The radio ratings process is broken. The ridiculousness continues and it appears broadcasters are doing little about it. And so, The Ratings Game continues.

Every market has stories about crazy ratings swings traced to a household or two. And management continues to freak out over monthly moves as programmers adjust the station based on data everyone knows is unreliable.

Consider this:

Imagine 70,000 people packed into a stadium. A group of about 150 fill one section. They’re of various ages, genders, and races. Several languages are spoken. They live in different areas, work different jobs and belong to different socio-economic classes.

Would it make sense to isolate these 150 people and, ask a series of questions, and draw conclusions to represent the entire stadium?

What useful information could be learned about eating habits or car preferences? Or what magazines they read, social media they use, and whether they’re iPhone or Android users? The data would be useless. Nobody would consider it a representative sample.

Yet that’s what the broadcast industry allows the rating companies to get away with.

Except the data is actually worse.

The Process is Ridiculous-and Broken

The rating company recruits a sample by direct mail, door-to-door visits, or telephone.

How many people do you know that would pick up the phone when an unknown number calls? Or answer the door for a stranger that wants something from them? Or open junk mail?

Oh, and it’s not as simple as answering a few questions. In a PPM market, respondents must carry a device for a year (or more) to record their listening behavior. Seriously, who’s going to do that? Real people? Of course, they won’t. Ratings respondents are unique.

To increase the sample, the respondent is asked to get each member of their household to participate. Consultant, researcher, and programming guru Dennis Constantine tells me:

Any good researcher will tell you that you should never have two people in a study that know each other. That’s why we don’t just invite a group of friends or family members together to a perceptual study or music test. Yet, radio ratings invite the whole family – sometimes up to 8 members of a family. And then, they play games with the participants to get them to listen more. The more you listen, the more money you make. Results are that one diary or one family can make or break a radio station.

Clearly, it is anything but a representative sample.

The Impact of A Single Meter

Maybe that’s why the placement of one meter caused a 38% increase for a station on a market’s ratings. It happened to one of my client stations (in our favor).

This may shock you, but then again, maybe not. It’s more common than it should be.

Here are the facts in this case:

  • It’s a major market, in the top 20 in the USA with 32 rated radio stations in the metro.
  • In one month, the station’s online stream grew from 0.0 to 4.2 among 18-34 women.
  • The online stream was the 10th highest-ranked station in the market
  • The over-the-air signal was tied for #1 with an 11.1 share.
  • Add the shares and the station has a 15.3. That’s an incredible gain of 38%

Now, here’s the kicker. We traced the respondents and found the online growth came from a single meter. One meter could raise the station’s ratings by 38%. Four shares from one meter? This should never happen, no matter how narrow the demographic.

The Sample

Imagine deciding the direction of a radio station based on data. You commission a perceptual research project to measure the health of the brand, current opportunities, and available positions in the market. The only thing that’s certain is that the station must win with 18-34 women.

The report comes back with the following sample:

W 18-24:    58 respondents

W 25-34:    89 respondents

Total W 18-34:  147 respondents

This doesn’t take into account ethnicity, primary language spoken, and listening preferences. Just raw numbers.

Go ahead. Make the decision that will affect the station’s future. and perhaps your career.

If the target is 18-24-year-old women (typical for a CHR), 58 responses aren’t even enough for a valid sample to make weekly music decisions even if they were screened by music or station preference.

And this sample from Nielsen includes rock fans, country fans, jazz fans, Christian music listeners, etc.

I don’t know of a single research company that would present this sample to a broadcaster. Yet this is the actual in-tab sample for this market of over 2 million. 58 women age 18-24 carry meters that determine the ratings for all stations in the market.

Conclusion

This research is the basis for millions of dollars in advertising. And broadcasters are paying a lot of money for this data on which we base ad rates.

I have no solution to Nielsen’s sample crisis. But I have a warning: This must stop before advertisers wake up and realize what their ad rates have been based on.  

It sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? Because it is. The radio ratings process is broken.

As long as we allow the system to remain in place, and fund the companies producing results, it’s the game we play.

At least until advertisers figure out what’s going on here and stop placing media buys based on it.

 

How Radio Ratings Work

The Ratings Game eBook

The Components of Radio Ratings: Understanding The Math

Why Radio Ratings Sample Sizes Are So Low

Pros and Cons of PPM Ratings

Double Your Ratings Seminar on Demand

Ratings Terms Every Programmer Should Know

Subscribe to Receive the Latest Radio and Personality News