Today’s blog post is focused on one thing: imploring Nielsen to make one of the biggest events in radio history available to the entire industry.
And to make my case, I’m going to use the words of the brilliant, witty, and sarcastic French philosopher, Voltaire. In an odd way, he’s the twisted namesake of this mysterious technology. Over the past few months, one of the odder outcomes from this PPM encoding dilemma and the 25-Seven black box is that it has made me more familiar with Voltaire, his writing and his witticisms. And as it turns out, his observations about people, life, and even business are spot-on in better understanding this crazy turn of events for radio.
“The more a man knows, the less he talks.”
As of now, the only legal attendees are to be Nielsen clients, the only ones with bona fide access to its webinar about PPM and where the industry goes from here. Except that one way or another, the industry trades, pundits, bloggers, and other interested parties will find a way to gain access.
That’s because Nielsen subscribers really don’t care that they’re the only ones invited. They simply want to know what the hell is going on.
And because all the people being kept out of the webinar will probably be in attendance anyway, the breaking news alerts should start within a few minutes after the proceedings begin.
Like so many other parts of this bizarre radio chapter, this lack of transparency continues to permeate the entire issue. Nielsen’s ruling on PPM, the Voltair technology, and its steps to rectify whatever limitations it has discovered about its encoding impact all of us.
“When it is a question of money, everyone is of the same religion.”
Yes, that includes Richard Harker, Jerry Del Colliano, Joel Denver, Mark Ramsey, Eric Rhoads, Tom Taylor, Charlie Sislen, Paul McLane, the RAMP dudes, the NAB, the RAB, and yes, your friends at Jacobs Media. We’re all in this together, and while we may strongly disagree about many of these issues swarming around PPM and Voltair, we are very much invested in these outcomes, too.
It is understandable that Nielsen is limiting access to the webinar to its stakeholders. Under normal circumstances, this makes sense. But there’s nothing the least bit normal about the efficacy of radio’s primary measurement source being questioned by a technology company, and hundreds of Nielsen’s own clients.
The fact is, we’re all “stakeholders” in this drama. Consultants, researchers, and analysts live and die with the ratings, too. We have a stake in this matter, whether we’re in a position to advise Nielsen clients or we dutifully report on the results every week in industry trades.
For too long, the rumors, innuendo, exaggerations and speculation have done more harm than good. Nielsen’s silence has only served to fuel the engine that generates misinformation, panic, and poor decision-making on the part of broadcasters and the agencies and sellers that do business with radio. Everyone should have access to this webinar where important questions will be addressed, hopefully, along with answers and solutions.
“Cherish those who seek the truth but beware of those who find it.”
There’s been much speculation about Voltair, along with opinion, hypothesizing, and outright lies. And that’s what happens when situations like these are allowed to spin out of control in back rooms. This is Nielsen’s opportunity to close the door on this chapter, but also leave nothing open to further misinformation from those who find out the news second-hand.
If there was ever a situation in radio that was analogous to a major Supreme Court decision, it’s this one. We’re all impacted by it, whether we’re in sales, programming, management, ownership, marketing, research, or consulting.
If Nielsen is truly interested in ending this stream of vitriol, guesswork, and conjecture, giving everyone an opportunity to learn the truth – in real time – is essential to managing this situation, understanding the problem, absorbing the solutions, and moving on.
Some believe that Nielsen’s lack of transparency has exacerbated the situation. That’s why turning the page on Voltair, beginning a new era that is focused on ratings that have the highest possible degree of both accuracy and credibility starts with opening up the books for everyone to see.
“Love truth, but pardon error.”
We are on the precipice of gaining measurement tools that can help radio level the playing field against the onslaught of digital competitors. The SDK project and other Nielsen initiatives hold great promise for radio to come out of this desert and compete more effectively over the next several years.
But it starts with righting the PPM ship and ensuring that radio’s ratings currency is stable, sound, and the best it can be.
We’re in this together.
“The greatest consolation in life is to say what one thinks.”
So Nielsen, do the right thing.
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.
- Radio + Thanksgiving = Gratitude - November 27, 2024
- Is It Quittin’ Time For SiriusXM? - November 26, 2024
- Radio, It Oughta Be A Crime - November 25, 2024
“Common sense is not so common” was how I summarized my summary of the June Top 10 PPM markets. We AREE all in this together with the on-going campaign for get all to salute and use radio as the Forever Content Connector. Jeff Smulyan calls radio “Free Choice” and has the foresight to insure our content connects on everyone’s favorite listening device – Smart Phones, locked & loaded just waiting to be turned on. Anyone who has lived & died by an Arbitron or Nielsen deserves to have the best possible, accurate, apples to apples listening for everything that comes from radio. Thanks Fred for spelling this out in your timely & effective manner!
Clark, we are all stakeholders in this affair, whether we are Nielsen subscribers or not. Thanks for commenting.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
Best wishes,
Oz.
Dave, all will be revealed. Votaire didn’t say that, but it is essential if radio is to move on from this mess. Thanks for the note.
Those of us mentoring the next generation of radio broadcasters also have a stake in this situation.
This should be open to all.
Thank You Fred for making the case.
Appreciate it, Dick. Tomorrow is an important day for radio.
I agree that transparency is the only option for Neilsen, but there stakes are really high and I understand that there are probably a lot of attorneys suggesting a cautious path, as there are potentially billions at stake here. First, although you’re right, there are many stakeholders beyond Nielsen subscribers, none of them have any say in this – PPM is a service for paying customers and those are the ones that Nielsen should and will address.
If from what I’ve read is correct, that Voltair can only uncover ACTUAL listening that otherwise, the PPM system missed, it will be tough for Nielsen to put any restrictions on its use. But this is a crazy world with crazy courts.
If a significant amount of radio listening has been missed, then radio isn’t losing its punch as much as was thought. Apparently, along with smooth jazz, talk segments are particularly impacted – so personality, talk based morning shows may actually perform more like they do via the diary, not to mention spoken word based formats. Just take the actual under-reported listening as a percentage of the listening universe and add that percentage to radio revenue in PPM markets and you’ll have a good place to start – and that number is probably in the billions.
Its very likely that Nielsen’s contracts shield them from any monetary blowback from this. As long as they do what they say they are going to do they should be in the clear. But radio could decide to find another company who could do this better – or create its own and cost them a lot of money anyway.
Yeah, Nielsen needs to be transparent, but that’s only one of its problems. Putting an end to the rumors would be a good thing, but my guess is they feel they have bigger fish to fry right now…and may not even know all of the answers themselves.
IMO, this is much more important and impactful on radio’s revenue than FM chips on cell phones and I hope the industry give this its full attention.
It’s a big one, Bob. I equate it to a Supreme Court decision…for radio. To avoid any additional exaggerations, untruths, and crazy claims, they may as well open this up for all to see. Thanks for the perspective on one of the most fascinating issues for radio during our careers.
From Nielsen.com website: “And with Nielsen Audio, you’re never left to figure things out on your own. In addition to knowing listeners’ radio and lifestyle preferences, Nielsen Audio has the tools, services and software to help radio stations, and programmers, make the most of their air time.”
Really? This smacks of the McGwire creatine problem baseball had in the 90’s. It wasn’t illegal, but was it ethical?
Jim, it IS a gnarly issue and one that many have conjectured about publicly and privately in the past several months. And that’s all the more reason to break the news to the industry about what’s next for ratings…and revenue. Thanks for taking the time to comment.
While you’re in quote mode Fred, to paraphrase a supposed quip from Sir Winston Churchill…
“the Americans (Nielsen?) can always be relied on to do the right thing… after they’ve tried everything else”.
It’s a process, Lee, it’s a process. Thanks for the pithy quote.
We have just unveiled what most have known for a long time….. the PPM technology is flawed. The fact that simple audio processing can cause the meters to record what they should have been recording ALL THE TIME, points out just one of the many weaknesses of the PPM system. We cannot, nor should not put reigns on broadcasters with reference to how they process their audio (look at what a farce the CALM act has been for television)….. rather, Nielsen should withdraw this “drive by” audience measurement system until it is perfected.
Jim, you’re espousing that theory that PPM is a damaged goods and we still haven’t heard from Nielsen and their report about their technology or what the Telos box does. More reasons why I wish we all had real-time access to their findings and where we go as an industry from here.
For just one moment, let us back away from the rights and wrongs of the Voltaire/Nielsen debate and, instead, salute Fred Jacobs for a finely executed article. Damn good, Fred.
Appreciate that – it was fun to write.
Fred,
Great perspective and insight on this raging debate. Doing the right thing is not always the first thing. The industry should have the benefit of transparency from Nielsen. Their credibility as a research organization and obligation as a primary provider of data depend on it.
Tim, it’s that kind of moment. This is very much an industry issue where the onus is on the primary measurement organization to clearly explain where we’ve been, where we are, and where we’re going. Tomorrow will be a big day, and not just for Nielsen’s clients. Thanks for chiming in.
Enough! The system was crap when it was Arbitron diaries. The methodology in the front of their books clearly showed they would be seriously off at least 1 time in 3. You just wouldn’t know when. Broadcasters and other “stakeholders” went along with it, with only the occasional squeak. When PPM came along, it was clear that the samples were too small and that recruiting was sub-optimal as it resorted to household flooding. Broadcasters didn’t want to pay more for a better system (Lowry Mays was famously proud of stating that he wanted to pay “less”) and the other “stakeholders” went along with it for fear of upsetting those who paid the bills. Now, Voltair arrives as a legitimate red herring (if there is such a thing) that allows everyone to cheerfully ignore the elephant in the room – that PPM is a mediocre system at best.
John, thanks for the reminders about how you get what you pay for. The Voltair situation also brings out some of the latent anger that many broadcasters have toward first Arbitron, and now Nielsen. Appreciate you taking the time.