4 ms·

does the bar chart (http://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/blog/424/ad_cost.png http://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/blog/424/ad_cost.png) irritate any one else here? I

does the bar chart (http://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/blog/424/ad_cost.png http://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/blog/424/ad_cost.png) irritate any one else here? I feel like it's a rather biased data visualization, it seems patently unfair to compare the finale of breaking bad with the average of a network. If anything, it should be contrasted with the finales of each of those network or possibly replaced with a figure representing the average cost of an ad on AMC.

jonnathanson 13y ago
Hi there! Great feedback. The bar chart isn't perfect, and certainly less so out of context. But I should clarify my intent behind it. The final episode of Breaking Bad pulled in roughly the same numbers that your average primetime hit (or even indexed basket of hits) pulls in every night. So when we're talking about the primetime averages, we're talking about indices with viewership figures roughly comparable to Breaking Bad's final episode. The point was that Breaking Bad was able to put a significant price premium on its finale relative to the nominal size of the audience it drew. It punched above its weight, so to speak. (Finale or otherwise, we're talking about 10 million Breaking Bad viewers vs. 11 million CBS viewers.) Is the comparison totally fair? In that specific context, in illustration of that specific point, I believe so. Would it be remotely fair if it were used, say, to illustrate a point about Breaking Bad in general vis-a-vis the market? Considerably less so. The point was more about its value to AMC, and less about the show's ostensible superiority to any other network show. To that point, I like your idea about contrasting Breaking Bad (finale, ordinary episode, etc.) with the average cost of an ad on AMC (though we'd have to control for the skew exerted on that index by Breaking Bad itself). That might be more apples-to-apples in certain respects, and it might have driven the point across a little bit better. Duly noted, and in as much as I am considering a followup, I may want to address that specific concern.
- logical42 13y ago
  I actually feel like it is misleading. I would expect each bar to represent an item of a similar type. But, in this case, it doesn't.
  - jonnathanson 13y ago
    I am sorry you feel that way, and that was certainly not the intent. I didn't intend for it to be any more misleading than, say, a chart comparing the performance of one company's stock versus an index or set of indices. I tried to explain that this is a unit-vis-a-vis-indices comparison in the text, but the chart could have been clearer in visualizing that point. A bar chart was probably not the best chart to go with. Anyhow, thanks for the feedback. I very much appreciate it.

jonnathanson 13y ago

Hi there! Great feedback. The bar chart isn't perfect, and certainly less so out of context. But I should clarify my intent behind it. The final episode of Breaking Bad pulled in roughly the same numbers that your average primetime hit (or even indexed basket of hits) pulls in every night. So when we're talking about the primetime averages, we're talking about indices with viewership figures roughly comparable to Breaking Bad's final episode. The point was that Breaking Bad was able to put a significant price premium on its finale relative to the nominal size of the audience it drew. It punched above its weight, so to speak. (Finale or otherwise, we're talking about 10 million Breaking Bad viewers vs. 11 million CBS viewers.) Is the comparison totally fair? In that specific context, in illustration of that specific point, I believe so. Would it be remotely fair if it were used, say, to illustrate a point about Breaking Bad in general vis-a-vis the market? Considerably less so. The point was more about its value to AMC, and less about the show's ostensible superiority to any other network show. To that point, I like your idea about contrasting Breaking Bad (finale, ordinary episode, etc.) with the average cost of an ad on AMC (though we'd have to control for the skew exerted on that index by Breaking Bad itself). That might be more apples-to-apples in certain respects, and it might have driven the point across a little bit better. Duly noted, and in as much as I am considering a followup, I may want to address that specific concern.

logical42 13y ago
I actually feel like it is misleading. I would expect each bar to represent an item of a similar type. But, in this case, it doesn't.
- jonnathanson 13y ago
  I am sorry you feel that way, and that was certainly not the intent. I didn't intend for it to be any more misleading than, say, a chart comparing the performance of one company's stock versus an index or set of indices. I tried to explain that this is a unit-vis-a-vis-indices comparison in the text, but the chart could have been clearer in visualizing that point. A bar chart was probably not the best chart to go with. Anyhow, thanks for the feedback. I very much appreciate it.