>>172011541:1 for streaming is way closer than the Nielsen trickery. Not saying everyone watches alone but I would bet it’s on average less than 3 per screen. Either 1 or 2 in 75% of the streams. Just knowing the audience.
You know enough about Nielsen to know how scummy those numbers are. Not just 5 per household all watching the same thing (retarded because by the late 90’s everyone had TV’s in their corresponding rooms, kids weren’t watching what their parents watched etc etc) but there was something like 10k or 20k Neilsen boxes out there and they extrapolated out from there. The type of person that even signs up for that is not an average person. Then to say because 2000 of those boxes was watching Nash Bridges that must mean 20% of everyone watching TV on Wednesday night in America was watching Nash Bridges is crazy. The sort of person that got those boxes was the sort of person that watched ultra normie TV. Every single kid I knew in school watched South Park, it sold insane amounts of merch and was white hot those first few years. If you look up the ratings it does show a 5 fold increase over the first season but the actual number of people watching was probably 5 or 10x’s what Nielsen had down. There was a show called Pants Off Dance Off, it was on Fuse. For boys of a certain age, everyone turned that fucking show on. It probably got a 0.001 rating but any guy I talk to that’s my age remembers watching that shit at some point. The box households skew heavily towards shit like Young Sheldon and stuff like that. They know what they are doing, it’s all a scam to create data to grift advertisers. No one wants the real numbers out there, the day that happens is the day they’ll have to play fair with advertising, so never.
