Questions about posting Nielsen ratings

[Nu_Roo_2]

I read the pinned post "Nielsen Rules For Data Usage - PLEASE READ THIS" and have a few questions:

-- In addition to citing the source, is it OK to also include specific 6+ trends for up to, say five or six stations to backup observations? For example, "WXXX continued to rise, moving 3.4 -> 4.7 -> 5.9, despite all the predictions that their approach was doomed to fail in this market"?

-- Is it OK to link to a source that, like RD, requires free registration (by anyone)? For example I am thinking of AllAccess.com's ratings info, since they list cumes and a longer trend than most other sources.

--While I understand why it can be better to provide a link rather than specifying numbers, doesn't that run the risk of the post becoming less useful in the future if the source site goes away, or decides to remove that data (editorial decision, change in site direction, etc)?

Thanks

 

[davideduardo]

I read the pinned post "Nielsen Rules For Data Usage - PLEASE READ THIS" and have a few questions:

-- In addition to citing the source, is it OK to also include specific 6+ trends for up to, say five or six stations to backup observations? For example, "WXXX continued to rise, moving 3.4 -> 4.7 -> 5.9, despite all the predictions that their approach was doomed to fail in this market"?

-- Is it OK to link to a source that, like RD, requires free registration (by anyone)? For example I am thinking of AllAccess.com's ratings info, since they list cumes and a longer trend than most other sources.

--While I understand why it can be better to provide a link rather than specifying numbers, doesn't that run the risk of the post becoming less useful in the future if the source site goes away, or decides to remove that data (editorial decision, change in site direction, etc)?

Thanks

You may want to look up the Internet definitions of "fair usage".

Small, attributed quotes of a larger article or table of data are OK. Full copies are not.

 

[Nu_Roo_2]

You may want to look up the Internet definitions of "fair usage".

Small, attributed quotes of a larger article or table of data are OK. Full copies are not.

Thanks. So it sounds like my first example would be OK since I am quoting a small portion of the total data.

Any feedback on my question of linking to a source that requires (free, open to anyone) registration, like AllAccess.com?

BTW, per your suggestion I did look up some information on "fair use" from the US Copyright Office.

More Information on Fair Use | U.S. Copyright Office

www.copyright.gov

 

[frankberry]

You must provide a link to the source of your material.
There is a reason for the "Fair Use" rule. We are sending traffic to the source of the material as a way of thanking them for providing the information.

 

[lanceventa]

I read the pinned post "Nielsen Rules For Data Usage - PLEASE READ THIS" and have a few questions:

-- In addition to citing the source, is it OK to also include specific 6+ trends for up to, say five or six stations to backup observations? For example, "WXXX continued to rise, moving 3.4 -> 4.7 -> 5.9, despite all the predictions that their approach was doomed to fail in this market"?

-- Is it OK to link to a source that, like RD, requires free registration (by anyone)? For example I am thinking of AllAccess.com's ratings info, since they list cumes and a longer trend than most other sources.

--While I understand why it can be better to provide a link rather than specifying numbers, doesn't that run the risk of the post becoming less useful in the future if the source site goes away, or decides to remove that data (editorial decision, change in site direction, etc)?

Thanks

You have to have a license from Nielsen to publish the full ratings lists. It took me nearly a decade of trying and an assist from a retiring competitor (Thank you Tom Taylor!) to gain the license to publish the ratings on RadioInsight.

Anyone can summarize the 6+ (or 12+ in diary markets) with the public numbers given. However, you can not give specifics about any demographic numbers outside of a ranking (ex. WXXX was second in middays with women 25-54).

 

[Nu_Roo_2]

Wow, nearly a decade?!

When, in an interview, a PD says something like, "we dominated in Women 25-54," is the publisher of the interview committing a violation? Or is there perhaps something in the station's Nielsen contract that specifically allows this?

 

[lanceventa]

When, in an interview, a PD says something like, "we dominated in Women 25-54," is the publisher of the interview committing a violation? Or is there perhaps something in the station's Nielsen contract that specifically allows this?

Straight from the horse's mouth... https://www.arbitron.com/downloads/Nielsen_Audio_Ratings_Data_and_Guidelines.pdf

Allowed: “Happy Herman’s Men 18-34 share took a beating in Toon Town when Merry Mooney signed on for the morning shift at WNXX. Herman, who ruled the roost in Spring ranking number 1 in AQH share, saw Mooney chew away a full third of his core demo. The Summer survey dropped Herman to fourth in the market and Mooney jumped to the top among the morning talk fans.”

Not allowed: “The 18-34 race in RadioTown USA is heating up. WAAA took top honors, with a 5.4 share, up half a share from the previous survey. WBBB is a close second, with a 5.2. In the middle of the pack are WCCC, with a 4.3, WDDD, a 4.2, and WEEE, posting a 4.1. WFFF pulled only a 3.5, while WGGG came close with a 3.3 share. There are no cheers for WHHH, with a dismal 1.8, and the Big Band AM WBND posted an unsurprising 0.9 share.”

 

[davideduardo]

Straight from the horse's mouth... https://www.arbitron.com/downloads/Nielsen_Audio_Ratings_Data_and_Guidelines.pdf

Allowed: “Happy Herman’s Men 18-34 share took a beating in Toon Town when Merry Mooney signed on for the morning shift at WNXX. Herman, who ruled the roost in Spring ranking number 1 in AQH share, saw Mooney chew away a full third of his core demo. The Summer survey dropped Herman to fourth in the market and Mooney jumped to the top among the morning talk fans.”

Not allowed: “The 18-34 race in RadioTown USA is heating up. WAAA took top honors, with a 5.4 share, up half a share from the previous survey. WBBB is a close second, with a 5.2. In the middle of the pack are WCCC, with a 4.3, WDDD, a 4.2, and WEEE, posting a 4.1. WFFF pulled only a 3.5, while WGGG came close with a 3.3 share. There are no cheers for WHHH, with a dismal 1.8, and the Big Band AM WBND posted an unsurprising 0.9 share.”

That said, I have not seen Nielsen come down on more specific information as long as it can't be interpreted as being useful for sales.

 

[lanceventa]

That said, I have not seen Nielsen come down on more specific information as long as it can't be interpreted as being useful for sales.

I have. I know of sites that have also gotten flagged for publishing the 6+ data a few minutes before the 5pm publishing time as well.

 

[davideduardo]

I have. I know of sites that have also gotten flagged for publishing the 6+ data a few minutes before the 5pm publishing time as well.

I'm talking about... and should have been more specific... things like newspaper articles or newsgroup posts. AllAccess messages are often quite specific, but generally refer to only a couple of stations at a time. And the Research Director reports in AllAccess seem to push the limits at times.

 

[Nu_Roo_2]

I have. I know of sites that have also gotten flagged for publishing the 6+ data a few minutes before the 5pm publishing time as well.

Would be interesting to know how much of that was from someone reporting a violation, vs. spot-checking by Nielsen.

 

[lanceventa]

I'm talking about... and should have been more specific... things like newspaper articles or newsgroup posts. AllAccess messages are often quite specific, but generally refer to only a couple of stations at a time. And the Research Director reports in AllAccess seem to push the limits at times.

I knew exactly what you were saying. But I do know they pay attention to those reports most of the time. Way back when people would make ratings comments on these boards in the early 2000's they reached out to me about them. Some reporters have noted to me they too have been flagged by Nielsen for going too far.

 

[davideduardo]

I knew exactly what you were saying. But I do know they pay attention to those reports most of the time. Way back when people would make ratings comments on these boards in the early 2000's they reached out to me about them. Some reporters have noted to me they too have been flagged by Nielsen for going too far.

That is good to know, and a solid reference when someone seems to go too far. Recently, though, the biggest issue is in the posting of Nielsen release data without a link, sourcing or credit.