As TV networks offer measurement currency alternatives to Nielsen in the coming upfront, Nielsen is offering an alternative of its own, according to the Video Advertising Bureau. The trade group that represents networks isn’t happy about it, but said it wants to partner with Nielsen on a solution.

In a letter issued to Nielsen late today, the VAB said Nielsen is preparing to release two sets of currencies into the market in advance of the upfronts. One is based on its TV ratings panel from 41,000 U.S. households and the other is a “big data” alternative from the alpha version of the next-generation Nielsen One, which incorporates data from millions of household set-top boxes and smart TVs.

Subscribe to Ad Age now for the latest industry news and analysis.

“Nielsen’s view is that buyers/sellers should decide which currency data set to use in upfront negotiations,” according to a statement from the VAB. The group said research teams from media companies have “discovered real concerns that could hurt upfront negotiations” after analyzing one month of the new data (from September 2021, but not released until February).

"We are deeply disappointed that these concerns would be raised in the press rather than in direct discussion and collaboration with us,” Nielsen said in a statement. “We have been in regular contact with our clients, including hosting client webinars and numerous individual client meetings to review the methodology used to create the audience estimates and the recent release of impact data. We have been, and remain committed to working with our clients to convey a deep understanding of this comprehensive offering. Up until this letter was issued, we have not received questions from the VAB. Additionally, a trade group associated with traditional TV channels is an incomplete and biased subset of the video marketplace. We prefer to work openly with the entire industry to get to the best measurement solution.”

The VAB is calling for more information on how the new currency data was created and to have "complete confidence in the accuracy of the information to explain the differences to buyers,” according to the organization's statement. The group also said it wants to partner with Nielsen on next steps.

Nielsen said it made the decision to allow either data set to be used in trading in the fall based on feedback from buyers and sellers. The company said it had addressed client concerns around proximity of the data release to the upfronts. “Our approach will enable buyers and sellers to trade against big data plus panel metrics if they so choose, while giving our clients runway to adapt to this launch.”

“The VAB had high hopes for big data being a big leap forward in what Nielsen’s measurement and currency can bring to marketers, but after in-depth analysis it’s clear to us that this first data set is rife with serious problems,” said VAB CEO Sean Cunningham in a statement. “Taking the time to right the wrongs now is in the TV buy/sell marketplace’s best interests and gives Nielsen time to fulfill their promise of coming to market with a more accurate solution. VAB’s Measurement Innovation Task Force is ready to work with Nielsen on the issues we’ve raised, to help put them on a better course to better measurement.”  

In the letter, the VAB seeks at least two types of disclosure to begin that process, including on how Nielsen created the data and clarification on the methodology, plus disclosures on how to compare panel-based and big-data numbers.

Failures from the initial release of Sept. 2021 “big data” numbers mean Nielsen needs to stop releasing further data into the marketplace “until those failures are fixed, and adequate disclosures are made,” the VAB said.

The initial Nielsen big data issuance is “rife with illogical audience patterns and contradictions” that render is unusable, according to the VAB’s letter. The issuance also came months after the original promised start in the second half of 2021 and didn’t have meaningful disclosures about how the numbers were calculated, the letter said.

Among inconsistencies between the big data numbers and current panel were significant audience gains were the big data showing significant gains in age 18-49 audiences with simultaneous declines in age 25-49 audiences. The letter also cited “wild swings in comparative gender results in many day parts/genres/programs” that “defy any logical pattern or explanation.”