When media buyers purchase inventory from television networks, they typically rely heavily on Gross Rating Point (GRP) metrics which are designed to reflect reach.

And for good reason: if you're buying media to get in front of consumers, you need to know how many consumers you can reach through various media channels and properties.

One company, Nielsen, dominates the television market, and its GRPs heavily influence how billions upon billions of dollars are spent each year.

Needless to say, the stakes are high and any mistakes could have a notable impact.

Some media buyers are dealing with that reality today, as Nielsen discovered that some of its GRPs have been inaccurate since the end of January.

Joe Mandese of MediaPost's MediaDailyNews explains:

In the notice it sent to clients Wednesday, Nielsen said the problem began when it implemented a new method for calculating average audience estimates in its main TV ratings processing system beginning in February, and that it appears to have been delivering "incorrect data for time-shifted data streams" since Jan. 31.

Nielsen's so-called C3 ratings, which include time-shifted viewing for three days after a program and its advertising have aired, is the official currency for the national TV advertising marketplace, and the basis for most TV advertising buys and audience guarantees.

Nielsen said it became aware of the problem when clients "inquired about elevated average frequency levels" for the time-shifted viewing data, indicating that the glitch may have over-inflated TV audience estimates.

As Mandese observes, the timing of this mistake wasn't the best, as Nielsen is currently pushing a new GRP-equivalent for online properties.

Nielsen's television GRPs is calculated based on Nielsen's television panel. While there's nothing inherently wrong with panels in theory, they aren't perfect.

One of the biggest criticisms of panels, for instance, is that they may not be representative of the audiences they're being used to measure and analyze. More generally, statistical sampling is always subject to error of various kinds.

So are panels harmful, or useless?

No. But when it comes to digital media buying, Nielsen's flub reminds us that panel-based data and analyses shouldn't be trusted blindly. It may not be possible to measure audience directly on television, but online, panels are definitely not the end all and be all.

Patricio Robles

Published 23 September, 2011 by Patricio Robles

Patricio Robles is a tech reporter at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter.

2647 more posts from this author

You might be interested in

Comments (1)


Larry Goldstein

It's quite a stretch to call a software development error a potential peril of panels. Pure and simple, while the issue highlights the risks of imperfect quality assurance testing/protocols, it has nothing to do with the research methodology.

This particular issue, involves the R&F module in Nielsen's NPower system, NOT the ratings data used by networks and agencies to assess advertiser schedule delivery so will have no material impact on the marketplace.

NPower is a respondent level analysis system which is used by broadcasters and the largest of agencies (most cannot afford it). Everyday planning which impacts key allocation decisions is typically done with other resources -- IMS, Telmar, New Age, Stone House Systems' T-View and others. It would be helpful if these issues were better understood before the headlines were written and premature conclusions reached. Contacting Nielsen prior to publishing would help.

Larry Goldstein
Chief Media & Research Officer
Media Management, Inc.

almost 7 years ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Digital Pulse newsletter. You will receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.