Big Brother (Wednesday night live show) Neilsen ratings...
The ClubHouse: Big Brother 2000: Weekly Neilsen Ratings:
Tables and Discussion:
Big Brother (Wednesday night live show) Neilsen ratings...
Mrbozack | Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 11:18 pm  Okay, Big Brother is no Survivor, understood, but man, for all the talk on this board and others around the Internet, it isn't doing that badly. Big Brother's weekly live show finished 11th overall for the week of Aug. 28 - Sept. 3, 2000. For the record, that ain't bad. You don't cancel a show that's just a slot out of the top ten, as well as extremely inexpensive to produce for as well as it's doing. Nor do you view that as a failure. Think about it, for all the talk about people not watching it, a hell of a lot of people have to watch to make it 11th out of all the shows on prime time television. That means it's doing better than most of the shows on television right now. Plus, it got parodized twice during the night's Emmy broadcast. It was worth mentioning. Whoever's planning on flying a banner informing the house guests that the show is bombing should re-consider. They'd be contributing to sending the house guests false information. Here's where you can get the same info I got: http://tv.zap2it.com/news/ratings/networks/000828network.html |
Homer | Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 11:30 pm  It's not doing that well either when you consider most of the shows which rated higher than BB are re-runs. : ( |
Mrbozack | Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 11:38 pm  Homer, I have no come back for that one. |
Ryn | Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 11:47 pm  any "new" show that made top 20 during the summer would probably get a shot in the fall. Not that this could possibly happen. but - I am wondering if CBS or another network won't try this again next summer with a bit more controversial characters. |
Creamynougat | Sunday, September 10, 2000 - 11:56 pm  Bear in mind that BB is shown 6 days a week and most people (unlike most of us diehard addicts) don't watch each and every day. My point is that BB has a greater exposure in a weekly period than the ratings of a single episode would indicate. And almost any show pales in comparison to megahits like Survivor or Millionaire. With a little rethinking, BB may actually have a promising future. |
Rwsbetter | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 12:01 am  Clearly CBS and Endemol are disappointed in the ratings. They've come out and said it in the press (articles re $10,000/Beth and Sabateur). I agree that 11th place isn't bad, honestly, I thought they'd do worse after the first week. I love the show (I've been into reality programing since Real World 1) but I can see why it's never been picked up by the mainstream American public. I think what a lot of people on this board have been saying is that the houseguests have over-inflated ideas of their fame after the show. You need to look no further than the fact that Letterman, CBS' own premier interview show, hasn't had a HG on since Jordan, and has actually started making fun of the show and its low ratings. I can't believe that Jamie, of all people, doesn't realize that no cast member of any prior reality program has ever made more than the smallest blip on mainstream culture. Survivor Rich will be the biggest star to come out of any of these programs, but 10 years from now, we'll remember Survivor (like "who shot JR") but we won't remember Rich (like...well...who did shoot JR?). |
Lafatme | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 01:51 am  the problem with BB's ratings is that it didn't live up to CBS' expectations. they wanted another survivor. compared to the high hopes it is disappointing, but, it's not doing badly compared to normal new show ratings. there are about 140 shows per week on tv. BB would be the equivalent , in football, of a playoff team but not a super bowl winner. still not bad. i hope we see BB2 but not 6 days a week. |
Kyline | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 01:58 am  *Kristin shot J.R.* LOL. |
Remus | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 03:57 am  You can't just refer to Wednesday night's show and say therefore it is the 11th best show on TV. You have to realize that CBS is running this show 6 days a week and the ratings for the other days factor into the whole equation. |
Ocean_Islands | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 04:52 am  Gilligan's Island was cancelled when it was in the top ten. |
Nikki17 | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 05:19 am  Actually the show is doing better than it appears. Networks are less interested in a show's overall ratings than they are with it's 18-49 year old ratings, since this is the demographic that advertisers want to reach. Big Brother consistently wins its time slot amongst 18-49ers. And last Wednesday it not only won its 8pm time slot overall, but helped CBS win the night for the 15th straight week with 18-49ers. |
Creamynougat | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 05:48 am  Good point, Nikki. The thing that disappoints me the most is that BB has been such a critical failure. It's universally panned. And if you consider only the TV portion alone, the criticism is very well deserved. But a few critics have recognized the interesting synergy that BB has discovered in integrating the television segments with the Internet. This is where BB succeeds. At least, this is where the greatest potential lies, IMO. How much enjoyment would any of us have gotten out of BB without the Internet component? |
Nikki17 | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 05:59 am  The Internet is key to Big Brother's success. Most of the TV critics haven't bothered to watch the webcast, so they don't really understand the show. The live feed has helped to build a dedicated core audience of about 5 to 7 million, with another 5 million or so who watch on the live show on Wednesday. This dedication is key with the Olympics coming up. I expect that other shows will take a real ratings hit, while Big Brother will steam along with its very respective ratings. |
Stillme | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 07:31 am  The problem is that Endemol and CBS disregard the internet. If they respectedthe internet, they would not have been surprised about Brittany's banishment since most internet polls and websites had her and George pegged as the clear losers. I still contend that the reason the show is so popular on the internet is that internet viewers don't know many Big Brother fans in real life. I've only met ONE other person who watched the show and she doesn't watch it anymore. We have no where else to turn to discuss this phenomenon. |
Hammer | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 07:37 am  While I agree that people need to view the Internet portion of the show in order to understand the overall concept, I have to think that after seeing the Internet feed that the critics would bash the *TV* portion of the show even more that they're doing for the awful, sugar-coated editing that we've been bitching about for weeks now. There actually are some interesting things that have been happening on the live feeds since Day 1, but most of these end up on the cutting room floor. |
Hosewater | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 10:09 am  The failure aspect to Big Brother comes from the almost complete lack of media interest. Survivor set the all-time record for media stories about a TV show, over 500 articles in about 3 months (this is from the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly). Big Brother may very well set the all-time record for LEAST number of media stories. People who never watched Survivor know who Rich, Rudy, Susan, Kelly and a few others are. Why? Because they were on the cover of Newsweek, Time, Us, People, Entertainment Weekly, and others. They were featured almost daily on Entertainment Tonight, Access Hollywood, etc.. Not to mention 48 Hours and many local news outlets. Outside of the roughly 10 million BB viewers, hardly anyone knows Curtis, George, Jamie, etc. You DO NOT get TV and advertising opportunities based on such a small number. Brittany, Jordan, Jamie... You won't be seeing them in milk ads, or Reebok commercials. Or anything else for that matter. Show business is a BUSINESS, and the numbers do not add up for the Big Brother houseguests to do anything other than return to their private lives once the show is over. |
Lafatme | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 11:06 am  i only saw the last episode of survivor. the concept sounded stupid to me (unkike BB, LOL). but the web feeds got me hooked on BB and here i am. if BB was on live only it would be considered to be a hit, the 1/2 hr shows really aren't very interesting at all. oh, i watch them, but don't know why the average viewer would. they should have done a live, or semi-live, show 2 or 3 times a week. they could have shown hilights since the last show and checked in with the HGs to ask about their thoughts. this would have kept the HGs "real" to the tv viewers, as they have become to us. the tapes just don't do that. |
Rwsbetter | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 11:57 am  Kyline: Thanks for filling me in about JR . You will certainly remember Survivor Rich. I agree that the live feeds (and this board) are what make this show so unique and so interesting. I think a great next step would be a live BB channel that you could get over digital cable or sattelite. As far as the HGs expectiations go, I thought that Curtis' Emmy experience might bring them back to Earth, but now I see it had the reverse effect. There's been a lot of talk about the fans in the gauntlet and giving autographs. I mean that's okay. As several have pointed out, they are watched by millions and they do have a fan club. I just think they need to keep reminding themselves about their dayjobs, cause that's where they'll end up, if they're lucky. IMHO, obscurity as a roofer or prosecutor is better than the hell of *former* stardom (Gary Coleman the security guard). |
Solun | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 01:05 pm  Rwsbetter -- I agree that the next step is 24x7 live over cable/satellite. I keep wishing I could flip the TV on to a limited-time channel to watch everyone in decent color and sound. |
Mrbozack | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 02:03 pm  Remus, sure you can say Big Brother is the 11th best show on television. It's obvious that that is their big night for the week, and that's a big bonus on top of whatever ratings they do during the five other days it's on the air. If that Wednesday night show wasn't providing respectable ratings, then they would be in serious trouble. Nikki17, excellent points! Just because critics don't like a show, doesn't mean it isn't good. Hell, half the movies and television shows I watch faithfully are given bad reviews. Some make money, other's don't. Curtis was very accurate when he returned to the house last night after the Emmys. He realized that, while the show isn't a national obsession, it has a faithful following, and the Neilsen ratings support that observation. It will be interesting to see how it fairs against the Olympics. However, I'm not getting my hopes up. |
Delia | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 03:46 pm  How accurate/reliable is the current TV ratings system? Considering–-to my knowledge--Nielssen only knows what the currently being surveyed households are watching. I’m not being surveyed at the moment–-I have only been asked to be surveyed once-–so they have no idea I’m watching BB. Just wondering. Delia |
Ohjohnny | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 04:02 pm  What a good thread. Really sensible intelligent discussion. It's so refreshing to see people not tearing each other apart AND saying something worth reading! That said, I think part of the problem is that for CBS this was an experiment, like Survivor. It's not the kind of show they normally do and they are being lambasted by the media and critics for how poor the production/show is. So maybe, for it to be really worth it for them, it would have to do better in the ratings. Then they could counter critics by saying BB is a runaway hit. But I don't think it is. It, of course, lost a ton of viewers without the Survivor lead-in, and even when it had the Survivor lead-in it lost a ton of viewers from Survivor. Yes, it finished 11th last week, but this was probably one of the lowest weeks of viewership overall on tv. The last week of Summer/transitioning into fall? And even though it finished 11th, it lost nearly a million viewers from the week before (and 7 million viewers from when it followed Survivor) which indicates further decline. The show is not building-- at least I don't think. And now the Olympics are coming? Don't get me wrong, I watch BB but like other posters, I have yet to find another real live person who watches it. People don't even know what I'm talking about when I mention BB. I suspect CBS will not do a BBII, but who knows. The point was made that they are bringing in a younger audience, which is absolutely a plus for CBS. They are definitely running commercial after commercial for their other programs during BB. The effect of that might be seen in the fall. It's a toss up. |
Nikki17 | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 06:46 pm  The reporting about Big Brother has been atrocious. Journalists continually compare it to Survivor and declare BB to be a ratings flop, conveniently failing to note that EVERY show is a failure compared to Survivor. What CBS is really concerned about is how BB is performing relative to their usually summer TV fare. The answer is more than a 100% improvement, which more than makes up for the modest costs of the show. This reminds me of the old Woody Allen joke: Those that can't do teach Those that can't teach teach gym In this case: Those that can't do report Those that can't report report on television I think most writers expected a really tacky show about sex and conflict. Instead that got a show that is interesting on a different level. Perhaps if newspapers assigned serious journalists to cover the show they would produce more accurate stories. It seems to me that after Will and Jordan were banished the remaing houseguests make an implicit pact, which became increasingly explicit over time. That is, become a member of the "family," and submerge your individual identity into the group, or you will be banished. The houseguests have thus had to deal with the stresses of living in the house by imploding rather than exploding. Each has fallen apart in different ways and at different rates. Jamie (until last night at least) and Josh are suffering from minor depression. George, once zany and loveable, has turned into an annoying basketcase. Even Curtis temporarily lost his capacity to think logically. Perhaps the most interesting case has been Cassandra. She is probably in the most difficult position. Unwilling to express herself directly to her new "family, she vents, mostly against Big Brother, in the Red Room. I remember one episode in which Jamie attempted to compliment Cassandra by saying that it was a good thing for the "white community" that she was on TV. In other words, "Cassandra, you're a credit to your race." You could see the look of horror in Cassandra's eyes. She then went into the Red Room and said she wasn't going to let Jamie into her head; i.e., it would be too disruptive to tell Jamie why such a comment is so insulting. Of course, journalists are going to miss all of this if they insist on watching the show with one hand on the remote and the other on their genitals. |
Bad_Murtle | Monday, September 11, 2000 - 07:49 pm  Nikki, you are right on, and sum up that Jamie/Cass thing perfectly. Unfortunately, what serious journalist, or serious person even, has time to watch every episode, follow the internet site(s), think about it all, and write something about it? Well, uh, anyway... By its length, BB is probably beyond daily journalism. Even more interesting, and impossible for the same reason, would be a good, in-depth comparison to the other BB's in other countries. I saw one decent article relating it to the political style of Americans vs. Europeans. We tend to cave towards the center, while Euro politics is all about factional parties. And it's been mentioned that Americans might be more media savvy, aware of the cameras, etc. I think there is something else going on also: a difference in the production and network. Seems Endemol hired some young L.A. production assistants to play the voices of BB without enough thought into the crucialness of this role. (A trained voice actor, prompted by a producer, might have been better.) What has developed is a wishy-washy authority figure. As any middle-school teacher can tell you, this makes the pupils uncomfortable. A "good" teacher who is not consistent ends up looking "unfair." And "fairness" is the major concern of students, or company employees, at least in the USA. The frustration that sowed the seeds for the walkout was all about fairness, even if the actual harvest came by way of George's zany, ridiculous brainstorm. The idea the BB is unfair drives this whole thing, but in reality this BB is incredibly benign. Note the Survivor host seemed like a goofball at first, but he had some charisma, and I don't think he ever backed down on rules. He also took the time to point out "you WILL have to leave immediately," and things like that. Defiance just was not an issue, if I recall. Also, I suspect CBS may be playing a bad role, interfering with Endemol to tone it down, or up, at inopportune moments. One scenario would be the "Vietnam" scenario: the (I think) myth that the American generals won the war, but the politicians lost it. It's hard to imagine TV execs not trying to get their fingers into something like this, and consequently harming the producer's "artistic vision." (!!) After all, this is LA, a strangely dysfunctional place (which functions pretty well financially). Survivor was away from it, as BB2 should be. Anyway... back to comparing this show to the Euro one. The problem is, who would have time to watch all the U.S. BB tapes, and all the European ones, and think about it all? You're talking academic journal here, or some other long form. Which brings me to one more point... I'd love to see someone here post daily summaries that are not quite as literal as the "live feed" posts, but not quite as breezy as the http://www.salon.com daily summaries, which mainly cover the TV show anyway. All the material, the analysis, opinions, facts, bones of contention, are here in the discussions, and a daily distillation of them into a literate 20 or 25 paragraphs would be cool. But I can't do it because, uh, well, I don't have broadband. That's it! BTW, my thanks to the live feeders. |
|