Talk:List of Philippine television ratings for 2008

Reminders
I'm expecting this article will be flooded with fanboys of every color. With that in mind, revisions will be reverted if it doesn't comply with any of the criteria: Thanks and happy editing. -- Howard  the   Duck  16:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * All edits without references will be reverted. Don't engage in an edit war for you will be blocked.
 * All edits on the current week for the "Weekly ratings" will be temporarily hidden until the week is done.
 * Currently, we're using PEP.ph, as much as possible we should keep off from tabloids even if they publish the same thing since we can use the more reliable PEP.ph. If you have other sources aside from PEP.ph, list it here first so that it can be evaluated as per external link guidelines.

Many regard PEP as a "tabloid" website. Also it is currently own by GMA network. The whole article seems to be geared to reinforce GMA network spins on the ratings competition. Example: overemphasizing the "Mega Manila" aspects. Also, AGB is under scrutiny for rating manipulation allegations. Regardless, ratings fluctuates all the time, I don't see this as very "encyclopedic". This article would only serves best for the "fanboys"71.107.250.97 (talk) 04:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Where did you get the fact the GMA owns PEP? And PEP is a "tabloid" website? I'd say it's even a tad better than Page Six. Also, Mega Manila ratings are located way below, and the page has been structured to give prominence to the NUTAM; the problem is the NUTAM is released irregularly so you can't accurately compare each release to the other since the encompass different lengths of time.
 * AGB's scrutiny is duly linked at the see also section -- there's even a full article for that. It is up for the reader to decide for himself whether this is true or not, Wikipedia doesn't and shouldn't force anyone to believe it.
 * As for ratings fluctuation, see List of Australian television ratings for 2008 for which this article was "ripped off" from.
 * Nevertheless, if you still believe this article is inappropriate here, you can always use the AFD process. -- Howard  the   Duck  06:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Added a tag
I have added the "confusing" tag in the article. It didn't clarify the difference between NUTAM, weekly ratings, monthly ratings etc. How did AGB or any research firm come up with that figure? --Jojit (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've transferred much of the info at the AGB Nielsen Philippines article. -- Howard  the   Duck  06:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Latest ratings
Why should there be a "latest ratings" section? It is completely unnecessary and isn't appropriate. 119.95.17.214 (talk) 00:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Performance
In this table the ratings are tabulated from monday to friday to show the program's performance for the week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.mi. shinley (talk • contribs) 01:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not needed. Wikipedia is not PEP.ph. -- Howard  the   Duck  01:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

It is important
Weekly performance is vital because, we can determine the average rating and certainly predict ratings the next week. And mainly, we can determine which episode shown is highly attended and lowly viewed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.mi. shinley (talk • contribs) 01:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * How is that relevant to the article, as an entry in an encyclopedia—which may be subject to printing and issuing in a static form? —C.Fred (talk) 01:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think people go to Wikipedia to find out about the latest TV ratings in the Philippines. -- Howard  the   Duck  01:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Certainly, what I added this time is informative, I know that wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it must contain all-time records, i got this from ikuwaderno and the prominence —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.mi. shinley (talk • contribs) 01:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Blogs aren't reliable sources. And someone called User:Theprominence has been banned here. -- Howard  the   Duck  07:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

NUTAM Market comprise of only 38%
Who wrote this????

NUTAM supposed to be 100% of all the "Urban Markets" in the Philippines INCLUDING MEGA MANILA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.146.72 (talk) 06:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the article seems to be authored by a GMA Network fan.

Besides, The whole thing look like an Almanac where we archive everything single rating result.

We should stick in a broader sense of explaining this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.146.72 (talk) 06:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Follow Up
This article is truly GMA sided. I think Wikipedia should refer their ratings on AGB-Nielsen or NUTAM and not on other website such as PEP, which is popularly known to be made by GMA New Media, a subsidiary of the said network. If it is so,then PEP, Wikipedia or the kind contributing author must display the real country-wide numbers for weekly ratings and most watched section and not "for Mega Manila only". According to, "Rating" is the percentage of potential listeners  Since listeners (or viewers) are not only in Metro. Plus, The percentage division must be revised: When did "Mega Manila got the 48% of the total TV households" combining it with the Luzon will be 76%. Therefore, 24% belongs to Visayas and Mindanao? Is it because Luzon is highly urbanized city? Dealing with Market shares: Mega Manila represents 52% while the remaining percent shares come from the regions.

What I wanted about this article is not just about ratings. It's about authority of reference and PEP is not a good example. In conclusion, this article must be revised. Else, it will be a new candidate for deletion: Blatant Advertising of PEP on GMA, Notabiltity, and Inappropriate in a way that weekly review must be based as country-wide.


 * PEP is not owned by GMA. What AGB Nielsen spews out is on PEP. PEP doesn't conduct ratings surveys, they rely on AGB Nielsen and other ratings agency. So AGB Nielsen = PEP. They're identical.
 * As you can notice, the NUTAM is displayed first. When you say about NUTAM, you'd only factor urban Philippines which is 39% of the Philippines; hence when the figures say "33%", it means 33% of urban Philippines. The rest of the 61% isn't included, maybe there are no TVs in the area.
 * Now, 52% of that 39% (or 20% of the 100%) is Mega Manila; now when you say 33% of Mega Manila, that means it only encompasses Mega Manila (Metro Manila, Bulacan, Rizal, Cavite and Laguna).
 * And we don't "archive everything single rating result" since if that was the case this won't be formatted a la top 10 and instead we just copy-paste everything that's on PEP. -- Howard  the   Duck  11:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Very Absurd and Bias. Recommending Article for deletion.
The two first paragraphs are devoted on focusing on how "Mega Manila is the largest Media Market etc". A common GMA Network propaganda on sweet coating their rating performance. Even though, in common sense, National ratings deems to be important for every Countries in the World, thus the more appropriate information for an Encyclopedia. We do not see the US giving special commendation on New York ratings or L.A. ratings (the two largest media market). Or UK on London ratings or Japan on Tokyo ratings. Local ratings are important to their Local Areas and not necessarily to the whole Country. If we are to put Mega Manila Ratings why not put Metro Cebu or Metro Davao or Metro Baguio ratings as well?The point is if we are to provide "Philippine" ratings article its should always be exclusively devoted to National Ratings. Make a "Mega Manila" ratings article a sub article. Regardless, this article should be deleted because archiving ratings itself is not very encyclopedic. Or at least reformatted in a more encyclopedic sense.68.127.150.4 (talk) 20:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

overemphasizing Maga Manila
Mega Manila accounts for about 48% of total TV households in urban Philippines. The Mega Manila and Luzon markets combined account for about 76% of the total TV households in urban Philippines. Non-urban households aren't included in both Mega Manila and NUTAM surveys.

The largest television market is at Mega Manila; in AGB-Nielsen's case, Mega Manila consists of Metro Manila, Bulacan, Rizal, Cavite and Laguna. Metro Manila and other urban areas in the Philippines comprise the National Urban Television Audience Measurement (NUTAM) and are scattered throughout the country.

Note that the National Urban Television Audience Measurement (NUTAM) does not represent the entire Philippines but only urban areas; NUTAM markets comprise 39% of the entire country. The Mega Manila market comprises 52% of the NUTAM market. 68.127.150.4 (talk) 20:43, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

How about Metro Cebu? Davao? Baguio? IloIlo? The point is The author of the article could not reiterate "Mega Manila" enough, very selective reasoning very repetitive and very poor written. It mirrors those of GMA Network propaganda Ratings Advertisements, because of GMA lead in that particular area68.127.150.4 (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * What this article needs are ratings data from those other areas. That's why there is an "Other markets" section at bottom.
 * It is true though that Mega Manila is the biggest component in the NUTAM, though, and they come from AGB Nielsen, not from GMA. – Howard  the   Duck  09:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I do understand Mega Manila and NUTAM comes from the same source which is AGB. But the point is "our source" (Portal) is very doubtful if they are also objective. Keep in mind Philippine Entertainment Portal was created by Summit Media a very close partner of the GMA Network. Why do they do not post other Areas ratings as well? If they want to be really fair. Why they are focus on the "Mega Manila Ratings"? Is it because this is where GMA is leading? Why are they being so selective on areas on what they post? NUTAM ratings I believe is weekly yet the Portal only post the Monthly ratings for NUTAM. So I do understand why People here are very skeptic in the source we uses here. Like I said Portal's saturation of the "Mega Manila" ratings is nothing but a cheap propaganda on their part and this article is like straight from GMA ratings booster ads.

I think the most fairest way is to show the NUTAM only for this article because its called "Philippines Ratings" and that is the closest data we could attributed for a National Ratings even though you keep saying its only 38% of the whole population. If GMA fans really wants an article about Mega Manila, by all means make one but do not cluttered everything over here. Make a link of some sort along with other areas. Make a brief summary or brief Data of Mega Manila ALONG with other Major areas.

In common sense people from other nation if they are to search the "TV Ratings in the Philippine" they should be presented with NUTAM because it is the true reflection if not the closest one in the National Rating of the Philippines. Confusing them with only Mega Manila rating is only doing them disservice. Because it seems the article is suggesting Mega Manila IS the Whole Country basing on how the article was written. We should also make a brief acknowledge on other issues like the alleged Rating Manipulation in the Philippines. But again the point is NUTAM is the closest one we can called "Philippine television ratings" and this is the one we should EMPHASIZE.24.7.4.138 (talk) 22:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Isn't NUTAM also represented here? It's even the first to be presented.
 * And no matter whether it's PEP or something else, as long as it comes from AGB I don't see any reason why we shouldn't use it. If it were some other news agency they'd churn out the same thing anyway. Plus we don't add their own "analysis" but only the raw data.
 * Plus I'm planning to cut down on the Mega Manila ratings since they take up too much space, like only displaying the #1 show per week. Plus Sunday ratings if anyone wants that.
 * If there's some bias, it's not anti-ABS-CBN but anti-other TV networks. I know for a fact the PBA rates high when it's the playoffs and PEP only shows GMA and ABS-CBN shows. 119.95.25.193 (talk) 02:39, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The #1 show per week is a good idea to cut down the size but wouldn't that be replaced with the Sunday ratings? – Howard  the   Duck  02:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)