At the recent Arbitron Consultant Fly-In, the fur was flying as broadcasters wanted to know what the Houston numbers and related issues were all about. Not surprisingly, Arbitron is experiencing some growing pains with PPM. It’s all new to an operation that has been cranking out diary-based ratings for decades. To shift to a platform that’s totally different – while maintaining the traditional ratings system simultaneously – is a tall order.
I’m not making excuses or apologizing for Arbitron. They’re big boys, and they can defend themselves. And in the spirit of full disclosure, readers of this blog should know that we have done business with Arbitron in the past couple of years, including the new "Bedroom Project."
The fact is that broadcasters need to hold Arbitron’s feet to the fire regarding PPM. They need to ask the tough questions. And it is incumbent upon them to challenge Arbitron’s performance when they see inconsistencies or deficiencies in ratings, panel size, and/or compliance. Arbitron needs to be accountable for its ratings and for getting PPM right.
But the venue and tone of these protests are what matters. When broadcasters take their protests directly to the media, and when they so obviously salivate at the hint of an Arbitron problem, the net result is to unsettle the advertising community, while raising credibility issues about PPM. Playing "Gotcha" with PPM is easy. There will be more snafus and mistakes down the road, as you’d expect with something so new, different, and expansive. When these things happen, it’s understandable when broadcasters become disappointed, angry, and frustrated. But openly discrediting PPM loudly and publicly only undermines the credibility of the ratings to the people who really matter – the advertising community.
Recently, Emmis’ Jimmy Steal was quoted in R&R about this same issue: "Cut the unnecessary negativity about the PPM rollout. We’ve waited years for electronic measurement to finally put radio on part with how other media are measured. At this important juncture, radio should speak with one voice about how the new technology illuminates the medium’s strengths. In-fighting portrays the industry in an unfavorable light. Any concerns should be addressed thoughtfully and professionally."
Realistically, PPM is radio’s best and only chance to move into th century with ratings that are modern and credible. No new and improved radio service is going to swoop down, offer something better, and have it perfected and ready to go in the next year. Radio’s ratings future lies solely in Arbitron’s ability to get its arms around PPM, and get it right. To openly challenge PPM – or even mock it – in industry trades simply sends out the same old message to advertisers: radio doesn’t get it, and our industry simply doesn’t believe in or trust its own ratings. If we don’t stand behind our own numbers, why in the world should buyers and planners?
In one of the presentations at the Fly-In, Arbitron showed some baseball play-by-play breakouts from the Philadelphia market. Comparing the diary to PPM was an eye-opening experience. Diary ratings produced 38 games where there were seemingly no ratings for Phillies games. Of course, that makes no sense, but that’s what you get from the diary system. In PPM, that didn’t occur for a single game. And you could clearly see the differences in ratings from day games to night games, or when the Phillies played an exciting divisional opponent like the Mets.
We have lived with the irrational world of the diary for so long that we’ve lost sight of how totally out-of-step its ratings can be. The inconsistencies, "bounces," and other irregularities in the diary have made it virtually impossible to conclude much from even quarterly reports. Of course, that hasn’t stopped broadcasters from trying to understand why a station tanked in the last month even though TV was running during that time. The diary system simply isn’t consistently able to capture those moments when great radio and/or marketing occurs. On the other hand, PPM offers a much truer, consistent, and yes, a more accurate view of our stations, our jocks, and our programming.
But don’t take it from me. Recently, media buyer Sandra Williams from Houston’s largest ad agency, FogartyKleinMonroe, pointed out, "When you have this confluence of technology, it is going to be problematic – I am more confident in a lower-sampled PPM than about a diary." Like the iPhone, there will be glitches, but future versions should produce a better product.
PPM is far from perfect, but it’s our best shot at regaining credibility in the ad community. How we go about making PPM better is going to say a great deal about whether we’re serious as an industry about becoming contenders in the media future.
Jacobs Media has consistently walked the walk in the digital space, providing insights and guidance through its well-read national Techsurveys.
In 2008, jacapps was launched - a mobile apps company that has designed and built more than 1,300 apps for both the Apple and Android platforms. In 2013, the DASH Conference was created - a mashup of radio and automotive, designed to foster better understanding of the "connected car" and its impact.
Along with providing the creative and intellectual direction for the company, Fred consults many of Jacobs Media's commercial and public radio clients, in addition to media brands looking to thrive in the rapidly changing tech environment.
Fred was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in 2018.
- Baby, Please Don’t Go - November 22, 2024
- Why Radio Needs To Stop Chasing The Puck - November 21, 2024
- Great Radio – In The Niche Of Time? - November 20, 2024
Leave a Reply