YMCA B-Baller
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2006
- Messages
- 808
As expected, the ratings stunk:
https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2025/02/nba-all-star-viewership-decline-tnt/
Not that it makes much difference. The NBA is increasingly a niche product designed for corporate America to reach a certain younger demographic that likes to spend money, watch viral videos and tool around on social media.
I'm not here to defend the NBA All-Star Game. It was dumb and what I watched of it sucked.
I am here to cry out that we need to stop using ratings as an end-all, be-all. The media landscape is too fragmented to use it as a historical barometer.
In addition, the NBA All-Star Game was up against the SNL reunion show, and unexpectedly, against the Daytona 500. Is that level of competition analogous to previous years? The game was also on TNT, which is going to knock the rating down by itself.
I will never understand why "share" doesn't get more traction than "ratings". At least share gives you an idea of where a program ranked against its competition.
Share numbers are probably way down historically from the three-network days, but you can see where something ranks in its timeslot more accurately.
Interpreting Nielsen data is interesting. For example, on their web site, Nielsen lists where viewers come from. In January, it was 42.6% streaming, 24.4% cable, 22.5% broadcast and 10.5% other.
Read that a certain way, and it seems like networks are headed for extinction, but Nielsen provides the breakdown of where those streaming numbers are coming from and no entity, not even OG Youtube, has half the audience cable or broadcast have.
My point is that it's a weird landscape and TV ratings can provide a window, but hardly any kind of definitive window into tastes of the public like they once could.