As evidenced by the following article, it seems Mr. Bob Neil (Cox CEO)is big on criticism and short on solutions. On the one hand, he does not support PPM because it's fatally flawed. But he's also not a fan of Arbitron's current diary based system because it's outdated.
In my opinion, Mr. Neil is typical of the "ole' school" radio mentality that automatically condemns anything put forth by Arbitron, with no real thought to back-up his position. Does he seriously think the radio industry can support a "DIY" ratings system? How much credibility would such a system have within the media buying community? What methodology would be employed? Is Mr. Neil going to submit his proposal to John Hogan along with Arbitron? If not, why the hell is he wasting our time with this silly notion of "DIY" ratings? He supports this as a viable alternative, but slams PPM?
Mr. Neil... please reconsider your position and use your influence to move radio forward. As the saying goes, either lead, follow or get the hell out of the way!
***
Cox Radio Supports Clear Channel Proposal
June 13, 2005
By Paul Heine
Cox Radio’s Bob Neil tells Billboard Radio Monitor he supports Clear Channel’s outreach to find an alternative ratings system to Arbitron. But Neil goes one step further, suggesting the industry consider a DIY approach.
“Along with options from different companies, I think radio needs to consider operating it's own ratings measurement system,” Neil says. “That's been done successfully in other countries.”
The president and CEO of radio’s third largest company has never been shy about expressing his lack of support for Arbitron’s portable people meter. In October 2004, he called it 1980’s technology with “some fatal basic flaws.”
Cox is one of only two Houston radio station owners that have refused to participate in ongoing PPM tests there. The company has nearly four years left on its current contract with Arbitron.
“The bottom line is that the Arbitron PPM is based on outmoded and old ideas,” Neil said, after Arbitron said it would offer a proposal next month that could commercialize PPM by April 2006. “’Fast tracking’ a bad idea, as Arbitron suggested today, isn't the way to go. Looking for new ideas that measure radio listening in the best way is the right way to go.”
Like Clear Channel CEO John Hogan, Neil believes Arbitron needs to update its methodology. He’s just not convinced PPM is the answer. “There are a whole lot of ways that you can electronically measure listening,” Neil said in October. “We feel that PPM has some fatal basic flaws to it that would result in it not measuring all of the listening that would occur… A lot of things have changed since they developed the PPM and tried to tell us that this is the right form of electronic measurement. We’re not sure that that’s the case.”
In my opinion, Mr. Neil is typical of the "ole' school" radio mentality that automatically condemns anything put forth by Arbitron, with no real thought to back-up his position. Does he seriously think the radio industry can support a "DIY" ratings system? How much credibility would such a system have within the media buying community? What methodology would be employed? Is Mr. Neil going to submit his proposal to John Hogan along with Arbitron? If not, why the hell is he wasting our time with this silly notion of "DIY" ratings? He supports this as a viable alternative, but slams PPM?
Mr. Neil... please reconsider your position and use your influence to move radio forward. As the saying goes, either lead, follow or get the hell out of the way!
***
Cox Radio Supports Clear Channel Proposal
June 13, 2005
By Paul Heine
Cox Radio’s Bob Neil tells Billboard Radio Monitor he supports Clear Channel’s outreach to find an alternative ratings system to Arbitron. But Neil goes one step further, suggesting the industry consider a DIY approach.
“Along with options from different companies, I think radio needs to consider operating it's own ratings measurement system,” Neil says. “That's been done successfully in other countries.”
The president and CEO of radio’s third largest company has never been shy about expressing his lack of support for Arbitron’s portable people meter. In October 2004, he called it 1980’s technology with “some fatal basic flaws.”
Cox is one of only two Houston radio station owners that have refused to participate in ongoing PPM tests there. The company has nearly four years left on its current contract with Arbitron.
“The bottom line is that the Arbitron PPM is based on outmoded and old ideas,” Neil said, after Arbitron said it would offer a proposal next month that could commercialize PPM by April 2006. “’Fast tracking’ a bad idea, as Arbitron suggested today, isn't the way to go. Looking for new ideas that measure radio listening in the best way is the right way to go.”
Like Clear Channel CEO John Hogan, Neil believes Arbitron needs to update its methodology. He’s just not convinced PPM is the answer. “There are a whole lot of ways that you can electronically measure listening,” Neil said in October. “We feel that PPM has some fatal basic flaws to it that would result in it not measuring all of the listening that would occur… A lot of things have changed since they developed the PPM and tried to tell us that this is the right form of electronic measurement. We’re not sure that that’s the case.”