Nielsen study: We're still a nation of couch pumpkins

TV watching continues to be America's favorite pastime.

In its "State of the Media: TV Usage Trends," the Nielsen Co. said Thursday the average person watched more than 143 hours of television a month during the second quarter of 2010. (Nielsen, however, stopped short of exploring potential causes of airwave rage. This week a Wisconsin man shot his television after Bristol Palin advanced to the final round of ABC's "Dancing With the Stars.")

And while the rate of TV consumption was "essentially flat compared to the same period a year ago," Nielsen said that people are indeed watching a little differently.

"The emergence of the DVR as a widely distributed device has changed viewing behaviors in many homes," the research firm said. The average person who has a digital video recorder watches more than 24 hours a month of recorded shows.

Not surprising is that younger viewers -- particularly those aged 25 to 34 -- were more apt to use DVRs.  "That demographic watched 29 1/2 hours of DVR playback per month," the Nielsen report said. That represents a 20% increase over older viewers' usage.

The trend suggests that traditional network scheduling patterns eventually will become less important. Broadcast networks have already begun to feel the pinch as dramas running in the 10 p.m. hour have been getting smaller audiences. Ten o'clock appears to be prime time for DVR viewing.

Similar to past findings, teenagers watch fewer hours of television. Viewing increases as people get older and more settled. Nielsen also said that women watch more TV than men, 54% to 46%.

Nielsen did not offer corresponding statistics on the size or fitness of American TV viewers. But given recent studies on eating habits and obesity, it seems appropriate to replace couch potato with couch pumpkin.

-- Meg James

Comments

[truth to power]

I haven't watched TV in ten years!

[Manuel Alderete]

That whole "Internets" thing is just a fad.
It'll never catch on. You'll see in a couple years.

[Marvin]

This hate is getting beyond ridiculous. We have comments about everything from overt racism to tea party conspiracies.
Let's look at the obvious first, Bristol getting votes does not signify racism. Kyle has been gathering many more votes than Bristol. Some may argue that Brandy was a better dancer than Kyle, but I do not hear the outrage that he was safe. No, Kyle was safe because people like him, just like people like Bristol. As the show host says "vote for your favorite" not for the best dancer (if this was purely a dancing competition then there would be only judges votes, and that is not how it is).
Brandy was not well liked. She had an attitude, argued with her partner, and lied how she wasn't responsible for that accident (evidence shows that she was not Criminally responsible, but was negligent and was in fact responsible for the accident). A tragedy for the other family and her, but it is what it is.
It was also in poor taste that the celebs got 10s from the celebs when they duplicated their dances, except Osborne could not do it for Bristol and had to show her prejudice by giving her a lower score. I am sure this got Bristol more sympathy votes than any tea party conspiracy (you can thank KO for getting Bristol into the finals).
Is it wrong for conservatives to vote for Bristol? How about older Jewish ladies voting for Jennifer, or black people voting for Kyle? No, you vote for whoever you want for whatever reason. It is a TV show, and helping your favorite win is empowering. The problems I hear mostly are from those who didn't even vote, yet complain about the outcome.
So now we go to the last week. Will the youth vote split and Jennifer wins? Will the white vote split and Kyle win? Will the liberals split and Bristol win? The judges will do their best to make it lopsided towards their favorite, but it is up to the public to vote for theirs.
Be sure to vote, and vote as often as the rules allow, and live with it. It is only a TV show.