Help Change TV BLOG

DOES THE LATINO MARKET AGREE THEY HAVE RECEIVED SPECIAL TREATMENT

help spread the word! — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:45:00 +0000

I've noticed over the past year or so (since the immigration debate became a big media topic) a SLIGHT increase in negative email directed at Latinos via Help! Change TV.

The emails range from people who don't bother to check out what Help! Change TV is really about (we don't hold a position in the immigration debate) to just plain ignorance about Latinos in general.

I am happy to say that some who've emailed negative comments but included legitimate email addresses, we were able to have a constructive dialogue with. In a couple of cases it was very refreshing to have an honest exchange of ideas that I THINK resulted in a better understanding of what Help! Change TV's goals are. Everyone, regardless of their ethnicity, at some point in their life, has felt marginalized, misunderstood or just plain left out, I promise you. And I think most people, especially in today's environment, can sense when a multi-billion dollar corporation is unwilling to "build a better mousetrap" when there is a lack of incentive (or in this case competition).

Alas, but there are others, who hide behind the anonymity of the Internet with fake email addresses and seem to be happy to spew their opinion, right or wrong without sticking around long enough to hear the other side or consider the consequences of their beliefs.

Irregardless, I am happy to say that 95% or more of the thousands of emails we've received have been positive, supportive and for that we thank you.

It really helps to hear the encouraging words and that is why we continue the fight for change. We hope to be releasing these comments very soon as we near our third year of no change from Nielsen Media Research in counting U.S. born Latinos fairly in their surveys.

In the meantime, in the interest of full disclosure and maybe to "out" those who have some very strong opinions about the subject of diversity in the U.S. but don't seem to want us to know who they are, I will be posting these "anonymous" emails, for everyone to see.

The following email was sent by someone this past weekend. I sent two email responses but got nothing back, so I'm assuming it was a fake email address.

Here for your viewing pleasure is an email from SOMEONE from SOMEWHERE who believes that because Latinos would simply like to be depicted honestly and accurately on TV, they are asking for special treatment. Life is not fair and yes, all immigrants had to put up with their fair amount of negativity in their day and age.

But that doesn't make it right... and that doesn't mean that Nielsen Media Research can ignore a better research method just because they don't have competition.

The email from this weekend is below:

Via Email
TO: Help! Change TV
FROM: Anonymous

DOES THE LATINO MARKET AGREE THEY HAVE RECEIVED SPECIAL TREATMENT?

compared to any other immigrant group to ever come to America?

Is it fair that just about everything in this country is written in Spanish as well as English? Why not the two languages of China, or Arabic, or any of the languages in Africa, or Japanese? Why not have everything in this country written in English and every other language on earth besides Spanish.

To disagree that Latinos receive special treatment is absolutely ignorant.

Help Change TV? You are joking right?

HELP! CHANGE TV SETS RECORD STRAIGHT ON

help spread the word! — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 22:37:00 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

HELP! CHANGE TV SETS RECORD STRAIGHT ON
NIELSEN’S HISPANIC RATINGS MOVE
Nielsen’s Much Touted Move Leaves U.S. Born Latinos Out of the Mix... Again!

New York, September 4th, 2007 – Help! Change TV responded to Nielsen Media
Research’s recent announcement that it will produce its Hispanic TV ratings through its National People Meter “general market” panel exclusively while abandoning the National Hispanic People it has used since 1992 to track Hispanic television viewing.

“This move still does not address the Nativity issue (Hispanic sampling represented by census data for U.S. born & non U.S. born) in Nielsen’s methodology which unfortunately remains the biggest obstacle to obtaining more accurate TV ratings for all U.S. Latinos,” stated Robert G. Rose, founder of the initiative Help! Change TV (formerly “Change the Sample”).

“With all the hype over Latinos being compared to ‘side by side’ next to the ‘general market,’ the fact remains that TV ratings for U.S. Hispanics will remain inaccurate until Nielsen adjusts their sample based on Nativity, the proven and single most important factor that determines whether Latinos watch TV in Spanish or English,” Rose continues.

Help! Change TV contends that the impact of Nielsen’s erroneous Hispanic ratings on the media and marketing industry is that many advertisers and marketers overspend media budgets on Spanish language television under the assumption they are reaching the majority of U.S. Latinos. In reality these marketers are missing the largest, youngest and fastest growing segment of the U.S. Latino population (U.S. born Latinos), who currently comprise over 65% of all U.S. Latinos and are projected to be over 75% of all U.S. Latinos by 2020 yet rarely if ever watch Spanish language TV.

The impact on viewers’ lives includes an under-representation of Latinos on English- language television resulting in skewed stereotypes that tend to mislead many non-Latinos that Latinos are either recent or “illegal” immigrants who do not speak English and are not a valuable part of mainstream society or are one dimensional stereotypes that have remained prevalent in the media for years (gang-bangers, Latin lovers, drug dealers, prostitutes, maids, gardeners, etc.).

Help! Change TV’s grassroots initiative for change includes www.HelpChangeTV.com
where concerned viewers and those in the industry can go for more information and sign
the petition for change.
# # #
CONTACT:
Margarita Cheng / Tel (212) 627-3192 x18
Email: HCTV@AIMtvgroup.com

New York Times - Too Many Latinos On Primetime TV???

help spread the word! — Mon, 28 May 2007 22:36:00 +0000

A New York Times Arts and Entertainment Blog recently featured a bit of coverage on our Help! Change TV (HCTV) street team campaign at the television network upfronts.

The writer received a flyer while attending the ABC Upfront and she assumed the campaign was simply protesting the cancellation of The George Lopez Show. It looked like she didn’t bother to visit the web site, or if she did, only on a cursory, surface level.

Had the writer taken the time to go to the site and properly research the issue, she would have seen that Help! Change TV’s specific purpose at the upfront was not simply as protesting the cancellation of one show on English language TV.

HCTV attacks the root and cause of the cancellation, which of course, is money and which is directly tied to ratings and Nielsen Media Research’s role in the under-representation and stereotyping of Latinos on English TV (due to their under sampling of young, U.S. born Latinos or those most likely to watch “The George Lopez Show”).

George Lopez spoke out pretty strongly against the circumstances surrounding the cancellation of his show. I agree with him on many points.

The show was moved several times and was repeatedly up against the American Idol juggernaut. Just as it was headed to syndication, ABC pulled the plug on one of the first shows featuring a mostly Latino cast and crew (since they didn’t produce the show, they don’t get the lucrative dollars that the production studio will from syndication).

Puzzling that no one seems to be mentioning the outrageousness of the recent low ratings of The George Lopez Show, which Nielsen, defying all logic, reported attracts more African American viewers than Hispanic viewers? Preposterous!

If Nielsen were correctly counting U.S. born Latino viewers (those most likely to watch Latino shows in English according to mounds of research), who knows what the George Lopez Show’s ratings would be?

Would it be enough to beat American Idol in head to head competition? Probably not.

Enough to save the show for another season? Possibly.

But the point is “who knows”? Since Nielsen Media Research does not track nativity, they can not tell you how many U.S. born Latinos are watching anything (ah, but they can tell you how many Latinos of Peruvian or Bolivian heritage are watching).

The New York Times reaction came across like so many in today’s corporate media world; simplistic, a bit lazy and elitist (some may argue, a bit like Nielsen Media Research). The writer pointed to the one remaining successful Latino show on network TV (Ugly Betty, also on ABC) and hinted that George Lopez is jealous or “disappointed” at this success. The blog suggested that since Latinos have Spanish language TV, one Latin show on English language, prime-time network TV is fine; as if two or three would simply be too many (despite that fact that in many major markets like Los Angeles, young Latinos are 50% of key demographics).

The writer further suggested that Latinos clamored for Spanish language TV and got it because there “was gold in them there barrios”, clearly ignorant of the fact that Spanish TV has been around for well over 30 years and appeals almost exclusively to immigrant Latinos (and just 17 million or so of the nation’s 42 million documented U.S. Latinos).

The writer doesn’t acknowledge (or know) the fact that U.S. born Latinos make up over 60% of all U.S. Latinos and represent a market that is 25 million strong making up a much larger percentage of the network and advertiser coveted youth demographics (persons aged 18-34 and persons 12-34). This information and more is on the www.HelpChangeTV.com site.

The writer does refer back to the couple or three recent failures by the English language networks to woo Hispanic audiences, suggesting, I suppose that since the networks tried and failed once, they shouldn’t try it again.

Never mind the fact that approximately 80% of all new TV series fail. Are Latin themed shows on English TV somehow supposed to be held to a higher standard of success? The suggestions is that if the networks are generous enough to try a Latin themed show and are not blessed with an immediate, surefire hit (as in the case of “Ugly Betty”), then there is no need to try again for another five or six seasons.

Latinos have “Sabado Gigante” (Big Saturday) or wall to wall nightly novellas and soccer on Spanish language TV! What else can they possibly want?

The writer for the times needs to spend a weekend with AIM Events, promoting our shows. If we could coax her into El Barrio or East LA she’d witness a very different picture.

She’d see many Latinos (not all of them U.S. born by the way) fed up with the limited choices on Spanish TV’s imported (and inexpensive) programming that they eagerly sign the Help! Change TV petition. She’d also see fatigue with the tired, old gardener-maid-drug dealer-prostitute stereotypes and the persistent lack of representation on English language TV.

When we announced the Help! Change TV initiative to pressure Nielsen to change their ratings methodology last fall, I received an urgent call from the New York Times business section, very excited about writing about the effort on this issue. This writer requested an urgent interview with me so he could meet a quick deadline. I dropped everything I was doing to accommodate their deadline.

The following week, when the story never ran, I called the writer back to ask what happened. He was kind enough to return my message but sheepishly admitted the article didn’t run because Nielsen Media Research never called him back to give their side of the story.

How many times have you read a news story where one side of the issue never calls back by deadline and you see the story run anyway? Read your paper today (if you still get your news from the paper); see how many stories fit that description.
After reading the unfortunate New York Times blog after the upfront, I can’t help but wonder if the old “Nielsen didn’t respond by my deadline” excuse really holds water.
I think it just might be another case of an elitist, out of touch newspaper not understanding the very issues they purport to write about or the REAL world around them. The NY Times blog writer said that Help! Change TV was “confusing” yet the Toronto Globe Mail wrote a wonderful piece about it (as did scores of other publications in the U.S.). More recently a student run, neighborhood newspaper “The Bronx Journal” did an excellent job of telling the Help! Change TV story (and they got a call back from Nielsen for comment within one day). The message was not “confusing” to them.

So let me get this straight: One New York Times writer was “confused” and yet another New York Times writer couldn’t get a call back from Nielsen for comment? Howver college students in the Bronx easily grasped the issue and wrote about it and were able to get a call back from Nielsen within a day?

I wonder if the New York Times writers would be happy with just a single network show that didn’t make fun of or misrepresent them in some way. If all TV network shows but that one presented New York Times writers as intellectually lazy, out of touch, media elites. Do you think then they might understand and empathize a little more with U.S. born Latinos?

Then again, maybe that wouldn’t be such an inaccurate stereotype after all.

Link to the NY Times blog below:
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/39/
Link to the Bronx News Journal Story Below:
http://aimtvgroup.com/hctv/press/TBJMayEdition2007ENG_11.pdf

http://www.helpchangetv.com/
Robert Rose is CEO of AIM Tell-A-Vision Group (a division of Artist and Idea Management, Ltd.) and American Latino TV, LLC and founder of Help! Change TV as well as Executive Producer of American Latino TV and LatiNation (http://www.aimtvgroup.com/). The opinions expressed are those of the author alone, and not of the companies with which he is affiliated.

Robert Rose Responds to Nielsen’s Comments on Hispanic TV Ratings Issue

help spread the word! — Mon, 30 Apr 2007 22:35:00 +0000

NIELSEN’S DARFIELD CONTINUES DISTURBING PATTERN WITH COMMENTS ON HISPANIC RATINGS ISSUE

Nielsen Media Research’s Senior VP of Hispanic Services, Doug Darfield (former Univision executive) was recently quoted in a trade publication responding to why Nielsen doesn’t match census data for Nativity (U.S. born / non U.S. born Latinos) in their Hispanic samples despite overwhelming evidence that Nativity is the major factor determining media consumption among U.S. Hispanics.

The following quote from Darfield was published in MultiChannel News’ Hispanic TV Update, April 4th, 2007:
“It is amusing. The poor fellow [Robert Rose] really does believe there is some sort of conspiracy there. Getting the information from the old sample will show that this in fact is not what was going on and never was going on,” he continues “My own personal belief is that what we’re going to find out is that by controlling on language we are going to have the born inside/born outside number exactly where it needs to be because they are surrogates on some level.”

How is Darfield so sure that Nielsen is not over-sampling foreign born Latinos? The company has gone on record numerous times stating they don’t ask that information. How can a research company, which makes its living on providing cold, hard and supposedly objective research, allow a key executive to make public assumptions without evidence or predict an outcome and still claim objectivity?How does a multibillion dollar company like Nielsen allow a key spokesperson to make such broad, sweeping and irresponsible comments and still claim any credibility?

This, I’m afraid is modus operandi for this “objective” research company. When we first went public with concerns related to Nielsen’s erroneous sampling of U.S. Latinos in November 2005, Nielsen’s “spokesperson” Jack Loftus responded with public comments that bordered on hysterics that amounted to personal attacks rather than addressing the issue. His unprofessional and undignified comments were surprising. To see comments in full context go to www.HelpChangeTV.com/press

In August 2006, Darfield and I along with other marketing and research professionals familiar with the issue were invited to participate in a debate at the Texas Association of Broadcasters (TAB) meeting in Austin.

The behind the scenes at that encounter proved to be very telling.

THE REST OF THE STORY

Having known of Darfield from my Univision days, I held on to the belief that despite Nielsen’s misguided methodology and Darfield’s Univision connection, the company probably employed good, professional people who, if given the chance, would support a more accurate TV ratings service. Darfield, Ed Rincón and the other participants of the debate team had a good, civil, pre-debate rapport. All in good spirit, nothing personal, just people who were on different sides of an important, if complicated, issue.

A THREAT OR A FAVOR?

I was seated next to Darfield on the panel and just as the introductions began, he whispers over to me something to the effect “don’t worry I won’t mention how low your ratings are.” I was a little taken aback at what seemed like a not too veiled threat. Then I thought “why do I care?”

At AIM TV, our ratings are a source of pride for us, with over 1 million viewers weekly (according to Nielsen’s own studies), our broadcast syndicated shows provide, by far, the largest reach of any show in English targeted to U.S. born Latinos and we gladly use these ratings, just like the big media companies, to sell our advertising and to track our success. Our reach and ratings success is a big reason we do so well among Fortune 500 advertisers and have grown from 27 cities to over 100 the past five seasons. So disclose away! He’d be doing me a big favor.

I told Darfield as much, but realized right then and there that Nielsen Media Research was not just a company with misguided methodology and good people who wanted to do the right thing. It is a company bent on protecting its current financial situation at all costs, regardless of the outcome or tactics.

Darfield never followed through with his “threat” during his time at the podium, perhaps now realizing that what he had thought was a weakness (our ratings) was actually our strength. We were and are proud of our ratings (underreported though we believe, we make a very nice living off of them, thank you very much) and if Darfield knew anything about the TV business he’d know that, but he is in his own little “Nielsen” world, I suppose.

Darfield did manage to put at least one man in the sparse audience asleep with a presentation that seemed to fulfill a mission of “bore them to tears and maybe they’ll forget about the reason for the debate in the first place” going well over his time limit and expressing how “satisfied” Nielsen was with their current methodology. If I were making billions, uncontested, I’d be “satisfied” too. Over the past 7 years, I’ve traveled all over the U.S. in meetings with several hundred TV executives and I have yet to see anyone of their clients “satisfied” with Nielsen’s ratings (with the exception of Univision perhaps?).

When it was my turn at the podium, I used information in Darfield’s own presentation to prove the point that Nielsen does not properly sample U.S. born Hispanics. After the debate, he accused me of “intellectual dishonesty,” got very agitated and was led away. Video coverage of the debate can be found at www.helpchangetv.com/video

Over the past two years, Nielsen Media Research has spent untold sums sponsoring Latino and minority media and not-for-profit organizations such as the Annual Imagen Foundation Awards (where Nielsen CEO Susan Whiting was honored for her “contribution” to the image of Latinos on Television, something akin to a victim throwing a dinner party in honor of their assailant), the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute’s Annual Conference (that should keep lawmakers at bay), the 4th Annual Hispanic Television Summit, The Association of Hispanic Advertising Agencies, and the list goes on and on.

WHY FIX A PROBLEM WHEN IT’S CHEAPER TO PAY THE CRITICS OFF?

To me, their mission is clear. Why should Nielsen admit they are wrong and spend millions fixing something when they can spend much less on hush money keeping others who should be their harshest critics at bay? I’m surprised Nielsen hasn’t called me to head up one of their divisions with a nice, fat salary complete with benefits (I hear they have a great Healthcare plan).

As for me, Nielsen has accused me of acting in my own commercial self interest on this issue. This issue has costs our very small, very busy, independent company, tens of thousands of dollars in precious money and man hour resources (the websites don’t update themselves). Furthermore, we are not sure that a change in methodology would impact our business dramatically or even benefit our shows at all. But we are sure it would be a better, more accurate ratings service and in the end that should be the objective of everyone in the Television, advertising, research and marketing field.

Taking on an issue of this magnitude is NOT fun and I don’t enjoy it. It is financially, physically and emotionally draining and distracts us from our core business and creative missions. But right is right and this serious issue won’t get fixed unless Nielsen is forced to change, so I’ve vowed to not stop fighting until it’s fixed, completely and without bias.

INAPPROPRIATE RESPONSE TO A SERIOUS ISSUE:

Later in the same trade article Darfield goes on to say about our efforts: “It is not going to change anything. [Laughter.] This is one of history’s greatest tempests in a teapot, and I give kudos to old what’s-his-name there for stewing up the industry about absolutely nothing.”

“Old what’s-his-name”? Ouch, that stings and as tempting as it is to sink to a level of name-calling, I prefer to stick to the facts.

THE FACT STILL REMAINS:

Why aren’t U.S. born Latinos represented in the Hispanic sample matching U.S. census data like every other demographic consideration (sex, age, etc)? Why has Nielsen dodged the issue by first protesting vehemently then switching game plans and pretending “Nativity” has no impact on TV viewing (which flies in the face of almost every other piece of research done on the subject).

Why did Nielsen commit to study the issue in January of 2006, yet has not reported any results in well over a year? Then they said they had a study from 2003, where is that study? Why isn’t it publicly available?

Is it because they are waiting until they get the results they need so they can then say “nativity” is a non-issue and was really just a “tempest in a teapot”?

Judging by Darfield’s comments, I’d bet on it. I now believe after reading Darfield’s comments that if we see the results of a study at all from Nielsen, it will be for the sole reason of proving that their current methodology was not erroneous after all. They are just waiting on the “right” results before releasing them.

DARFIELD’S COMMENTS FIT THE NIELSEN PATTERN

The fact that Darfield resorts to personal attacks isn’t surprising or as disturbing as the fact that in the article he laughs and makes light of a very serious situation (the potential under-sampling of U.S. born Latinos, which means there are few TV programs for U.S. born Latinos and contributes to larger, very serious social issues).

Maybe he lacks the empathy gene or more likely he’s just doing his job, carrying out orders for his multibillion dollar, monopolistic employer who doesn’t give a damn about accuracy or the social implications of their mistakes, just their bottom line.

Hey, we all have to make a living, I understand. But we also all have to look at ourselves in the mirror everyday, and somehow, stomach what we see staring back at us and be able to sleep at night. Darfield and a few other folks at Nielsen may have a tough time doing that. As for me, I’m happy to report that I’ve been sleeping just fine.

MORE INFO:

http://www.HelpChangeTV.com

Rob@aimtvgroup.com

Robert G. Rose’s opinions are entirely his own and do not necessarily

reflect those of Artist and Idea Management, Ltd. or

American Latino TV, LLC.

FINE FOR UNIVISION REVEALS BIGGER INDUSTRY & SOCIAL ISSUE

help spread the word! — Sun, 25 Feb 2007 21:51:00 +0000

FCC Fine for Univision Reveals Bigger Industry & Social Issues
By Robert G. Rose / 2.28.07 – Rob@aimtvgroup.comAccording to recent reports, Univision agreed to pay a $24 Million fine by the FCC for failing to meet the 3 hours weekly minimum of Kid Friendly Educational Programs that broadcasters are required to air.

According to these reports, Univision passed off some of their many, imported South American tele-novelas as “Educational and Kid Friendly” from 2004 to 2006. When the FCC rejected this claim, Univision agreed to the record fine (the previous record was $9 Million) so that they could begin the transfer of their stations’ licenses to a new buyer (who paid over $13 Billion).

Reading this report brought back memories from when I was working at Univision (1997-2000) as a sales executive and how we’d pitch advertisers the tele-novelas and Sabado Gigante (“Big Saturday” - a quirky, throwback variety show taped in Miami), to advertisers as family-friendly programming.

A typical pitch often featured a bunch of Univision “gringos” (myself included) in a room talking to another bunch of ad agency or client “gringos” about how Hispanics, from kids to grandma and everyone in-between, each and every Saturday like clockwork, stopped what they were doing and gathered around the one TV set and watched three straight hours of Sabado Gigante’s “family entertainment.”

The advertisers ate it up! We conjured up images of 1950s Americana when the whole family gathered to watch primetime entertainment featuring old-school, not-so-subtle product pitches in the show (a.k.a. “Product Integration”).

However, we failed to mention that Sabado Gigante regularly featured scantily clad girls, thong bikinis and hot “mami” or “papi” contests. We never mentioned it, the advertisers never asked and most certainly never actually watched the programming.

And why should advertisers doubt that what Univision sales reps were saying was true? After all, we produced Nielsen Research that showed that almost all Hispanics watch Spanish language TV.

Turns out the thong contests weren’t the only things we failed to mention. We never mentioned that Nielsen’s research doesn’t include a sampling of U.S. born Latinos (over 60% of U.S. Latinos who do not tend to watch Spanish TV) or that other research (1999 Tomas Rivera) indicated that only 20% of Spanish TV’s audience were U.S. born Latinos?

“It just complicates things and confuses people” say some in the Hispanic marketing and media world. “Why do you want to take money from Spanish language TV?” ask others.

Whatever happened to telling advertisers the facts? Letting research be research and let the chips fall where they may?

By allowing this injustice to occur we seem to be saying its ok to “conveniently forget the facts” if you can find research that justifies your business model, you can just use that. If that research doesn’t exist, you can do what Spanish TV did and create it by collaborating with research companies such as Nielsen Media Research, and pay them big time!

Spanish TV flies so far under the radar that most people never notice (remember not so long ago when Spanish TV was replete with “cancer cures” and “hard liquor” ads that you’d NEVER see on general market TV?) and government agencies can all be lobbied and bought off with the kind of big money Spanish TV is now raking in. What took the FCC so long to figure out that tele-novelas are NOT educational?

Sales are all about accentuating the positive and downplaying the negative right? It’s not like we lied, we just didn’t tell the whole story. The result not only kept advertisers in the dark but as evidenced by the FCC fine, resulted in few if any educational programming for young, Latinos.

According to Nielsen Media Research “The George Lopez Show”, one of the few shows featuring an almost all Latino cast and crew, allegedly has more African-American viewers than Hispanic viewers. Also, according to Nielsen, ABC’s wildly popular “Ugly Betty”, (takes inspiration from a bonafide Spanish language novella “Betty La Fea”) has less than stellar ratings among Latino viewers when compared to non Latino viewers. The Super Bowl takes second place to soccer telecasts on Spanish TV and the Latin Grammy telecast tripled its audience when it moved from CBS to Univision a few years back.

Yeah! Right! Who actually believes that non-sense when only 20% of U.S. born Latinos (over 25 million) EVER watch Spanish TV?

So who is hurt by this misrepresentation of Hispanic TV viewing? As evidenced by the FCC fine, Hispanic kids and U.S.-born Latinos mostly. Univision has never been overly concerned about actually serving the entire Hispanic marketplace, so long as they can get away with taking the low hanging fruit (non U.S. born Latino adults, less than 40% of the market) and still get virtually all the TV ad dollars (Spanish TV gets over 90% of Hispanic TV ad dollars).

Univision has been loathe to invest in local or national original programming, preferring to buy cheap programming (most imported from South America for pennies on the dollar), minimizing their risk, maximizing their profits and never mentioning to advertisers the fact that most young U.S. Latinos are born in the U.S. (median age of 18), speak English and would like to watch something relevant to their lives (as evidenced by U.S.-born Latino’s snubbing of Spanish TV fare- Tomas Rivera 1999, Pew Hispanic Center, etc).

Even in this era of media fragmentation and choice, the power of broadcast television is second to none. For U.S. Hispanics it is even more powerful, because there is still scarce choice out there for them, despite their growth and power as a consumer group. U.S. born Latinos (25 million) remain ignored and stereotyped on mainstream media and completely left out of the Spanish TV equation.

The smoking gun for this imbalance is Spanish TV’s collaboration with Nielsen Media Research, which created a flawed ratings methodology over 15 years ago that excludes sampling for U.S. born Latinos and sends the misleading message to TV execs and marketers that its a waste of time to develop programs for U.S. Latinos in English, because they all just watch Spanish TV.

Latino Kids are left with steamy, imported tele-novelas or inappropriate Spanish TV programming as their supposed educational Television fare. The FCC reaps a $24 Million payday for our government while Univision gets a pass on the rules that every other broadcaster must follow. Everybody is happy, except the viewers who are left out and the advertisers who are misled.

I propose that a portion of the $24 Million dollar fine be directed by the FCC to cover the costs of Nielsen finally doing the right thing and changing their sampling methodology to include the correct percentage of U.S. born Latinos (60%) in their samples.

The result of this change would probably lead to the new Univision owners’ to voluntarily creating legitimate educational and informational programming (maybe even some in English!) and a much more vibrant Hispanic media and marketing business with TV programs in English and Spanish for both viewers and marketers to choose from.

I won’t hold my breath, but last I checked this is still the United States of America, and I am still allowed to dream aren’t I?

www.HelpChangeTV.com
Robert Rose is CEO of AIM Tell-A-Vision Group (a division of Artist and Idea Management, Ltd.) and American Latino TV, LLC and founder of Help! Change TV. The opinions expressed are those of the author alone, and not of the companies with which he is affiliated.

The Good Life - MultiBillion Dollar Monopolies…Broken Promises and Missing Studies

help spread the word! — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 23:33:00 +0000

IT MUST BE NICE!

Ahhh… the beauty of being a multi-billion dollar monopoly. I guess, you can pretty much say and do whatever you want.

In a meeting with me and my colleagues at the 2006 Natpe convention (January ‘06), Nielsen executives said that they were getting ready to conduct an INDEPENDENT research study on the impact of Nativity (U.S. born / non U.S. born) on Hispanic ratings and that we should have the results of that study by August of 2006.

While that is a bit like announcing a study on the link of smoking and lung cancer, we bit, took Nielsen at its word (MISTAKE!) and pretty much hiatused our “Change The Sample” efforts.

Well, August comes and goes and it is apparent that either we were misled at the January meeting or if there WAS a new 2006 study conducted, somebody didn’t like the results because NOW, acccording to Hispanic Market Weekly article they are citing a 2003 study! Let’s see, the list of excuses keeps changing, I’m counting FIVE different answers to ONE simple question.

1) NIELSEN SAYS - “It’s an outrageous invasion of Privacy…” Nielsen’s Jack Loftus, Nov. 10th, 2005 - Mediaweek AIM RESPONDS: Then how does Nielsen get so much more detailed information such as the # of Mexicans, Guatemalans, Puerto Ricans, etc. in their survey. That is much more invasive! 2) NIELSEN SAYS - “Mr. Rose offers no data to support his claims” - Nielsen’s Jack Loftus, Cynopsis MCE 11.16.05

AIM RESPONDS: We’ve used nothing but 3rd party, published research such as “US Census Data” (ever heard of them Jack?), “Tomas River Policy Inst.”, ”Pew Hispanic Center”, “Rincon & Associates”, ”Hispanic Media Coalition”, ”New American Dimensions”… whew! My fingers hurt from typing all that.

3) NIELSEN SAYS “Mr. Rose has shown no interest in taking his case to the industry…” Nielsen’s Jack Loftus, Cynopsis MCE 11.16.06
AIM RESPONDS: Hey Jack, are you reading the trades? Going to conventions? The whole CTS campaign IS an industry initiative? Come down from the Ivory Tower occasionally my man. 4) NIELSEN SAYS - “AIM hasn’t been forthcoming in what they want…” Nielsen’s Jack Loftus, Video Age January 2006.AIM RESPONDS: We presented to Nielsen this information months before “Change The Sample” or “Help Change TV” was launched and the information is right on the website. It’s very, very simple.

ONE MORE TIME: Hispanic samples should match U.S. Census data on Nativity (U.S. born & non U.S. born) so we can see what TV programs Hispanics truly watch. You’re a research company and that confuses you?

5) NIELSEN SAYS - “All our research indicates that language spoke is a far better predictor of television viewing behavior than nativity” says Monica Gil, spokeswomen for Nielsen. The Company bases its decision on a comprehensive, internal research study conducted in 2003… Hispanic Market Weekly, 11.20.06

AIM RESPONDS: “uhhh, excuse me. Sorry to bring this up but “what happened to the study that you promised us in January ‘06? Where has this 2003 study been hiding? Why is it internal? That’s sort of like me auditing my own taxes.

When I asked Nielsen’s Monica Gil recently about the January ‘06 meeting at NATPE and the “missing study”, she said she didn’t remember that being part of the conversation. Monica was pretty new at that point, so I guess it is possible it slipped her mind. But what of the other folks at that meeting, do they remember it? Nielsen’s Paul Donato, Kevin Svennington, Michele Orlick?

Well I have allot on my mind these days but I remember that meeting and that promise plain as day (as does my colleague). That was pretty much the entire meeting, how could you NOT remember it.

In MY business, if you make a promise you can’t or don’t keep, your out of business. Of course, we’re not a multibillion dollar monopoly.

It must be nice.

The Toronto Globe-Mail Gets it. Why doesn’t Nielsen?

help spread the word! — Tue, 12 Dec 2006 21:48:00 +0000

We thought today’s article on “Help! Change TV” from Simon Houpt of the Toronto Globe and Mail was well written and enlightening.They saw the bus campaign in NYC and felt compelled to research the issues.

Which begs the question: “If the Canadian Press clearly recognizes the issue, why doesn’t Nielsen?”

FOR PDF CUT AND PASTE THIS LINK IN BROWSER:
http://aimtvgroup.com/hctv/press/GLOBEREVIEW.pdf

Toronto Globe & Mail –
Globe Review Monday December 11th, 2006
By Simon Houpt / New York Diary

Producer battles Nielsens over missing Latinos

12-11-06

Hispanics are hot! Shakira and her hips shimmy up the charts. Mexican directors Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (Babel), Alfonso Puaron (Children of Men) and Guillermo del Toro (Pan’s Labyrinth) are Hollywood’s flavours of the month. Hispanics are now a larger minority in the United States than African-Americans. You can’t open an advertising-industry magazine these days without hearing about the importance of the exploding Latino market.

Not that you’d know it by watching U.S. network television. True, the Colombian-spawned Ugly Betty is one of the season’s few breakout hits. But beyond Betty’s braces and Eva Longoria’s catty sexpot on Desperate Housewives, there are woefully few Hispanic leading men and women on network TV. The George Lopez Show (currently on hiatus on ABC) illustrates the dearth: As if recognizing its role in U.S. culture as The Token Hispanic Show, its web page points viewers to sites about Hispanic art, culture and business opportunities.

“The only time they put Latinos on TV is when they’re on the news, or there’s an immigration debate,” Robert Rose told me the other day. Rose is a 39-year-old businessman, a former employee of the wealthy Spanish-language TV network Univision, who now operates out of a cramped and ramshackle office in an unglamorous part of town.

Last week, sitting beneath a portrait of Che Guevara, Rose outlined the guerrilla campaign that he and a handful of colleagues have started to try to change the face of U.S. television.

The problem, he says, is simple: Nielsen Media Research, the ratings company, doesn’t include enough U.S.-born Latino viewers in its audience sample. (About 60 per cent of U.S. Latinos are native-born.)

By including too many foreign born Latino viewers who don’t speak English, he believes Nielsen is giving the mistaken impression that Hispanics watch only Spanish-language TV.

“It leads to the marginalization of Latinos on TV, which leads to the marginalization of Latinos in society,” he said. It also suggests the 40 million Hispanics aren’t interested in assimilating, which runs directly counter to most of the available social, economic and political data.

Last month, Rose kicked off his low-budget effort to pressure Nielsen, placing local radio promos and buying about 100 ads on the backs of buses that feature a striking image: a woman with a piece of duct tape over her mouth, on which has been scrawled the word “Nielsen.”

The campaign calls on viewers to visit a website, HelpChangeTV.com, where they can sign a petition calling for a change in the viewing sample.

Nielsen currently tries to ensure its Hispanic sample matches the language preferences of the wider U.S. Hispanic population. (The sample is sliced into five categories, ranging from Spanish Only to English Only.) It ignores nativity, or place of birth.

But Rose argues nativity is far more important in determining viewing habits. His case is intuitively true: How many second generation immigrants do you know, even those who still speak their mother tongue in the home, who spurn the tacky bazaar of American pop culture?

Nielsen, which is already under attack from the TV industry for failing to adapt to new viewing technologies, has shot back with a volley of arguments, none of which are very convincing.

But if you look at the numbers, something seems severely out of whack. Take Ugly Betty. Despite heavy promotion in Hispanic communities that trumpeted them show’s
South American origins and its executive producer and occasional star Salma Hayek, Nielsen concluded that the show’s early episodes performed dismally among Hispanics,
drawing only about 768,000 out of a total audience of about 16 million. (That is, less than 2 per cent of Hispanics tuned in versus about 5 per cent of the general population.)

“A Latin-themed show did worse among Hispanics than it did among everybody else?” asked Rose. “That math just doesn’t add up. “Think of how much bigger a hit it would be if they accurately monitored Hispanics,” Rose continued. “Think about the implications if ABC looked at their numbers and said: ‘You know what, 25 per cent of our viewership for this show are Hispanics and it’s a hit, let’s get some more shows featuring Latino characters.’

“All of a sudden viewers would see that Latinos aren’t these evil people crossing the border, taking their jobs and denigrating the culture by only speaking Spanish. They see that Latinos are doctors, lawyers, they’re integrated into our society.”

Nielsen understandably doesn’t want to rock the boat. Univision is the company’s largest Spanish language client. Nielsen research consistently finds the 10 most popular

Spanish-language shows are on Univision, which naturally wouldn’t be interested in seeing data suggesting their viewership is actually sharply lower. And the Spanish-language ad agencies have little incentive to tell their clients they’ve helped facilitate a multibillion-dollar sham.

There’s a kicker, though: Rose is in it for the money, too. His company, AIM Tell-A-Vision, produces and syndicates English-language TV entertainment magazines that celebrate Hispanic culture, with titles like American Latino TV and LatiNation.

If he can prove his viewing numbers are higher than the ratings indicate, he could be a rich man. So he’s trying to do well by doing good. But that doesn’t negate his argument.

“There’s been an explosion of Latin film, there was an explosion in Latin music. No explosion in Latin TV? I wonder why? What’s the one thing Latin TV has that those other two don’t have?” Rose asked rhetorically. “The Nielsen ratings service and a flawed methodology.”

On Thursday, I was on the line with a Nielsen spokesperson when I mentioned that I’d heard the company, under public pressure at a TV convention last January, had promised to study the issue and get back to Rose by the summer. But there had been no follow-up.

The spokesperson excused himself and said he’d get back to me.

I’m still waiting for his call.

By

Simon Houpt
New York Diary
shoupt@globeandmail.com

Help Change TV Press Conference is now online at www.HelpChangeTV.com

help spread the word! — Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:22:00 +0000

Official Help Change TV Video is Online

AIM TV ENLISTS CONSUMERS IN FIGHT FOR FAIR RATINGS AND TO CONVINCE NIELSEN TO ‘CHANGE THE SAMPLE’

help spread the word! — Sat, 16 Sep 2006 20:28:00 +0000

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

AIM TV ENLISTS CONSUMERS IN FIGHT FOR FAIR RATINGS AND TO CONVINCE NIELSEN TO ‘CHANGE THE SAMPLE’

AIM TV Marks Anniversary of Campaign with Consumer Media & Grassroots Blitz

New York, November 8th, 2006 – Marking the one year anniversary of its trade and industry outreach program “Change The Sample”, AIM Tell-A-Vision® Group (AIM TV) announced today it is now launching a second front – a major consumer targeted campaign to further build awareness and visibility.

AIM TV, pioneering producers and distributors of English language programming for the U.S. Latino market, launched the “Change the Sample” campaign in November, 2005 as an industry targeted initiative. “Change the Sample” is intended to convince Nielsen Media Research, Inc. to change its language preference method of monitoring U.S. Hispanic TV viewing to a more accurate measurement based on nativity (U.S. Born / Foreign-Born). The trade campaign netted over 3,000 petitions from various individuals in the television and media industries and also provided much needed awareness and discourse.

Now AIM TV is launching “HELP! Change TV” (HCTV), a consumer targeted, multi-tiered consumer media blitz and a grassroots initiative that educates everyday viewers about the impact of Nielsen’s flawed methodology.

The Help! Change TV Phase of the Campaign launches on November 8th with:
- Press Conference & Kick Off Event – Press Conference (viewable online Thursday, November 9th at (www.HelpChangeTVVideo.com), immediately followed by Help! Change TV Kickoff Event in New York City (open to the press & general public).
- Help Change TV Viral Video - Available at www.HelpChangeTVVideo.com and You Tube, Google Video, Yahoo Video, My Space and more.
- HelpChangeTV.com website - Featuring video content, research tailored for the consumer market, petition sign up, photo gallery from events and a daily blog.
- Petition Drives & Tour – Presentations at organizations, schools & colleges nationwide.
- Publicity Campaign – Bookings on national and local radio & TV discussing the impact of Nielsen’s current methodology on television and society.
- Consumer Media Blitz including:

* Out of Home Bus Campaign
* National Print Campaign
* Local Newspaper Campaign
* Consumer Radio Campaign
* Internet Marketing Campaign
* Television Promo Campaign
* Guerilla and Grassroots Marketing including postcards and flyers distribution; posters at key locations; petition drives, etc.
* Markets include: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Orlando, San Antonio, Dallas and more.

AIM TV contends that the impact on viewers’ lives includes an under-representation of Latinos on English language television resulting in skewed stereotypes that tend to mislead many non Latinos that Latinos are recent or “illegal” immigrants who do not speak English and are not a valuable part of mainstream, U.S. society.

The campaign is the result of a summer long focus group analysis that determined Latinos and viewers overall are very concerned about stereotyping and a general lack of representation on TV and showed a surprising awareness of the ratings process and eagerness to foster change.

“We attended several Latin-themed events all summer speaking directly to the viewers most impacted by the erroneous ratings system. I was surprised by how fed up people are with stereotyping and the injustice this issue can have as a social issue. I was heartened to learn the average viewer understands that the current status quo is about protecting the interest of a few in the Hispanic Media Industry with complete disregard for accuracy and the needs of the mainstream industry and MOST IMPORTANTLY the viewers.” states Robert G. Rose, CEO of AIM Tell-A-Vision and founder of the initiative.

“This serious issue impacts our society negatively as displayed in the recent immigration debate. Most Latinos are U.S. born. We are soldiers, scholars, doctors, lawyers and we contribute greatly to U.S. society. It is time to enlist the viewers who live with the consequences daily and are most affected by this injustice.” states Renzo Devia, President of AIM TV’s Maximas.

More information can be found at www.HelpChangeTV.com and www.ChangeTheSample.com.

PRESS CONTACTS:
Sayles & Winnikoff Communications
Alan Winnikoff / Tel (212) 679-2982 / Alan@sayleswinnikoff.com
Carina Sayles / Tel (609) 297-6200 / Carina@sayleswinnikoff.com

AIM TV
Tel (212) 627-3192 x24 /

HelpChangeTV.com Launches - Round 2 Nielsen

help spread the word! — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 20:25:00 +0000

After one year of educating the industry on Change The Sample, we are announcing a new initiative in the battle to have Nielsen Media Research change their methodology of measuring Latino viewers to more fairly represent U.S. born Latinos on TV.

The effort is targeted to consumers, those most negatively impacted by Nielsen’s inaccurate ratings. www.HelpChangeTV.com educates and gets the average viewer involved. Get ready.

Nielsen Media Buys Their Way Into The Good Graces of The Imagen Foundation

help spread the word! — Sat, 19 Aug 2006 20:20:00 +0000

The Imagen Foundation began over 20 years ago with the help of then prolific producer Norman Lear (All in the Family, The Jefferson’s, Maude, etc.). Lear was acutely aware of the near absence of positive portrayals of Latinos in the entertainment industry and understood the importance of positive images and he thus helped create the Imagen Foundation with founder Helen Hernandez to reward media that positively portrayed Latinos on television and film. Its a great foundation with a great mission. Sadly, over 20 years later, the absence of positive portrayals of Latinos in the media still persist, especially on English language television.

This year’s Imagen Award Event was polluted by the fact that Nielsen Media Research BOUGHT a major sponsorship package and Susan Whiting, Nielsen’s CEO was then honored with The Imagen Foundation President’s Award.

The irony of rewarding an organization like Nielsen Media Research (which directly contributes to the lack of Latinos on English language television with its faulty methodology) with the President’s Award from an organization who’s purpose is to better represent Latinos in media (The Imagen Foundation) was not lost on us. As recipients of three consecutive Imagen Awards, we sadly had to sit this event out on moral grounds.

After receiving an email from the Imagen Foundation’s founder, Helen Hernandez, as to why AIM Tell-A-Vision’s participation was so low, we responded with the letter below. Its a sad but true fact that Nielsen Media Research, a multi-billion dollar corporate monopoly throws money at well intentioned and often not for profit Latino organizations like the Imagen Foundation and the result is a short term gain for that organization (who often struggle for sponsorship support) but in the end inadvertently hurts the fight to get more positive AND ACCURATE portrayals of Latinos on Television.

As long as Nielsen can buy the silence of their potential biggest critics they won’t change. And as long as they don’t change we will continue to have a misperception that ALL Latinos watch novellas and soccer on Spanish TV.

But our criticism is not for sale and we won’t stop until change has occurred and Nielsen fairly represents U.S. born Latinos in their sample.

August 15, 2006

Ms. Helen Hernandez

Imagen Foundation

Dear Helen,

After our recent phone discussion I wanted to formally clarify our position on the Imagen Foundation’s plans to honor Susan Whiting of Nielsen Media Research. I respect and admire you and the Imagen Foundation and appreciate the goals of the awards to recognize those making significant contributions to accurate and positive portrayals of Latinos in TV and Film.

Though we are an independent production company with very limited capital, we’ve always tried to be as supportive as possible of the Imagen Foundation Awards by attending, purchasing extra tickets and spending time and money distributing press releases, airing on air promos and building promotional materials around our success with the Imagen Awards the past few years.

For the 2006 awards ceremony, we intended to be more supportive financially. Our plans were put on hold when we learned of the decision to honor the CEO of Nielsen Media Research with the Imagen Foundation President’s Award. We believe Nielsen Media Research is directly responsible for the absence of Latinos on English language television since their current language stratification methodology ignores the factor of Nativity (U.S. Born / Non U.S. Born) despite a mountain of credible research indicating otherwise.

Beginning in 2004, we spent considerable time and energy with meetings informing Nielsen of this issue only to be misled and stalled. We then unveiled ChangeTheSample.com to widespread media attention in an effort to educate the industry. Nielsen’s spokesperson, Jack Loftus, responded with personal attacks in an effort to discredit our very legitimate argument for change.

Nielsen has allocated some money (small relative to their billions) to Latino not for profit organizations (such as The Imagen Foundation) and hired liaisons of Latino descent, we believe, in an effort to silence critics and divert attention. While this may be good for a few people in the short term, in the long run, it doesn’t address the issue that Nielsen’s Ratings Service is inaccurate and does not fully account for U.S.-born Latino-viewing (leading to fewer Latino programs and positive, accurate portrayals of Latinos on television).

I understand and respect the Imagen Foundation’s right to honor Nielsen Media research for the President’s Award. I ask that you also respect our position. We look forward to supporting the Imagen Awards in the years to come when Nielsen is not being honored or is being honored instead for their willingness to change their Hispanic methodology to account for Nativity. I wish you and the dedicated Imagen team the best of luck on another successful event.

Regards,

Robert G. Rose
AIM Tell-A-Vision / American Latino TV