Series 1 people were worried the ratings dropped off towards the end, series 2 there was angst about the mid series ratings, series 4 was the year we saw the move towards time shifting (contrary to what some will have you belive) and there was certainly some anxiety around the time of the Sontaran two parter, series 5 people worried as the summer months came in to play....and so it goes on.

Of course the reality is the show has never been safer than it is now, never been bigger worldwide, never been so profitable, and, most importantly of all, never been as important to the BBC for the aforementioned reasons.

Short of hand written letters from Tony Hall, Charlotte Moore & John Smith explaining over six pages of A4 why there is no cause for concern with Doctor Who - their bias aside - I don't think anybody will believe you

Just out of interest, does anyone know when 'catch up' viewing figures started to be included in final viewing figures or when its felt there was a surge in digital TV technology?

Me and the other half have had a digital box that recorded TV shows for about 10 years and I never particularly felt we were ahead of the wave. So I'm unsure whether there has been a genuine move to digital catch-up over the past few years or if its a relatively new idea to capture/include those viewers in the 'final' viewing figures.

We had a video recorder before that, of course, but I get the impression that video-recorded shows (back in the day, when we 'taped' things) were never included in viewing figures, although I could be wrong.

As far as I am aware it has been for a very long time indeed (decades), certainly I think BARB always has since it took over in the early 80's but it used to represent a much smaller figure because it's only since the advent of more sophesticted methods over the last half a dozen years that we have seen big changes between overnight ratings and final ratings for shows.


The chart in this article demonstrates the mass growth in time shifting since 2007 pretty well, though out of date a little as it only goes up to 2011:

http://www.barb.co.uk/whats-new/255

That is such a good page, really makes the information understandable. And I finally know what VOSDAL means!

Ha, yeah it is good, I think the current overall time shift percentage is closer to 12% now, though don't quote me on it!

Also the bottom chart is quite revealing, in that it highlights the kind of programmes that time shift very highly (drama, soaps) and those that time shift very little (news current affairs). Obviously dramas and soaps have a higher than overall average time shifted percentage by quite a bit.

There is the expectation that the figure will level off a bit in due course, there's always going to be a limit with any technological advancement. Then something new will come along to kick the thing in an upward direction again one day down the line.

I would imagine the shows that rely on 'live votes' (X-Factor etc) are also less likely to time shift. Which sadly always leads to the unfortunate overnight comparisons.

Those sort of shows will also pick up a lot of floating viewers who aren't really engaged with the show as well, which does arguably inflate the figures. There is an arguement that those that time shift in many ways are more committed viewers because they take steps to ensure they catch their favourite show, albeit it may not be at the time of broadcast. A percentage of on the nightv viewers for every show will be those flicking through the channels and sticking something on because nothing else appeals to them and they are bored, after all.

That's kind of how I end up watching things like Country File and The Antiques Road Show on a Sunday evening....

Just a quick question. What were the comparisons between DT's series averages and MS'? Brilliant time shifting surely tips it in Matt's favour? it would be interesting to compare eras.

Kind regards

Here's the full era ratings!

David Tennant - 8.36 million
Matt Smith - 7.98 million
Christopher Eccleston - 7.95 million

I suspect that David's higher specials count (with the high ratings they had amassed) widened the margin between him and Matt more than it would have been if their episode count was equal.

Yet, you will still get many Moffat detractors who insist he's lost the show millions (there was one who claimed Smith's era was 4 million down on Tennant's) of viewers. I gave up trying to educate them with the facts such as the above a long time ago.

To be fair, there was a drop of almost a million between the episode averages of season 7a and 7b which is quite substantial.

I can only assume the claim about the 4m drop is something to do with the decline of overnight ratings/audience share and the shift to watching the show on catch-up.

To be fair, one of 7A's episodes (A Town Called Mercy) was boosted quite highly from a lead-in from Strictly Come Dancing's launch night, something none of the other 4 episodes benefited from. It's an anomaly figure that skewed the average of Series 7A. (Most notably showing how Who can really perform when it has a decent lead-in.)

Series 7B on the other hand took damage from 15-minute clashes with Britain's Got Talent, and Nightmare in Silver in particular clashed directly with the FA Cup Final.

If the BBC gave 7B some decent scheduling I suspect the margin would have been a lot smaller.

But these aren't the overnights but the final viewing figures. I keep getting told more people are watching on catch-up now, so surely any clashes would be neutralised by iPlayer viewing figures?

"iPlayer" viewing figures in full aren't included in final viewing figures.

They were said to be by the end of 2013 - but I don't know what happened. They're reported monthly.

What are the "catch up" viewers made up of - are they just the Sky+ type of thing?

Sky+ is measured, incidentally, but I'm not entirely sure about the details of the whole thing. But 2013 saw a notable interest in timeshifted data.

Barb to extend window for timeshifted data

Online and catch-up TV added to official ratings

Series 8 would be the first to fall under any new system. Rings of Akhaten had almost 2 million iPlayer requests in April - so I'm guessing they would strip it down to unique, fully downloaded requests.

Interesting because we watch BBC shows on iPlayer through our Virgin+ box, so I'd be interested to know if that gets counted of not. Sounds like it probably doesn't.

Here's a breakdown of Live+7 ratings for Series 7 (which include iPlayer and BBC 3).

http://layout.doctorwhonews.net/copp...tings_33_d.png

Sounds like 2014 is going to be a bit of a watershed for the way viewing figures are calculated.

Which is the iPlayer figure which is counted in the +7 rating? (0.83m) Where does that come from?

It doesn't match up with the iPlayer stats for the first week (1.4m).

In the "Total Ratings" slide near the end it notes the "unique" iPlayer viewings, so I assume that's the one-per-household rating. (I'm guessing.)

Sorry - I wasn't even registering the nature of the chart!

Where is unique iPlayer data gathered from?

When they are eventually included in the final figures, it bodes very well, indeed, given how much of an anomaly Doctor Who is said to be with timeshift data.

Quite alright - It is quite an infodump I must admit!

I'm not sure, but if I were to guess, I'd say unique IP addresses logging onto iPlayer to watch the episode during the first week. In my view anyway. :L

Just wondering if they're published somewhere for DWN to have them.

The iPlayer Performance Packs only have full numbers.