Not in Buddy's view. He pays for Nielsen and guaranteed a 5 share for WECK. It still isn't close to that, so he cries fraud.
But many "clients", both agencies and direct accounts with an ad department, buy based on metrics. No book, no sale.
Weighting is done, but upwards and downwards, to adjust for cells (age, gender, ethnicity, income, education, location) that are under or over sampled. It's normal in all random probability samples because they are never completely, 100% proportional.
Actually, if you look in PPM markets, young people do not listen as much, but they listen. The youngest usable demo is 18-34 and much of that demo is made up of adults with jobs, families, responsibilities and less time than a teen for music exploration. They use radio as well as paid services that are pre-programmed because they are easier to use and less time consuming.
It's really easy to explain. You recruit a new sample for each week. As weeks progress, you adjust the recruit for more or less of certain cells. You get the books back and tabulate them.
Too many stations were borrowing data. Nielsen wishes to make a profit. However, they should enforce compliance, not produce a product with missing stations.
Where is there evidence of this? Recent station listings in the online trades show them to again be listing all stations.
It was not perceived as wrong then, just as slavery prior to the most recent modern era was not perceived as wrong in most of the world.
Agreed. Ratings are not a sociological problem.
This has everything to do with politics. I spoke to Dave Donovan the other day and he agreed. Research or call Neilson and ask if I am right. Stations will be pulled out of ratings to everyone and agencies if we do not subscribe. Not included in the rule is minority, women, and public broadcasting. It’s a new Nielson law
I am not sure, but I spoke to Nielsen because I could not believe what I was hearing, and they confirmed it. If a radio station (Called "Subscriber-First) does NOT pay to subscribe to the ratings, not only will the station show up in the rankings, but it will show up nowhere, like ad agencies. However, if the station is owned by a female, or minority or public broadcasting, that rule does not apply.
The bottom line is that non subscribers are not supposed to be using ratings in the selling process. Sales reps of a station that doesn't pay Nielsen probably violate that anyway. Does Nielsen police that? Why don't you just cancel your subscription? There's no advantage in just being listed in the (6+)or 12+ numbers. The majority of the stations you are complaining about likely have very low ratings. Public Broadcasting is a different business model anyway...
Perhaps because it is under "Alternative Facts"...
I think this is referring to the so-called "Minority Exemption" of "Subscriber First"(??).
Not sure where you're looking... ... ...
For clarity sake... That wasn't intended to be a snarky shot (though as I read it back... gulp... it could be taken that way). Just pointing out that I'm hardly an expert in ratings nonsense and the inner workings of how they are perceived... and hadn't done any research beyond some superficial "Googling".
www.tvtechnology.com
3.8 share is pretty close to a 5 . When your done with your shift at Walmart , talk to me.. You may learn something
Notwithstanding 'margins-of-error' ('cuz they can go either + or -) is - in the radio ratings game/environment - ~75% of the commitment/expectation generally considered "pretty close"?
