Beauty and the Beast Fandom and The Nielsen Ratings

Related terms:
See also:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

The Nielsen Ratings (sometimes misspelled as "Neilsen" or Neilson" and often referred to as "the ratings") is a measurement system operated by a for-profit company that seeks to determine the size, demographics, and composition of the audiences of television shows in the United States.

High ratings, of course, mean eyeballs which in turn means advertising dollars and continued filming and support.

Beauty and the Beast (TV) fandom, probably more so than any other fandom then and now, was very openly focused on the Nielsens, The ratings were huge topic of fan speculation and discussion.

some commentary from Wishes and Dreams #2 (1990)

some commentary from Wishes and Dreams #2 (1990), Michelle Hawley: "Instead of the "Furry Batman" that CBS pushed Witt/Thomas to give us this season to raise Beauty and the Beast's Neilsen ratings, there were two other alternatives they really should have considered first. [...] #2 HEAVY METAL ROCK STAR - It would surely have attracted the "younger, hipper" audience Sagansky was looking for! Vincent reading Hemingway while playing a smokin' version of "Stairway to Heaven" on his southpaw guitar (a la Jimi Hendrix) to a screaming female audience. Vincent's next album, "Rock or Not to Rock...That is the Question" goes platinum. Too hip!"

Explaining Nielsen Ratings

In 1989, an anonymous network executive explained how it all worked to a fan. From "Conversation with a Net Exec":

On average, a B&B episode reaches 1,553 people in every thousand homes.... Of those, 1,555 or 1.5 people, 805 (or .805) are women (18 or over), 515 are men, 80 are teenagers, and 153 are children. Of those women who are watching, 372 are under 50 years of age, 433 are 50 and over. Of the men who watch, 288 are under 50 years of age, 227 are 50 and over. Of the teenagers that watch, 45 are female and 35 are male.

Q: I'm amazed, where are these figures from?

A: The basic source for all this kind of audience data is the A.C. Nielsen Co. And the numbers that I have been reading to you are averages starting with the premiere of "Beauty and the Beast" through April 9, 1989. This report is called the "Nielsen Television Index." And this is the bible. This is what this business is all about... (Note: Tape problem here. But the gist of what was said was: "Television isn't about selling programs to the audience, it's about selling an audience to the sponsors.") ...What they talk about is, oh, $7.00 to reach a thousand men or some such thing. And this (the Nielsen Index) is how they know how many thousand men, or thousand women, or women 18 to 49, or whatever it is you're looking for, that the program reaches.

Altering Results: Bagging Those Boxes

Stephanie A. Wiltse, editor of Pipeline was very upfront about gaming the system in her newsletter. Not only did it have upwards of 1,500 subscribers, it was was regularly read by TPTB:

...lest we forget; February is 'Sweeps Month.' A time when television takes an accounting ratings-wise — and charges the sponsors accordingly. And by spring, the network programmers will have formulated their first tentative schedule for next season (which they usually announce by early June). There cannot nor will there be any guarantee that Beauty and the Beast will be on that schedule.

Now can I worry? Go right ahead... If worrying prompts you to seek out every Nielsen box within 100 miles: Be it a neighbor's. A friend's. A friend of a friend's. Or someone else's, located through the want ads. Then make sure it's tuned to B&B on Friday night. In fact, write me about your appropriation of a People Meter or TV Diary, and I'll tack another issue on to your subscription [to Pipeline], gratis. The person who bags the most boxes during February gets a free subscription...and will have his/her exploits celebrated in April's "Helper's Gazetteer". "Granted the above is meant in jest, but I do think the reality of the situation is that our favourite series can live by the numbers or die by them, you takes your choice. Certainly,'twould be better to win the ratings battle before there's a need for war. And I never joke about subscriptions.

Questioning Results: The Box Hunt

From Wiltse in Pipeline and the article, "The Ratings - Quality Blind?":

The Nielsen box hunt results are still coming in. So far, out of an approximate mailing of 1,900, only one Nielsen box belonged to a "loyal" household, while three others told of boxes belonging to friends (who, rest assured, were well visited on B&B nights). Many readers wrote in, wondering how they themselves could get one of these 'people meters' or how to find people who have a box. The answer of course is that people with boxes are chosen "scientifically" at random, and are actually asked to keep mum about their participation ...so that special interest groups (like ourselves) can't affect the results.

It was some thing of a shock to discover that there are only 4,000 boxes employed nation-wide to divine what 90 million households are watching! But they do give some pretty convincing arguments — in laymen's terms — as to why such a small 'sample' is accurate: through checking multiple samples against one another, and by testing their statistical 'scale model" (in situations where complete national records are available). Even a diehard skeptic would have to concede that the bulk of their findings may well be correct.

However, there were 3 unexpected replies to the February 'Box Hunt' that do cast doubt as whether 'quality television' is actually being fairly represented in the ratings. Two loyal viewers approached by Nielsen were under the impression that they did not watch enough television to make having a box worth while. And a third was actually told by a Nielsen representative that she did not watch enough TV to be eligible for a people meter. (If you or someone you know has had this experience, industry sources suggest that a letter of complaint be registered with the address above!)

Is this a case of the discriminating being discriminated against? Have those people who view only two or three shows a week ever been able to cast their votes for the programming they watch? "Pipeline's" little impromptu survey was neither scientific nor indicative of the entire population of the United States. But, when it is known that 3 out of a possible 7 Nielsen households have not been factored into "Beauty and the Beast's" ratings, it gives one pause — if not a few more points to ponder.

It's Not the Letters, Fans. It's the Ratings

In 1989, Ray Faiola (Director of Audience Services, CBS) explained to fans about what really mattered... and it wasn't their constant letter campaigns:

What doesn't carry a lot of weight is organized campaigns. They call attention to themselves immediately, as cleverly disguised as they may often be (laughter) — we've been in this business too long. Unfortunately, the enthusiasm of the relative few seldom outweighs the inevitability of the majority (of the many) out that we then pass along to our there in Neilsen [sic] land.

In 1990, a fan wrote to Starlog:

It's a dark day when a show like Growing Pains can run for five years on three or four different jokes, disguised cleverly, and networks only literate, magically creative program, "Beauty and the Beast," is cancelled after struggling for survival. It only proves that network executives think of nothing more than ratings. Doesn't it ever occur to them that the reason a good show with umpteen million fans gets bad ratings is because the tiny percentage of the country counted in the Nielsen's are too busy looking for shows that will dull their minds rather than stimulate them?

A Fan Alternative: "Viewers for Quality Television"

The ratings system is not, as it is so often defended, a "democratic system." Luckily, our governmental affairs are not dictated by a simple body count. Our country is moved and shaken by citizens who care enough to step forward and vote. What Viewers for Quality Television is offering us ...is the only ballot box in town.

See Viewers for Quality Television (VQT).

Fan Comments

This retooling the silly network uses as their excuse for not having B&B on the fall schedule is scaring the hell out of all of us. Only because Koslow is back, and hopefully Martin, Gansa and Gordon as well, do I have any faith at all when B&B comes back that it will be the same show we've all grown to love passionately. Still, having inhabited this earth for 36 years and having seen network television screw up or cancel just about every show that dealt in fantasy and/or romance that gnawing knot of fear will remain. When Koslow is quoted in TV Guide as saying about 'Vincent's romance with Catherine? "I think that will turn bittersweet".' What does that mean? I thought it was already bittersweet! I think most of us true fans want to see this romance grow even deeper, perhaps even sweeter. Yes, we know they still have trials to face, obstacles and fears to overcome. How much more tragedy, sadness, pathos can any of us stand? Well, I guess we have to put our faith in these guys, and pray the core of this fandom doesn't become the ones betrayed in the efforts to please the couch potatoes with the Nielsen boxes.