"Unreliable Viewership Ratings, Not Reflecting Changes in Media Environment... Sample Controversy Also"

[Asia Economy Reporter Seolgina Jo] "The media environment and viewing habits have changed, but the TV ratings survey method has not. The ratings results are inevitably inaccurate." "Even with viewing records, a 0% rating appears. There is an issue with the appropriateness of the panel."

As new media such as Google YouTube and Netflix rise, rapidly changing the media environment, concerns about the current TV ratings survey method are also increasing. It is pointed out that the method fails to properly reflect changes in viewing habits, and the composition of the panel, which is the sample group for the ratings survey, applies different ratios for each platform, raising concerns about distortion.

According to the industry on the 19th, the Korean Association for Journalism Studies recently held a seminar titled 'Limitations of the Current TV Ratings Survey and Seeking Alternatives According to Changes in Viewing Habits' to discuss these problems with the TV ratings survey method.

Dr. Seong Yuntaek of KOBACO, who presented at the seminar, pointed out the issue of fluctuating ratings and limitations of the survey, saying, "There can be cases where the rating is 0% despite having viewing records." He criticized that "the existing TV ratings survey method has reached its limit."

The current TV ratings survey takes the form of a sample survey. AGB Nielsen holds over 95% of the domestic ratings data survey and provision market, effectively a monopoly. The 'panel,' which is the sample household participating in the ratings survey, should represent each platform, region, age, and gender, but it is pointed out as a problem that Nielsen’s ratings survey method applies different panel ratios between platforms.

According to AGB Nielsen’s panel data, compared to the population ratio, the cable panel ratio is significantly low, while the IPTV panel ratio is excessively high. For cable, the panel ratio is about 60% of the population, indicating under-sampling, whereas IPTV is over-sampled at 126% (based on nationwide households). This means that the value represented by one cable panel member is reflected disproportionately higher than that of IPTV panels.

As the panel ratios differ significantly from the population, the ratings survey company announces data with its own weighting applied, but there is no remedy for cases where the rating is ‘0’. Dr. Seong expressed concern, saying, "Verification of ratings is necessary, but currently there is none in Korea."

Professor Kim Hwalbin of Kangwon National University, who participated in the discussion, said, "The media environment and viewing habits have changed, but the ratings survey method has not," adding, "From the advertiser’s perspective, ratings are inevitably necessary to execute advertising. The demand for improvement in the ratings survey method will continue to be raised."

Dr. Seong Gihyun of Yonsei University also said, "There is an issue with the appropriateness of the panel," and questioned, "Would the relevant business operator accept a zero rating?" For broadcasting channel operators (PP), advertising revenue is a major source of income, so if a zero rating appears contrary to actual viewing records, the impact is unavoidable.

He suggested, "This is not a problem that private operators can solve among themselves," and proposed, "A ratings verification committee led by the government is necessary." As a solution, he also suggested using set-top box data. However, this has the limitation of being household data rather than individual data, and cooperation from platform operators is essential.

Dr. Jung Yongchan of KISDI also pointed out, "Since ratings include public interest, it cannot be left to the private sector alone," and noted, "The survey environment is deteriorating as viewing habits diversify and it becomes difficult to get cooperation from panels." He questioned, "How much can a TV set in the current media environment reflect the viewing habits of general viewers?" calling it a "coverage issue."

He also emphasized the need for a paradigm shift in the ratings survey. He suggested, "It is necessary to combine panel surveys with set-top box data." However, the industry inside and outside agrees that this is not an easy task. Dr. Jung said, "Everyone agrees with this intention, but it is not easy to implement," and added, "Regulatory authorities need to intervene with some degree of enforcement."

Regarding this, Dr. Hwang Sungyeon of Nielsen Media said, "To prevent zero ratings, a large number of panels are needed," and added, "Nielsen also hopes for a verification system or organization." He acknowledged the limitations of the ratings survey method but said, "It is impossible to solve this with Nielsen alone."

At the discussion, participants agreed on the need to establish an organization like K-MRC (Media Data Council), similar to the U.S. MRC. The MRC was organized in the 1960s in the U.S. to verify ratings. As of last year, 155 companies are members. It prepares and discusses ratings survey methods, standards, and execution according to the changing media environment.

Professor Choi Youngjae of Hallym University, who moderated the session, said, "There is a need for a permanent organization to seek alternatives according to changes in viewing habits." Dr. Seong suggested, "Government funds such as the Broadcasting Development Fund should be used to invest in improving the ratings survey method."