KCRW speaks out on PPM

[JimmyJames]

KCRW Management Consultant Will Lewis: "We believe the biggest reason KCRW is under reported is the difficulty in the recruitment of individuals willing to commit to wearing the meters for two years. Busy, influential professionals would commit to filling out a diary for 1 week – but not to carrying around a meter for two years. We also believe that the panel is too small to represent the listening habits of 12,048,000 potential listeners accurately."

 

[SuperRadioFan]

I also read that this morning. Here's another take I agree with from Jerry Del Colliano....

I especially like these quotes from Jerry:

"There is also the fact that PPM results cannot be considered actual listening and that’s why Arbitron doesn’t use the term. If I have a radio with "Magic Carpet Ride" playing and my daughter is wearing a People Meter, when she gets within the appropriate distance to record that listening on KOOL-FM, you can’t call a 20 something in this case a KOOL listener.

But the radio industry is picking up "cume" (my word, not theirs) and they think it has to do with something they are putting on the air.

In reality, radio is getting credit for being on in a lot of places people visit.

Don't confuse this with listening. You can't call People Meter wearers radio listeners."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2009/07/radio-people-meter-strategies.html

 

[OC Radio Geek]

I also read that this morning. Here's another take I agree with from Jerry Del Colliano....

I especially like these quotes from Jerry:

"There is also the fact that PPM results cannot be considered actual listening and that’s why Arbitron doesn’t use the term. If I have a radio with "Magic Carpet Ride" playing and my daughter is wearing a People Meter, when she gets within the appropriate distance to record that listening on KOOL-FM, you can’t call a 20 something in this case a KOOL listener.

But the radio industry is picking up "cume" (my word, not theirs) and they think it has to do with something they are putting on the air.

In reality, radio is getting credit for being on in a lot of places people visit.

Don't confuse this with listening. You can't call People Meter wearers radio listeners."

http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2009/07/radio-people-meter-strategies.html

perfectly stated!

 

[Buckethead]

The same could be said of Indie 103.1 listeners.
Ok, let the hating start.

 

[musicfan101]

The same could be said of Indie 103.1 listeners.
Ok, let the hating start.

that's true...dont forget about the 97.1 KLSX listeners...

 

[davideduardo]

"There is also the fact that PPM results cannot be considered actual listening and that’s why Arbitron doesn’t use the term. If I have a radio with "Magic Carpet Ride" playing and my daughter is wearing a People Meter, when she gets within the appropriate distance to record that listening on KOOL-FM, you can’t call a 20 something in this case a KOOL listener.

That is why the PPM talks about "exposure" because the principal use of ratings is to sell advertising; advertisers want to know who heard a commercial in any way.

But the radio industry is picking up "cume" (my word, not theirs) and they think it has to do with something they are putting on the air.

Of course it has something to do with what is being put on the air. Somebody put the station on, and other people may or may not hear it also. What the station did was get the base listener... and the advertiser benefits from the additional exposure.

Jerry hasn't programmed a station in about 30 years. He has a bully pulpit at the university and in his blog, and he loves bashing the industry that he couldn't work in any more.

In reality, radio is getting credit for being on in a lot of places people visit.

And while there, they are exposed to the station and its commercials, to the advertiser's benefit.

Don't confuse this with listening. You can't call People Meter wearers radio listeners."

Whatever. Who cares what they are called, if they hear the spots?

Somebody has been mashing the sour grapes for too long....

 

[ChannelFlipper]

Uh oh, here comes the Wahhhhmbulance. Wahhhhhh!!!

I guess the rich, westside lefty libs have learned from the urban, race-baiting lefty libs. When the painful fact becomes apparent to all that a superior measurement system that is much harder to manipulate comes around and it shows much less listening than you thought you had, the best course of action is to blame the messenger.

And its also a return of the Indie "Our listeners are just wayyy to cool to ever wear one of those people meter things". Of course this ignores all of the cool people that listen to KIIS, KAMP (KLSX), KYSR, KPWR, KSWD among others.

Here is the bitter truth. You are right, your listeners ARE cool. So cool in fact, they know what the hip, eclectic, politically correct, somewhat underground radio station in town is. So when the diary comes around, they want to support the station and they dutifully write KCRW down. The problem is that although they are cool enough to know about the station and even write it down in the diary, they are in large part not cool enough to actually listen to the station. As Homer S. would say, "D'oh!!"

The funny part of all of this nonsense is that these anomolies were the exact reason a superior system to diary keeping was needed in the first place. There are in fact large discrepancies between noted listening and actual listening, whether the difference is intentional or not. The fact that these people are complaining is proof that the new system is superior and is working.

Remember, after killing the messenger doesn't work, you might want to consider airing material that people actually want to listen to.

 

[radioresearcher]

Uh oh, here comes the Wahhhhmbulance. Wahhhhhh!!!

I guess the rich, westside lefty libs have learned from the urban, race-baiting lefty libs. When the painful fact becomes apparent to all that a superior measurement system that is much harder to manipulate comes around and it shows much less listening than you thought you had, the best course of action is to blame the messenger.

And its also a return of the Indie "Our listeners are just wayyy to cool to ever wear one of those people meter things". Of course this ignores all of the cool people that listen to KIIS, KAMP (KLSX), KYSR, KPWR, KSWD among others.

Here is the bitter truth. You are right, your listeners ARE cool. So cool in fact, they know what the hip, eclectic, politically correct, somewhat underground radio station in town is. So when the diary comes around, they want to support the station and they dutifully write KCRW down. The problem is that although they are cool enough to know about the station and even write it down in the diary, they are in large part not cool enough to actually listen to the station. As Homer S. would say, "D'oh!!"

The funny part of all of this nonsense is that these anomolies were the exact reason a superior system to diary keeping was needed in the first place. There are in fact large discrepancies between noted listening and actual listening, whether the difference is intentional or not. The fact that these people are complaining is proof that the new system is superior and is working.

Remember, after killing the messenger doesn't work, you might want to consider airing material that people actually want to listen to.

You have some great points. The diary system is so much more of a vote than real listening. We no longer have room for bad songs, promos, and on air personalities. The diary is much more forgiving than the PPM.

Indie 103.1 got a lot of votes because people who didn't even listen to it would vote for it.

Also, stations that did a lot of external marketing benefited in the diary because they were top of mind, which is a huge diary trick. I still see it go on in diary markets we work with.

Look at a station like MY-FM... It did very little in its early months in the diary but then exploded in PPM. New stations tend to catch on much quicker with the meter.

KCRW is not a mass appeal station nor was Indie. That is the inherent problem.

 

[JimmyJames]

Are you not aware that some niches are sellable, and not every station can be mass appeal? What exactly are you proposing KCRW air? Commercial free Power 106 music?

KCRW appeals to a certain audience, that has appeal to certain underwriters. This is no less valid a proposition for a format than anything else. There is a balance between creative and business, and stations like KCRW balance it quite well.

People who listen to KCRW have lives and views that don't lend themselves to easy recruitment for any Arbitron project, be it PPM or diaries. So in your world, they don't listen.

They not only listen, they go to events, and take an active role in their community. Viable audience, believe it or not.

 

[Dick Skinner]

Are you not aware that some niches are sellable, and not every station can be mass appeal? What exactly are you proposing KCRW air? Commercial free Power 106 music?

KCRW appeals to a certain audience, that has appeal to certain underwriters. This is no less valid a proposition for a format than anything else. There is a balance between creative and business, and stations like KCRW balance it quite well.

People who listen to KCRW have lives and views that don't lend themselves to easy recruitment for any Arbitron project, be it PPM or diaries. So in your world, they don't listen.

They not only listen, they go to events, and take an active role in their community. Viable audience, believe it or not.

Wouldn't it stand to reason that people with "views" would want to be involved in the ratings process and have their view heard? The assertion that their "lives don't lend themselves to easy recruitment" is arbitrary. I'm unaware of any research that supports it. Maybe David E. or Researcher can shed some light here. Everybody has a life and views. Are KCRW and Indie partisans' lives so much more complex that they couldn't possibly take on the burden of making a positive impact on their respective favorite stations' success? Somehow, I don't think so, any more than than I believe that of a KISS or KROQ fan's life.

If KCRW's "viable audience" is active in the community and attends events, the station's management should quantify those attributes and sell them. I agree with Flipper: Blaming the messenger is an exercise in futility.

 

[JimmyJames]

I've worked in public radio and my experience with that audience is they feel they express their "view" by their attendance at shows and support of underwriters and the station as a whole. There is something inherent in the majority of them that resists things like PPM. They don't want to be bothered with the device, they're suspicious of it, it's not worth it to them, etc. I just think a system that has to plead with people to wear it so the station won't tank is shortchanging the value of stations like KCRW which can be financially viable.

 

[Dick Skinner]

I've worked in public radio and my experience with that audience is they feel they express their "view" by their attendance at shows and support of underwriters and the station as a whole. There is something inherent in the majority of them that resists things like PPM. They don't want to be bothered with the device, they're suspicious of it, it's not worth it to them, etc. I just think a system that has to plead with people to wear it so the station won't tank is shortchanging the value of stations like KCRW which can be financially viable.

Can you quantify that "majority" please? Have you conducted some kind of systematic polling to arrive at your conclusion or are we talking something more anecdotal? Are you operating on the assumption that public radio listeners only listen to public radio? Just asking.

I don't question the notion that a station like KCRW can be financially viable. I just don't see the point in bashing Arbitron when:

a. There's an assumption put forth that KCRW listeners are too engaged in their busy lives to participate in the process without substantial data to back up that claim. And...

b. That KCRW listeners have such a high qualitative profile that ratings don't matter anyway.

 

[davideduardo]

I've worked in public radio and my experience with that audience is they feel they express their "view" by their attendance at shows and support of underwriters and the station as a whole. There is something inherent in the majority of them that resists things like PPM.

And that would be why public station KQEW in San Francisco is generally #2 or #3 in 25-54 in that market?

As mentioned, public radio listeners are like general market listeners... they have 4, 5, 6 stations they use with some regularity. Nearly nobody listens exclusively to one single station.

Maybe KCRW just does not have the right programming.

 

[JimmyJames]

I'll be the first to admit my evidence is anecdotal. It's dealing with specific public stations in markets that aren't even close to being PPM users yet. But in conversation and experience with the audience, they simply seem resistant to it. They'll call up and tell us they listen. They'll give at pledge time. They'll show up to things we promote.

My business is to program a viable station that underwriters and listeners support. But it feels to me as though we're working against PPM here because their samples often don't represent the hard facts of who listens, and more importantly, why.

I'm not saying PPM is a bad technology, but I am saying that for pubcasters, increasing the sample size is important. I'm concerned too by the fact that if station X is playing in a store, and 4 people have a PPM device, they're counted towards that station. Yes, it gets exposure to the ad in a sense, but the station shouldn't program to listeners that don't exist. There is a serious difference in my mind between "hearing" and "listening" and my station courts listeners. Who engage with the programming, the news and the music, and find value in it.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

I'll be the first to admit my evidence is anecdotal. It's dealing with specific public stations in markets that aren't even close to being PPM users yet. But in conversation and experience with the audience, they simply seem resistant to it. They'll call up and tell us they listen. They'll give at pledge time. They'll show up to things we promote.

My business is to program a viable station that underwriters and listeners support. But it feels to me as though we're working against PPM here because their samples often don't represent the hard facts of who listens, and more importantly, why.

I'm not saying PPM is a bad technology, but I am saying that for pubcasters, increasing the sample size is important. I'm concerned too by the fact that if station X is playing in a store, and 4 people have a PPM device, they're counted towards that station. Yes, it gets exposure to the ad in a sense, but the station shouldn't program to listeners that don't exist. There is a serious difference in my mind between "hearing" and "listening" and my station courts listeners. Who engage with the programming, the news and the music, and find value in it.

So if I understand you correctly, you admit that the technology is accurate for the stations and advertisers that actually pay for the service for their own ends, but not for your public radio station for your own ends.

By the way, how is the increased sample size going to help? What difference will it make when they sample 500 more people and only 5 of them are listening to the station? Same results.

Its been pointed out above that KCRW is a niche station and you seem to agree that it is. One of the attributes of a niche station is it only serves a small minority of listeners, so what are we really talking about?

And lastly, KIIS, KPWR, KROQ and others also have phone lines with listeners who come to their events who tell them they are listening. How is KCRW different? If your going by anecdotal information gleaned from conversations with your own listeners, of course your view on this is going to be skewed in favor of your station. That is why the PPM is so great - it doesn't have an agenda, it doesn't know which stations are cool, and which stations are supposed to be written down. It simply records the signal to show what was heard by the wearer. Period.

 

[musicfan101]

Uh oh, here comes the Wahhhhmbulance. Wahhhhhh!!!

I guess the rich, westside lefty libs have learned from the urban, race-baiting lefty libs. When the painful fact becomes apparent to all that a superior measurement system that is much harder to manipulate comes around and it shows much less listening than you thought you had, the best course of action is to blame the messenger.

And its also a return of the Indie "Our listeners are just wayyy to cool to ever wear one of those people meter things". Of course this ignores all of the cool people that listen to KIIS, KAMP (KLSX), KYSR, KPWR, KSWD among others.

Here is the bitter truth. You are right, your listeners ARE cool. So cool in fact, they know what the hip, eclectic, politically correct, somewhat underground radio station in town is. So when the diary comes around, they want to support the station and they dutifully write KCRW down. The problem is that although they are cool enough to know about the station and even write it down in the diary, they are in large part not cool enough to actually listen to the station. As Homer S. would say, "D'oh!!"

The funny part of all of this nonsense is that these anomolies were the exact reason a superior system to diary keeping was needed in the first place. There are in fact large discrepancies between noted listening and actual listening, whether the difference is intentional or not. The fact that these people are complaining is proof that the new system is superior and is working.

Remember, after killing the messenger doesn't work, you might want to consider airing material that people actually want to listen to.

i'm curious does the "im too cool" crowd also goes toward the KDAY listeners as well? or for that matter what about the KJLH listeners? i'm not trying to defend anyone, just curious..

 

[JimmyJames]

I'm making the point that for the purposes of what a noncomm does, PPM measurement doesn't seem to have the value people imply it does.

Let's take KCRW hypothetically.

It's played in some business, and people are "exposed" to Which Way LA, or To The Point. They hear it in the background when they shop. So that measures on PPM. That doesn't tell me if that person was engaged by the content of the program, or is someone KCRW underwriters target, or if they even took note of who underwrites the program. In other words, PPM is measuring people who I don't consider actual listeners. I'm not marketing my station to them. And the person in the business who may leave KCRW on for several hours a day isn't getting measured if they aren't in that sample. Even though they hear the underwriting messages and have a connection with the content.

PPM can't tell me what I really want to know, and my job is to sustain a quality service that I believe has value and should be an option. But I can envision a scenario where PPM makes my station a much harder sell in SPITE of what is a very viable and worthwhile audience.

If we really wanted to make it accurate, just put a feedback device in radios. Ah, but then people would have the same privacy and paranoia they do about PPM.

Ratings games have been played for decades in commercial radio, and I don't want to see quality public radio programming marginalized by the rush to PPM.

As the first post in this thread points out, KCRW believes that the types of people who are potential or likely listeners to their station are, to their mind, not represented by PPM. So why not try it out? Increase the sample with higher income adults and see what happens with KCRW. Fair enough, right?

 

[davideduardo]

In other words, PPM is measuring people who I don't consider actual listeners. I'm not marketing my station to them. And the person in the business who may leave KCRW on for several hours a day isn't getting measured if they aren't in that sample. Even though they hear the underwriting messages and have a connection with the content.

First, the casual "hearer" contributes very little TSL. Less than half the cumers contribute 92% on average of the AQH listening. You are way to worried about casual listening. It does not make much difference, except to inflate cume.

And a panel is supposed to represent every stratification variable in proportion to the total population. If you are concerned about upper income persons, the panel is supposed to have an exact proportion of such persons so as to mirror the total market. Increasing the sample will not change this, IF the panel is proportional in every cell based on age, gender, ethnicity, income, geography, etc.

If we really wanted to make it accurate, just put a feedback device in radios. Ah, but then people would have the same privacy and paranoia they do about PPM.

In car is less than a third of radio listening.

As the first post in this thread points out, KCRW believes that the types of people who are potential or likely listeners to their station are, to their mind, not represented by PPM. So why not try it out? Increase the sample with higher income adults and see what happens with KCRW. Fair enough, right?

The cost of PPM increased 60% over that of the diary. Nobody will pay for more sample.

 

[Dick Skinner]

As the first post in this thread points out, KCRW believes that the types of people who are potential or likely listeners to their station are, to their mind, not represented by PPM.

And once again, Jimmy, I'll ask the question: How did he arrive at this conclusion? Is he polling KCRW's potential or likely listeners to determine whether or not they're represented by PPM? Or is he basing the assertion on what his neighbor said, or what his wife believes or what the guy down the hall thinks? Obviously some of his listeners are carrying PPM's, or they wouldn't show up at all.

Another point: Arbitron ratings are a measurement of listening levels that can be broken out into cells according to age, gender, geography, ethnicity, education, income and dayparts. There are no reports to tell you if your programming is what your listeners want to hear. Of course, one can make the case that if you're doing it right, the numbers go up. And you can certainly arrive at certain findings, i.e., more music in morning drive has merit.

But if you really want to know what they want, gather a random sample in a room - your neighbor, your wife and the guy down the hall don't get to participate - and present them with some carefully designed questions and surveys that are as unbiased as possible. Tabulate the results and come to some unbiased conclusions. Then do it on an ongoing basis to see what patterns develop and act accordingly.

And hire a professional to do the studies...someone who doesn't assume any facts about your station's listeners going in.

 

[TheBigA]

Here's a simple truth: When it serves your purpose, PPM is good. When it doesn't, then it's bad.