Hey,

If you enjoy The Office, check out this free on-line sitcom, Break A Leg. It's like The Office set in Hollywood.

Breakaleg.tv

Enjoy!

Blaine

That midnight penguin person sure has a lot of time on their hands to argue about something like that. Well, we all have our passions I guess.

BS is the right abbreviation for Big Shots. That whole show is complete BS. I really had to force myself to watch it till the end. Main problem: there's no plot, and of what they tried to get across nothing did interest me at all. Dylan McDermott is just a nice face nothing more, the whipped guy looks like a puppet and the West Wing dude's story is just completely idiotic.

With a lack of "quoting" abilities or even italics, I wasn't able to convey that I was quoting Bob and agreeing with you.

Oh well... not the first time things were worded wrong or misunderstood online.

"Big Shots won the 10pm race, though it lost viewers halfway through to Without A Trace and and ER."-tvs

is NOT the same as

"Note that "Big Shots" won the 10:00 slot with a 5.4 rating ("Trace" - 5.1, "ER" - 4.2) but its 4.0 rating lost the 10:30 slot to both series ("Trace" - 4.5, "ER" - 4.1)."-futoncritic

Paul, I agree with you that futoncritic meant it that way - I don't think I ever said differently. My point was that Bob's statement does not mean the same thing. It can be take two ways so it should be worded better. That's all I was trying to point out.

Yes, but you report that they "lost viewers half-way through TO" the two shows without fully explaining the half-hour numbers directly - implying, in my opinion, that the people turned around and turned on the other shows. This is why futoncritic gave the breakdown of the numbers for each half hour in their post. They didn't lose them TO anyone, they just lost them. My point was that without the rest of the information not every will interpret it the way you assume they will (which is why I took note with it) - and your statement vs futoncritic's wording mean two totally different things, at least to me.

I appreciate the link to where you get the numbers, but what is your job as a poster then if you've leaving it to us to investigate how our shows are doing? Many people probably rely just on your post to get their information for the day. You start with a 18-49 statement, go into the overall. When ABC takes second are we to assume that you mean overall or 18-49? I assumed overall since it was following the overall comment by CBS. While ABC took second in both and the other stations stayed in line the same way, it can get confusing. The 20% drops you mention are in 18-49, but it SOUNDS like you return to the overall when you go back to NBC. You single out OFFICE's highest 18-49 ratings, which to me implies a change from the prior statement, which would mean the prior statement was meant to give overall ratings.

Presentation of data is critical in my opinion. I am just asking for a better presentation of it if you're going to make a post. I know you can't repeat exactly what futoncritic says, but how about an opening paragraph that states what the overall ratings between each of the stations did, followed by a second statement of the coveted 18-49. THEN in subsequent paragraphs break down what the shows were and who won the hours in the 18-49, making special note as to what the top overall show was. At least that is how I personally would rather read it, it would clearly set out the differences between Neilsen's two ratings. If I'm the only reader out there that feels like that then I apologize. Maybe I'm just the most vocal and no one else cares about the ratings post? I do enjoy seeing the ratings post for what it's worth.

Midnight Penguin: The Futon Critic itself says that Big Shots won the 10 to 10:30 time period and then "lost the 10:30 slot to both series (Without a Trace and ER)."

I think you're misreading that quote there. It's not saying it LOST VIEWERS TO those shows, just that it LOST TO those shows.

Midnight Penguin: The Futon Critic itself says that Big Shots won the 10 to 10:30 time period and then "lost the 10:30 slot to both series (Without a Trace and ER)."

CSI was #1 in households at 9, but #2 in the 18-49 demo. Grey's was #1 in the 18-49 demo, but #2 in households.

As for overall numbers vs. specific demos, that's why I link to the ratings, so everyone can read the numbers themselves and see how their favorite shows did in various time slots against other shows.

Ah, nbc you've got the best #'s ever for one of your more popular shows and it's still THIRD!

I'd like to clarify that BIG SHOTS only won the 10-1030 time slot. The 1030-11 slot was won by WITHOUT A TRACE followed by ER and then BIG SHOTS. When you look at overall numbers, WITHOUT A TRACE beat BIG SHOTS overall, coming in 3rd total viewers and 3rd for 18-49 for the 10-11 time slot, versus BIG SHOTS doing 5th and 4th respectively.

BIG SHOTS didn't lose viewers to WAT or ER - that's a misrepresentation/misunderstanding on what futoncritic actually published. If you look closely at the data, both of the other shows also lost viewers, so in general people just turned off their televisions, but more so of the people watching BS.

This took me all of 10 minutes to analyze the data they posted. Maybe take a little more time with these ratings posts?