I've seen a number of posts on here about being "high in the (ex. 25-54) book" (or something along those lines), in relation to a station in the ratings. Where do you find such information? I see 12+ and 6+ on sites like radio-online, but no other demos, and I doubt that the sites are only for industry pros, since only a few members of here actually are.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Ratings information per demographic?
- Thread starter Tomgsinger
- Start date
There are other websites that will disclose some of the "real" data, and some people are in the business and working at stations that subscribe.
Sometimes you see Chad Finn of the Globe quote specific demographic numbers when writing about the sports stations in Boston.
But on this forum, there is a long standing policy of not being able to discuss "real" numbers, due to the fear of being nailed for divulging copyrighted material.
The closest you will come to getting broad demo breakouts is on allaccess.com. They have 18-34 rankers and 25-54 rankers, but are not allowed to put more specific data.
Where do you find them? I do have an account. Scrolling through it as I write this and can't seem to find it. If you're not allowed to post publicly you can DM me.
in the ratings section there is a section where they discuss ratings.... Nielsen/PPM Analysis.... it is an occasional piece that covers different markets as they feel the need to comment... the last one about Boston was probably 6 months ago
http://www.allaccess.com/nielsen-pp...556/research-director-inc-exclusive-march-ppm
Go to the Net News and search for the stories for last week. They issue five per day on the week of ratings every month. If you want to see Boston's breakouts, look in last Tuesday's Net News.
The data is not copyrighted not matter how much people claim otherwise. It's contractually protected from being released.
Per the Nielsen terms of use page:
"All the Web products and services, information, materials, data, images, graphics, sounds and other components on the Nielsen Site (the "Contents") are copyrighted and owned or controlled by Nielsen unless otherwise noted"
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/terms-of-use.html
Since all ratings data is delivered via the Nielsen subscriber website, that means that the data is copyrighted.
You cannot make something copyrighted by calling it copyrighted. Certain things are not copyrightable and data, facts are some of those things. It's a contract issue, not a copyright issue.
Nielsen audience reports are delivered as "audience estimates". They are not "facts" as they are the product of proprietary sampling and processing of a survey of a sample of the population. Ratings are this particular company's projection of what the "facts" would be if it were possible to do a census of every American once per minute, 365 days a year.
well the former Arbitron ratings folks, before they were swallowed up by Nielsen had no problem suing for misuse of "data"
http://archive.jsonline.com/enterta...s-over-ratings-data-b9920966z1-209278821.html
http://archive.jsonline.com/enterta...s-over-ratings-data-b9920966z1-209278821.html
Arbitron's Copyrighted estimates...
Sorry to point out another incorrect statement...but Arbitron/Nielsen had a handout called:
"Working with Arbitron's Copyrighted Estimates"
It's still online here:
http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/Copyrights_mxeng.pdf
Then, there's this:
Successful Arbitron Copyright Infringement in Southern District of NY: Obtained a favorable settlement for Arbitron in an action in the Southern District of New York in which defendant agreed to cease all further use of Arbitron’s copyrighted works.
http://www.winston.com/en/what-we-d...uthern-district.html?aj=ov&parent=1585&idx=11
And this: "You have to list the survey period,
the survey area, the demographic, the daypart, and
the estimate cited, along with our copyright notice,
for example: “© 2002 Arbitron Inc."
Sorry to point out another incorrect statement...but Arbitron/Nielsen had a handout called:
"Working with Arbitron's Copyrighted Estimates"
It's still online here:
http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/Copyrights_mxeng.pdf
Then, there's this:
Successful Arbitron Copyright Infringement in Southern District of NY: Obtained a favorable settlement for Arbitron in an action in the Southern District of New York in which defendant agreed to cease all further use of Arbitron’s copyrighted works.
http://www.winston.com/en/what-we-d...uthern-district.html?aj=ov&parent=1585&idx=11
And this: "You have to list the survey period,
the survey area, the demographic, the daypart, and
the estimate cited, along with our copyright notice,
for example: “© 2002 Arbitron Inc."
The first one is just a report of a lawsuit being filed. The second is a report of a settlement. There are other legal theories upon which Arbitron/Nielsen can rely to force prevent companies from using its data to make sales. My point is it is not copyrighted in the sense that it is illegal for it to be published.
Section 106 of the U.S. copyright law seems to allow for legal recourse.
BTW:
Rights of the Copyright Owner
Section 106 of the U.S. copyright law gives the owner of a copyright the exclusive rights to do and to authorize others to do the following:
to reproduce the work
to prepare derivative works based upon the work
to distribute copies of the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending
to perform the work publicly
to display the copyrighted work publicly
in the case of sound recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of digital audio transmission.
in the case of a “work of visual art” the author has certain rights of attribution and integrity
Where two laws intersect (such as freedom of the press), it is up to the courts to decide which supersedes the other.
(The first rule of copyright....defend, defend, defend!)
Last edited:
If one party has a copyrighted property, they can specify to customers the extent and scope of permitted use of whatever copyright material they are given access to.
Nielsen gives ratings subscribers permission to cite their data in sales presentations, but not to publish it in magazines, newspapers and the like. They may use specific ratings data in advertising to the trade but it must be properly credited and within specific limitations. There are a set of acceptable use provisions in the contract by which Nielsen rents to a station limited access to its data which at all times belongs to Nielsen and is definitely copyrighted.
Copyright does not "make it illegal" to disseminate material. Otherwise, reading from a copyright book in a classroom would be illegal. Copyright limits the usage to that which the owner chooses to permit.
You are all begging the question. Is Nielsen data protected by copyright? It has to be copoyrightable before it's given any protection from reproduction. It's data, like a box score or yesterday's temperature. The company may want to call it an estimate to avoid the argument about the data being facts, but I don't think it is at all clear that it is protected information.
Lawyers is these cases didn't think so.
http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/a...sen-sues-lm-for-unauthorized-ratings-use-saga
There are other legal theories to prohibit the use of ratings by non-subscribers. The belief that stations settle because of copyright issues isn't necessarily supported by the law.
Lawyers is these cases didn't think so.
http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/a...sen-sues-lm-for-unauthorized-ratings-use-saga
There are other legal theories to prohibit the use of ratings by non-subscribers. The belief that stations settle because of copyright issues isn't necessarily supported by the law.
The Nielsen data is very definitely covered by by copyright because the information is unique and not in the public domain. It is obtainable only from Nielsen and is the product of data collection and tabulation that is proprietary to the extent that the Nielsen radio survey techniques and technology alone are covered by dozens of patents.
Going back to the earliest Arbitron reports, the phrase "Audience Estimates" was prominently displayed and copyright notices were printed on every report. Requirements for usage long included the required "estimates" term when making presentations by subscribers.
Nielsen even uses specialized public records databases they purchase, similar to credit rating data, to make sure respondents are not media affiliates. They don't use straight Census population data; they buy reports from third party processors who invest substantial resources in fine tuning Census data by crossing it with things like car registration and other indicators. All this makes the data a "creative work" and definitely not "facts" that are common knowledge.
The Saga defense was not effective, despite the lawyers' arguments. Saga ended by settling with the ratings company for illegal use of proprietary copyright data.
Last edited:
Again, saying something is "not in the public domain" is begging the question. Slapping a copyright symbol on something does not mean it has the protection of copyright laws. Being unique does not mean copyrightable.
You keep lecturing everyone on what is or isn't copyright(able), without anything to back it up.
I'm guessing you are not a copyright lawyer.
- Status