technology

In Part 1, you were introduced to the vocabulary used in measuring television audiences and to the application of statistics as a relatively reliable way of providing quantitative and qualitative information about the viewers. BBM and Nielsen Media Research combine their efforts to measure audiences in Canada. The second part of this series explores the ways used to obtain information, an introduction to the "sweeps" and the exploration of Joost as a solution to many sources of inaccuracies.

Although I am a firm believer in the usefulness of a physical library as the most reliable source of information, I must admit the Internet currently features many relatively trustworthy websites that can add to any school paper. Of course, many education professionals do not agree. Some will include witty remarks about Wikipedia and Internet usage in their course outlines and discourage any kind of cyberspace activity as it concerns the course. Indeed, this extreme measure is, for the most part, unjustified but understandable. Internet does bring up a lazy side in all of us. Also, websites like Facebook continue to hurt its reputation as a solid study-friendly environment (read more here).

This is the introductory part to the processes involved in measuring television audience. Every week E. G. Media Blog reports on the top ten television programs in Canada based on average minute audience estimates generated by BBM Nielsen Media Research. Although, for practical reasons, I call them ratings, this is not exactly what they truly are. A rating in TV measurement is a statistical estimate of the size of a television program's audience relative to what is known as the total universe, expressed as a percentage. The weekly data presented here on a weekly basis measures the average audience of a program during each broadcast minute.

Contrary to whatever misconceptions may arise after you read this entry's title, this article is not intended to be taken as an attack against Facebook or its well-meant creators and developers. It is not my goal to offend those 31 million active users the Web 2.0 company claims to have. Rather, I believe it is important to raise awareness of its flawed purpose and structure and to take a critical look at its very nature as it inevitably begins to form part of our lives. Here's a scoop on what the Web 2.0 has come down to.

A group of New York graduate students is developing a system that is surely going to piss off Communication Theory teachers, such as my own Robert Danisch, around the world. In fact, simply reading Botanicalls' opening paragraph on their website, would make them all flip their lid. Those involved in the project claim to have opened a "new channel of communication between plants and humans" that will improve "interspecies understanding." Here's the scoop on the new communication system.