
Darren
Whereas in the past people used to go to the pub and watch Downton Abbey or EastEnders??? What are you talking about.
The pub I go in always has Sky Sports News on, funnilly enough
BBC1: 20.5%
Itv1: 14.3%
Before last decade, Itv used to be the most watched channel. Not anymore by a long stretch.
Actually televisions in pubs were never a big deal until Sky arrived. You would see a portable in the corner that was only switched on for MOTD or the news and that was it. Also the old licencing laws would have meant Sunday football was a no go area as pubs closed at 2.00.
Those figures are wrong, they are actually:
BBC1 20.5%
ITV1 16.2%
ITV1 have been in second place for about 11 years
If being second behind BBC1 is a crisis then you are right, ITV are in a crisis.
Well, Itv has never been so far behind BBC1 before. If you look at this graph: http://www.barb.co.uk/graph/weekly-viewing?_s=4
Before when Itv used to be 2nd, it wasnt far off BBC1. Now it's really far behind BBC1, about 5% or 6% behind which is very bad.
the +1 is fair this watching things on there is splitting the audience and making itv look like it basically losing to the bbc when it is not as clear cut as that, if the bbc had a +1 than your thread would be correct however the existende of itv1+1 greys that completely and mkes this thread invalied in my opinion as it completely misunderstands the modern tv landscape a bit like the broadcasters do as well, therefore the thread is flawed.
1 ignore it and just use the main channel (+HD simulcast showing)
2 Add the main channel and +1s together on a programme-by-programme basis
3 Add the main channel and +1s together on a timeslot basis
1 is patently unfair to the commercial channels as having the +1 available undoubtedly dilutes their audience for the main channels.
2 overemphasises the commercial ratings somewhat because peaks tend to get added to peaks, and troughs get added to troughs (but the troughs rarely get reported)
3 would seem to be a reasonable "3rd way" but is difficult to analyse because of the piecemeal way the ratings get reported.
K
Its only the ratings thread league table anoraks that get upset by +1 channels. Its not "Queensbury rules" apparently. The rest of the tv and ad industry seem to understand it ok.
I can only speak for myself, but I rarely watch program's live, I record most things on freesat pvr, quite often 2 at once, and watch later, especially channels with adverts, so I can skip them. So based on that, would I be counted or not as a viewer???
http://www.barb.co.uk/about/tv-measurement?_s=4
K
Thanks for that. I still don't see how a panel selection can give even vaguely accurate figures for the whole of the UK though, as everyone has different tastes (even taking households of similar sizes and ages). I would have thought in this day and age there would be a better way of working it out.
K