‘Empire,’ ‘The Big Bang Theory,’ and ‘NCIS’ take various end-of-year ratings prizes
Now that the TV season is officially over, we are getting a chance now to more or less see what the networks are considering to be their official data from the past nine months or so. This means not only the live ratings, but also those when you add in DVR figures after the fact.
So what do these cumulative numbers tell us? Ultimately, not too much that will surprise you. NBC won the title for the 2014-15 season when it comes to adults 18-49; however, at the same time this is skewed somewhat when you think about the impact of Sunday Night Football and the Super Bowl this past year. CBS was close behind, and they are #1 by a good margin when it comes to total viewers. This is a title that they have routinely held.
When you include DVR viewing, “Empire” on Fox was closely behind NBC’s NFL telecasts as the top-rated program in primetime this season, with the show averaging close to a 7.1 rating in the demo. In terms of total viewing, “The Big Bang Theory” and “NCIS” were almost equal to each other with more than 21 million viewers watching every week.
“Empire” is obviously the biggest game-changer of the season, since this is a show nobody imagined would be the sort of hit that it became. We don’t anticipate it continuing to grow, but even if it holds around 80% of its audience in season 2 it will still be one of the biggest hits on TV. It is also benefited by having a reasonably short first season, which is one that viewers can catch up on quickly.
Do you want to get some other TV news right now when it comes to “Empire,” be sure to head over to the link here. Also, sign up now to get some other TV updates on all we cover via our CarterMatt Newsletter. (Photo: Fox.)
Marla
May 26, 2015 @ 7:32 pm
And at the end of the day, all that matters to the advertisers are the demo numbers!!!! They don’t care about L+SD, L+3 or L+7 viewer numbers, only the demo numbers.
liz laughlin
May 26, 2015 @ 8:00 pm
You are right. The 18-49 demo is the most important ratings number but I was looking at the stats for The Blacklist on Wikipedia and they have ” live” both total and the 18-49 demo and also “Live +7” for demo, total and DVR viewers.. I still don’t think one should compare “live” to “live +7” It’s the “live +7” that i have issue with Too many unanswered questions for me.
Marla
May 26, 2015 @ 8:48 pm
I agree with you on this….however I think there are too many unanswered questions about how they go about getting the data for L+Same Day, L+3, & L+7, in viewers and various demos, for all shows. Times have changed and Nielsen as well as other companies that track ratings need to come up with a better measure of these ratings. I think the biggest issue these companies have is they don’t know how to track the demo numbers in a home, even if they could track how many people watch a show, you know what I mean?
liz laughlin
May 27, 2015 @ 7:27 pm
Yes, how does one know who is watching the DVR playback? I’m assuming that Nielsen is still having their live viewers keep a log of who is watching and how old they are. They used to use a hand written log in the old days. I assume today either the info is entered into the metering device itself or possibly kept manually and entered by computer later. Because the numbers are tabulated so fast, it seems that they are doing one of the two. As for same day DVR or +3 or +7, I don’t know how they get the ages, unless as I said there is a way on the metering device to enter that by hand before you start viewing. Tivo, comcast and all of the the other media services that have DVR’s associated with them could tell what is being watched but again how do they know how many people and the ages? For all the services that allow streaming by internet, it would be easy to count but again, how do you get the number of viewers and the ages. What they could be doing is using the percentages from live viewing and assume that the same percentages would hold for DVR. It would be very dumb to do that. I’m thinking that younger people would be more likely to use the internet. Anytime you trust people to accurately enter information by hand, you are asking for trouble. Honesty in this country is slipping away. When the census is taken every ten years, I’m sure that some people answer incorrectly either by accident or by choice and the government has the power to penalize deception.
Beverly
May 24, 2015 @ 1:52 pm
Maybe Cartermatt can explain to me why some commenters on this site talk about the show and whether they like it or not and some commenters continue to name call and talk negatively about fans who disagree that the show is doing as well as it used to. My dislike of the changes in NCIS in the past two seasons has nothing to do with other fans and how they come to their conclusions about the show it’s just my opinion. I welcome different opinions and do not think my opinion is the only one. I don’t consider anyone who disagrees with my opinions childish Ziva haters and people with sock accounts who work for CBS although I have seen others do this. What I don’t understand is why there is a need to talk down other fans and insult them when they are merely stating what they think about the show. No need to get personal about it. It’s just a fictional show. Seems a little classless and off topic if you ask me. Just sayin’.
Lisa Bannister
May 25, 2015 @ 12:29 am
Well said Beverly. You and I disagreed earlier on this page and neither of us felt the need to attack the other personally. It is after all just a television show and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Now I’m heading back to the NCIS Marathon on USA. “Baltimore” is on next and it’s one of my favorite episodes.
Beverly
May 25, 2015 @ 1:15 am
We agree to disagree. Sounds good to me. :-)
Just Jeanette
May 24, 2015 @ 8:43 am
There is one other factor I find amusing among those determined to talk NCIS down… The reliance on past ratings while simultaneously dissing current ratings…
Technology has changed markedly over the past decade and, maybe, instead of being down now what we are seeing is a more accurate picture of what the real ratings have always been like… ☺
That NCIS continues to hold its place at the top of the drama board, (unfortunately, both ratings, and entitled drama from those are mad that Cote de Pablo took her ball away) just cements the fact that CBS know their market.
NCIS is an ensemble piece with Mark Harmon, rightly, holding a pivotal role, but it’s about ALL the cast; never just one actor among the many.
Sherry McKenna
May 23, 2015 @ 3:49 am
Funny math going on here. Sounds like they are comparing s11 & 12 live plus 7 with the rest of the seasons overnight numbers. Apples to oranges to make it look better. Read above. Ncis has lowest numbers ever even for finale.
LSilvaxx
May 23, 2015 @ 9:25 am
That’s the loss of those people. I for one watched live and loved it. I love S11 and S12 more than any other season after S1 + S2
liz laughlin
May 23, 2015 @ 11:38 pm
Amen, Sherry! I trust the live numbers. They are derived from a statistically representative group of viewers. They put a meter on the TV to record what is being watched live. I assume that they still use a log sheet or some other way to know who is watching. How you can compare this to live plus 7 is a mystery to me. I read somewhere that Les Moonves is one of the industry people who wants live +7. I think that he thinks that he will find his missing viewers for NCIS and other shows that are losing viewers.
Live is still valuable to me because it tells me how many people are taking the effort to watch the show live. My best friend watches both Castle and NCIS:LA. One has to be DVRed the other watched live. My question was do you DVR your favorite or watch it live? Her answer was some times I DVR, sometimes I watch live. So, what do the ratings mean anyway?
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 5:14 am
I would far more trust Les Moonves than a couple of vindictive fans who are looking for excuses to claim the sky is falling for one tv show in a market where everyone is comparably down. He knows far more about ratings and how they apply to his product. At the end of the day, the only people ratings really mean anything to are network execs and ad execs.
.
Read any article about the current viewing audience and it is frequently discussed and readily apparent that times have changed. As it is, the Nielsens are being challenged by several other companies vying to be the next big thing.
.
NCIS remains one of the most watched shows in the world! Denying that is sheer idiocy – almost as dumb as attacking Brian Dietzen for allegedly “not having Cote’s back. I guess friends doesn’t mean what it used to”. Yanno, just sayin’. ;)
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 7:01 pm
I agree with you that viewership is down over all. But I am a skeptic by nature and training. Whether it is by Nielsen or whomever, I want to know how their statistics are derived. I’ve taken three statistics classes: one at the undergraduate level, one for people getting their masters degree in education and another to teach statistics to middle school and high school students. The numbers are not the most important thing. The important thing is how they got those numbers and as I said before, Nielsen gives only a sketchy explanation of the process for live +3 and live +7. So, you can trust Les Moonves all you want. You can sing Kumbaya with him. but I still want to know how they (all the media statisticians) are deriving their data. Do they use polls, metering or what and then what do they do with the data?
Could you give me an explanation for the last paragraph? I never denied that NCIS was the most watched show in the world. So, what are you saying after that? attacking Brian Dietzen?? Are you wearing your aluminum foil hat?
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 7:18 pm
Ask your buddy Sherry in between your refrains of Kumbaya and rounds of hair braiding.
.
I do have to laugh whenever someone alternately plays the convenient expert whilst being so obtuse. I realize this data is inconvenient for your rhetoric, and yet #1 is still #1. ABC doesn’t argue it. NBC doesn’t argue it. One would think, if CBS was skewing numbers to make themselves look good, that they would point out that it wasn’t necessarily accurate, and yet they don’t.
.
One would think, with all of your nature and training, that the simple truth that NCIS is doing fine in a changing market with a considerably smaller audience to pull from, would be evident. One would HOPE against hope that one with such an impressive CV in statistics would understand that looking at dry data in a bubble is sheer idiocy. On a site such as this, with the audience it panders to, obviously my expectations are much lower, and yet, it still boggles how one can claim expertise and continue to show such willful ignorance at the same time.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 7:31 pm
See, as usual, you deflected and attacked me personally. I asked a question about what you meant in your last paragraph. Now, that is something that you should be an expert on. Your fingers typed it. What did you mean? Is it your usual nonsense?
I don’t know anyone named Sherry.
It is certainly possible that anyone can skew data. If you don’t understand that, then some woods is missing it’s babe. I won’t bring up the village. Call yourself what ever you want, it’s still you.
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 7:44 pm
So, when you tell me to sing Kumbaya with Les Moonves it’s okay, but when I tell you to do the same thing with the poster you’re replying to as a kindred soul, it’s not? Same with mentioning aluminum (sic) foil hats? You might wish to pay better attention to whom you reply. People are often judged by the company they keep. Don’t be such a hypocrite. ;)
Your third paragraph is pretty rich considering I have repeatedly encouraged you to look at the data as a WHOLE rather than in a bubble, which is often the key element in rhetorical foolishness. One with an extensive education in statistics, even if it did only come up a couple of days into the discussion, after your boss’ credentials didn’t impress, would know better.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 10:01 pm
Where did you get “whilst” from? the only one who posts using that is Lorraine64. Are you two close?
Lee
May 25, 2015 @ 8:33 am
If there is a clash of programs I often watch the ‘lesser’ of the two programs live and DVR the one I really want to see – often watching it straight after. This is because if I get interrupted I will miss some of the one I am watching live, so DVRing my favorite guarantees that I won’t miss any of it. It also means that I have it recorded to re-watch the following evening if I want and is why I often record things like NCIS even while watching live.
I don’t know exactly how any of these numbers are collected, but they are collected by professional companies whose existence relies on the veracity of their figures and is why they are expanding into counting more than just the live numbers, as the market itself expands. But however they are collected I don’t believe that you can compare live figures for earlier seasons with +7 day figures for the later seasons. However there are +7 day figures for season 10 to compare with, and they imply that overall viewership is not down as much as the live figures might suggest nor anywhere near as much as certain ‘fans’ seem to want them to be.
liz laughlin
May 26, 2015 @ 1:07 am
I agree with most of what you said. To me it only makes sense to compare live to live figures. I’m not sure how they derive live +7 numbers but definitely they can’t be compared to live. Blacklist on Wikipedia has a nice comparison chart for both season 1 and season 2. It shows the 18-49 demo and the total for both live and live +7. The chart for season 2 is incmplete.
Hinky Hippo
May 23, 2015 @ 11:51 pm
Actually, when apples are compared to apples, NCIS is still very strong and far more consistent despite a huge drop in the general overall network audience across all networks. Just look at other shows’ numbers.
The only funny math I am seeing these days is that happening on a regular basis on the NCIS hashtag on Twitter, but that is to be expected considering the sources and their publicly stated vindictive desire for the show to fail ever since someone took their ball away.
Beverly
May 22, 2015 @ 7:25 pm
As for NCIS it sounds like tricky math. Any fan site you go on you see complaints about the show and people who have stopped watching the past two seasons. I would like to know how these Live + 7 day ratings are calculated. I have clicked on demand shows that look interesting and then not watched the whole thing because I didn’t like it.. By the same token especially with NCIS I get distracted doing something else then have to start it over on demand. Not buying the 21 million viewers weekly. The season finale live rating was less than 15 million. Does that mean 6 million people watched it sometime during the rest of the week?
Lisa Bannister
May 22, 2015 @ 9:01 pm
Fan sites are just a small portion of data. Most people that use fan sites to complain about a show think they are in the majority because they are preaching to the choir so to speak. Example, Bishop needs to go, TIVA, TIVA, TIVA and so on. What they do not realize is that yes there still are 18 to 20 million people watching the show. Even in re runs like last week, more than 9 million people tuned in to watch; a number other network shows would kill for on their first run broadcasts. DVR playback numbers are the new norm. People would much rather watch a show without commercials and this is becoming more of a reality. I’m sure my Directv has negotiated this new trend into their CBS contract to make everyone happy.
Beverly
May 22, 2015 @ 9:31 pm
The thing is before Season 11 people mostly talked about the episodes and characters not the show itself. I was on the fansite before and there would be arguments here and there but nothing like it is now. This is not a few people commenting but a large number. It would be one thing if there were only a few complaints on one or two sites but this is widespread. I challenge you to find a site where the majority of commenters are not upset about the changes to the show. This is not all of the Ziva lovers either. Some people just don’t like Bishop. Some people don’t like the writing or new storylines. People are complaining for different reasons but the point here is that they are complaining. Yes their rating numbers are still good compared to it’s competition which isn’t much. But compared to previous seasons it is obvious to most people that they are losing viewers. As a baby boomer which I’m, sure make a a huge part of the audience, I don’t want to give up on a show that I have enjoyed for years hoping the humor, chemistry and interesting cases return but although I still watch it I no longer enjoy it as much. The fun is gone.
Hinky Hippo
May 23, 2015 @ 12:14 am
Considering this fansite caters exclusively to Teh Tiver shippers, what exactly do you expect? Most of us don’t bother with this site because of the slanted writing and pot stirring. (I only came here because it was tweeted with a tiny url, and then rolled my eyes at the isp, but the hit was already recorded, so I went with it)
Added to that, the concerted efforts of a small, vindictive group to spread their venom about losing their ball with a number of sock accounts, it’s hard to take much of what is written in the comments seriously when they are all writing from the same ridiculous script.
Does the show have room for improvement? Absolutely! And yet, the numbers speak for themselves – and the network understands far more about the numbers than a bunch of wankers who want to screech that the sky is falling to validate their own desire that, if they can’t have what they want, then the show (and any other fans) should suffer.
The fun may be gone for you, but this fan hasn’t enjoyed the show so much in years! I only hope the show continues to return to what made it awesome in the first place – more TEAMcentric episodes, with EVERY character being given a chance to shine, and compelling, unexpected stories of a team that interacts in fun, organic ways and obviously has each others’ backs both in and out of the field.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 7:32 pm
I’m so happy for you and all of yourselves.
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 7:45 pm
Sorry, I don’t have my snotty to English decoder ring on. What does that even mean?
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 10:08 pm
Oh I think that you know. Good bye I’m going for a walk. Keep telling yourself, “Cote is gone, Cote is gone..” Eventually maybe you will feel better.. Oh, maybe the decoder is up your nose. Have you checked there? That’s usually where something snotty is found.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 10:08 pm
Oh I think that you know. Good bye I’m going for a walk. Keep telling yourself, “Cote is gone, Cote is gone..” Eventually maybe you will feel better.. Oh, maybe the decoder is up your nose. Have you checked there? That’s usually where something snotty is found.
Lisa Bannister
May 23, 2015 @ 12:57 am
Hi Beverly. I think you missed my point. I was saying that just because dozens of fan sites have the same complaints about the show doesn’t mean they speak for the majority of the fans. Most fans do not post on message boards or read them for that matter, those that do are in the minority, the shows numbers dictate that. On a bad night NCIS would have about 16 million viewers, at the most I would say maybe a few thousand people post on message boards about the show. Even if a few thousand posted on a dozen different forums, do the math, the percentage is ridiculously low. Yes the show has lost some viewers but that is likely due to a variety of reasons, The show has been running for a long time, peoples tastes change. As to accepting your challenge to find a site that shows more positive reviews of the show I will say this, look at the show itself and use it as the bench mark. I will take 16 to 18 million NCIS fans tuning into the show each week as opposed to your position that a few thousands fans complaining about the show speak for all or most NCIS fans. I hope season 13 brings you more enjoyment. I for one am very excited to see where we are headed next.
Miguel Ripoll
May 22, 2015 @ 9:09 pm
I watch NCIS, no complains right now.
liz laughlin
May 23, 2015 @ 2:25 am
See, this is what I’m talking about. I don’t DVR. So, if one family member DVR’s the show can they watch while recording? If they then watch a couple of times more does all of the watching get counted as a viewing? How does Nielsen count it? Do they still have a written log or a computerized log of who is viewing.
liz laughlin
May 22, 2015 @ 7:04 pm
If you include the DVR numbers, yes, NCIS is right up at the top but when you look at the live numbers it has slipped a lot. The live numbers dropped from 18.5 million last year to 17.3 million this year. That means that on the average about 1.2 million viewers who last year watched NCIS live didn’t this year. That could mean a lot of things. To name a couple: 1).those people didn’t think NCIS was a priority any more. 2) a lot of the unemployed went back to work on the swing shift and could no longer watch live. What I do have a big problem with is comparing live numbers to live +7.
I would also like to know how Nielsen dealt with VCR usage in the past. (It’s not as though people were not able to record and watch later before we had DVRs.) Were VCRs counted live or not at all. I have too many questions about how the ratings sausage is being made.
Hinky Hippo
May 23, 2015 @ 12:25 am
There are any number of articles on independent sites with no relation to CBS or NCIS which detail the changes in viewing habits and how they have impacted the general viewing audience across all networks. As these viewing habits change, the +3 and +7 numbers become far more relevant, and Same Day numbers less so.
The numbers actually aren’t much lower than they were two years ago, especially in the +3 and +7s – unless you enjoy listening to those whose entire existence depends upon skewing the data to find fault with the show because of vindictive anger. NCIS still tops out as #1 or #2 week after week. Other shows are down on comparable numbers. You simply cannot look at ratings in a bubble – they don’t tell the entire story.
liz laughlin
May 23, 2015 @ 11:14 pm
Hippo, You fail to address my questions. The big player in this is Nielsen. They have been in business for a long time doing live numbers. The live pus three and the live plus seven are fairly recent additions. I know how the live numbers work. I would like to know the methodology of the live +3 and the live +7. On their website, Nielsen gives only a cursory explanation for the way that these statistics are derived. I want more information before I can hang my hat on their numbers.
Yes, viewing habits are changing. My boss is a mathematics teacher as well as a computer engineer. He no longer uses satellite or cable services. Instead he uses broadcast digital television, his computer and a media service such as netflix. He assures me that very soon cable/satellite will have to merge with internet. I have a tech savvy friend doing a similar thing. Yes, the times they are a changin’
Here is my dilemma. If one has a DVR that allows you to record. 5 programs at the same time, how are they ranked when they are finally viewed? Do we assume that the first one watched is the most important? So, if I watch all five shows within 3 days, are all of equal value? Or does the first watched get more value than the others? If I don’t DVR then it is only the one I watch live that counts. If I DVR five shows and watch the same one three times, I assume the ones that got DVRed but not watched are not counted but does the one I watched three times get counted three times. What about the few diehards with VCRs? Do they get counted as live and if they are not watching but watch later, does that get counted? What about the people who don’t have any recording equipment but watch on a website the next day are they counted? How are they getting their numbers? I don’t know. Do you? The old saying is that the devil is in the details.
My niece went back to school to become an IT specialist. She had just started a class in statistics and she said to me, “Aunt Liz, did you know that people can lie with statistics?” I laughed and said , “Welcome to the real world.”
Hinky Hippo
May 23, 2015 @ 11:44 pm
A basic Google search yielded a number of results which detail how these metrics are tabulated – some going back to when they were initially introduced prior to Season 9. These independent sources are far more likely to satisfy your questions, so I will happily leave it between you and them. ;)
I simply pointed out that the numbers aren’t as bad as you claim, when looked at within the whole. And, also that they are good numbers when looked at logically with all of the salient data considered.
If you were to look at nearly any other show, you would find comparable drops in Same Day numbers, again, due to the change in viewing habits. There is a reason NCIS continues to win the night in Same Day numbers and it is not due to a worldwide conspiracy against an actress, that apparently all of the other networks are going along with. Again, you cannot judge ratings in a bubble. It’s like judging a horse race by looking at one horse’s time and announcing him a winner or loser based upon that number. You have to count all of the horses in the field that day. After that. it is simple math.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 7:38 pm
Oh, how long I waited for that tell. “a worldwide conspiracy against an actress, that apparently all of the networks are going along with.” It’s you!! I keep telling you that Cote de Pablo is no longer on the show but you just keep obsessing. Have you noticed that no one is mentioning her but you. You just can’t let go, can you?
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 7:56 pm
Then, pray tell, what else would drive someone with such an ‘impressive education in statistics’, who frequents *THIS* site with its known history of slanted writing, to ignore simple facts? Why are you so unable to let it go? Why do you deny these ratings? Why is it so important to you that there is something afoot, rather than deal with the fact that the show is as strong and steady as ever? Why do these numbers threaten you so? And, why do you immediately jump on the simple observation that there is not a worldwide conspiracy despite people who sound just like you having screeched about it and how the sky is falling because the show must suffer for their whatevertheinsultofthedayis for nearly 2 years on any available forum?
Again, CBS understands those ratings far better than an armchair expert with an obvious agenda – as do the rest of the networks, none of whom are disputing them. To point, whether you believe the numbers or don’t believe the numbers matters not. It’s just silly to ignore facts merely to support one’s position.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 9:45 pm
I’m not a statistician, never claimed to be. The bigger question is why are you on this site that you seem to find so deplorable? It appears that you are looking for a fight? There are names for people who spend all of their time looking for a fight. I think that you know what those name are. I don’t need to tell you. So, you don’t have an agenda? I admit that I have an agenda. My purpose here is to post my opinions. not to verbally lambaste anyone who disagrees with me. You are among those I would call the “thought police.” Your job is to purge all “wrong thought” from the Universe, but I think that I’ve probably told you that before. Good luck on your agenda.
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 10:53 pm
Actually, you did claim to have an “advanced” education in statistics, after your boss’ CV failed to impress, including specifically citing particular “Master’s level and such” classes.
I already addressed why I initially came here. As you can see from looking at my posting history, I have avoided this site like the plague and will do so again. Its recycled “news” and slanted writing are not something I believe in supporting.
I replied to posts with my own thoughts – or are they not allowed here since my answers are inconvenient to your rhetoric? Who is acting the part of the Thought Police in your little fiefdom, really? Invest in a mirror. Your intolerance and hypocrisy are hysterically obnoxious on so many levels.
Apparently, while you were taking all of those statistics classes, I developed more of a vocabulary than one typically acquires with a Word a Day calendar. Who knew?! I’ll try to remember to type slower should I find myself in your presence in the future.
I don’t have to dick sling (another term for ya – you’re very welcome!) to make my point, I simply cite independently verifiable facts which anyone with half a brain and an internet connection can easily access for themselves.
I pointed out the show has room for improvement, and we may even agree on some of it, but your incapability to be open to anything you disagree with, or to face simple truths, makes discussion impossible. It still boggles my mind how you continue to insist upon going to such incredibly bizarre lengths to skew statistics to prove your flawed rhetoric. I’ll just consider the source, since you are apparently a regular here?
As for agendas: Pot meet kettle. And they wonder why they never see any other opinions on here…
*still laughing at the 474M maths* omg
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 4:29 am
This is what I posted.
“I’ve taken three statistics classes: one at the undergraduate level,
one for people getting their masters degree in education and another to
teach statistics to middle school and high school students.” That is accurate. I do not have a Masters in Statistics and I never claimed that I do..
You are welcome to have your opinions. However, you don’t stop there. You insult people who don’t agree with you. You call them names. When they respond back, you cry foul. Maybe you don’t even realize that you say offensive things. Maybe you don’t know any better. I have had students who don’t know what is inappropriate speech. They, however, have an excuse. They’re just kids. What is your excuse for potty mouth talk?
And as for skewing statistics, i’m just saying that I have issues with the live+7. I’m looking at Nielsen’s live numbers that are published by a number of media outlets. Someone must think that they still have validity or they would not continue to publish them. You seem to think that anyone who does not adopt the live +7 numbers is an idiot.
Just Jeanette
May 25, 2015 @ 6:33 am
No, I just think that someone who makes comments about decoder rings in noses is a major pollock. I notice in all your harping I have yet to see you provide COMPARATIVE numbers for the ratings of all shows shown in competition to NCIS…but, as you’ve pointed out you are not a trained statistician/analyst I suppose we can overlook this omission. .. except that you keep stating that NCIS is failing.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 7:09 am
Oh my, Jeanette! the Hippo brought up snot and decoder rings. I was was just responding to his/her post to me. It’s really not something that you need to worry about unless you and Hippo are joined at the hip–Oh, that was cute. Hmmm….”major pollock?’ Are you calling me a fish? Or using a derrogatory term for Polish people? So, it’s not just Cote de Pablo you hate, it’s Polish people? Since I know a lot of very nice Polish people, thank you for the compliment. .Maybe I need to check out the Urban Dictionary. Pollock may have an obscene meaning that I don’t know about. Good, I checked the UD, no obscene meaning for pollock. “Harping?” I’m a bit Irish and the Irish harp is a beautiful instrument. Are you suggesting that I take it up? I don’t know how to play the harp but I know someone who does. I wonder if she gives lessons. All I’m saying is that the Nielsen “live” stats show that NCIS is slipping and has been for two years. Their data shows that about 2 million per episode fewer viewers have been watching live since season 10. You don’t think that is true and that is fine with me. I don’t think that it is my responsibility to convince you. Oh and comparatively Blacklist season 2 had much better numbers in the 18-49 demo in the live +7 than NCIS season 12 did this year. (Although The Blacklist was stronger in the 18-49 demo last year. They were smokin’) The 18-49 demo is important for selling advertisements. Thank you for this lovely time. Sleep tight, don’t let the bed bugs bite.
Just Jeanette
May 25, 2015 @ 8:55 am
Auto correct..I meant pillock.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 5:52 pm
Never heard that one before, British slang. Same to ya! You know there are probably more than fifty ways to tell someone they are stupid. I rarely use any of them. Rarely do people have an actual intelligence issue. Usually, it’s an attitude problem. A lot of the kids I work with need attitude adjustments. My job is to get them to think about the future and what they want to do with their lives. When their attitude changes, then I can help them. It’s all about locus of control. an exterior locus is coercion. An interior locus is empowerment. Feeling empowered is exhilarating. Have a warm fuzzy day.
Just Jeanette
May 24, 2015 @ 2:46 am
And so you accept that there are lies, d’mned lies, and statistics while at the same time lauding the Nielsen ratings… The devil is certainly in the details and one of those details is that Nielsen, themselves, as an organization are trying to hold onto their role as the premier reporter of watching figures.
My credentials : IT professional with specialist training in data mining, 10 years as a forensic scientist, and ongoing researcher into the behavioral psychology affects of embedded frames of reference in entertainment media. .. me, not my boss.
What matters is the bottom line and CBS makes a lot of money from NCIS across a broad range of income streams, not putting their eggs in one basket called advertising revenue which is very direct ratings based… Product placement, syndication, name, these are NCIS’ strengths… Of course, these factors seem to matter little to those who want to talk NCIS down because it had the bad manners to go on without needing Ms de Pablo.
Hinky Hippo
May 24, 2015 @ 5:16 am
Inconvenient truths, Jeanette. If they continue to scream loud enough, and keep alleging foul play, they think they can actually make it so, when all they do is make fools of themselves. CBS is laughing its way to the bank.
Lee
May 24, 2015 @ 5:49 am
Oh, I love that line JJ: “NCIS had the bad manners to go on without needing Ms de Pablo”. LOL
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 9:34 pm
Lee, she’s gone. Cote de Pablo is gone. She’s not on the show anymore. Have you noticed that she’s not there. Can you give it a rest? You don’t have to obsess anymore. Think of all the other things that you can do with that energy.
Lee
May 25, 2015 @ 8:00 am
I thought the comment that made me laugh makes it clear that de Pablo is gone. Silly me.
I know she is gone, and I have enjoyed NCIS more in the last two seasons than for many years prior to that, which is a shame because Ziva began as an inspired character and what they did with her over the years was a disappointment.
Frankly it is a relief to be able to enjoy the show again without the story screeching to a halt while some random extra tells the audience that two of the characters were made for each other – when one of them was never written or portrayed as even liking the other.
Whatever.
But give what a rest?
I’m not the one obsessing over how TV viewership is recorded because it doesn’t fit my world view. Or working hard to try to destroy something that I don’t enjoy any more in order to spoil it for others because it is spoiled for me.
I thoroughly enjoy NCIS and I read and post on articles and message boards that talk about something I enjoy.
Shows I don’t enjoy I don’t watch and I don’t read about or talk about – not even ones I used to watch.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 5:19 pm
Okay, here is the thing. You may not care about the viewership numbers but I do.. Why? Because I liked NCIS. It was my favorite show and the numbers hold the future for TV shows.
I don’t like a lot of the decisions that were made by Glasberg et al. These are artistic decisions, the writing..
I have posted my thoughts on this before. Briefly, the team is no longer a family, where all of the members of the family are important. One big example of this is Tony. Tony now stands around with nothing to do. Another thing is how the character Bishop is written. (This has nothing to do with Emily Wickersham or her ability to act.)
DP Bellisario always had a strong, “kick butt’ leading lady. To show you how important this was in the beginning, watch seasons 1 & 2. Sasha Alexander had 2nd billing right after Mark Harmon in the opening credits. Weatherly had been in the two pilot episodes but he was taking a back seat to her. From seasons 3 through 10, Michael held 2nd billing with Cote de Pablo in third place. Now, Michael is still in 2nd with Paulley is in 3rd. Emily Wickersham is at the back of the pack. Cote’s replacement is at the back of the pack. Effectively they eliminated the strong woman. The character Bishop was really never meant to replace the strong woman but to eliminate her. We could have a big discussion about why they did it but not now.
You can argue that Abby is the new strong woman but that does not fly for me. Abbey has always been a brilliant forensic analyst but according to Paulley, herself, Abby is a cartoon, because she never changes. Abby lacks the depth, the gravitas of the strong women. She has had phobic episodes. Remember “fear of autopsy?” She is often silly. Most people love her for these quirks, but a serious leading lady she is not.
These kinds of things are serious structural changes. I believe that the live numbers show that NCIS is slipping and I don’t believe that it is solely because of DVR usage. (Maybe computers?) Before DVR’s we had VHS recorders. People were still recording and watching later.
You may not care about the numbers but believe me, CBS does. Their $ come from selling advertising. The slip in the 18-49 demo is probably one of the biggest concerns for them. Blacklist season 1 & 2 had much higher 18-49 demo but they’re slipping too. CBS’s Big Bang Theory is a winner in the valuable demo. Anyway, I don’t want NCIS cancelled . I want them to fix the problems that they created. Feel free to love the show as is but I’m longing for the pre Glasberg days, when writers could write and women were strong. That is why I like NCIS:La. All the women are strong on that show even the techie.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 9:28 pm
Same as above to Hinky, you are obsessing about Cote de Pablo. I won’t argue that CBS dominates the market. We are in complete agreement about the abilities of CBS. They are the masters. My problem is with what they have done to the show NCIS. As I’ve stated before, NCIS was created by the brilliant Donald Paul Bellisario and Don McGill.. It was formulaic. Bellisario himself said that what made this show different was the interpersonal relationships and it’s humor.
The team was a family. All of the characters were important. It had episodes that put the spotlight on the individuals. Now some characters, like Tony, are standing around with nothing to do. The spotlight is always on Gibbs.
There used to be a strong “kick butt” woman, first Kate, then Ziva and now that is gone. I could go on and on but you’ve seen it before. This is not about Cote de Pablo. They could have replaced her with another strong leading lady. but instead we got Bishop. For almost two years, they have been trying to figure out who she is. This isn’t Emily Wickersham’s fault. This is a writing issue.
I don’t want this show to go off the air. I want them to fix the problems that they created. This was my favorite show and now I’m watching an erosion of the viewership. I trust the live numbers because it tells me within, a margin of error, how many people care enough about this show to watch it live.For season 8, about 19.75 million people sat down in front of their TV and watched NCIS live.for 24 episodes–that is 474 million for the season. For season 12 17.3 million showed up to watch live for each episode–that is 319.2 million.
Anyway, you could just let the Cote de Pablo thing go. She’s gone. Instead of being so strident. you could just kick back and watch the Gibbs show all you want.
liz laughlin
May 24, 2015 @ 9:44 pm
With all of those credentials, Just, why do you spend all of this time beating up on people who are just expressing their opinions and yes, sometimes their frustrations? To someone like you, it seems that you should be hob nobbing with other rich highly trained folks and not even bothering with the hoi polloi.
Just Jeanette
May 25, 2015 @ 12:51 am
Liz, so, you can use your boss’ credentials to legitimize your POV but think I’m all hoi polloi for stating my credentials with regards the ability to engage in critical thinking… You, like many a Ziva fan seem intent on talking down NCIS…So, I must admit I feel that you are not really a fan of NCIS but simply a Ziva fan, and yes, I mean the character Ziva not the actor Cote de Pablo given how many seem to want Ms de Pablo to play Ziva and only Ziva.
A wide range of people enjoy NCIS; it’s not only the purview of the lower educated.
Now, back on point, NCIS continues to remain a viewer favorite regardless of those who seem to want it to tank so they can laud NCIS’ failure across the fan boards and attribute it to the lack of Ziva David. That some people seem fixated on trying to get a show to lose, thereby affecting over 300 people’s direct employment be cause ONE actor left… sad is the politest word I can use.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 8:21 pm
I did not say that you are a member of the hoi polloi. I was implying that I am a member of the hoi polloi and that you are above us common folks. I questioned why you spend so much time arguing with people that you see as below you. Is this a public service that you provide–stamping out wrong thought. Wouldn’t it be better to volunteer at the food bank or some other charity. They do wonderful work. Again, you bring up Ziva. SHE IS GONE!!!! Are you so afraid that she might return that you have to silence everyone who ever said they liked her? This is a weird obsession in which you are engaging. Please, just let it go. I don’t see how this one person could be causing you so much distress.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 4:46 am
Have you ever heard the expression “tilting at windmills?” that is what you are doing. It means fighting an imaginary enemy. You, Hippo, Dean, and LSilvaxx are the ones who keep bringing up Cote de Pablo. I don’t see anyone else doing this You are all obsessed with her. She’s gone. She is off the show. She can’t hurt you any more. She is not likely to come back. Let go of her. Put it to rest. You say that you are into behavioral psychology. Why do you, personally, obsess about this person? Even if what you say about the posters on this site wanting to bring her back is true, why should you care? Do you really think that the execs at CBS care one iota what anyone on this site thinks? Are you really afraid that Les and his friends are influenced by any of this?
Beverly
May 25, 2015 @ 5:07 am
You got a smile out of me. lol I would chalk this up to a lost cause. Trolls are going to troll. Best to let them think they are winning as that seems to be their primary goal and of course defending NCIS from those that are complaining about the changes.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 6:13 am
Thanks, Beverly. I think that actually the four of them are the same person. Ir’s a multiple personality thing. I’m suspicious that they are all anasan. The writing is similar. Last year I was commenting to one of her other selves, could have been Dean, and bang, she was right there. But her post was written as if she was the person I was commenting to. Oh what a tangled web we weave. Also, she posts things that make absolutely no sense at all and when I ask her what she meant, she never explains it. She also went on a rant about how sexual harassment in the work place was non-existent and women who complained were just incompetent slackers. It didn’t even sound like something a woman would write..
Just Jeanette
May 25, 2015 @ 6:28 am
Or it might be that we are all educated women with vocabularies somewhat larger than the non hoi polloi. Of course, that might require some to engage in critical analysis passes first year university level.
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 10:25 pm
The first sentence I get but what about sentence two?
“that might require some to engage in critical analysis passes first year university level.”
Do you mean “critical analysis past first year university level?” i think that is what you said but i’m not sure what you mean. Since it is usually something insulting I’m going to take a shot at it. You are saying that “Lee, LSilvaxx, Hinky Hippo, Jeanette, and anasan are all well educated women who possess vocabularies larger than that of the common man.” Did I translate that correctly? Then you said and this is more difficult, “Of course, it might require a big vocabulary to engage in critical analysis past a first year at university level.” Since this is an insult, you are implying that I lack such skills? Correct again? Well, the only way I could go any higher would be to get my EdD and I’m not too inclined to to that. I’m just too tired. I’ve got all of the letters after my name that I’m going to get. C’est fini..
How about if you go get another degree You are probably younger than I am. It’s always nice communicating with you. I’m going for a walk, Bye Bye.
Just Jeanette
May 25, 2015 @ 6:25 am
Pot, kettle, tilting at ratings….
liz laughlin
May 25, 2015 @ 9:24 pm
Again, I’m not afraid of the ratings. Ratings are numbers. I love numbers. Positive, negative, zero, primes, composites, rational, irrational, imaginary, complex, they are all my friends. It’s not the numbers I fear, it’s what people do with the numbers. Like people, numbers can be manipulated. If you tell me that Joe Doaks is ahead of John Smith by 42.5% to 42.2% but the margin of error is +/- 0.4% then we don’t know who is ahead. It is a statistical dead heat. Does the average American know that? They should.
When I was in grad school I took a class in research techniques for educators. Our instructor explained to the class what good research looked like and what causes bias in research. I was familiar with these ideas from stat and science classes that I had taken but most of the people in that class were elementary ed people. This was new for them but they caught on pretty fast. We then started reading published education research papers. We were all shocked at the number of basic errors that had been made by PhD’s and Ed.D’s in education. These flawed research papers were going to be used as the rationale to change curriculum, methods and entire school systems. It was a real eye opener.. So, maybe you can start to understand where I’m coming from. “In God we trust”, everybody else, not so much. The point is that you can do all of the math correctly but if the methodology used to collect the data is
flawed, the numbers aren’t worth much.