<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress.com" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>nielsen &amp;laquo; WordPress.com Tag Feed</title>
	<link>http://wordpress.com/tag/nielsen/</link>
	<description>Feed of posts on WordPress.com tagged "nielsen"</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:24:33 +0000</pubDate>

	<generator>http://wordpress.com/tags/</generator>
	<language>en</language>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[La redención continúa. Estados Unidos barre Australia con un gran Kobe Bryant]]></title>
<link>http://wheresporthappens.wordpress.com/?p=452</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 07:12:16 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>wheresporthappens</dc:creator>
<guid>http://wheresporthappens.wordpress.com/?p=452</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Estados Unidos venció cómodamente a Australia en el partido de cuartos de final tras un comienzo u]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Estados Unidos venció cómodamente a Australia en el partido de cuartos de final tras un comienzo un tanto dubitativo. Australia se fue al descanso con doce puntos de desventaja pese a haber realizado un partido magnífico. En el tercer cuarto apareció Kobe Bryant para sentenciar. El resto sirvió para que el equipo americano siguiera dando minutos a otros jugadores. Australia finalmente fue arrollada por 115-85.</p>
<p> Carmelo Anthony y Dwight Howard realizaron un gran primer cuarto, sin embargo el acierto australiano desde la lína de tres mantenía el partido muy igualado. Pese a que Bogut estaba en el banquillo con problemas con las faltas, todos los australianos eran capaces de anotar desde la líena de tres. Estados Unidos empezó a precipitarse en ataque, y ganaba 25-24 al final del cuarto gracias al rebote ofensivo.</p>
<p>En el segundo cuarto Estados Unidos intentó poner velocidad en el partido. Kobe y Lebron empezarn a anotar gracias al contragolpe. Sin embargo Australia seguía ahí. Finalmente Kobe Bryant y un gran triple de Deron Williams sobre la bocina mandaron el partido al descanso con los americanos ganando 55-43. Australia empezaba a ver que pese a realizar un magnífico encuentro, venecer a Estados Unidos es algo casi imposible.</p>
<p>Tras el descanso apareció el mejor Kobe Bryant. Lideró un parcial de 14-0 y puso a su equipo 69-43. El partido ya estaba sentenciado. Australia perdió sus ganas, su trabajo, y también su muñeca. Chris Bosh y Tayshaun Prince mantuvieron la ventaja para su equipo en el final del cuarto. Estados Unidos ganaba 89-61 tras treinta minutos de juego.</p>
<p>Hasta casi el final del partido las titulares estuvieron en cancha. Mills, Nielsen y Joe Ingles mantuvieron el buen nivel de Australia. En los americanos tuvieron su momento Deron Williams y Carlos Boozer. El partido terminó con 115-85 y con Estados Unidos en semifinales. Allí verá a Argentina, quizás el equipo que más daño puede hacerles. Australia ha realizado un gran torneo, pues ha conseguido la clasificación y ha sido el equipo que más a molestado a Estados Unidos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Hulu Hit 105M Streams in July]]></title>
<link>http://newteevee.com/?p=6989</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 21:02:02 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Chris Albrecht</dc:creator>
<guid>http://newteevee.com/?p=6989</guid>
<description><![CDATA[We thank the online video gods for Hulu, if for no other reason than the ability to write a Nielsen ]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We thank the online video gods for <a href="http://www.hulu.com">Hulu</a>, if for no other reason than the ability to write a Nielsen web video measurement post without the headline "YouTube Still #1." Sure, YouTube is still in first place in terms of video plays, with more than 5 billion video streams served to more than 77 million unique users in July. But Hulu is now No. 8 in Nielsen's ranking of the top 10 video sites, generating more than 105 million streams to more than 3.2 million unique viewers during the month.</p>
<p>Though Nielsen cautioned us against comparing these stats month-over-month (something about its VideoCensus tool going through frequent tweaks), in June, Hulu was ranked 10th with more than 82 million streams going to 2.6 million unique visitors. Despite Nielsen's warnings, a 20 million jump is a 20 million jump. That's a whole lotta <em>Airwolf</em>.</p>
<p>Hulu beat out CNN, Turner Sports and Entertainment Digital Network, and the site's not that far off from overtaking ESPN. You have to wonder what kind of boost Hulu will get now that it has <a href="http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/account-activity/e3i59d687c2e454352eee12b6aec44d1d91">hired a marketing firm</a> and is expected to get $50 million worth of paid and unpaid media time across NBC and News Corp. properties.</p>
<p><a href="http://newteevee.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/nielsen_july.jpg"><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-6990" title="nielsen_july" src="http://newteevee.wordpress.com/files/2008/08/nielsen_july.jpg" alt="" width="514" height="222" /></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Fairfax poll on NZ First]]></title>
<link>http://curiablog.wordpress.com/?p=92</link>
<pubDate>Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:36:15 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>dpf</dc:creator>
<guid>http://curiablog.wordpress.com/?p=92</guid>
<description><![CDATA[The Dominion Post reports further results from the Fairfax/Nielsen poll, on the issue of NZ First:

]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/4659487a11.html">Dominion Post reports</a> further results from the Fairfax/Nielsen poll, on the issue of NZ First:</p>
<ul>
<li>48 per cent of voters believe Peters should be stood down from his ministerial positions over questions surrounding donations to NZ First, with 37% disagreeing and 15% unsure</li>
<li>On whether NZ First should be involved in discussions after the election about the formation of the next government, 37% support a Labour doing a deal with NZ First and 52% against. For a deal with National 26% say yes and 54% say no.</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Fairfax Poll August 2008]]></title>
<link>http://curiablog.wordpress.com/?p=83</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 18:12:29 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>dpf</dc:creator>
<guid>http://curiablog.wordpress.com/?p=83</guid>
<description><![CDATA[







Polling Company: Nielsen
Poll Method: Random Phone
Poll Size: 1,102 total voters, 981 decide]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="postentry">
<div class="snap_preview">
<div class="postentry">
<div class="snap_preview">
<div class="postentry">
<div class="snap_preview">
<div class="postentry">
<div class="snap_preview">
<p><strong>Polling Company:</strong> Nielsen</p>
<p><strong>Poll Method:</strong> Random Phone</p>
<p><strong>Poll Size:</strong> 1,102 total voters, 981 decided voters (3.3% maximum margin of error)</p>
<p><strong>Dates:</strong> 6 to 12 August 2008</p>
<p><strong>Client:</strong> Fairfax Media</p>
<p>Report: <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4657717a24035.html">Stuff</a> and <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominionpost/4657579a6000.html">Stuff</a></p>
<p><strong>Party Support</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>National 54.0% (+3.0%)</li>
<li>Labour 35.0% (nc)</li>
<li>Green 4.0% (-1.0%)</li>
<li>NZ First 3.0% (-1.0%)</li>
<li>Maori 2.0% (nc)</li>
<li>United Future 0.0% (nc)</li>
<li>ACT 1.0% (nc)</li>
<li>Progressive 0.0% (nc)</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="snap_preview"><strong>Projected Seats</strong></div>
<div class="snap_preview">
<ul>
<li>National 70</li>
<li>Labour 46</li>
<li>Green 0</li>
<li>NZ First 0</li>
<li>Maori 6</li>
<li>United Future 1</li>
<li>ACT 1</li>
<li>Progressive 1</li>
<li>Total 125</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="snap_preview">This is based on Maori Party winning six electorate seats and ACT, United Future and Progressive one each.</div>
<p><strong>Preferred PM</strong></p>
<div class="snap_preview">
<ul>
<li>Key 43.0% (+4.0%)</li>
<li>Clark 31.0 (-1.0%)</li>
<li>Peters 2.0% (-1.0%)</li>
</ul>
</div>
<div class="snap_preview"><strong>Issues</strong></div>
<div class="snap_preview">
<ul>
<li>35% think National can afford significantly bigger tax cuts than Labour, 48% disagree</li>
<li>45% think personal finances get better in next 12 months, 30% worse</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Research Pages Review or 'Professors Don't Read' ]]></title>
<link>http://universityusability.wordpress.com/?p=99</link>
<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 14:56:45 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>universityusability</dc:creator>
<guid>http://universityusability.wordpress.com/?p=99</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Summer&#8217;s over and I&#8217;m back at my desk - there&#8217;s a lot of cool stuff coming up in t]]></description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Summer's over and I'm back at my desk - there's a lot of cool stuff coming up in the Autumn, not least the results of an expert review and usability test I've commissioned a consultancy to do of the english web pages. I'm looking forward to it with constructive apprehension - watch this space...</p>
<p>I've recently completed <a href="http://edit.info.lu.se/upload/Englishsite/ReviewoftheEnglishResearchPagesAugust14.pdf">a review of the research pages of the university</a> - principally just to find out how many we have...We've got at least 2500 pages which directly describe research and there's probably another 5 000 to 10 000 describing, among other things, researchers, equipment, services etc etc. This review will be used to focus further development work.</p>
<p>One issue I saw immediately, in some cases, is the sheer volume of text. Many pages had at least 300 plus words - which is a problem. Why? Here's some facts:</p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.gerrymcgovern.com/">Gerry McGovern</a>, in his book <a href="http://www.gerrymcgovern.com/killer-web-content.htm">Killer Web Content</a>, says that after the first 300 words you've lost 40% of the readers.</p>
<p>or, if you want something a bit more empirical (and we are talking about research, after all)</p>
<p>- Based on the work of <a href="http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1326561.1326566">Weinreich et al. (2008)</a> <a href="http://www.useit.com/alertbox/percent-text-read.html">Jakob Nielsen</a> showed that most visitors to a web page will look at only 28% of the text (on a page with 300 words, users are on it for around 30 seconds)</p>
<p>Ah wait, but the research pages will be read by Professors and such, who have much more patience than the rest of us time starved hunter gatherers of the web. Sorry:</p>
<p>- <a href="http://www.bl.uk/news/pdf/googlegen.pdf">A study by the British Library (2008)</a> showed that both undergraduates, and professors, exhibited the same tendency for shallow, 'flicking' behaviour in digital libraries. Yep, just like the rest of us, professors don't read.</p>
<p>So too many words, and you've lost the reader. Which is a problem if the most exciting stuff is in your last sentence. And this is now 341 words, which means, according to Gerry, that only about 40% of you ever got this far.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
