KSSE Reacting to KMVN's Exitos format?

[4UH8SIMBKAGN]

It is comical the lengths that some (losers) in the PPM world will take to go back in time and argue for the more "reliable" use of the inferior diary method. Perhaps some of these prosaic responses to the new technology are representative of the poor management decisions that led to the low ratings in the first place.

The fact is that the diary still has many advantages over the PPM. As evidence, we can start with the fact that it is not accredited by the MRC in all but 2 markets, and the reaccreditation in one of those is late...

This is a serious question and not a snotty retort:

Is it possible that the slow accredidation process has been affected by the (racial) politics being played out in certain jurisdictions? That is, the accredidation agency doesn't want to bless a method while it is still a political hot potato?

Maybe we should ask someone as believable and honest as Al Sharpton...

 

[davideduardo]

This is a serious question and not a snotty retort:

Is it possible that the slow accredidation process has been affected by the (racial) politics being played out in certain jurisdictions? That is, the accredidation agency doesn't want to bless a method while it is still a political hot potato?

Houston was accredited, but that market employs, uniquely, address based recruiting. And the reaccreditation has not been seen... hmm. And Houston has both a huge Black and a huge Hispanic population.

Riverside, with a huge Hispanic component, was accredited.

The issues the MRC deals with have to do with methodology and implementation. Is the methodology, or suvey design, properly designed? Is the implementation, or the actual doing of the survey, in accordance with the methodology?

The MRC members are researchers and statisticians, and their job is to, via certification, deliver to advertisers a guarantee that a sound methodology is being implmented correctly to produce ratings reports.

 

[davideduardo]

Totally disagree. The diary was a 40 year farse. The fat and moronic weighting for minorities is what most, including you, are crying about.

The only weighting, ever, in the diary method is up or down weighting to bring a cell into proportionality in the market. That includes weighting of each diary for age cell, geographic division, gender, and ethnicity / language dominance if the last two apply.

There is no weighting, nor has there been, any weighting that makes any ethnic group look better than reality.

The often higher than average returns of diaries by Hispanics overall meant that many diaries were actually weighted down, not up. The highest upward weighting occurs in the diary for 18-24 and 25-34 non-ethnic men.

There was no dispropotionate weighting on any stratification variable in the LA diary survey, or, for that matter, in any other market. You are, by making that vastly untrue statement (highlighted in blue above) are perpetuating an urban legend.

It's true that DST was introduced about 30 years ago to make sure the ethnic and young adult male samples were proportional, but DST was basically made up of creating HDHA and HDBA zones and doing incentive increases for hard to get cells. There is no weighting there... in fact, DST reduced weighting.

Diaries, of which I filled out a nice household of and helped bump up all my favorite Los Angeles talkradio hosts during a survey period not to be named here, shows how idiotic it was.

How nice. You admit you cheated. If you worked for a radio station at the time, you violated their contract and, no doubt, their employee proceedures.

In any case, one diary out of 7500 in LA does not affect much, and Arbitron yanks lots of diaries after checking, via a flagging algorithm, for atypical individual or household behaviour.

The fact is that experts who know more than any of us on these boards, namely the MRC, have not accredited the LA PPM book and the diary based book was accredited. In fact, only one US market was not accredited in the diary survey.