A slow Saturday look, from the other side

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Stephanie, Sep 16, 2006.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    From the Du..

    LordLovesAWorkingMan (143 posts) Sat Sep-16-06 12:58 PM
    Original message
    Should TV and radio ratings be IQ-weighted?
    I was watching my DVDs of Arrested Development last night, a brilliant show that got cancelled because it got terrible "ratings." It occurred to me that this is the same ratings methodology they use to see who's watching NASCAR. Since advertisers look not only at ratings but also at demographics to determine whether they want to advertise, wouldn't it make sense to weight Neilsen and Arbitron ratings by IQ? Higher IQs, which correlate with purchasing power, would help up-weight clever and creative shows, while shows generally favored by mouth-breathing Repunks would got down-weighted. Also the commercials you would see on good shows would be tasteful, clever, and would advertise useful stuff. The commercials on Moron TV would be for shit like fried chicken and monster trucks.

    Any thoughts? I'm tired of idiots and their buying habits determining what I get to see on TV.


    fasttense (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-16-06 01:08 PM
    Response to Original message
    1. I know, I loved Arrested Development
    I think they should put an IQ rating on each show or movie. Instead of those stupid sex and violence ratings, they should give them IQ ratings. That way you can pick the more intelligent shows to watch. The smart shows will probably attract smarter people and the advertisers can adjust their marketing strategies to better suit the audience.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
    ladywnch (48 posts) Sat Sep-16-06 01:13 PM
    Response to Original message
    2. unfortunately, there are more of the low IQ folks out there
    than with high IQs and people with low IQs spend beyond their means like everyone else so if you simply play the numbers.........they out number us. A product of the dumbing down of America.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
    Jim__ (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-16-06 01:20 PM
    Response to Reply #2
    3. Never mind.
    Edited on Sat Sep-16-06 01:21 PM by Jim__
    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
    BlueJazz (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-16-06 02:08 PM
    Response to Original message
    4. fried chicken and monster trucks


    How about a Monster Truck carrying a load of Fried Chicken?

    I know what Fried Chicken commercial you're talking about. If I hear "Sweet Home Alabama"
    one more time I'll Puke...
    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
    Connie_Corleone (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-16-06 02:48 PM
    Response to Original message
    5. IQ has nothing to do with it.
    Plenty of people with high IQs never watched Arrested Development. Some, dare I say, even watch NASCAR or "Moron TV" as you put it.

    And I wouldn't call them idiots just because they like to watch shows you think are moronic. That's like sticking your nose up in the air, looking down on people who you think are not as intelligent as you.whoa a sane one :laugh:



    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
    LordLovesAWorkingMan (143 posts) Sat Sep-16-06 03:13 PM
    Response to Reply #5
    6. Allow me to parry
    I don't care if there are high IQ people don't watch particular TV shows. I am saying that SOME shows are likely to have viewership of a different profile than other shows. I think it's misleading to use the same ratings system to determine who advertises where. Being smarter about ratings could help intelligent shows survive. That's my main point. I'm not sticking my nose up at all.
    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
    BerryBush (1000+ posts) Sat Sep-16-06 03:13 PM
    Response to Reply #5
    7. Good point.
    As tempting as it is to make those assumptions, they can be really, really wrong.

    Maybe this thought occurred to me because I was just listening to Keith Olbermann yesterday on Dan Patrick's radio show, and he was singing the praises of Hee Haw. Said it was one of the best produced shows on TV ever.

    And here I was thinking "This is a guy who grew up in suburban New York, lives in Manhattan and has fond memories of Hee Haw. And I remember when I was a kid I used to hate that show, because I actually lived in the country and all it did was remind me of my isolation from anything resembling civilization to my young mind. But when I look back on it, from a safer distance, it all seems kind of funny--corny jokes and all."

    And, really you just haven't lived until you've heard Keith Olbermann sing the "Where, Oh Where, Are You Tonight?" song in his best attempt at a corn-pone accent.

    http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2151062
    :huh:
     
  2. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    First, how's about we give people voting power in elections based on IQ? The lower the IQ, the lower the weight your vote is given. We wouldn't even need an IQ test, per se. Anyone who would vote for, say, Kathleen Blanco, automatically has registered a score of imbecile, and gets only 1/8 the voting power of a whole vote. A Cynthis McKinney voter gets 1/16 voting power. And so on.
     
  3. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360

    :laugh:
     

Share This Page