Used to be PDs and air talent stayed awake at night cooking up ways to game the rating system. Arbitron, Birch, Pulse, Hooper....
Now it's the listeners who are doin' the home cookin'.
http://harkerresearch.typepad.com/radioinsights/2011/03/arbitrons-perverse-ppm-panelist-incentives.html
Buffalo and Rochester are not yet PPM markets. Maybe 2012. Many stations in Buffalo were wired in 2008 for PPM on air and streaming, but pulled the units and returned them to Arbitron. Given the issues with PPM measurement and the methods used by some panelists to game the system, the diary may actually better serve broadcasters, especially in medium and small markets. At this point and from here on out, is it possible to accurately measure radio listening such as it is today?
Many of us remember the slide rule nomographs in the back of every Arbitron book and sometimes calculating the margin of error, wherein a station with a 12 share and a competitor with a 10 share could conceivably be tied given the variables applied.
Arbitron, it seems, devises methods to keep itself in the revenue game as much as to measure radio listening, however inaccurately, imperfectly or dubiously. I know the shortfalls of the diary, but this report (and previous reviews by knowledgeable sources) doesn't make inspire trust the PPM any more than the diary.
Accounts such as those mentioned in the link are mildly amusing but disconcerting, especially when we consider how ratings affect so many peoples' lives and livelihoods.
Now it's the listeners who are doin' the home cookin'.
http://harkerresearch.typepad.com/radioinsights/2011/03/arbitrons-perverse-ppm-panelist-incentives.html
Buffalo and Rochester are not yet PPM markets. Maybe 2012. Many stations in Buffalo were wired in 2008 for PPM on air and streaming, but pulled the units and returned them to Arbitron. Given the issues with PPM measurement and the methods used by some panelists to game the system, the diary may actually better serve broadcasters, especially in medium and small markets. At this point and from here on out, is it possible to accurately measure radio listening such as it is today?
Many of us remember the slide rule nomographs in the back of every Arbitron book and sometimes calculating the margin of error, wherein a station with a 12 share and a competitor with a 10 share could conceivably be tied given the variables applied.
Arbitron, it seems, devises methods to keep itself in the revenue game as much as to measure radio listening, however inaccurately, imperfectly or dubiously. I know the shortfalls of the diary, but this report (and previous reviews by knowledgeable sources) doesn't make inspire trust the PPM any more than the diary.
Accounts such as those mentioned in the link are mildly amusing but disconcerting, especially when we consider how ratings affect so many peoples' lives and livelihoods.