No offense but i hope ot tanks
I hope it tanks..big time...
share
Take a look here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1399045/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt
Granted, there aren't a ton of votes, but other shows have started slow with the number of people casting their opinions. I can't say how many more it'll take until it becomes statistically significant - that's not my branch of math.
There are twice as many people who gave it a 1 as did give it a 10. And those are the two largest voting blocks.
But to me, the most telling item is the median score - 4 - meaning there are as many votes below 4 as there are above it.
Also quite telling: how low non-US voters' opinions are.
Somewhere, I saw ratings which put all three Friday CBS shows in the top 25...
Why do people insist IMDB ratings mean anything?
The advertisers pay attention to the Neilson Ratings, in particular to the 18-49 demographic. IMDB is probably the most dishonest website and voting system on the web. I could go on the page for "Bull" (CBS's #1 new show) right now and rate it as a 1 even though I've never watched it and have no intention of watching it. And believe me there are more people who do that than not which is why I NEVER base what I watch on what people on IMDB say.
I can't say how many more it'll take until it becomes statistically significant - that's not my branch of math.
My math background mimics that of Galois, and I knew Erdős (RIP 20 years). But...at some point, some volume of votes has to become significant.
And whilst Nielsen (sp?) ratings are important for 18-49, 50-59 is next, which is where this Nielsen (sp?) household comes in.
And whilst one wants to believe in Nielsen (sp?), you have to remember "60 Minutes" ranks up with the best of them, week in and week out, even when it's rerun time. Why? It's got to be part of the DVR vote - they mark every show as "New", even when the three stories could be from the 80s, 90s, and 00s, as they were earlier this year. I 'spose they could claim the hour was "new" in the sense all three stories hadn't been shown together before, making it a unique airing, but methinks they're trying to stack the deck.
(Not unlike some publishers have done in the past by rerouting their fulfilled book orders through crucial channels which are traditionally used to project overall book sales.)
share