Talk:GMA Network

If you are frequently watch GMA Network programs and a certified Kapuso, you can add this userbox on your userpage: {{User:Danngarcia/Userboxes/GMA network}}, to display this on your userpage:

GMA This user watches GMA Network programs and is "proud to be a Kapuso."

Leave it at as it is, right now it looks professional and too much information can't hurt.

well, the article has too much information...useless information.

Here is my list of the article's useless info:

• Worldwide (through GMA Pinoy TV and seen worldwide) - why would you repeat "and seen worldwide" if the article mentioned that it is Worldwide? And GMA Pinoy TV must be placed in the "See Also" section.
• Philippines (through owned terrestrial stations and as seen on QTV 11) - actually, you can put "GMA-7 and QTV-11" here because the article is about GMA Network, not GMA-7.
• The history section must be reformatted as it looks like the exact copy from the company's website, like in the case of Ayala Corporation, which is now edited.
• The article is about GMA Network, Inc.--not about GMA-7. So, the article should be splitted into two: GMA Network and GMA-7.
• Partnerships in acquiring TV programs must not be included, as if you've seen in an NBC article that the company acquires from 20th Century Fox, MGM or WB.
• Comcast, DirecTV and such are not affiliates of GMA Pinoy TV but rather providers of GMA Pinoy TV , so the info must be deleted, and also the Local TV Networks and Media Productions, the reason is stated earlier.
• The list of GMA Network shows must be deleted as it is shows of GMA-7, not GMA Network. GMA Network is just a proprietor of GMA-7.
• Program blocks are useless. They don't seem to be informative.
• In the external links portion, you must not put Orbit there as it is just a provider of GMA-7 shows, not a GMA Network subsidiary, and also the blogs about GMA Network.

That's all.

Good idea, yea reading it is one thing but paying attention to details is another thing. You got my support in editing it. JonSnow

Partnerships

Perhaps those would have to be updated, or are we making it historical? Howard the Duck | talk, 11:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I really think that this part of the article must go. This list is incomplete, and would grow overtime.

We a little referencing it would be a "legit" section. --Howard the Duck 15:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Programming

Are all stations nationwide show the same thing? Or are there local variants? --Howard the Duck 11:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so, Iloilo and Cebu has some entertainment programs.

What days and times are they shown? Are they shown on primetime? So we can edit the TV programs section. (Also, sign your posts with ~~~~ so we'll know who you are. --Howard the Duck 15:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

New Branding Page

How about a new, chunky article about the branding of GMA? I propose that the article contains a merged GMA Network Logos and the Where You Belong Page. We might as well put the lyrics of GMA's current theme song, as it would probably not go well with the main page. All the mottos and slogans would go into that page, and the only mottos left for this page would be the first three ones. What do you think?

GMA Network Addresses:

I think they can merged with another section. --Howard the Duck 14:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

GMA Network owned by American Broadcasting Company?

Does ABC really owned a portion of GMA (Then RBS) way back in the 1960's? I thought that "Uncle Bob" Stewart is the sole owner of the station... -Danngarcia 19:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Some Unnecessary Info and Criticisms

• "When democracy in the Philippines was restored in the People Power Revolution in 1986, television stations began to air, some with their original owners. ABS-CBN..."
  • What's the point of this paragraph? It's all about ABS-CBN.
• GMA Radio-Television Arts section needs sources and/or a rewrite. Too much history, some irrelevant info there. Potentially libelous statements if unreferenced, for example: "Imee Marcos, daughter of Ferdinand Marcos, attempted to takeover GMA".
• Throughout the entire article, the present tenses and past tenses are so messed up it just ain't funny.
• "The production of various shows were up to par with its rival network, ABS-CBN."
  • More unnecessary mention of ABS-CBN. In fact, the sentence should just be stricken from the record.
  • "GMA finally gained a rating advantage in Mega Manila over ABS-CBN, officially on September 23, 2004." What's the point?
• There are a lot of statements presented as facts which have no references.
• "In April, the founder of the network, Robert "Uncle Bob" Stewart died in the United States." I don't see the point of the statement. Maybe on the person's article (if one exists), but it has nothing to do with GMA as it is.
• Too much of the article is centred around ratings. Far too much than is actually encyclopedic.
• "In a 2006 survey conducted by Pulse Asia, 7 out of 10 Metro Manila-based viewers find GMA Network a more credible network than rival ABS-CBN." I don't see the relevance to the article. Sounds like some editors might have a WP:COI since a lot of the article sounds like mere chest-beating.
• A lot of the article sounds like it was written by GMA employees or people affiliated with the network (this applies to a LOT of Philippine company articles I've seen). I refer these editors to WP:COI.

A lot of work needs to be done on this article. Shrumster 21:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd agree with this, but since you know where to look at, perhaps you do it. I'll back it up of someone goes ballistic. --Howard the Duck 07:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

GMA Ratings

• It says that GMA's ratings are higher then ABS-CBN's when in fact ABS has higher ratings, the ratings that they showed on the page were only PRIMETIME ratings not the total ratings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.37.26.155 (talk • contribs)
  • For what it's worth, only Mega Manila primetime ratings are what the advertisers want. --Howard the Duck 03:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

• This is not a website for Advertisers. The Ratings Section is somewhat Bias. There has been a reliable ratings source Nationally from AGB NEILSEN (NUTAM). The readers ought to know true popularity of a show or a network by showing the overall "National" ratings and not a "selective" rating datum.68.127.165.27 00:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually it is a website for advertisers - and everybody. It pays to know that only the Mega Manila ratings do count. --Howard the Duck 14:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
• Ok you need to have a source for this comment, otherwise it is your own opinion.68.127.165.27 21:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Also, the only news items that proclaim #1 in the Philippines are ABS-CBN press releases, since AGB Nielsen doesn't group Mega Manila and non-Mega Manila exclusively; non-Mega Manila is always splintered into the different cities and provinces, and are never grouped together as "rest of the Philippines." And even if the rest of the Philippines has a larger population than Mega Manila, Mega Manila may indeed have a larger market.
  • And not to mention the primary reason why ratings are published are for the advertisers themselves. --Howard the Duck 15:18, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

According AGB Nelisen Media Research website they officially release the: http://www.agbnielsen.net/whereweare/dynPage.asp?lang=english&id=240&country=Philippines

MEGATAM which only include "Mega Manila",

MCTAM "AGB Nielsen Media Research also reports on three (3) metropolitan cities dubbed as the Metro City TAM (MCTAM). In addition to Metro Manila, TV viewing in Cebu City, Iloilo City and Davao City are included in the MCTAM"

NUTAM "which AGB Nielsen Media Research (Philippines) launched the country's first truly national urban television audience measurement panel in October 2006. Composed of 1,540 representative panel homes, NUTAM will cover about 90% of the total urban population with TV sets or about 37 million individuals age 2 and above in the country."

ABS-CBN releases Data from them (AGB) and not from their own source. AGB is a third party source and GMA is also a customer of AGB Nielsen. ALL are important to Advertisers. And you are wrong to say that rating are only for advertising sake. Many readers want to know the clear picture of the ratings throughout the Philippines. And advertisers do not certainly use this website as their main source of getting their ratings. They get that on the AGB website itself.

According to their website: http://www.agbnielsen.net/whereweare/dynPage.asp?lang=english&id=222&country=Philippines

CHANNEL SHARES ARE AS FOLLOWS (NUTAM)

• MORINING-- ABS-35.5 GMA-39.6
• NOOTIME-- ABS-49.1 GMA-35.7
• AFTERNOON-- ABS-41.9 GMA-38.9
• PRIMETIME-- ABS-43.3 GMA-37.6
• LATENIGHT-- ABS-37.3 GMA-42.6

It turns out, ABS-CBN does lead in primetime "Nationwide". But this article says otherwise.

In the United States they do not publish any "Local Ratings" to newspaper, TV, Internet etc. Local ratings can be requested by local channels. "National Ratings" are published periodically instead in the media

Before you post the Mega Manila ratings solely, you should provide a direct quote from advertisers or companies that they only prioritize the "Mega Manila Ratings" over the "National Ratings". Otherwise, the comments made on the article would be suspected as POV. Because, how come GMA are investing time and money to expand provincially if they deemed only Mega Manila that only matters?

I say we should show everything for objectivity sake and NOT selecting data just to make them look good. We can say GMA lead in Mega Manila but we should also say that they still lagged Nationally. And besides your argument about the advertisers is irrelevant anyway and better yet it is POV since there are no source. Just based on your reasoning It just clear to me that you are bias to one station which is GMA.68.127.165.27 20:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

See, there really is no unified rating for the whole Philippines since it is still splintered into the different time of the day. The article consistenly says Mega Manila (unless someone else edited it.)

If you can show me one table for the whole Philippines, not splintered into time of the day and/or cities/regions, then it'll be fine. --Howard the Duck 03:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

NUTAM is "unified", it includes Metro Manila, Mega Manila, etc. etc. as they say it include 90% of TV viewers in the Philippines.

Regarding time,

??? um, it says in the article Mega Manila Ratings PRIME-TIME-- isn't that splintered?

And also that is how they usually do it, by time of the day.

I think what you are talking about or looking for is the top 50 highest rated shows "nationally" (NUTAM) on "Daytime" and "Nighttime" -- You can also view that on the AGB website. http://www.agbnielsen.net/whereweare/dynPage.asp?lang=english&id=222&country=Philippines

And through the ABS-CBN quarterly report. REMINDER: Although this is from ABS-CBN corporate website-- their source is from AGB Nielsen Media Research (This is where both ABS-CBN and GMA get thier information about ratings)

http://www.abscbn-ir.com/pdf/2007/Anlayst%20corner/ABS-CBN%201Q07%20Presentation%205.10.07.pdf

(NUTAM) 2nd Quarter report 2007

This is the overall ratings (regardless of time and place)

• Audience Share
  • ABS-CBN 47% GMA 35%
• Ratings
  • ABS-CBN 19% GMA 14%

If you really need a comprehensive report of the Philippine ratings then you have to apply and become a member on their website. But I think you must have some kind of Advertising affiliation or some sort.68.127.165.27 02:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The ABS-CBN quarterly report isn't the best reference we can use, especially in a GMA article (LOL-- a good way to balance this is to get GMA's statement on the same report). With that said, anything that isn't available publicly isn't also a good reference. To resolve this, the ratings agency should release national, un-splintered and raw ratings data to the public. --Howard the Duck 03:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok I already showed you what you requested , again the DATA is from AGB Nelisen Media Research NOT from ABS-CBN themselves. Its on every page of the report.

The report also shows GMA leading in Mega-Manila in about 6% margin and in Metro Manila in about 1% margin. So it means the report is reliable and not bias because they are telling the truth.

The report is available publicly then why not use it? OR Why not use the sample Data in the AGB website itself?? Thats public.

And why aren't you complaining about the "Splintered" "Mega Manila Prime-Time Ratings" that is already on the article if you are so against it?

Again, I am showing you all the facts and figures directly from reliable sources and yet you are still not satisfied? And yet you are contended with the articles' source from an entertainment magazine website.

Again I have been suspecting a biased opinion from you right from the beginning and I do not expect any changes from you anytime soon. This will go nowhere. I just hope other "non-bias" people will read this.68.127.165.27 03:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Come on, don't suspect anything until you can prove it. If you can obtain GMA comments from the same AGN Nielsen data, then we don't have to worry about neutrality. It's like saying we should use PepsiCo's data obtained from a neutral source to say Coca-Cola has more bottles sold. Also, even if ABS-CBN leads in 3 out of 5 timeslots of the day doesn't mean that they're "#1" in the Philippines, isn't it? Nor does AGB Nielsen release publicly raw, unsplintered data to remove doubts once and for all what is "#1". --Howard the Duck 03:46, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I really think you are not making any sense, no offense.

Where does ABS-CBN and GMA officially get thier ratings report?? AGB Neilsen Media Research right?

What did ABS-CBN used on their report? AGB Neilsen Media research Data right?

What is the purpose of ABS 2Q 2007 report? for their business decision right?

Why would they falsified the Data report? Do you think they doctored their own report so that they can make themselves feel good?? This is a matter of loosing and gaining.

The point is ABS-CBN is using a NEUTRAL SOURCE via AGB. AGB Neilsen is Neutral because its a third party provider.

I am sure if I research more and found the GMA report they will also use the data coming from AGB Neilsen so what is the freaking difference?????

And I really do not understand your "unsplintered" data comments, its not even a word.

If you are talking about the overall shares/ratings and not the "unsplintered" ones, I already showed you.

(NUTAM) 2nd Quarter report 2007 Source:AGB Nelisen Media Research.

This is the overall ratings (regardless of time and place)

• Audience Share
  • ABS-CBN 47% GMA 35%
• Ratings
  • ABS-CBN 19% GMA 14%

You really don't have to explain yourself, sir, its just clear to me that you are bias towards GMA.68.127.165.27 04:28, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Hahahaha, and I thought was the one who had bad arguments, and now you're accusing me. Easy way out, compadre?

Now if ask the editors at the The Coca-Cola Company article if they're willing to accept figures from PepsiCo, even though it may come from a neutral source, to see which sells more bottles? If you can find a GMA Network statement on the same AGN Nielsen report, then they'd balance each other out? I'd imagine you're good at hunting down numbers so if you managed to obtain AGB Nielsen's numbers from ABS-CBN, then you can certainly find a GMA one right? After all, these two companies may have different interpretations of the same thing, right?

It's not that hard, even though ABS-CBN's numbers may be true, it certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't be using GMA's interpretation of the same data, right?

Now before you whine that I'm biased, it is certainly biased to use ABS-CBN's interpretation of the AGB Nielsen data when we don't present GMA's interpretation. So go hunt down that GMA interpretation and stop whining of me being biased, OK? --Howard the Duck 04:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

OK. let me spell it out for you in a very simple way,

AGB Nielsen released this DATA: (NUTAM) 2nd Quarter report 2007 Source:AGB Nelisen Media Research.

Overall Nationwide (regardless of time and place)

• Audience Share
  • ABS-CBN 47% GMA 35%
• Ratings
  • ABS-CBN 19% GMA 14%

Now, both GMA and ABS-CBN officially get their information about ratings through AGB Neilsen Media Research. The Official provider in the Philippine Broadcast & Advertising industry.

So basically they use the same source.

Now how can GMA interpret the above data otherwise? tell me--- when it is very clear simple datum. Its Black and White, Its right their in front of you.

Tell me how can they interpret it differently??? How?

Its a very simple four numbers data from AGB Neilsen not ABS-CBN

so how???68.127.165.27 04:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

You keep on repeating the same thing over and over again, just obtain GMA's interpretation of AGN Nielsen's numbers, it's not that hard, right?

A specific event can be interpreted differently by two different parties; for example, if a winless team suddenly defeats a championship contender, then they'd fell about themselves, on the other hand, their opponents would just dismiss it as another bump on the road. --Howard the Duck 05:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

You are not making any sense anymore and keep on doing analogies which also not making any sense.

What event are you talking about? I think you need to make a better analogy.

Its SIMPLE four number-- black and white data.

Both GMA and ABS uses this.

You mean even though ABS-CBN is leading nationally according to the AGB DATA. GMA will dismiss it because they are not winning?? They will not believe it according to their "interpretation"?

Why is then ABS-CBN-- according in their report also shows that GMA is leading in Mega Manila? They showed plainly that GMA indeed lead in Mega Manila?

You are being hopeless68.127.165.27 05:12, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. I seems you don't understand that in order to be balanced, we need to find a GMA source for that data. Or else it will be unbalanced. It doesn't matter if the data is the same, as I've said before, 2 parties may have different interpretations of a single event.

Now stop whining and start looking. --Howard the Duck 05:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh My, It is not an EVENT. Again Im just pointing out what it needs to be point out so that other readers will know.

You keep on saying different "interpretation" which does not making any sense at all. How can you interpret a clear and simple single data.

I am not whining-- its just sad to know that a bias person like you ran this place.

You will not change your mind Im sure-- even if I show you a Report from GMA, you will still look for something else, or some other reason-- maybe the "unsplintered" thingy.

Why not use the AGB Neilsen sample data as for now? instead?

No? Im sure.

because ABS-CBN also lead in that data?68.127.165.27 05:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, not an event, but data. The data used is a social science statistic, not as exact as the ones you'll get in a laboratory (physical science), that's why there'll always be different interpretations.

As for changing my mind, if they show the exact same data, then I'll personally rewrite that section, or you can do it yourself, but with only the ABS-CBN source won't cut it, we'd need a GMA source to balance things.

Would you use an NBC source to say that ABC is leading in the ratings in a CBS article?

So go search for that GMA source. You could have found it a long time ago if you were not whining here.

And biased? Wouldn't it be biased if we'd only use one sole source? --Howard the Duck 05:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

No, If you want to look for it then do it yourself. that is IF you are not really bias.

That is, IF you really wanted the truth. If you just gonna ignore it and not going to be proactive about it then you are biased. You want to see everything that would suit you.

I on the other hand already found 2 reliable sources and one from AGB website itself and yet you are still not satisfied. mmmm No wonder.

I already know the truth. I already explain it many times.

And please stop your analogies about getting sources from rival companies. Its not really helping.

We are NOT talking about a data coming from this side or that side. We are talking about a NEUTRAL DATA here that you are completely ignoring again and again and keep on insisting about "interpretation". Isnt AGB Neilsen interpretation enough?

And please don't preach about being "bias", Ive known all along who is. And I am not going to do all those unnecessary thing you have been telling me to do.68.127.165.27 05:53, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

A neutral data coming from a possibly biased source? All know that I'm asking is a GMA source. It will really be awkward to say the least if we don't have a GMA side of things on that matter, isn't it? How did ABS-CBN interpret the data anyway?

So if you won't do it, then fine by me. No changes. Any changes done would be against WP:NPOV where the article's subject side isn't given. --Howard the Duck 05:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Please read the report before saying about "interpretation" this "interpretation" that see it for yourself

Because they are showing DATA from AGB Nielsen "AS IT IS"68.127.165.27 05:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Show me a GMA reference and we'll talk again. --Howard the Duck 06:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Then you are BIAS. Not being proactive on an unsettle issue is being BIAS. Wha? Im the one that will do all the work just to satisfy you? I already found reliable--- sources what have you done so far???

Telling me about "interpretations"?

And do not intimidate me with that WP:NPOV thingy.

Oh.... is that mean you know better than me?? Is that mean you are right because you know how to link that??? scary. I don't care if you don't change it. I just want others to know that you are BIAS.

Ive tried to be reasonable from the beginning but Ive had it.

Sorry for the other readers but my patience just lost with this stupidity

What can a simple thing so hard to understand? Unless one is bias, Im done with this68.127.165.27 06:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I can see where Howard is coming from... we do need the perspective on GMA on this such as this... especially on an article about GMA Network. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.2.88.193 (talk) 10:21, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

We only need the single data called the NUTAM Overall Nationwide Ratings and Share and not the whole "source" or "report" of ABS-CBN. Since we are not really presenting the whole "report" of ABS-CBN, the citation would not be biased because the single "neutral data" that we only need comes straight from AGB Nelisen Media Research itself.

It has not been changed by ABS-CBN-- otherwise the document will be LEGALLY falsified as it was released publicly. It does not require any other interpretation as howard has been suggesting-- Because it is a single data or datum not a "collection" of data.68.127.172.142 21:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Campus radio 97.1

Hope GMA will bring back the old format..The new one sucks big time! Hate GMA for wanting to '"earn"' more...

Talk pages aren't discussion forums. Use PEX or some other website. --Howard the Duck 02:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:GMA Kapusostars.jpg

Image:GMA Kapusostars.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

pki send nga po ang organizational structures nio.

"Kapamilya" should be "Kapuso"

Observed as of this writing 9/5/2007 Manila time. Please kindly correct throughout the article. Perhaps, Wikipedia can investgate when this article was altered with this misinformation and/or perhaps also who did it. This was not the article's state the day before.--E mendz 05:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)