Accuracy of PPM

[theradioman]

Many in radio will tell you this first decade for PPM has been difficult and challenging at best, and problematic at worst. The promise of this methodology captivated many in radio, frustrated by the crude paper and pencil diary system. Many – including me – were excited about the possibilities of a new ratings ecosystem that measured real-time listening rather than recall, providing accountability and clarity for an industry sorely in need of validation.

While the technology is generally accurate, I'm sorry but PPM is not! We could debate this forever, but let's be honest the biggest problem is that the sample size is too small!

To make matters worse, radio has played to the meter rather than the audience. Safe playlists in the era of Spotify and Apple Music are not a benefit. Killing real content and engagement in an era of content and engagement does not make radio more attractive. Somewhere, somehow we forgot that this is still show business. As an advertising medium radio still works – and works well. In fact radio is one of the best platforms to advertise on but as an entertainment medium it has come up short. Whatever happened to live and local? Boston Radio needs to wakeup!!!

 

[CTListener]

While the technology is generally accurate, I'm sorry but PPM is not! We could debate this forever, but let's be honest the biggest problem is that the sample size is too small!

The sample size is just fine. Election polls using similar sample sizes nearly always produce results well within the stated margins of error.

As you say, radio is a very effective advertising medium, and advertisers are the end users of ratings, whether the station is a throwback to the gabby days of full-service radio or a tightly formatted, hit-focused modern CHR.

 

[Deleted User]

Many in radio will tell you this first decade for PPM has been difficult and challenging at best, and problematic at worst.

Well John DePetro’s wife doesn't have 6 PPM's does she?

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/x499360924/R-I-Radio-host-blames-wife-for-ratings-scandal


But to be fair PPM's can be manipulated too

http://www.insideradio.com/nielsen-...cle_e5320614-73e6-11e5-a86d-cbaa601ee4e4.html

 

[davideduardo]

We could debate this forever. While the technology is generally accurate, the sample size is too small!

The sample size is a pure dictate based on how much radio stations will pay for the service. Since moving from the diary to the PPM cost about 60% more, nobody is going to pay even more.

The counterpoint is that the daily and weekly samples are much larger than in the diary, allowing for measurement of specific shows and sporting events.

In general radio has played to the meter rather than the audience.

Just as radio played to the diary by nailing the listener with constantly repeated call letter of name mentions to reinforce what to write down and benchmark shows like "Top 5 at 5" to help people remember when they listened.

And before Arbitron, we played to the in-home coincidental or 24 hour recall of Pulse and Hooper. Typical were "cash call" type contests to make people name your station when the ratings company called.

Safe playlists in the era of Spotify and Apple Music are not a benefit.

Safe lists are actually researched consensus lists of songs that don't drive away listeners. We started researching music more than 65 years ago by analyzing juke box plays and retail and jobber sales. From that we moved to callout in the mid-70's and full-fledged AMTs in the early 80's.

What we find by looking, today, at the ranking and listening totals for on-demand services is that radio is playing the same number of current hits as people are requesting in on-demand situations, and the "power gold" is the same as radio plays. The "deep playlist" is a myth, based on a tiny number of outliers.

Killing real content and engagement in an era of content and engagement does not make radio more attractive.

The definition of "engagement" has changed. I was on an advertiser / radio researcher workgroup for Arbitron shortly after the PPM debuted, and the goal was to achieve and engagement metric. While it turned out that agencies did not want another metric, we found that the greatest engagement often came from the most music intensive, non-personality stations.

Somewhere, somehow we forgot that this is still show business.

But radio is not Barnum & Baily's circus. Folks don't generally want or need a "friend on the radio" as they have instant friend contact via Facebook and all the others, plus texting and even Facetime and the like. Radio is in the entertainment business, and often a well curated playlist and minimal talk is all that is needed.

Whatever happened to live and local? Boston Radio needs to wakeup!!!

Technology made it impossible to distinguish between live and voice tracked; I had the #1 and #2 stations in a Top 15 market back in 1979 and both were high energy contemporary stations... and both were voice tracked.

"Local" is meaningless to everyone except sports fans and news junkies. To me, Facebook is "local" and my friends are anywhere from Milano adn J-Burg to Buenos Aires and Quito. Distance does not matter when you are doing a music format.

 

[CTListener]

But radio is not Barnum & Baily's circus.

Good thing, since it went out of business last year!

 

[theradioman]

"Local" is meaningless to everyone except sports fans and news junkies. To me, Facebook is "local" and my friends are anywhere from Milano adn J-Burg to Buenos Aires and Quito. Distance does not matter when you are doing a music format.

We clearly have different viewpoints but one thing that particularly stood out that I will argue is that you said "Local" is meaningless. You clearly must be a satellite radio subscriber, and another thing, Facebook is not radio it's a social network! So let me ask you when there is a local event or festival and the "local" radio station is there you're saying that doesn't make an impact with the listener? You went on to say distance doesn't matter in a music format, could you elaborate?

Take a Top 40 such as Kiss 108, there is a Top 40 station in just about every market so you're saying if you lived in LA you'd rather listen to WXKS than KIIS?? It's people with your rationale of thinking that are killing terrestrial radio!

 

[KarsonWithaK]

Whatever happened to live and local? Boston Radio needs to wakeup!!!

WZLX - Karslon & McKenzie
Amp - The TJ Show
Magic - David O'Leary and Sue Tabb
ROR - Loren & Wally
Kiss - The Matty Show
Country 102.5 - Jackson & Hannah
Hot - Ramiro, Pebbles et al...
WEEI - Kirk & Callahan
Sports Hub - Toucher & Rich
WAAF - Greg Hill
WKAF - KJ & Kesha
WRKO - Kim & VB
WWBX Karson (yours truly) & Kennedy

Find me a market that has more live and local talent than those I've listed, and this is just morning drive. Your argument might bode well in smaller areas but I'd say Boston is one of the most vibrant radio landscapes in the country, not to mention the fantastic local programing on its non-comms. Also this batch of talent is providing content across all media platforms, not just radio. Check any number of YouTube channels, podcasts, TV news or other social media and see the power of, not just live and local, but GREAT live and local content.

 

[TheBigA]

It's people with your rationale of thinking that are killing terrestrial radio!

Keep in mind that the entire world has changed in the last 15-20 years. Locally owned brick & mortar stores, once the foundation of terrestrial radio, are mostly gone. People don't buy self-contained radios any more. And the music business is controlled by international conglomerates. The main advantage of WXKS over KIIS is the ability to fine tune song selection to fit the market, and to sell heavy coats and snow shovels instead of sun tan lotion and convertibles.

 

[Wimmmex]

I agree with all the comments here...but I find it interesting when I listen to , say....BBC1 or BBC2, etc...it all seems a little old-fashioned, and folksy. Lotsa talk, featured personalities and DJ's, etc.

Does Britain have PPM's yet? Or do they still use some sort of diary system?

 

[davideduardo]

We clearly have different viewpoints but one thing that particularly stood out that I will argue is that you said "Local" is meaningless. You clearly must be a satellite radio subscriber,

No, I have multiple Echo devices and can listen to anything that is available there.

and another thing, Facebook is not radio it's a social network!

But, back in the 50's and 60's end even into the 80's and much of the 90's, radio stations were our contact. As teens, we heard Friday's HS sports scores and school closings due to weather. We heard ads for the new movie and lots of other things we got nowhere else. Today, social networks have eliminated the need for listening to the radio for that.

So let me ask you when there is a local event or festival and the "local" radio station is there you're saying that doesn't make an impact with the listener?

Not the way it used to. Most of the folks in attendance heard about it online or via a text from a friend or a tweet. Sure, a station gets some promotion, but there is far less sense of "ownership" of the event because record companies now even try to charge for that sort of thing.

You went on to say distance doesn't matter in a music format, could you elaborate?

Hits break almost simultaneously nationally and even around the world. There are few local differences (sure, local stations, individually, will have different blends, but collectively the markets are all playing the same things.

[/QUOTE]Take a Top 40 such as Kiss 108, there is a Top 40 station in just about every market so you're saying if you lived in LA you'd rather listen to WXKS than KIIS?? It's people with your rationale of thinking that are killing terrestrial radio![/QUOTE]

Only a few markets have the money to have a local and great morning show. The rest of the time, it's about the blend, the flow and the presentation. The jock can be anywhere.

I did full scale national radio via microwave networks going back to the 60's. In every market I added, we beat... actually "slaughtered"... the local stations. We did it better, with the best announcers and production.

 

[TheBigA]

I find it interesting when I listen to , say....BBC1 or BBC2, etc..

One could compare it to the American equivalent of the BBC, which is NPR, and happens to get great PPM ratings in Boston, despite the fact that a lot of its programming is national, and comes via satellite from DC and other places. Kinda disproves the OP, no?

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Many – including me – were excited about the possibilities of a new ratings ecosystem that measured real-time listening rather than recall, providing accountability and clarity for an industry sorely in need of validation.

We still don’t have the system you dreamed about, because PPM does not measure listening. It measures exposure. As long as the meter “hears” PPM-encoded audio, the meter records it. It doesn’t matter whether the audio was heard in someone’s car at ear-splitting volume, or in the waiting room at the doctor’s office while the meter wearer is reading a magazine, paying no attention to the radio.

The holy grail of audience measurement is to know exactly who’s listening and when, something neither a diary nor a PPM can measure.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

So let me ask you when there is a local event or festival and the "local" radio station is there you're saying that doesn't make an impact with the listener?

It makes an impact with me. I impact the "next preset" button. There are few kinds of advertisements I hate more than the "Live on Location" 2 minute rambling.

It's people with your rationale of thinking that are killing terrestrial radio!

Probably. I'm a millennial, and we love killing whole industries!

 

[TheBigA]

Safe playlists in the era of Spotify and Apple Music are not a benefit.

Have you ever looked at streaming charts? You really should. Most radio programmers do. This has been a topic at a number of radio programming conventions, including last month's Country Radio Seminar. There was a concern that terrestrial radio playlists are potentially missing songs that listeners want to hear. So playlists were compared to streaming charts. Guess what they found? Basically the same songs on both lists. What it tells us that people are streaming the same songs, for the most part, that programmers are playing on the radio.

How is that possible? It turns out record labels have promotion people who are working streaming services in the same ways that they're working terrestrial radio. In fact at some companies, they're in the same department. They're promoting the same songs. Often using the same arguments and the same research. With the intent of getting the same results. And it's working.

So let's not assume that because listeners have access to unlimited playlists on their streaming devices that the way to reach them is to give them unlimited playlists on OTA radio. Because those listeners don't necessarily want unlimited playlists. At least if we're talking about current hits.

 

[davideduardo]

The holy grail of audience measurement is to know exactly who’s listening and when, something neither a diary nor a PPM can measure.

That's not true. Ad agencies, who demanded electronic measurement from radio, want to know how about exposure, not engagement.

As mentioned, I was on a committee formed by Arbitron in the early years of the PPM to work on an "engagement metric". The committee had some folks from radio, and quite a few from ad agencies and buying services. The committee decided that there was no need for an engagement metric, as agencies did not want "another piece of data" on radio and radio groups did not want to pay for another piece of information that agencies could use to hammer us on rates.

Agencies want to know who hears their spots. They don't care if they are actively listening. An impression is an impression.

 

[theradioman]

It makes an impact with me. I impact the "next preset" button. There are few kinds of advertisements I hate more than the "Live on Location" 2 minute rambling.

I wasn't referring to a "Live on Location" 2 minute rambling. I was more so talking about a live and local radio station presence at a local event giving away prizes, interacting with people in person. That is something that a "distant" radio station in another market or satellite radio cannot provide.

 

[ksradiogeek]

We clearly have different viewpoints but one thing that particularly stood out that I will argue is that you said "Local" is meaningless. You clearly must be a satellite radio subscriber, and another thing, Facebook is not radio it's a social network! So let me ask you when there is a local event or festival and the "local" radio station is there you're saying that doesn't make an impact with the listener? You went on to say distance doesn't matter in a music format, could you elaborate?

Take a Top 40 such as Kiss 108, there is a Top 40 station in just about every market so you're saying if you lived in LA you'd rather listen to WXKS than KIIS?? It's people with your rationale of thinking that are killing terrestrial radio!

If you can crank out good content, and capture listenership in a short amount of time (tune out factor has gone WAY down in the last 20 years, down to roughly 5 seconds), it doesn't matter if its Live & Local, Local & VT or Non-Local & VT. If you gain listeners and the buck$ with your content, you're doing your job and the bosses are happy. I'm almost 25, and was taught this by pros when I got into the biz when I was in my teens.

Thanks to the glories of technology, if there's a local station that's playing something I don't like, I'll gladly pull up an app for an out of market station and stream what I like (or just use my music). If KIIS is bleh at the moment and I feel like listening to XKS because they're playing something better, I'll head over there. We have so many more entertainment options on hand now than even 15 years ago.

Also, David's been around in radio for decades, MUCH longer than I have. He's lived and breathed it. You can't argue with success and experience. I've learned A LOT from him and others like him. It'd be in your best interest to not make broad statements, not argue with him and research, learn and maybe change some perceptions.