The Melting Blog Archives

Melting Blog Archives:

000

The Melting Blog

Musings on the Intersection of Marketing, Culture, and Research

Monday, June 28, 2004

Florida's Pan-Latino Melting Pot

This morning's Column One section of the Los Angeles Times has a special report on the radical transformation of Florida's Hispanic demography -- long a central outpost for the U.S. Cuban population. Thanks to the diverse Latin American immigration in the 90's, the Sunshine State is now ground zero for a new pan-American Latinoism instead:

In a major demographic shift with implications for politics as well as the humdrum minutiae of life — including the use of parks and the kinds of foods sold in supermarkets — Florida's Latinos, more than 2.6 million strong and growing each day, are undergoing a metamorphosis. Cubans and Cuban Americans, long the majority in the state, have been reduced in the last decade to a distinct if still dominant minority.

What's more, in large part due to the newcomers, people of Spanish language and heritage are no longer concentrated in a few locations like Miami's Little Havana, settled by refugees fleeing Fidel Castro's Cuba, or the older cigar-rolling Cuban district of Ybor City in Tampa.

There is now a Little Caracas of Venezuelans in the Miami suburb of Doral, a Colombian enclave in the Broward County city of Weston, and pockets of Guatemalans in Lake Worth near Palm Beach.

In rural inland towns like Immokalee and Sebring, food markets with names like Azteca cater to Mexican farmworkers and sell votive candles with the image of the Virgin of Guadalupe, Mexico's patron saint. In formerly Anglo suburbs of Fort Lauderdale, gas stations offer hot Argentine beef turnovers.
--
Slowly, though, a trans-Latino identity is taking root. Nowadays, even a venerable temple of Cuban gastronomy like Miami's Versailles restaurant offers non-Cuban specialties on its menu, including churrasco, a thick Argentine cut of steak. Strolling Mexican-style mariachi bands are common, but the musicians are often Colombians. More and more, there are households where the spouses hail from different Spanish-speaking countries or backgrounds.

Marco Rubio, a Cuban American, knows firsthand about the blending of Latin cultures. The 33-year-old Coral Gables attorney and Republican majority leader in the state House is married to a Colombian American who used to be a cheerleader for the Miami Dolphins. They have two children.

"I describe my two daughters, Amanda, 4, and Daniella, 2, as Colombanas — half Cuban, half Colombian, and 100% American," Rubio said. "I myself never ate an arepa (a Colombian specialty made of cornmeal) until I married Jeanette." On the other hand, Rubio said, "any Hispanic who lives any length of time in Miami ends up at a Cuban bakery and picks up some Cuban words.

"What you get is all those different Hispanic cultures melding into one 'Miami' culture," Rubio said. "America has always been about taking the best of other parts of the world, the best of other cultures."'Just because you speak Spanish, no one assumes you're Cuban anymore.'

One real interesting thing to keep an eye out for is how this more diverse Latino base will vote (to the extent they are citizens) in the upcoming Presidential elections. It's no secret that Cuban American emigres have a hardcore bent favoring the Republican party. But what about these new Floridians? The article suggests many of them still hold conflicting notions of dual citizenship ("We leave the country, but we do not close the door.") Remember the insanity of 2000? Florida, as a swing state, will be as pivotal as ever, and these "New Latins" could well make the difference in 2004 should they become active.

Read the whole article.

UPDATE: In fact, John-Thor Dahlburg, the author of the aforementioned article has a second article on this very issue I've raised above (it's also in the L.A. Times). The non-Cuban Latino vote in Florida is very much up for grabs:

"It will all hinge on getting the votes out," Martinez said. In general, he said, Cuban Americans vote roughly 80% to 85% Republican, while Florida's other Latinos, including Mexicans and South and Central Americans, vote about 60% to 65% in favor of Democrats.

"In a sense," Martinez said, "they are more up for grabs than the Cubans."

More.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 9:14 am

Friday, June 25, 2004

Nielsen President: "Fox Plays the Race Card"

Susan Whiting, the President/CEO of Nielsen Media Research -- the beleaguered media ratings provider that has occupied a prominent space over here in TMB over the past month-and-a-half -- pens a response to Nielsen's critics in today's L.A. Times. Highlights:

So what's the problem? It's true that under the ratings measured by the people meter, not as many people of color are watching certain UPN programs with African American themes or Fox shows with mainstream themes. Instead, people of color - like everyone else these days - are watching a wider variety of programming, including niche cable networks, which people meters are picking up.

Since lower ratings means lower advertising revenue, News Corp. has responded with a campaign against Nielsen and people meters that has played the race card again and again. Its actions contrast significantly with those of other TV groups like CBS, Univision and Tribune, which - despite their varying concerns about the roll-out of local people meters - have not funded any campaigns against the system.

If you read the whole thing (which I encourage you to do if you're following this soap opera), she also discusses what the leaked E&Y audit means and contrasts the new people meter technology with the obsolete handwritten diary system. Interestingly enough, there's no mention of Univision or its lawsuit in this editorial -- not even an attempt to address Univision's contention about mis-sampled Spanish-speaking households. Nope, this one's aimed squarely at Rupert.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:14 pm

Thursday, June 24, 2004

Giant Robot's 10th Anniversary

Props to former New York Times film scribe, Elvis Mitchell, who on his radio show today, KCRW's The Treatment, interviewed Eric Nakamura and Martin Wong -- the inventive young entrepreneurs behind the Asian-themed pop culture movement known as Giant Robot. These hep cats have spun what started out as an underground magazine created from their garage into a virtual media empire that now encompasses book publishing, art galleries, online commerce, and retail stores (two in Los Angeles, one in San Francisco) -- where you can buy everything from your latest Bruce Lee DJ gear to tasty Calpis candy.

I can hardly believe that a decade has flown by since their inaugural issue (alas, age has a wicked way of sneaking past you). Since that time, other print rags attempting to capture the imagination of a general Asian American demographic have failed -- most spectacularly A Magazine and Yolk -- while certain off-beat, quirky publications aimed at niche-based interests have only thrived (TokyoPop, American-based purveyor of manga and anime galore, being another notable success story).

(Other "Asian American" magazines that are hanging around these days are those geared strictly at women, such as Audrey and the newly-launched Yin magazine, but since they're still in their fledgling stages, the jury's out on them.)

What's made these hip, niche attempts successful and enduring, while their higher-profile (and better funded) counterparts have fallen flat? There are of course numerous reasons, but I'd primarily chalk it up to the viral marketing factor: edgy niche-based interests have a way of generating ardent enthusiasm and strong word-of-mouth among their obsessive fans in a way that general interest publications aimed at Asian Americans haven't in the past. In addition, the subculture that forms around these shared pop affinities crossover much further beyond any single race or ethnic group.

Because irreverent, cheeky niche efforts like Giant Robot and TokyoPop are fueled by the passions and visions of their creators, they are also given more time to find their intended audiences organically ("they're out there, we just don't know how large!"), whereas there's never been a question who A Magazine was targeting. I don't know about the rest of you, but A Magazine (if you've ever tried to read it) always felt like required reading and was drudgery to get through. And Yolk? Well, Yolk never had much going for it beyond its pictures.

The magazine industry can be very unforgiving, so props to Giant Robot for sticking it out. You can listen to Elvis Mitchell's Giant Robot interview here (Real Player required) -- it's a wonderful story.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:14 pm

Wednesday, June 23, 2004

An Old Cat Sings A New Song

Following the previous post below, the battle between English vs. Spanish is a very contentious one in Hispanic marketing. You can pretty much draw a thick line to separate those in the old Univision/AHAA camp ("Spanish rules, period") and the new generation Latino vanguard of SiTV/Mun2/LaTV ("English works too, for the young!"). As a result, I just about dropped when I read this passage from Felipe Korzenny in this week's Hispanic Market Weekly (paid subscription only)

"The U.S. is the No. 2 Spanish speaking country in the world," said Felipe Korzenny, professor of communication at Florida State University in Tallahassee and co-founder of Cheskin Research. He estimated that there are 46 million Hispanics, including undocumented immigrants, in this country. That would place the U.S. behind Mexico, which has 105 million residents, and ahead of Spain, which has 41 million.

Of those 46 million Hispanics in the U.S., Korzenny estimates that 70 percent - roughly 30 million - are proficient in English. "It's time to question some of the assumptions we've made about Hispanics," said Korzenny. "Just because they speak Spanish at home, doesn't mean they have to be targeted in Spanish." Research conducted by Korzenny indicates that Latinos whose first language is Spanish spend 13.64 hours per week watching Spanish-language television and 13.48 hours watching English-language television.

I always placed Korzenny in the old guard. At least in public and at conferences, he's consistently sung the sole virtues of marketing to Hispanics in Spanish only. Moreover, in the past, Korzenny publicly debunked a study that my colleague David and I kicked off at the old, tired firm we abandoned last year. That research captured the preponderance of English-preference among Gen-Y Latino youth. His statements above clearly signal a different tune.

Not to knock Korzenny. He is one of the early pioneers of Hispanic marketing research, and the rest of us who are fortunate enough to work in this eclectic, funky industry owe him a debt of gratitude. I've had the pleasure of speaking with him several times in my short (relatively) career in ethnic marketing at various conferences. A class act. Shortly before starting New American Dimensions, he even offered a job for me to work at his firm, which I politely declined.

He's since moved on into semi-retirement as a professor at Florida State University, but still looks pretty active as an elder statesman for the ethnic marketing industry. Now, he's coming around too.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:41 am

Setting the Record Straight: Univision vs. Fox News?

All this time, I just assumed that Univision was working in cahoots with the Fox News Corp/Don't Count Us Out coalition as a triumvirate (the Axis of Arrogance) in mobilizing against Nielsen's modernization attempt of its ratings system -- aka Local People Meters (LPM).

It turns out I was wrong.

Yes, both media entities are respective giants of their domain. Check. Both companies are known for their bottomless hubris and overly aggressive business tactics. Check. Both empires are ruled by notoriously enigmatic, quirky but powerful individuals (and are also uber-Republican donors). Check. Univision has filed a lawsuit against Nielsen, while Fox's proxy bitch -- Don't Count Us Out -- considers the same. Half check. Both groups are doing this for the same reasons: to bend the ratings system in order to gain the most favorable, advantageous outcomes for optimizing their broadcast ad revenues.

But that's where the similarities end (at least in this case). Both groups are on the attack against Nielsen, but they're making two separate arguments. Not only that, but their cases outright conflict with each other. Read this report from the Dallas Morning News (which also offers a great summary of the LPM debacle). Here's the snippet:

The Nielsen fight has also exposed a long-simmering rift in the Latino media community about language. In 1992, Nielsen began a separate ratings service for the Spanish language media. And Univisión's two broadcast and cable networks consistently dominate that market.

But critics say the separate ratings index gives corporate America a false impression that Hispanic families uniformly watch Latin American telenovelas, as the soap operas are known. Moreover, the critics say that view was buttressed by faulty research that oversampled Hispanic families with foreign-born members to skew the results in favor of the Spanish language.

"The language of locomotion is English," Mr. Nogales says. He argues that the children of immigrants pick up English quickly and absorb themselves into the popular culture of Disneyland and Hollywood cinema.

The Hispanic media coalition contends that English-speaking Latinos are being undercounted by Nielsen.

---
Univisión says Spanish-dominant Latinos are being undercounted by Nielsen.

In its court filings in Los Angeles, Univisión's senior vice president of corporate research, Ceril Shagrin, said that Nielsen's preliminary data used flawed samples in the Los Angeles Spanish-language market that showed drops of as much as 50 percent in prime-time viewing among 18-to-34-year-olds – a highly sought after demographic.

"If the inaccurate Los Angeles service goes forward ... I believe that advertisers will lose faith in Univisión's previously reported ratings and its viability as a channel for advertisements to reach the coveted young Los Angeles demographic," Ms. Shagrin said in a court filing.

So Alex Nogales, President of the National Hispanic Media Coalition who leads the Don't Count Us Out coalition, says Nielsen's LPM sample undercounts English-speaking Latinos. Univision, on the other hand, contends that LPMs undercount Spanish-speaking Latinos. Which is it folks?

No wonder the Don't Count Us Out coalition still hasn't made a decision over whether to file a lawsuit to block Nielsen on the heels of Univision's lawsuit. I mean, geez, how would a legal ruling work on such a case when two different cases contend the exact opposite of the other. One of them would have to be wrong, right? Moreover, courts will have to decipher a great deal of technical, statistical know-how in their hearings -- which is about as interesting as watching paint dry.

Welcome to the world of ethnic research.

More on Nielsen's statement on the Univision lawsuit here. Plus, whoever leaked that Ernst & Young LPM audit to the L.A. Times is going to be in trouble. Ready to get kicked off the MRC, Rupert?

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:28 am

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

Where I Live, Where Samuel Huntington Lives

Yesterday I heard this story on NPR's The World about a new online tool developed by the Modern Language Association which allows any computer user to visually map out the linguistic composition of any neighborhood -- anywhere in the United States. Nifty tool, I thought. So being the compulsive research geek I am, I decided to check out the MLA Language Map (which uses data from the 2000 Census) just to see the difference of Spanish-speaking households within my hometown, Los Angeles, CA, and compare that to where Sam Huntington -- infamous author of the nativist screed "The Hispanic Challenge" -- lives in Boston, MA.

(Funny, the NPR interviewer even asked architects of this mapping program whether there was any concern over allowing this accessible tool to fall into the hands of market researchers. To which I can only say: too late suckas!)

Here are the results for Los Angeles County below (home to approx. 12 million):

As you can see, there are a healthy dose of Spanish-speaking households across the greater Los Angeles landscape, particularly well represented in those areas highlighted in yellow and light green -- essentially big chunks of the central regional core and east San Fernando Valley. Those areas colored by various blue-shades exhibit significantly smaller numbers of Spanish speaking residences. As expected, this town might be Huntington's worse nightmare (and I haven't even begun to map out the other 80 languages spoken here).

Moving right along, let's check out the Boston MSA region, est. population: 6 million:

Hmm, lots of blue areas (giving whole new meaning to the term blue bloods). Hardly the language cauldron that is Los Angeles. Yet, there looks to be several vibrant pockets of emerging Spanish-speaking neighborhoods that I bet weren't nearly as large a decade ago. As you'll recall, Huntington fears Hispanic immigration will divide the United States into "two people, two cultures, and two languages". For now, it looks like old Sam is relatively safe in his hood. But as these pockets continue to grow? Maybe not.

Listen to The World story here (windows media player required).

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 3:33 pm

Nielsen To File Motion Blocking Univision Lawsuit

*Yawn* From the daily gaggle:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Nielsen Media Research said on Tuesday it filed its response to a lawsuit brought by Univision Communications Inc. in state court seeking to block a new television audience measurement system from being introduced in Los Angeles.

On June 10, Univision, the top U.S. Spanish-language broadcaster, filed suit against Nielsen, alleging that the local "people meters" would reduce the count of its viewers in Los Angeles by as much as 50 percent.

In its filing, Nielsen, the predominant U.S. TV audience measurement provider, said that Univision "seeks to prevent the L.A. market's use of a modernized, improved and more accurate system that is already in use nationally ... because it results in lower ratings for some of Univision's programs."

Read the whole Reuters article.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 2:31 pm

Friday, June 18, 2004

Nielsen Admits To The Undercounting...

... of Asian Americans! Check out this clip from today's daily installment of the Local People Meters controversy at Media Daily News:

Actually, Nielsen said the report did reveal an underrepresentation of some people of color in its New York people meter sample: Asian Americans, who were 3 percent below the market's universe estimates for the demographic group. Ironically, no Asian-American groups have voiced any opposition to the local people meter service. The service went live on June 3, and Nielsen has faced a groundswell of pleas from clients--mainly major broadcast groups--and trade associations to delay the service until the issues can be resolved and the MRC grants accreditation.

To all my brothers and sisters in the APA media/civil rights/activism communities: Where are the protests? Where is the mobilization? Where is the outrage? The fact there's been nary a peep or hint of opposition to Nielsen's LPMs coming from the APA community (like there have been for this issue, this issue, or this issue) tells me the following:

Either the APA political, community, and media network is behind the ball and haven't yet caught up to the Nielsen LPM controversy; or
APA organizations have been left out of the organized free-for-all carried out by the axis of Fox/Don't Count Us Out/Univision; or
APA organizations haven't been paid off by Rupert Murdoch like they have for the Don't Count Us Out coalition; or
They simply recognize this whole thing for what it is: a flat-out bogus issue that doesn't have any merit. We gots bigger fish to fry.

Besides, it's not like any of the major broadcast networks opposed to LPM have any Asian-themed programming for APA households to even be on their radar screen for this to matter to advertisers. Moreover, Asian TV outlets, -- such as KSCI or KTSF in California -- probably don't even purchase audience measurement data from Nielsen, so LPMs are a moot point as far as they're concerned. Sadly, we're used to being undercounted!

The Media Daily News report was prompted by Nielsen's lengthy response yesterday to the leaked E&Y audit mentioned Tuesday. If you have the patience or inclination (few people do), read the whole thing.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 2:31 pm

Border Gaffes

In today's Washington Times, border patrol agents eager to receive their new uniforms got a surprise when their shipment finally arrived:

New Border Patrol uniforms, ordered in the wake of the agency's transfer last year to the Department of Homeland Security, arrived this month and some agents are not very happy: The new uniforms were "Made in Mexico."

"I'm embarrassed, not only as a Border Patrol agent but as an American citizen, that our government has decided to outsource the production of these uniforms with no regard for the safety of the process or the security of our country," said Joseph N. Dassaro, president of the National Border Patrol Council (NBPC) Local 1613 in San Diego.

"What system is in place to ensure that these uniforms are not stolen en masse or sold outright in Mexico to be used by terrorists, alien smugglers or drug dealers who could cross unimpeded into the United States?" asked Mr. Dassaro, a veteran agent.

More than $30 million in new uniforms have been ordered for the Border Patrol by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), a new agency within Homeland Security that now oversees the border force. Homeland Security was created in March 2003 after the September 11 terrorist attacks on America.

Read the whole thing. Then ponder this question: more outsourcing or more illegal immigration?

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:54 pm

Wednesday, June 16, 2004

More Intrigue! More Twists! Over Local People Meters

Greetings from South Bend, Indiana! I'm here for a brief stop for this conference and will be back to a mournful L.A. on Friday.

The saga continues: I know many of y'all are probably hoping I move onto a different topic, but this Nielsen LPM controversy just keeps getting more and more interesting. It's what happens when billions of dollars are at stake. Y'know that Ernst & Young audit of LPMs that I mentioned yesterday? Apparently it was a leaked document to the Los Angeles Times. Its contents were intended to be a private, internal summary for the Media Ratings Council:

The document was prepared by auditors Ernst & Young for the industry's Media Ratings Council, an independent industry organization composed of more than 50 broadcasters.

The council, which has refused to give accreditation to Nielsen's new system because of its flawed samples, said it didn't know how the document was leaked.

Nielsen was outraged over the leak, saying its system was "violated." It demanded that the council "help ensure that the integrity of the process is protected and that the by-laws of the organization are followed."

Here's a more detailed account in the New York Times -- note the public jockeying and gamesmanship by the Fox-underwritten Don't Count Us Out coalition:

The coalition sent reporters a news release yesterday reiterating its requests to have the council and Nielsen release the audit, citing the details of the executive summary as reported in The Los Angeles Times as "shocking findings" that "exceed even the most dire concerns of the coalition."

Nielsen, in its own statement yesterday, described itself as disappointed that the council's process "has been violated" and decried what it termed "the release of confidential audit information taken out of context."

The fact that News Corporation has a single member on the Media Ratings Council immediately makes them suspect. That's just pure conjecture on my end, but it's hardly far-fetched now is it? Few would put something like this beneath a Rupert Murdoch-run corporation. The Times piece also contains the following tidbit that again contradicts Alex Nogales' denial on Monday about Fox's financial sponsorship of Don't Count Us Out:

Univision has not supported the marketing campaign by the Don't Count Us Out Coalition, but another large media company, the News Corporation, has been an enthusiastic backer of the effort. It has given unspecified financial support and has helped the coalition hire well-known public affairs and political-advocacy agencies like Fabiani & Lehane and the Glover Park Group to help produce the ads and public relations initiatives.

Spin, spin, spin... twist, twist, twist... whirl, whirl, whirl...

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 11:44 pm

Tuesday, June 15, 2004

Ernst & Young's Audit of Local People Meters: Thumb's Down

In what is sure to add more fuel to the fire, consulting firm Ernst & Young has released its own audit of Nielsen's Local People Meters (LPM), and finds the system problematic. Here's an excerpt from today's Los Angeles Times:

Although the Ernst & Young audit examined a relatively small pool of minority viewers — fewer than 40 families in all — the details are likely to give a boost to critics who argue that Nielsen's "people meter" system is flawed and doesn't accurately capture what African Americans and Latinos are watching. In turn, they say, that could unfairly sway decisions made by TV programmers.

---
According to the report, auditors found that two of 12 families they checked were improperly classified as black, as were two of 27 families considered by Nielsen to be Hispanic. In one case, auditors discovered that a family listed as speaking "mostly Spanish" spoke none; as Brazilians, they speak English and Portuguese.

Ernst & Young also hit Nielsen for inadequately educating families on how to use the new system, with the auditors expressing particular concern about the experience of Nielsen's staff in this area. Of Nielsen's coaching of users, the report said: "Needs significant improvement, marginal effectiveness, marginal record-keeping."

Although this audit gives anti-Nielsen forces more fodder to discredit LPMs, the one audit that's likely to make any difference at all is the one produced by the Tomás Rivera Policy Institute. I believe it's currently being reviewed by the Media Research Council as alluded to at the end of this Adweek article, although we may not hear about it for another few weeks.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:47 am

Monday, June 14, 2004

A Second Lawsuit To Hit Nielsen By Week's End

One of the most vociferous, unrelenting anti-Nielsen critics in the media spotlight in the past several months has been Alex Nogales of the National Hispanic Media Coalition. As the chief mouthpiece for the Don't Count Us Out coalition, Mr. Nogales has been a consistent, fire-breathing presence over the entire duration of the Local People Meters controversy. Here's the latest missive from Mr. Nogales captured in AdWeek:

Nogales said he is "unconcerned" about the perception that his coalition may look like it is providing a special-interest front to what is in fact a business battle between two corporations, Fox and Nielsen, which is a unit of Adweek Magazines parent VNU. "Fox has its reasons for attacking Nielsen, and we have ours," he said. Nogales said Don't Count Us Out has received no money from Fox. (bold highlights mine)

Uh-huh, sure. In fact, this directly contradicts last week's Los Angeles Times report on Don't Count Us Out's conspicuous lobbying activites. Here's a snippet from that article cut from my June 9 post as a reminder:

Nielsen's plan to modernize its measurement system in Los Angeles and New York has drawn protests from four media companies and spawned a group called Don't Count Us Out. Sources say that the group has received more than $2 million from media mogul Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. (highlights mine)

And here's a more read-between-the-lines note hinting at Fox's financial sponsorship in a June 2 article in Adweek itself:

Nogales declined to state what parties are funding the coalition's advertising and legal endeavors, though he did acknowledge that Fox broadcasting "is working closely with us. As they've lost the most viewership [according to the LPMs], it would be silly of them to sit on the sidelines." (highlights mine)

How else would you explain a brand new non-profit organization (that previously did not exist) having the resources to launch a major media blitz (placing TV and newspaper ads like the one above) and hire phone bank centers for negative push telemarketing? Not to mention that all of this has been organized in a heartbeat once Nielsen decided to repudiate Fox and move forward with the LPM rollout.

A major philanthropic endowment? Nope, this is expensive, sophisticated political chicanery and it requires a high-rollin', big-pimpin' sugar daddy like Rupert Murdoch.

Anyway, the original motivation for this post was not to point out patent inconsistencies, but to mention another interesting revelation from the article: Don't Count Us Out is currently weighing its options over whether to join Univision and file a second lawsuit against Nielsen (quick question to any lawyers out there: would this mean they would have to disclose financials?). If they decide not to, then Nogales says his own organization, the National Hispanic Media Council, will take Nielsen to court instead. We should find out by week's end.

Read the entire Adweek article. The plot thickens...

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 11:14 pm

The Story Behind the Story

In telling the tale of the battle over Nielsen's Local People Meters (LPM), today's New York Times explores the "strange bedfellows" angle of the story involving the collaboration between Fox News Corp. and Democratic lawmakers to put the brakes on the new television measurement system. As TMB has been saying, and the article makes plain, Fox has been behind the elaborately-staged, organizing machinery all along. According to this piece, their use of tools from modern political electioneering as a way to sway public opinion caught Nielsen completely off-guard:

In a matter of a few months, this broad-based campaign seems to have overwhelmed executives at Nielsen, whose long-running disputes with its media company clients have previously been kept internal and relatively civil. At one point, Nielsen was deluged with so many complaints provoked by the anti-Nielsen forces that its phone lines were jammed.

"What's unprecedented about this is the appeal through Washington lobbyists and community organizations," said Susan D. Whiting, president and chief executive of Nielsen Media Research in New York, owned by VNU. "It has turned into a very active, aggressive political campaign" that is seeking to present what is actually "a commercial dispute as an issue of unrepresented minorities in television ratings measurement."

"In our company's history, we've never had an attack orchestrated this way," Ms. Whiting added. "We were not ready for this." (bold highlights mine)

There's another revelation in the story I didn't previously know about until reading this article (although this whole affair has had a certain acrid political stench to it). Quiz: who is the Democrat's go-to-guy for flinging filth onto their Republican opponents? (This name is probably only familiar to all you real political animals out there):

Glover Park, in turn, hired former Clinton operatives on the West Coast to handle the anti-Nielsen campaign there, chiefly Mark D. Fabiani, a former Clinton White House special counsel who worked on the Whitewater inquiry; and Christopher S. Lehane, who was also a counsel in the Clinton White House. Both men also went on to work for Mr. Gore's presidential campaign in 2000.

It all makes sense now. Lehane, if you must know, is one of those ruthless, loathed-but-feared Democratic operatives who is a leading practitioner of opposition research. In short, he digs out dirt about the enemy and leaks it to the media. During the Democratic primaries earlier this year, Lehane was one of the orchestrators behind the Kerry intern scandal. Essentially, he is Karl Rove's Machiavellian counterpart, a mostly behind-the-scenes gangsta unafraid of letting the dirt fly in the high-stakes game of win-at-all-cost politics. Most recently, he's been hired by filmmaker Michael Moore, in anticipation of the inevitable spin-and-slug fest that will accompany the release of the director's controversial Fahrenheit 9/11.

In the case of LPMs, I find it real ironic he's playing in the same sandbox as uber-Republican Rupert Murdoch and Fox News Corp.

You can finish reading the NYTimes article here. More fun ahead.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:16 am

Friday, June 11, 2004

Telemundo's Response to Local People Meters

After my posts yesterday on Univision's lawsuit to prevent Local People Meters from being implemented, you may wonder what other Spanish-language broadcast affiliates are considering. These ratings matter a great deal for all Spanish-language television networks after all. Here are the closing quotes from today's Chicago Tribune:

"They live and die by their Hispanic numbers," said Sam Armando, director of broadcast research for the media-buying firm Starcom.

"A little change can have a huge effect on [Univision's] ad revenue."

So what is Univision's chief competitor -- the NBC-owned Telemundo -- making of this whole Nielsen debacle?

Telemundo, another Spanish-language network that lags behind Univision in the ratings and was purchased by NBC in 2002, has not seen substantial declines under LPMs, said one Telemundo executive.

"It doesn't really seem to be hurting us," the executive said.

"We're not dramatically up and we're not dramatically down."

No, they haven't witnessed significant declines, in fact, early LPM readings show the needle moving up for Telemundo's ratings! (As it also does for Univision's Telefutura broadcast). See this report for the details.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 10:34 am

Thursday, June 10, 2004

Univision Sues Nielsen Over Local People Meters (updated)

The gloves, as they say, are off. As I hinted here a week ago, the anti-Nielsen forces who planned on filing a court injunction against Nielsen Media Research in California to prevent the introduction of Local People Meters (LPM) in Los Angeles have made good on that promise. This morning, Spanish-language broadcast juggernaut, Univision, filed a lawsuit against Nielsen in California's Superior Court. Hot off the press:

NEW YORK The controversy over Nielsen Media Research's rollout of local people meters has moved into the courts. Univision Communications on Thursday said it has filed a lawsuit in the Superior Court of the State of California against the TV ratings firm's July 8 launch of the LPM service in Los Angeles.

Amid a growing chorus of protests and criticism from various groups and media companies (including some Nielsen clients), and despite the Media Rating Council's decision not to accredit the LPM service in New York, Nielsen launched the LPM in that market on June 3.

In its complaint, Univision alleges that Nielsen, which is owned by Adweek Magazines parent company VNU, has engaged in unfair, unlawful and deceptive business practices by launching the LPM service in Los Angeles using flawed sampling and weighting methodologies.

The Spanish-language media company also claims Nielsen has engaged in false and misleading advertising and promotion of its LPM sample and weighting methodologies to both customers and the public, harming Univision's relationships with advertisers and giving false credibility to the LPM sample. Finally, Univision seeks damages for trade libel.

"Nielsen data is the only industry measuring tool that is available to guide advertisers in placing their television dollars, and where those dollars get placed directly affects the ability of television networks and stations to develop and air quality information and entertainment programming for their audiences," said Ray Rodriguez, president of the Univision Television Network. "The sample and the weighting technique currently employed in Nielsen's proposed Los Angeles LPM system, just as in its New York LPM system, will result in a seriously flawed measuring tool and, as a result, Hispanic media and the Hispanic community in general will be unfairly prejudiced."

While I'm not surprised that litigation has been attempted, I am a bit surprised that Univision is the one filing the lawsuit and not Fox News Corp's faux-grassroots community coalition, Don't Count Us Out, the group that's been squawking the loudest. I guess the anti-Nielsen forces decided to dispense with the pretense and allow a big media network like Univision have a go at the New York-based research company.

Now, you may remember that early results from Nielsen's LPM in New York show Spanish-language TV to be one of the ratings winners in the transition from the previous diary system. So this begs the question: why would Univision be against LPMs if their ratings gain as a result? I'm sure there are multiple reasons, but the most likely answer is: because the opportunity exists for the taking.

Let me explain. Due to the storm of protests over LPM's alleged undercounting of Latino households, Univision now has an opportunity to force Nielsen to increase the LPM sample to include considerably more Spanish-language households than before. They've seen an opening and they're jumping at it. As the 5th largest television network in the country, Univision didn't get to where they're at by playing softball. Their culture of arrogance (it starts at the top) is reknown in the Hispanic marketing industry, and they will capitalize on any chance they can get to further inflate their advertising revenues.

Whether the existing LPM sample represents a proportional, statistically valid number of Latino households I don't know (those figures haven't been made public that I know of, and even if they were, it would make sense to only .0009% of the population). But that's beside the point. Putting the heat on Nielsen to increase the LPM sample of Spanish-speaking households will lead to a marked predisposition in the final panel to boost Spanish- television ratings. And guess who benefits if that happens?

UPDATE: There's more information in this much-more detailed report from Hispanic Market Weekly (subscription only). Here is one of the allegedly erroneous flaws prompting the Univision lawsuit. Read carefully:

Univision claims that Nielsen’s sample for the Los Angeles LPM is inaccurate because it includes too few young Hispanic households and too many English-speaking ones, explains the industry insider. According to Census data, 49 percent of the households in Los Angeles that are headed by an 18-34 year-old are Hispanic. The remaining 51 percent are headed by non-Latinos. But Nielsen’s LPM sample, the executive notes, does not adequately represent this breakdown. Of the 174 households currently installed for the LPM sample that will launch in July, 100 are non-Hispanic and 74 are Hispanic. “It should be at least 85 Hispanic,” says the insider. “That clearly indicates that viewing is biased.”

Clearly? So it comes down to a difference of eleven friggin' households?!?!

HMW's report also mentions that USC's Tomas Rivera Policy Institute (TRPI) will soon be releasing their just-completed audit of Nielsen's People Meters. As a respected think tank dedicated to policy issues facing Latinos, their evaluation will probably be taken as gospel. Remember, TRPI was contracted by Nielsen to investigate this, but they nevertheless carry a great deal of third-party credibility in the community. Hence, I have no doubt they're being lobbied and pressured by both sides of the spectrum, which will make their results all the more interesting. Stay tuned.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 2:06 pm (updated 4:49 pm)

Wednesday, June 9, 2004

"Cut The Crap!" Media Group Says to Anti-Nielsen Forces

Finally, some sanity in this whole Local People Meter (LPM) farce! Earlier today, the Media Rating Council -- an industry body which accredits and monitors audience measurement services (yes, there is such a thing!) -- made an announcement asking various LPM-opposition entities to cease their public campaigning against Nielsen Media Research's LPM rollout, citing concerns over a potentially strong public backlash that experts feel may negatively influence Latinos and African Americans from getting involved in any media research at all (already a formidable challenge). The lede:

An influential television group called on its members Tuesday to stop stirring up opposition to Nielsen Media Research's plans to change the way it measures TV ratings in major markets.

The Media Rating Council — a coalition of major network, cable and advertising executives — said opposition campaigns should tread carefully, lest they ultimately discourage Latinos and African Americans from participating in Nielsen audience surveys.

Nielsen's plan to modernize its measurement system in Los Angeles and New York has drawn protests from four media companies and spawned a group called Don't Count Us Out. Sources say that the group has received more than $2 million from media mogul Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.

Two million bones, huh? Is that what it costs to become a media 'ho these days? Fox is pimpin' on the cheap I'd say. So how is this group spending the loot? Well...

Don't Count Us Out has been lobbying members of Congress, the Los Angeles City Council and community groups to protest Nielsen's plans. In addition to buying TV and newspaper ads nationwide, Don't Count Us Out has hired phone banks to target Latinos and African Americans and encourage their opposition by alleging that the new system might underrepresent them, potentially leading to the cancellation of popular shows.

The use of phone banks raises my own intrigue meter -- is it a form of push-polling possibly, or just straight up negative telemarketing?

If you've been following this soap opera, you'll realize the Media Rating Council (MRC) is the same regulating entity that withheld accreditation to Nielsen's LPM system due to "noncompliance and performance issues" of its sampling methodology. Thus, they're hardly in Nielsen's pocket, and Nielsen Media Research has obviously decided to move forward in the LPM rollout regardless. Nevertheless, MRC's statement clearly underscores a widespread feeling that Fox News Corp has taken this battle too far into the extreme. Their message is an appeal for level-headedness to prevail.

Fat chance. Don't Count Us Out's response is basically F.U.

For MRC's press release, click this. More continuing coverage later...

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 12:38 am

Tuesday, June 8, 2004

What Destiny Looks Like

I will not turn this into a basketball blog...

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 11:49 pm

Thursday, June 3, 2004

He Decides, Then Reports!

Okay, enough nonsense already. I've missed enough great news items over this past month, so I'm getting my butt back on the blogging bandwagon.

Over the past month, this item kept kicking at my side. In short, the Rupert Murdoch-sponsored "Don't Count Us Out Coalition" continues to play hardball with Nielsen Media Research over the rollout of its long-delayed Local People Meter (LPM) system, still claiming the electronic method for measuring TV viewership is biased against minority households. Now, Spanish-language media giant Univision has joined the fray against LPM as well. Surprised? Astonished? Is anyone out there even following this boring charade other than me? Here's the skinny of it:

Since April, Nielsen has been under attack from Fox Television and Don't Count Us Out, a coalition of black and Hispanic political and community leaders who claim that the LPM service undercounts minorities. Nielsen has countered that its local people meters, which have been used to measure network audiences since 1987, are more accurate than the current meter/diary system and that the LPM service shows minority viewing is dispersed among more outlets, particularly cable.

In response to early criticism of undercounting, Nielsen substantially increased its sample of African American and Hispanic households (it's largest ever) prior to their LPM rollout. Furthermore, Nielsen even decided to extend its primitive pen-and-paper diary format (which really should have been discarded during the Clinton administration) during the LPM rollout so that broadcasters will have both sets of TV ratings simultaneously at their disposal, which presumably allows the networks themselves to select which data sets to use for establishing advertising rates and making programming decisions:

Nielsen said when the LPM sample goes live, the existing diary information will also be available so that "there are two currencies in the marketplace," said Jack Loftus, senior vp of communications. "The industry can decide what numbers it wants to use." Loftus said that Nielsen will discontinue the meter diary sample Sept. 2.

You'd think this might be enough to appease Fox News Corp. and Univision, right? You'd be wrong:

"The reaction from most reasonable people in the industry has been favorable," Loftus said. "Univision and Fox are against it. I think buyers will gravitate toward the LPMs, but stations such as Fox are perfectly capable of going to advertisers and selling whatever the numbers they want." (bold highlights mine)

A not-so-thinly-veiled dig if I ever heard one. Among the coalition of the "reasonable" are the likes of NAACP and BET, who -- in a break from other Black leaders like Al Sharpton -- support the Local People Meters system (which makes sense since LPM significantly boosts cable ratings). Meanwhile, Don't Count Us Out is undeterred in delaying the LPM rollout and are planning to stick it good to Nielsen. In California, they are seeking a legal injunction against the media research company for "unfair business practices" and will soon be launching an upcoming media assault over the television airwaves in the next few months:

Nogales declined to state what parties are funding the coalition's advertising and legal endeavors, though he did acknowledge that Fox broadcasting "is working closely with us. As they've lost the most viewership [according to the LPMs], it would be silly of them to sit on the sidelines."

Look, I really don't care if a fake grassroots coalition bankrolled by Fox News Corp. calls out a major international media conglomerate like Nielsen. Should Nielsen take a cold hard look at whether its sampling system adequately captures representative minority households? They probably should, esp. since these are the fastest growing consumer segments in the country. What I find distasteful about this debacle is News Corp's approach of co-opting the language of civil rights in order to advance its own narrow business interests. It's "let's discredit Nielsen by using ire-arousing, civil rights tactics" when the matter has nothing to do with social justice at all.

So let's not delude ourselves; this is not about civil rights no matter how many black and brown screaming faces Fox can muster in its corner. It's all about television ratings pure and simple. To wrap the debate in racial justice terms cheapens the achievements of real civil rights activists and the battles they wage on that front. There's little in the history of Rupert Murdoch or Jerry Perenchio (Univision CEO) that gives them any legitimacy in the civil rights arena. For them, protecting their share of advertising revenues is the real impetus behind this thinly-disguised Fox-in-sheep's clothing act.

The bottom line: Quit frontin', Rupert. We see right through you.

Posted by Thomas Tseng, 3:03 pm