So the overnight figures are a waste of time?

Timeshift viewing could skew those ratings an awful lot.

[quote=xKatieLx;72500381]I really hope this is true. I love Claudia in the Tesspit and Tess works so much better presenting with Claudia than she did with Bruce.

This is a disaster as far as I am concerned. I do like Claudia, but she is totally unsuitable in this role.

We must not be surprised if numbers drop.

[quote=dottiep;72557903]
Well I will be. The show is much more than the presenter, in spite of what Fforsyth thought.

In reality households could stop, or start, watching in their thousands but, as long as BARB's 5000 representative households don't change their viewing habits, the figures would show no change.

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

Who cares if the "numbers drop?"


However those who no longer continue to watch it, will likely be those who were more interested in the silly, irritating and irascible octogenarian, than dance.

They can go off and watch re-runs of "Play Your Cards Right" or any other vintage game show that the old codger presented, that are shown on one of the minor channels.

The BBC has learned that he was no longer needed for the continued success of the show.
That's why they decided to call it a day with him.
The viewing numbers weren't affected by his several absences. Quite the opposite.

Never mind what he says. He'd have loved for them to continue to indulge him, by letting him "swan in and out" of another series.

Hopefully this show will now concentrate on the contestants.

I already do.

The other bonus would be not losing sleep waiting up for the result of Sunday's show to be clairvoyantly forecast.

Overnights are especially useful for commercial channels as it tells them how many viewers will be available to watch the commercials!

Thaty's why there are the Official (consolidated) figures which are release around a week later, they include timeshifted viewing (but not including timeshifts on the night, which appear in the overnights as far as I can recall)

But, as with any statistical sample, as long as the sample size is large enough, and as long as the sample is seen to be representative across all demographs, then it is likely that such a widespread viewing change would also be reflected in some of those panel households, thus removing or dampening any skew.

Hence the rider about being a BARB household, which you brought up.

Sorry mossy but 5000 is in no way representative of say 60 million households and all the ethnic diversities that make up the UK . I don't care what Barb and its statistical experts says .

So are we saying we judge the viewing habits of 60 million by how many of the 5000 who tune into SCD

60 million households is incorrect, it's 60 million people.

There were 26.4 million households in the UK in 2013.
BARB


(Over) 5100 BARB households, each representing a group of 5000 real households gives a total in excess of 25,500,000 actual households.


So, to get a rating of about 12,000,000 actual households around half (2,550) of the BARB monitored households would have been watching.

Well, those who have studied statistics for a living, those who have degrees in statistical analysis, and those who are employed by and use the services of polling organisations will beg to differ.

Even election opinion polls might only sample 1300 people, but the crucial part is to ensure that those 1300 people are representative in terms of age, social class etc. And election polls have, for the most part, been pretty accurate (with only a few notable exceptions).


Yes. A few points:

1) Proven statistical methods are used. Methods that have a base in statistical mathematics.

2) All broadcasters use the results. So if there is any error, any misreporting, then not only is it likely to affect all programmes, all broadcasters are affected. (Loke opinion polls, margins of error exist of course).

3) Broadcasters and other businesses pay for this information. So they see it having some value and providing some useful feedback for the business.

4) Polling organisations are used by many businesses in order to gauge moods, likes and dislikes


And finally, it is the best and at the moment, the only method to gauge public reaction and viewing. There is no other yardstick, no other feedback mechanism that does not rely upon self-selection (where people decide to voice their opinion as opposed to being asked for it as part of a require class, social group or age range (to ensure a true representation of the UK viewer).


So you can rubbish what you see, but ultimately there is no better method (without monitoring every household, every viewing device, and every TV viewer, which would I guess cause some privacy issues as well as being pretty expensive to roll out, assuming that terrestrial TV reception could have such a return path activated of course.

Hmm, interesting Mossy, thanks for all the info.

I think the various channel iplayers are the only truly accurate calculation of viewing figures, as it's possible to count each download.

I think the issue with BARB and YouGov etc. is when choosing a "representative" of a certain household, or class, sex, ethnicity, income etc. is that not everyone fits so easily into a grouping or pidgeonhole - I know I don't, and am not representative in any way of a particular category, as I often discover when I have to fill out those forms requested by various organizations. However I accept your statement that this method of calculation is trusted by the media/organizations.

The announcement will be officially made just after midnight if anyone is interested!

Don't mean to be nationalistic but it is shocking that its 2 English presenters again. Would never be 2 Scots presenting SCD.BBC would not have allowed it.

Should have been Andy Murray and Natalie Robb presenting it. They were the best 2 for the job and the peoples choice..

Good old middle class BBC England. Nothing ever changes

Just one consideration for each (apart from neither having presenting experience) - Andy Murray is earning far too much playing on the tennis circus to give that up for a few months on less pay, and Natalie Robb is under contract to ITV.

They might have been your choice, but you're not "the people".