If our TV stations cannot even put out numbers of their viewership which have a faint whiff of credibility, can they real put out news and views that news consumers can trust and believe?
NewsX, the news channel which has already seen three sets of owners since its launch, is running crawlers on its screens and advertisements on websites, claiming that it was the “most watched English channel” on May 8, when the Karnataka election results came out.
By splicing and dicing TAM data, NewsX manages to show that Times Now was the least watched of the five major English news channel.
On the other hand, Times Now too is running print advertisements of its viewership on results day. Not surprisingly, this shows that Times Now was the most watched, with NewsX not even in the frame.
Also read: The most-watched TV news show at 9 pm is…
IJR 
Brilliant!
First things first…NewsX hasn’t “sliced” any data. The established TAM segment used to rank news channels is 25-44 M AB (Males in the age group 25-44 in A and B towns). And it is in this segment that NewsX has a 35% market share. Times Now has 7%.
Yes, NewsX has had many ownership problems. But as a news outlet it has always had editorial credibility. Viewers like its non-tamasha approach. Some people find that boring, and I doubt NewsX will become the No 1 channel on a regular basis for some time. But its viewership is clearly growing rapidly. I think the tide is turning in TV, away from screaming and towards more international level, sensible coverage. NDTV and NewsX are the only channels offering this, which is why even NDTV’s numbers are rising.
You said:
“If our TV stations cannot even put out numbers of their viewership which have a faint whiff of credibility, can they real put out news and views that news consumers can trust and believe?”
What about the print media – newspapers and magazines? When was the last time that any of the top brands – English/Hindi/regional – released ‘honest’ circulation figures that showed only the actual number of copies sold to paying subscribers and from the stands?
Why are there different yardsticks when it comes to measuring the credibility of the print and electronic news media?
It’s silly to paint all channels with the same brush and become cynical. The fact is TimesNow has been the no 1 channel for some time. But the fact is also that last week NewsX pipped TimesNow to the post. Why Is that something to becoming cynical about? It is something to applaud. It shows viewers are tiring of sensationalism. It shows the news market is becoming competitive. That’s only good news for viewers.
I am not surprised. Viewers are not fools, they know better who is worth how much!
Illogical comments and posts seem to be ruling this link altogether.
First read English, and then give any views/comments. It seems that people are foolish enough to read anything nowadays.
It is unfortunate that the ignorant poster could not understand /analyze the difference in the TG or the simple language of these mailers.
The newsx promo clearly mention “Karnataka Election Week” which means that they are not talking about 8th May in particular but the whole week. Times Now mailer is 8th May specific.
Secondly, mailer 1 clearly defines Newsx’s market i.e. Top 6 metros Male AB CS 25-44 Age group while Times Now mailer market is All India, 25+ age group.
Ownership does not decide a channels market share. It is an absolute immature statement on the part of the person who has posted it, and HATS OFF TO PEOPLE supporting this post.
Lastly, NewsX HAVE not sliced any data. On the contrary Times Now has sliced the data by hiding/omitting NewsX from the graph. NewsX stands on its core values I.e. clarity in complex world. That’s why NewsX has clearly defined its TG.
READ PROPERLY. IT’S IN ENGLISH NOT IN ANY OTHER ADOIFU 🙂
News X is a sub standard channel, its two main Anchors seem highly constipated, difficult to understand what they utter. Their choice of Panelists is extremely faulty. For instance the inclusion of Sudhanshu Mittal of the BJP in the debate on Spot Fixing last evening was hilarious. It was like setting a thief to catch a thief.