Men Are Sabotaging The Online Reviews Of TV Shows Aimed At Women

Advertisements

Not according to some.

 

what exactly is "women's entertainment" ??

 

Apparently it's whatever us guys are giving crappy reviews to and thus oppressing women's choices for.

 

And why should my preferences weigh into it? It's none of your business what movie genres I like.

If only bought Kenmore appliances in the past, does that mean my opinions on a Samsung or LG don't count? A traditionally-Ford buyer can't give his opinion on a Chevy or Toyota that he recently rented?

 

Advertisements

is this like Yelp where people give a place 1 star because the place is closed on some day of the week when they wanted to dine there?

 

The depends on the reason for which you are using the data. If you want to start a banana pudding store in a certain area, then it behooves you to know how many people would and would not be willing to buy it regardless of why. It doesn't matter if your banana pudding is the best in the world if most people in a given area don't like bananas.

On the other hand, if people in a certain area like bananas more than average, and you are looking to start a store in that area, you should use data collected from that area as opposed to the national or worldwide average. If you don't, however, it's not the fault of those who don't like bananas that you used the data incorrectly to come to the wrong conclusions.

 

It's like people giving a restaurant 1 star because their delivery took too long even though they loved the food. Personally, I like to give vegetarian and vegan restaurants 1 star for not having meat dishes on the menu.

 

Or like people who can't stand driving two-seaters due to lack of space giving a crappy review of a two-seater, complaining about the lack of space, that they rented one weekend.

 

It's an Internet-based movie review site, so there are going to be thousands of reviews with all different kinds of motivations. Some people will rate a show poorly simply because they don't like one of the actors or filmmakers. Some will rate a show poorly because they saw it while on a date which didn't end well. Some will rate a show poorly because they're immature idiots who get some kind of sick satisfaction out of trolling. And some will rate a show poorly because they truly didn't like the show.

That's why it would be ridiculous for studio execs to use IMDb ratings (or any general online ratings) as a gauge for how to run their business.

 

This is why, in the statistics community, self selected polls aren't worth the paper the results are printed on.

The Nielsen ratings folks, the folks Studio execs actually listen to, and not to IMDB, know how to do statistically significant polls.

--Carlos V.

 

I'm really not big fan of user review sites where there are number or star or letter or whatever ratings to begin with.

You should see how crazy those Internet people are.


Bunch of nut jobs

 

If I am asked to rate, using the author's example, Sex in the City, I will give it my honest rating: 3/10 stars. It has nothing to do with feeling empathy for some demographic or other, but giving my opinion on something if asked. I don't like fish or seafood, and if asked to rate a fish dish will give it 1 star, because I can not stand the taste of fish. It would never even occur to me to think, well someone must like fish so I shouldn't offer my opinion just because I don't like it. If I only rated shows I liked, then the shows I don't like would have higher ratings and the studios might make more shows that I don't like instead of shows that I would enjoy. I don't rate the show comparing it to the "best" of that genre, I rate it more or less on how much I enjoy watching it. I would definitely not base my rating of How to be Single by comparing it to Notting Hill. That just doesn't make sense to me. I would rate it on how much I enjoyed the film.

 

Exactly.

I still highly doubt that any entertainment exec in this day and age would use IMDb ratings to reach any business decision. A decision maker who does deserves having the whole thing flop. Its beyond ludicrous and stupid; using data like that puts the livelihoods of people attached to the project at risk.

Flawed data used to make a flawed decision results in a flawed outcome.

But hey, according to some on this thread, that's because men are mean to "women's entertainment." If only men would change their ways. If only the sabotaging men would do a behavioral shift, then things would be better in the entertainment industry.

Perhaps I have a better suggestion: let's view the IMDb ratings for what they are, and not what they aren't. Let's assume there is a built in bias, for whatever reason.

And then, for God's sake, don't use this internet poll data to make project decisions. Commission a real poll. Arrange for controlled studies, and real focus groups. Get reliable data.

Don't try to get by on the cheap by using IMDb info. Those that do, deserve what they get.

 

Why are people ordering or eating fish dishes if they don't like fish?

 

Unless there's some food rating site that asks you to rate every meal you eat and then provides you with custom recommendations of other meals you would like based on the meals you previously rated, then all this talk of rating fish is irrelevant. People rate movies on IMDb so that they can get accurate recommendations. If they didn't rate the shows they didn't like, the ratings wouldn't be accurate.

 

My wife watches Lifetime movies and they are terrible

 

wow, you must really hate your co-workers