"The Amazing Race" doing season of social media stars

[David]

http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-star-cast-of-the-amazing-race/

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of ‘The
Amazing Race’
By Joe Otterson

The 11 teams competing this season are:

Tyler Oakley and Korey Kuhl

Tyler has more than 7.7 million subscribers on YouTube and is one of
the biggest social media influencers in the space. He is racing with
his best friend and fellow YouTube star, Korey Kuhl, who hosts the
award-winning podcast “Psychobabble” with him.

Burnie Burns and Ashley Jenkins

Burnie runs Rooster Teeth, one of the largest gaming sites with more
than 8.2 million subscribers on YouTube. He is racing with his
girlfriend and Rooster Teeth co-host, Ashley.

Erin White Robinson and Joslyn Davis

Erin and Joslyn are best friends and YouTube hosts for the popular
news and entertainment channel Clevver, where they cover everything
Hollywood.

Sheri and Cole LaBrant

Cole is a teen heartthrob Viner who has amassed more than 6.5 million
followers. He is racing with his mother, Sheri.

Zach and Rachel King

Zach is best known as the Magic Viner and has more than 3.7 million
followers. He is racing with his wife, Rachel.

Dana Borriello and Matt Steffanina

Engaged couple Dana and Matt are best known for their dance videos and
tutorials. They have danced all over the world and Matt has more than
2.4 million subscribers on YouTube.

Jessica Versteeg and Brittany Oldehoff

Jessica and Brittany are best friends and Instagram Models who
together have more than 60,000 followers.

Marty Cobb and Hagan Parkman

Marty is best known for her hilarious flight attendant safety
demonstration that went viral and has more than 22 million views on
YouTube. She is racing with her daughter, Hagan.

Scott and Blair Fowler

Blair started her YouTube channel when she was 14, posting beauty and
fashion videos. She has expanded her channel to include all things
lifestyle and has amassed more than 1.7 million subscribers. She is
racing with her father.

Kurt Gibson and Brodie Smith

Brodie turned his Frisbee skills into popular videos and has a YouTube
channel with more than 1 million followers. He is racing with his best
friend and former ultimate Frisbee teammate, Kurt. They won three
National Championships at the University of Florida.

Cameron and Darius Benson

Cameron and Darius made a name for themselves on Vine by doing crazy
stunts like parkour, unicycling and juggling. Together they have more
than 3 million followers.

[Barry Margolin]

Post by David
http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-star-cast
-of-the-amazing-race/
Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of ‘The
Amazing Race’
By Joe Otterson

Yep, I'm officially an old fart -- never heard of a single one of them.
I haven't caught any of the viruses.

How did they avoid casting PewDiePie? He's the only social media "star"
I can name (although I hadn't yet heard of him when South Park spoofed
him last season -- it wasn't until he went on Colbert that I understood
what that was about).

Maybe they should hire him to do color commentary in the corners of the
episodes.

[Nancy Dooley]

I am with you, Barry...same goes for me. I believe it is a point of pride
not to have ever heard of any of these people. What is "social media,"
anyway?? LOL.

N.

[Michael Black]

Post by Nancy Dooley
I am with you, Barry...same goes for me. I believe it is a point of pride
not to have ever heard of any of these people. What is "social media,"
anyway?? LOL.

That's the joke.

In 1997, when I was trying to get groups to post to the local newsgroup,
someone said "it's too techical". I can't remember if I spoke it or just
thought it, but my reaction was at least to think "it's social". He was
talking about the effort to do things online, I was talking about the
benefits of posting about the group.

So as far as I'm concerned, Usenet is "social media". but the term only
came up much later, I think cooked up by marketers wanting to make some
specific site more important. But now, people just use the phrase,
assuming everyone knows what it means. A futher joke is that without
Usent, they'd not exist, since 20 or 30 years of Usenet helped to define
online interaction, so those sites extracted what was learned and created
a Disneyfied version. They all talk about spam, about "crossposting", and
they all "LOL", plus smileys, but they don't realize it all came from
here.

Michael

[Frosty]

Post by Nancy Dooley
I am with you, Barry...same goes for me. I believe it is a point of pride
not to have ever heard of any of these people. What is "social media,"
anyway?? LOL.

I think everyone is from YouTube.

[Brian Smith]

Post by Frosty

Post by Nancy Dooley
I am with you, Barry...same goes for me. I believe it is a point of pride
not to have ever heard of any of these people. What is "social media,"
anyway?? LOL.

I think everyone is from YouTube.

Is this for real? Sounds like the entire cast would be very young which is
something BB would do but not TAR. Did they not learn anything from the
Survivor: Second Chance vote where the public got to vote in the players?

[Frosty]

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Frosty

Post by Nancy Dooley
I am with you, Barry...same goes for me. I believe it is a point of pride
not to have ever heard of any of these people. What is "social media,"
anyway?? LOL.

I think everyone is from YouTube.

Is this for real? Sounds like the entire cast would be very young which
is something BB would do but not TAR. Did they not learn anything from
the Survivor: Second Chance vote where the public got to vote in the
players?

Bunch of mom n dad's along for the ride.

[Michael Black]

Post by Barry Margolin

Post by David
http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-star-cast
-of-the-amazing-race/
Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of ?The
Amazing Race?
By Joe Otterson

Yep, I'm officially an old fart -- never heard of a single one of them.
I haven't caught any of the viruses.

I haven't even heard of some of those "social media" sites.

So someone had their own set of fans at age 14? I didn't even get a
computer until I was 19. Of course, at 14, unless I had the money for a
minicomputer, the only choice was the Scelbi 8008 computer or the Mark 8
(also based on an INtel 8008 CPU). The Altair didn't arrive until I was
fifteen, and I certainly didn't have the money for one.

Michael

[Frosty]

Almost don't want to watch it but that means the ratings will be huge then.

[Karen M]

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of 'The
Amazing Race'
By Joe Otterson
Tyler Oakley and Korey Kuhl
Burnie Burns and Ashley Jenkins
Erin White Robinson and Joslyn Davis
Sheri and Cole LaBrant
Zach and Rachel King
Dana Borriello and Matt Steffanina
Jessica Versteeg and Brittany Oldehoff
Marty Cobb and Hagan Parkman
Scott and Blair Fowler
Kurt Gibson and Brodie Smith
Cameron and Darius Benson

As if the current FitBit product placement weren't sufficiently annoying, they have to feature social media "stars". I know I signed up for a YouTube account years ago but have no clue what the password is. Doesn't matter, given how rarely I've attempted to sign in, so the excitement of 'following' someone will just remain a mystery for me.

What the hell is an "Instagram Model"? Yes, I know what Instagram is, but the concept of an "Instagram Model" baffles me. Can one make a living that way?

Ah well, Amazing Race has been an entertaining diversion for the last 14 years, but I'd been thinking about working on my Masters and can use the extra hour to study, or something.

Karen

[Brian Smith]

Post by Karen M

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of 'The
Amazing Race'
By Joe Otterson
Tyler Oakley and Korey Kuhl
Burnie Burns and Ashley Jenkins
Erin White Robinson and Joslyn Davis
Sheri and Cole LaBrant
Zach and Rachel King
Dana Borriello and Matt Steffanina
Jessica Versteeg and Brittany Oldehoff
Marty Cobb and Hagan Parkman
Scott and Blair Fowler
Kurt Gibson and Brodie Smith
Cameron and Darius Benson

As if the current FitBit product placement weren't sufficiently annoying,
they have to feature social media "stars". I know I signed up for a YouTube
account years ago but have no clue what the password is. Doesn't matter,
given how rarely I've attempted to sign in, so the excitement of
'following' someone will just remain a mystery for me.
What the hell is an "Instagram Model"? Yes, I know what Instagram is, but
the concept of an "Instagram Model" baffles me. Can one make a living that
way?
Ah well, Amazing Race has been an entertaining diversion for the last 14
years, but I'd been thinking about working on my Masters and can use the
extra hour to study, or something.

You can use Instagram to sell photos, services, etc. I think an Instagram
model is a model who uses Instagram to get modeling jobs or other related
work. Apparently there are some big name models that do this. If they're
already big in the business I'm guessing it must be more for self-promotion
than getting jobs but who knows. Maybe they want to get on reality TV! A
number of reality TV people have been found on Facebook for example, and
Becky from this past season of BB was found on Tinder (thank you to whoever
found her! lol) so I wouldn't be surprised if people haven't been found on
Instagram. Instagram appears to be more popular than Twitter based on the
reality people I follow.

[Questor]

Post by David
http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-star-cast-of-the-amazing-race/
Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of "The Amazing Race"
By Joe Otterson

Interesting... I wonder if this crossover strategy will work for CBS/TAR.

Presumably the fan base of these media-sharing site celebrities skews younger
and is largely outside of the usual TAR viewer demographic. Even allowing for
a moderate amount of overlap between followers, that's more than thirty million
new potential TAR viewers. If only twenty percent of them watch, that's
still several million... does anybody know off the top of their head what the
current ratings numbers are for TAR, and how much this would help them?

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Questor

Post by David
http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-star-cast-of-the-amazing-race/
Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of "The Amazing Race"
By Joe Otterson

Interesting... I wonder if this crossover strategy will work for CBS/TAR.
Presumably the fan base of these media-sharing site celebrities skews younger
and is largely outside of the usual TAR viewer demographic. Even allowing for
a moderate amount of overlap between followers, that's more than thirty million
new potential TAR viewers. If only twenty percent of them watch, that's
still several million... does anybody know off the top of their head what the
current ratings numbers are for TAR, and how much this would help them?

Since TAR's move to Friday their average rating is roughly a 1.1 with an overall viewership of just under 6 million. That represents a 25% to 30% drop in viewership compared to similar seasons when TAR was on Sunday nights.

It appeared that TAR was on the bubble at the end of the last spring season only to get a reprieve with another fall/spring renewal.

Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewers are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to understand. However, it will be interesting to see if there is really a noticeable bump from this type of stunt casting which would boost TAR to a 6.5 or 7 million viewer average that would put it into first place for its timeslot.

However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply because the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather that be bothered with watching it themselves.

So, we'll have to see.

Ken

[Nancy Dooley]

The social media race got a "jeer" from TV Guide.

N.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Nancy Dooley
The social media race got a "jeer" from TV Guide.

Not surprising since TV Guide has traditionally favored TAR when it includes all "regular folk" for its cast.

Are casting social media "stars" an act of desperation or experimentation or just the results of boredom and laziness I don't know. I can say that while the ratings are lower than they were on Sundays, they are following the same rock-steady pattern of really not moving much from episode to episode. So whether this round of stunt casting makes any significant difference in the ratings is hard to say. (By "significant" I mean adding 500,000 to 1 million people to the overall average).

Ken

[Brian Smith]

Post by Nancy Dooley
The social media race got a "jeer" from TV Guide.

That's interesting given that CBS owns TV Guide.

[Nancy Dooley]

Brian, the CBS owning TVG apposite the jeer to the casting does say
something for a little bit of a corporate "hands off."

N.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Nancy Dooley
Brian, the CBS owning TVG apposite the jeer to the casting does say
something for a little bit of a corporate "hands off."

Plus, it is typical of the pattern TV Guide has established with TAR over the years. I've read their write-ups which "poo-poo" having reality show "celebrities" on TAR as well as "All-Star" versions because they like the show when it's all new people who are not celebutards and whatnot.

Ken

[Larry]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney
Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewers are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to understand.

Where did anyone suggest that? I think the idea is that the fans of
the social media personalities will have a desire to watch the show to
see their favorites. That's a lot different than saying they are
unaware of the show. I don't watch BB, The Voice, etc but that
doesn't mean I am unaware of them.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Larry
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney
Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewers are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to understand.

Where did anyone suggest that? I think the idea is that the fans of
the social media personalities will have a desire to watch the show to
see their favorites. That's a lot different than saying they are
unaware of the show. I don't watch BB, The Voice, etc but that
doesn't mean I am unaware of them.

I admit I worded my statement rather poorly.

The intention was, although it didn't really come across that TAR has been around for 14 years which means that a big chunk of the social media audience TAR is trying to reach knew the show as kids. And if they watched TAR during that time it was most likely with their parents.

Frankly, that's not much of a "cool" factor with which to entice audiences to watch the show.

We have PLENTY of examples of crossover stars on TAR and the only ones to have a measurable impact in terms of the almighty ratings was "Romber" in TAR 7 which helped them garner the best ratings overall TAR has ever had. Otherwise, no real change at all in the ratings for other guest stars.

To be fair, I cannot say what kind of impact this new effort may or may not have although I can say that "millions of hits" does not necessarily mean "millions of viewers" as they are two different things.

Having said that, if TAR consistently does 6.5 to 7 million viewers in the spring and boosts its 18 to 49 demo up to 1.5 or more, then it's safe to say it worked. If not...well, they tried.

Ken

[Questor]

Post by David

Post by Questor

http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-sta=

r-cast-of-the-amazing-race/

Post by Questor

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of "The Amazing=

Race"

Post by Questor

By Joe Otterson

=20
Interesting... I wonder if this crossover strategy will work for CBS/TAR.
=20
Presumably the fan base of these media-sharing site celebrities skews you=

nger

Post by Questor
and is largely outside of the usual TAR viewer demographic. Even allowin=

g for

Post by Questor
a moderate amount of overlap between followers, that's more than thirty m=

illion

Post by Questor
new potential TAR viewers. If only twenty percent of them watch, that's
still several million... does anybody know off the top of their head what=

the

Post by Questor
current ratings numbers are for TAR, and how much this would help them?

Since TAR's move to Friday their average rating is roughly a 1.1 with an ov=
erall viewership of just under 6 million. That represents a 25% to 30% drop=
in viewership compared to similar seasons when TAR was on Sunday nights.=
=20
It appeared that TAR was on the bubble at the end of the last spring season=
only to get a reprieve with another fall/spring renewal.=20
Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewe=
rs are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to underst=
and. However, it will be interesting to see if there is really a noticeable=
bump from this type of stunt casting which would boost TAR to a 6.5 or 7 m=
illion viewer average that would put it into first place for its timeslot.=
=20
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for =
younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply bec=
ause the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather=
that be bothered with watching it themselves.=20
So, we'll have to see.=20

So even if only two or three percent of the total possible fan base tunes in,
it will result in a significant jump in viewer numbers. Like I say,
interesting...

TAR obviously can't get big stars known by hundreds, or even tens of millions
of people. But now there are minor celebrities with national (not just
regional) appeal recognized by at least millions of people. No doubt the
racers are hoping the exposure will increase their viewers as well.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Questor

Post by David

Post by Questor

http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-sta=

r-cast-of-the-amazing-race/

Post by Questor

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of "The Amazing=

Race"

Post by Questor

By Joe Otterson

=20
Interesting... I wonder if this crossover strategy will work for CBS/TAR.
=20
Presumably the fan base of these media-sharing site celebrities skews you=

nger

Post by Questor
and is largely outside of the usual TAR viewer demographic. Even allowin=

g for

Post by Questor
a moderate amount of overlap between followers, that's more than thirty m=

illion

Post by Questor
new potential TAR viewers. If only twenty percent of them watch, that's
still several million... does anybody know off the top of their head what=

the

Post by Questor
current ratings numbers are for TAR, and how much this would help them?

Since TAR's move to Friday their average rating is roughly a 1.1 with an ov=
erall viewership of just under 6 million. That represents a 25% to 30% drop=
in viewership compared to similar seasons when TAR was on Sunday nights.=
=20
It appeared that TAR was on the bubble at the end of the last spring season=
only to get a reprieve with another fall/spring renewal.=20
Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewe=
rs are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to underst=
and. However, it will be interesting to see if there is really a noticeable=
bump from this type of stunt casting which would boost TAR to a 6.5 or 7 m=
illion viewer average that would put it into first place for its timeslot.=
=20
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for =
younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply bec=
ause the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather=
that be bothered with watching it themselves.=20
So, we'll have to see.=20

So even if only two or three percent of the total possible fan base tunes in,
it will result in a significant jump in viewer numbers. Like I say,
interesting...

Keep in mind that those who view television shows and those who follow on social media are two different things. Plus, how many followers are duplicated for each show? This would significantly reduce their numbers if the crossover is considerable.

Post by Questor
TAR obviously can't get big stars known by hundreds, or even tens of millions
of people. But now there are minor celebrities with national (not just
regional) appeal recognized by at least millions of people. No doubt the
racers are hoping the exposure will increase their viewers as well.

It's difficult to say what, if anything will happen because TAR has not tried something like this before. Apart from "Romber" in TAR 7, no crossover guest has managed to boost the ratings to any significant degree.

All I can say is that TAR has set a pretty consistent pattern in terms of their ratings since moving to Fridays. It will need to change upward well beyond the normal fluctuation point of 5.6 to 6.2 million and be consistent over the season for there to be any measurable impact.

So, I'm looking for a 6.5 to 7 million in total viewers and 1.5 minimum in the valuable 18 to 49 demographic that combined would boost TAR to a measurable degree. I think that is more than fair in terms of judging what impact it has for the season in general.

The season premiere might give us a hint of what's to come, but really all the episodes need to be evaluated to see if this new audience sticks around.

Ken

[Brian Smith]

Post by Larry
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by David

Post by Questor

http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-sta=

r-cast-of-the-amazing-race/

Post by Questor

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of "The Amazing=

Race"

Post by Questor

By Joe Otterson

=20
Interesting... I wonder if this crossover strategy will work for CBS/TAR.
=20
Presumably the fan base of these media-sharing site celebrities skews you=

nger

Post by Questor
and is largely outside of the usual TAR viewer demographic. Even allowin=

g for

Post by Questor
a moderate amount of overlap between followers, that's more than thirty m=

illion

Post by Questor
new potential TAR viewers. If only twenty percent of them watch, that's
still several million... does anybody know off the top of their head what=

the

Post by Questor
current ratings numbers are for TAR, and how much this would help them?

Since TAR's move to Friday their average rating is roughly a 1.1 with an ov=
erall viewership of just under 6 million. That represents a 25% to 30% drop=
in viewership compared to similar seasons when TAR was on Sunday nights.=
=20
It appeared that TAR was on the bubble at the end of the last spring season=
only to get a reprieve with another fall/spring renewal.=20
Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewe=
rs are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to underst=
and. However, it will be interesting to see if there is really a noticeable=
bump from this type of stunt casting which would boost TAR to a 6.5 or 7 m=
illion viewer average that would put it into first place for its timeslot.=
=20
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for =
younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply bec=
ause the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather=
that be bothered with watching it themselves.=20
So, we'll have to see.=20

So even if only two or three percent of the total possible fan base tunes in,
it will result in a significant jump in viewer numbers. Like I say,
interesting...

The overnight ratings numbers aren't as important as they used to be. The
"live + 7," etc. are what the networks seem to care more about. This is what
CBS Entertainment Chairman Nina Tassler had to say at the beginning of the
year during a press tour.

9:02 a.m. CBS is No.1 in total viewers and overnight ratings are less
important than ever before. And CBS is getting more value out of viewers in
digital platforms and whatnot. "It's about finding all viewers, wherever
they are and whenever they watch," she emphasizes. But the CBS brand is
distinguished by the ability to find big audiences. CBS has launched three
new hits, the top three ranked new shows (presumably overall?). Those would
be "NCIS: New Orleans," "Madam Secretary" and "Scorpion." ALL THREE HAVE
BEEN RENEWED. Tassler also says that "Stalker" is still in contention for
next season. [That's ridiculous, but whatever.] Tassler thinks that all of
CBS' Sunday shows should be getting more recognition, not just "Good Wife."
"Mom" is the fastest growing returning show, Tassler says.

9:18 a.m. How much life is left in "The Amazing Race"? "As we know, 'The
Amazing Race' is one of our beloved unscripted franchises. It is an upscale
show," she says, adding that it did well. She says the producers have made
some changes and that there will be some surprises in store. She likes that
with unscripted shows you can bring in new viewers with each new cast.
Tassler praises the playback ratings for "Race."

Source:
http://www.hitfix.com/the-fien-print/cbs-nina-tassler-on-the-state-of-the-network-press-tour-live-blog#uCk0vvKC3fg8ReaW.99

So the big question is are less people watching TAR than before or just at
different times? I know that's the case for me often since the move to
Friday night. Also, does everyone watch every season or do they come and go?
If this is the case which I think is obviously true, then "stunt" casting
might be resulting in new viewers. When you factor in this additional info
stunt casting doesn't look that stupid after all.

Post by Larry
TAR obviously can't get big stars known by hundreds, or even tens of millions
of people. But now there are minor celebrities with national (not just
regional) appeal recognized by at least millions of people. No doubt the
racers are hoping the exposure will increase their viewers as well.

I'm sure the racers are hoping that but does their exposure go up? For
example, are Meghan and Joey more popular now than before they did TAR? And
if they are, is it because of TAR or something else? I doubt TAR helped at
all as the show doesn't have enough time to develop characters and/or does a
horrible job of doing so. Survivor with two less players does a much better
job. If you go by social media numbers the more TV exposure the better. BB
people have by far the most followers, then Survivor followed by TAR at the
bottom of the pack.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Larry
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by David

Post by Questor

http://www.thewrap.com/tyler-oakley-korey-kuhl-lead-social-media-all-sta=

r-cast-of-the-amazing-race/

Post by Questor

Tyler Oakley, Korey Kuhl Lead Social Media All-Star Cast of "The Amazing=

Race"

Post by Questor

By Joe Otterson

=20
Interesting... I wonder if this crossover strategy will work for CBS/TAR.
=20
Presumably the fan base of these media-sharing site celebrities skews you=

nger

Post by Questor
and is largely outside of the usual TAR viewer demographic. Even allowin=

g for

Post by Questor
a moderate amount of overlap between followers, that's more than thirty m=

illion

Post by Questor
new potential TAR viewers. If only twenty percent of them watch, that's
still several million... does anybody know off the top of their head what=

the

Post by Questor
current ratings numbers are for TAR, and how much this would help them?

Since TAR's move to Friday their average rating is roughly a 1.1 with an ov=
erall viewership of just under 6 million. That represents a 25% to 30% drop=
in viewership compared to similar seasons when TAR was on Sunday nights.=
=20
It appeared that TAR was on the bubble at the end of the last spring season=
only to get a reprieve with another fall/spring renewal.=20
Given that the show has been around since 2001, the idea that younger viewe=
rs are somehow unaware of the series would be a little difficult to underst=
and. However, it will be interesting to see if there is really a noticeable=
bump from this type of stunt casting which would boost TAR to a 6.5 or 7 m=
illion viewer average that would put it into first place for its timeslot.=
=20
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for =
younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply bec=
ause the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather=
that be bothered with watching it themselves.=20
So, we'll have to see.=20

So even if only two or three percent of the total possible fan base tunes in,
it will result in a significant jump in viewer numbers. Like I say,
interesting...

The overnight ratings numbers aren't as important as they used to be. The
"live + 7," etc. are what the networks seem to care more about. This is what
CBS Entertainment Chairman Nina Tassler had to say at the beginning of the
year during a press tour.
9:02 a.m. CBS is No.1 in total viewers and overnight ratings are less
important than ever before. And CBS is getting more value out of viewers in
digital platforms and whatnot. "It's about finding all viewers, wherever
they are and whenever they watch," she emphasizes. But the CBS brand is
distinguished by the ability to find big audiences. CBS has launched three
new hits, the top three ranked new shows (presumably overall?). Those would
be "NCIS: New Orleans," "Madam Secretary" and "Scorpion." ALL THREE HAVE
BEEN RENEWED. Tassler also says that "Stalker" is still in contention for
next season. [That's ridiculous, but whatever.] Tassler thinks that all of
CBS' Sunday shows should be getting more recognition, not just "Good Wife."
"Mom" is the fastest growing returning show, Tassler says.
9:18 a.m. How much life is left in "The Amazing Race"? "As we know, 'The
Amazing Race' is one of our beloved unscripted franchises. It is an upscale
show," she says, adding that it did well. She says the producers have made
some changes and that there will be some surprises in store. She likes that
with unscripted shows you can bring in new viewers with each new cast.
Tassler praises the playback ratings for "Race."
http://www.hitfix.com/the-fien-print/cbs-nina-tassler-on-the-state-of-the-network-press-tour-live-blog#uCk0vvKC3fg8ReaW.99
So the big question is are less people watching TAR than before or just at
different times?

That's easy, TAR is down 25% to 30% when compared to it's Sunday numbers on the overnight, 3 and 7 day viewing for the Nielson ratings.

So yes, significantly fewer people are watching TAR now than they did when it was on Sunday night. The Nielson numbers I've seen for those viewing periods reflect the overall drop.

Post by Brian Smith
I know that's the case for me often since the move to
Friday night. Also, does everyone watch every season or do they come and go?

Since the move to Friday the ratings have been remarkably consistent for the fall and spring seasons. In fact, a hallmark of TAR since the 10th season was just remarkable stability of the ratings over both the fall and spring seasons with the only notable exception being when TAR went up against the Oscars or some other big event show.

Post by Brian Smith
If this is the case which I think is obviously true, then "stunt" casting
might be resulting in new viewers. When you factor in this additional info
stunt casting doesn't look that stupid after all.

This is stunt casting and it may or may not work, we'll have to look at the overnight and 3 day numbers to see for sure. What I can say is that the difference between the overnight, 3 and 7 day are fairly close overall and often the show does not change positions with the competition because their numbers often go up by the same small amount.

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Larry
TAR obviously can't get big stars known by hundreds, or even tens of millions
of people. But now there are minor celebrities with national (not just
regional) appeal recognized by at least millions of people. No doubt the
racers are hoping the exposure will increase their viewers as well.

I'm sure the racers are hoping that but does their exposure go up? For
example, are Meghan and Joey more popular now than before they did TAR? And
if they are, is it because of TAR or something else? I doubt TAR helped at
all as the show doesn't have enough time to develop characters and/or does a
horrible job of doing so. Survivor with two less players does a much better
job. If you go by social media numbers the more TV exposure the better. BB
people have by far the most followers, then Survivor followed by TAR at the
bottom of the pack.

Over the first five or six weeks of the upcoming spring season will reveal in the ratings the impact of the stunt casting. A consistent rise of a half million to one million new viewers along with an uptick in the important 18 to 49 demographic from its current 1.1/1.2 up to 1.5 or higher on a consistent basis will tell if this actually works or not.

Personally, no one has any idea whether this stunt casting will pay off and a guess is just a guess. However, there are standards by which to see if there has been any real impact in terms of ratings during the season.

I can say that it should be an interesting test of the power of internet "stars" and their pull on viewership. However, the numbers will have to be significantly and consistently higher in order to determine real, additional viewers from the typical bounces that occur week to week.

As for whether TAR lasts into the 2016/2017 season is not for me to say either as I stopped guessing after the ratings for the ninth season went into the tank and CBS renewed it anyway. So, whether it stays or goes depends on how CBS sees the series by the late spring as it still makes them money even with the lower ratings.

Ken

[Ken McElhaney]

Just to clarify, I believe that a very fair standard to see if next season's stunt casting is successful in gaining new viewers according to the Nielson ratings would be if the show AVERAGES 6.5 to 7 million viewers each week.

That means if its 6.3 one week and 6.8 the next and follows that trend for the next several weeks then it should be considered a measurable rise due to the casting of the contestants as it would be roughly a half-million viewers higher than it has enjoyed since its move to Friday.

Anything less than that would be IMHO not a rise of any significance, so we will have to wait and see. Traditionally, the first and last episodes tend to do slightly better than the middle, so I believe a run of the first five shows should be sufficient to get a good average.

The 18 to 49 demographic should go up I would think if the overall rise happens unless for some reason the new cast brings in the viewers who are largely OUTSIDE the 18 to 49 spectrum which I kinda doubt.

As I've said, I think this is a really good test of whether social media "stars" actually translates to real viewers. It will be tough since Friday is a pretty bad night, particularly for young people when it comes to watching the show. But hey, let's see these kids handle tough.

Ken

[Loren Pechtel]

On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply because the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather that be bothered with watching it themselves.

And how many are watching time-shifted or downloaded from the web and
thus not being counted?

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Larry
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply because the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather that be bothered with watching it themselves.

And how many are watching time-shifted or downloaded from the web and
thus not being counted?

The overnight, 3 day and 7 day time-shifted are counted and the drop has been consistent across the board from when TAR was on Sunday. CBS has not reported that those who watch from their website has risen in any dramatic fashion since the move to Friday.

But then again that is to be expected. Sunday is generally the most viewed night for television programs and that number drops each day until it reaches Saturday, the worst night for programs in terms of ratings.

Ken

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Ken McElhaney

Post by Larry
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly for younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump simply because the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give updates rather that be bothered with watching it themselves.

And how many are watching time-shifted or downloaded from the web and
thus not being counted?

The overnight, 3 day and 7 day time-shifted are counted and the drop has been consistent across the board from when TAR was on Sunday. CBS has not reported that those who watch from their website has risen in any dramatic fashion since the move to Friday.
But then again that is to be expected. Sunday is generally the most viewed night for television programs and that number drops each day until it reaches Saturday, the worst night for programs in terms of ratings.

But then again, if they can't count them...then they don't count. Ratings still rule.

Ken

[Brian Smith]

Post by Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney

Post by Larry
On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 12:21:08 -0800 (PST), Ken McElhaney

Post by Ken McElhaney
However, the show is on Friday which is a terrible night, particularly
for younger viewers and it's entirely possible that there is no bump
simply because the fans of these shows will simply listen to them give
updates rather that be bothered with watching it themselves.

And how many are watching time-shifted or downloaded from the web and
thus not being counted?

The overnight, 3 day and 7 day time-shifted are counted and the drop has
been consistent across the board from when TAR was on Sunday. CBS has not
reported that those who watch from their website has risen in any
dramatic fashion since the move to Friday.
But then again that is to be expected. Sunday is generally the most
viewed night for television programs and that number drops each day until
it reaches Saturday, the worst night for programs in terms of ratings.

But then again, if they can't count them...then they don't count. Ratings still rule.

That might be true but not as much as in the past and probably even less so
in the future.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Ken McElhaney
But then again, if they can't count them...then they don't count. Ratings still rule.

That might be true but not as much as in the past and probably even less so
in the future.

It's not "it might be true" it IS true today as it remains the dominant method used by networks to keep or cancel shows. Ratings that meet or exceed network expectations means the shows are renewed. Ratings lower than network expectations result in cancelled shows.

There are exceptions, but they are very few and far between and the exceptions prove the rule. For every show that has been saved due to factors beyond ratings there have been hundreds, if not more shows that were cancelled by the very same rating results.

It is true that networks make money from other sources such as selling seasons online for example. However, the money generated by this method is for the most part directly proportional to the overall popularity of the show reflected in the ratings.

Again, there are exceptions such as "Family Guy" for example, but for the vast majority of shows the money they make money online is not nearly as important consideration for networks compared to ratings which set the bulk of the money that comes from advertisers.

Now, sometime in the future it will change only because ALL things change.

However, as long as the advertiser/television network/cable channel relationship continues to be based on ratings which set advertiser rates, then the fundamentals do not change.

Ratings rule.

Ken

[Brian Smith]

Post by Ken McElhaney

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Ken McElhaney
But then again, if they can't count them...then they don't count.
Ratings
still rule.

That might be true but not as much as in the past and probably even less so
in the future.

It's not "it might be true" it IS true today as it remains the dominant
method used by networks to keep or cancel shows. Ratings that meet or
exceed network expectations means the shows are renewed. Ratings lower than
network expectations result in cancelled shows.
There are exceptions, but they are very few and far between and the
exceptions prove the rule. For every show that has been saved due to
factors beyond ratings there have been hundreds, if not more shows that
were cancelled by the very same rating results.
It is true that networks make money from other sources such as selling
seasons online for example. However, the money generated by this method is
for the most part directly proportional to the overall popularity of the
show reflected in the ratings.
Again, there are exceptions such as "Family Guy" for example, but for the
vast majority of shows the money they make money online is not nearly as
important consideration for networks compared to ratings which set the bulk
of the money that comes from advertisers.
Now, sometime in the future it will change only because ALL things change.
However, as long as the advertiser/television network/cable channel
relationship continues to be based on ratings which set advertiser rates,
then the fundamentals do not change.
Ratings rule.

That relationship is changing quickly. Also look at how quickly people are
cutting the cord. As more and more people consume their television much
differently than in the past I don't see how traditional rating models are
going to apply. When people watch episodes online from cbs.com, etc. I don't
think that's included in the ratings even though you're still subjected to
ads. This viewership is obviously being measured and will one day probably
be wrapped into a model that includes all sources. Until that happens I
wouldn't put too much stock into the usual ratings/shares numbers that we're
used to seeing. Some shows look like disasters based on the overnight
ratings but a week later look much better. TAR seems to be in that category
based on what Nina Tassler said earlier this year. With the new Star Trek
series CBS seems to be saying that they can skip the traditional model
altogether and go the Netflix route via All Access.

[Ken McElhaney]

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Ken McElhaney

Post by Brian Smith

Post by Ken McElhaney
But then again, if they can't count them...then they don't count.
Ratings
still rule.

That might be true but not as much as in the past and probably even less so
in the future.

It's not "it might be true" it IS true today as it remains the dominant
method used by networks to keep or cancel shows. Ratings that meet or
exceed network expectations means the shows are renewed. Ratings lower than
network expectations result in cancelled shows.
There are exceptions, but they are very few and far between and the
exceptions prove the rule. For every show that has been saved due to
factors beyond ratings there have been hundreds, if not more shows that
were cancelled by the very same rating results.
It is true that networks make money from other sources such as selling
seasons online for example. However, the money generated by this method is
for the most part directly proportional to the overall popularity of the
show reflected in the ratings.
Again, there are exceptions such as "Family Guy" for example, but for the
vast majority of shows the money they make money online is not nearly as
important consideration for networks compared to ratings which set the bulk
of the money that comes from advertisers.
Now, sometime in the future it will change only because ALL things change.
However, as long as the advertiser/television network/cable channel
relationship continues to be based on ratings which set advertiser rates,
then the fundamentals do not change.
Ratings rule.

That relationship is changing quickly.

You are mistaking overall lower network ratings that have been going down over the past 30+ years for a change in the basic relationship between advertisers and networks/cable channels.

That has not changed.

Post by Brian Smith
Also look at how quickly people are
cutting the cord. As more and more people consume their television much
differently than in the past I don't see how traditional rating models are
going to apply.

Again, your scope is too narrow. Around a decade ago Nielson started monitoring computers as part of their overall research for gathering information about what people watch which at that time went outside TV programs since they were not online yet.

Today, Nielsen provides that information to the networks. Your understanding of how all of this works is not up to date.

Post by Brian Smith
When people watch episodes online from cbs.com, etc. I don't
think that's included in the ratings even though you're still subjected to
ads.

Nielsen monitors that for the networks, although the networks themselves know how many times a video is viewed from their website. Plus, they know how many people purchase individual shows and full seasons.

They are not living in the stone age, Brian. They know all of these things already and take that into account

Today, the vast majority of people still watch programs on TV. It still represents the lion's share of where network revenue comes from AND much of the viewing from network sites and purchasing seasons REFLECTS the ratings in general.

A popular show on the network will tend to have more viewings and more purchases online than an unpopular show. Again, there are exceptions, but the exceptions prove the rule.

Post by Brian Smith
This viewership is obviously being measured and will one day probably
be wrapped into a model that includes all sources. Until that happens I
wouldn't put too much stock into the usual ratings/shares numbers that we're
used to seeing.

Well, since you have demonstrated a basic misunderstanding of what networks already know, I would not put too much stock in your belief system that thinks networks are somehow unaware of how many people watch online.

They do know that information and either Nielsen reports it to the advertisers or the networks do themselves. So that part is all covered.

Post by Brian Smith
Some shows look like disasters based on the overnight
ratings but a week later look much better.

You are applying YOUR standards to network expectations that none of use know about. What YOU see as a "disaster" may not be seen that way by the network since we are not familiar with their expectation of a particular show.

Conversely, some shows that appear to do "okay" get cancelled by networks on an annual basis. Clearly, they see something based on ALL the information that we are not privy to that you don't see.

Post by Brian Smith
TAR seems to be in that category
based on what Nina Tassler said earlier this year. With the new Star Trek
series CBS seems to be saying that they can skip the traditional model
altogether and go the Netflix route via All Access.

The new Star Trek series is going to be a fairly cheap one compared to its potential budget if it were a prime-time series. CBS as well as the other networks have created online-only shows for years, so this is not a new move for them.

Until the basic relationship between advertisers and networks/cable channels change in a fundamental way, ratings as we know them will be with us for the foreseeable future.

As of today, ratings still rule.

Ken

[Ken McElhaney]

Oh yea, a few years ago you stated that Nielson would be dumping its 18 - 49 demographic rating because the general population was getting older.

Well, that has not happened and it's not going to happen in the foreseeable future for a very good reason.

A plethora of studies stretching back to the 1960s have shown that people from 18 to 49 years old are far MORE likely to try NEW products than those who are older. Businesses WANT to appeal to younger people because they know they are more likely to try new products compared to older people who tend to be more set in their ways.

It's the very reason Nielson created the 18 to 49 demographic.

Plus, what businesses want is to create and keep a customer who is in their 20s or 30s because they are more likely to keep purchasing their products for decades to come. The same is simply NOT true for those over 50 who are less likely to try new products and sadly, are not likely to live as long as someone who is decades younger than they are.

Sure, there are businesses that sell products that are designed exclusively for older people, but that is just a fraction compared to the number of businesses that sell products that appeal to wide-ranging audience that includes food, clothing and everyday products that teenagers to seniors use on a daily basis.


Plus, let's say that a decade from now the vast majority of people watch TV shows online. If advertisers are still involved then the fundamentals of ratings do not change. Shows that few people watch get cancelled because advertisers will not back them while shows lots of people watch stay because advertisers will fund them.

Yes, there will be some shows which may be crowdfunded or perhaps purchased directly by viewers. But it's a lot easier and far less of a hassle to get advertisers to back the program rather than having to raise the money themselves.

So, while the format may change from television to going online, the fundamentals of how shows stay in production will not change as long as businesses want to advertise.

Ken