Hello all, and welcome from a slightly chilly Las Vegas. I’m a bit of a gadget dork, so coming to CES (Consumer Electronics Show) has been something I’ve looked forward to for some time. But you might be asking yourself, “Jon covers media, not technology, why, during these challenging economic times would Nielsen send Jon to hang out in the desert and lose money on cards for three days?”

The answer is twofold. First, I’m speaking on a panel tomorrow (if you’re around, stop by and say hi). That alone typically gets me out to conferences.

But there is actually a far more important reason. For some time we’ve been talking about media fragmentation. This has typically meant that there are more media options, more publishers, and just basically more media to consume. That clearly hasn’t changed, but what has changed is that we’re on the edge of a new era of fragmentation – where the publishers themselves are fragmenting their own media.

Let’s take a simple example – “Two and a Half Men.” CBS is currently showing the same series programs on: TV, iPod, CBS.com, YouTube, AOL TV and about a dozen other sites. The content is also available on TiVo, cable DVR, and a handful of other boxes people attach to their TVs. Now this doesn’t even include piracy, SlingBox/Sling.com, DVDs and a bunch of mobile content. So in many ways, CBS is fragmenting its own audience. And because rate cards are different for all of those platforms (where advertising is available), they are fragmenting their ad dollars for the only sitcom on TV that still consistently does well in the ratings.

So what does this have to do with CES? Interactive media is quite clearly no longer just about computers. It is about all three screens and different devices attached to those screens. If you’re talking about interactive video, but not talking about DVR, mobile and other alternate platforms, you not actually talking about interactive video.

So why am I here? I’m here to see what the future of all these screens looks like. Because someone has to measure them, and goodness knows, I want Nielsen to be the one to do it.

This is day one of my dispatches - I’m here through Friday. I’m hoping to have some video interviews to share with everyone tomorrow.

The automotive industry has witnessed an extremely volatile and game-changing 2008. As we close out the year, here is a look back at the top 25 automotive brands that consumers discussed online in 2008 relative to all online discussion.

We look forward to opening a new automotive chapter tomorrow and tackling the many challenges that are ahead in 2009.

From our automotive family to yours….Happy New Year!

Ah, the last week of December. Agencies are closed, most of my media clients are on vacation (or are at least having long lunches with questionable drink choices) and things generally slow down around the holidays. The next couple of weeks seem like a perfect time for the Media Analytics team to put out our “2009 Ones to Watch” list. Here are the rules: three of us (me, Chuck Schilling and John Brauer) are each going to post two companies to watch in 2009. We’re each supposed to pick a big hitter (a name who you will almost certainly know) and a smaller up-and-coming player. The only rules are that the companies have to be media players (no retail or CPG for the media team) and that you have to be able to support your argument with data (after all, we are Nielsen).

I can only hope in the end, our list is as relevant as this one.

Happy New Year!

The Media Analytics Team (Jon Gibs, Chuck Schilling, John Brauer and David Crowell).

My colleague Melissa Davies published findings earlier this year on the role of the Internet in healthcare, which found that while doctors are still the primary source for healthcare information, the Internet is a close second. In this new era of collaborative care, patients have access to an array of online tools to arm them with more detailed information about their conditions and treatments than ever before. Specifically, social media vehicles are expanding and accelerating the pace at which patients and caregivers can gain access to drug treatment ratings. Similar to how an online shopper may peruse consumer reviews and ratings for, say, a flat screen TV on WalMart.com, today’s patients can get a similar quick fix.

A new crop of sites such as PatientsLikeMe.com and iGuard.org enable patients to quickly access a trove of treatment ratings based on the results of its online participants. Each site varies a bit (PatientsLikeMe.com is intensely personal, featuring user images and detailed personal accounts, whereas iGuard.org presents limited demographic data) but they are similar in their approach. PatientsLikeMe and iGuard both field surveys to capture patient treatment experiences, including dosing, length of treatment, side effects and efficacy. The results are tabulated and presented as an aggregate of all patient experiences. With just a few clicks, users can learn why a patient takes a prescription and why they’ve stopped taking it. Another site, DailyStrength.org, publishes “success” rates based on the efficacy of all users currently taking a medication.

By literally putting a human face on this vast repository of patient information and fostering social networking, these sites distinguish themselves from predecessors like DrugRatingz.com, and even established sites like WebMD.com, which also allows users to rate treatments. I was curious to see what traffic to the sites looked like. As yet, traffic is quite low and below our minimum reporting levels, but directionally this data seems to indicate that awareness of review sites is gradually increasing.

My instincts tell me that patients are not going to make a wholesale change and stop engaging in discussion forums, but they will incorporate a search or two on these sites as part of their information gathering. I expect that we’ll see discussion of these ratings pop up in the leading forums as well. At the end of the day, managing a disease or condition is not a simple task and no single site is going to be the silver bullet to allay all consumer questions and concerns.

The Winter @Plan survey results reveal that the U.S. online population age 18 or older, is less likely to purchase a car / truck in the next 6-months when compared to the Fall results (10.1% vs. 11.8%). I’m sure none of this is shocking news, but simply another confirmation of the economic times. The opportunity lies in understanding where those consumers with the highest probability to purchase in the next 6-months go online. This kind of market intelligence will allow for savvy online ad spend and higher ROI.

The above five automotive sites naturally over-index in likelihood to purchase a car / truck in the next 6-months. Below is a sneak peek of five out of 500+ general interest ad-supported sites where visitors are yielding a higher probability to purchase a car / truck in the next 6-months relative to the U.S. online population. These types of sites that over-index on likeliness to purchase a car / truck should be considered in the automotive online advertising plan for 2009.