SCREEN-L Archives

February 1995, Week 1

SCREEN-L@LISTSERV.UA.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 6 Feb 1995 15:16:50 CST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
In response to my post:
>And I bet they are "dominated by ratings" much more now that corporate
>sponsors are so important -- AT&T wants the most bang for their sponsorship
>buck just like regular advertisers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Aaron Michaels ([log in to unmask]) writes:
>Molly -
>I'm not sure on this, but as far as I know, public broadcast stations aren't
>usually included in the ratings process.  I don't recall seeing our local
>Public Radio station in the 1994 Spring Arbitron book (of course, maybe that
>just shows that nobody around here listens to them - doubtful though).
>Anyone know otherwise?
 
We have an overnight Nielsen television ratings system and PBS is included --
you can see the ratings for PBS national broadcasts.  Our ratings reports don't
break it down by local stations, and some stations "cherry-pick" programming
from the national feed (show some nationally broadcast shows but not others),
but prime time is covered, and that's where the big sponsorship dollars go.
Nielsen probably also goes into more detail on non-primetime shows, local
markets, etc. than what's shown in our overnight reports.
 
Maybe radio's a different story?  I'm not even sure how PBS and NPR are related
other than having some common funding sources.
 
Molly Olsen
[log in to unmask]
These opinions are mine, not necessarily my employer's.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2