Page 445 - Battleground The Media Volume 1 and 2

| Rat ngs

suggest. Similarly, for years the system of measuring television audiences has
been criticized for containing flaws that overrepresent broadcast television view-
ing relative to cable television viewing.

raTings anD Programming For minoriTy auDiEnCEs

The stakes get even higher when we consider the issue of programming tar-
geting the needs and interests of minority communities. For instance, in recent
years a number of industry and advocacy organizations charged that the Nielsen
Local People Meter (LPM) dramatically undercounted African American view-
ers. The LPM is an effort to place the same technology used to calculate national
TV ratings into local television markets, where, until recently, Nielsen still relied
on paper diaries. As the groups opposed to the LPM argued, any undercounting
of African American viewers would lead programs that target African Ameri-
can viewers to appear less popular. This would lead to diminished advertiser
support for these programs and then to a greater likelihood that these programs
would be cancelled. As a result, members of the African American commu-
nity would have fewer programs targeting their tastes, preferences, and interests
to choose from. In this way, what has been called “diversity of programming”
would be diminished. This controversy grew so heated that in 2004 congres-
sional hearings on the subject were held as Congress considered the possibility
of directly regulating television and radio ratings firms in part to make sure
that their methods sufficiently measured the viewing habits of all demographic
groups. However, one key issue that arose during these proceedings involved the
question of whether the new measurement system truly was inferior to the old
system in terms of measuring African American viewers, or whether the issue
of minority programming was being used by some broadcasters to stall the new
system since the new system eliminated some of the shortcomings in the old sys-
tem that artificially favored broadcast television over cable television.
The nature of this controversy helps to illustrate important truths about
ratings—they are always inaccurate to some degree, and new measurement sys-
tems likely will improve upon some existing inaccuracies but also may introduce
new ones. And, perhaps more important, any inaccuracies often can be helpful
to some groups while being harmful to others. Some of the harshest critics of
the media also point out that ratings only measure “exposure” to individual pro-
grams, and neglect to measure how audience members feel about the programs
they watched (for example, how much they like or dislike individual programs).
A system that measured not only audience exposure, but also audience appre-
ciation (called Television Audience Assessment), was briefly introduced in the
late 1970s, but failed to catch on with advertisers or programmers. For these
reasons, the systems for providing audience ratings often become contentious
battlegrounds around which media industry executives fight for measurement
systems that present their programming in the most favorable light. And when
new audience measurement systems are introduced that have the potential to
completely reshape the media marketplace, these battles can become particu-
larly fierce.