-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
New York Metro Radio Ratings: October 2023
- Thread starter pjc1961
- Start date
Um no. Usually I'm typing fast, and it isn't as much of a pet peeve for me as it appears to be for you.
If you just look at K Love from a purely presentation stand point, it is a very well executed station. The personalities are friendly. In this hate filled world, they are an escape. And the proof is listeners support it by opening up their wallets in droves.
Living in the southeast, I’ve heard more religious stations than anyone should probably ever hear. If a signal has to go to a religious operator, be glad it’s EMF. Polished sound, great jingles and voiceovers, engaging jocks, great processing. Only WAY-FM comes somewhat close and is decent also.
The other alternatives are CSN International, Truth Network, or VCY America where a political agenda is being pushed when many are exhausted with politics. Sometimes said political agenda gets more attention than the message of Jesus.
In these ratings, it's odd to see WNYC 93.9 FM with a 4.4 share because I remember their ratings were much lower than that a few years ago. And WNYC rose by more than 1 point between August and October 2023, which means it succeeded more than I ever expected.
Some people attribute the jump in ratings on the fact that the station is non-commercial.
The other thing is that NPR tends to excel in international news coverage, and there's been a lot of international news lately.
Both points are true, but haven't we also discussed how the Nielsen panels are underweighted in certain populations, leaving them at risk of being statistically invalid? And how Nielsen, as a workaround for this problem, "overweights" certain underrepresented parts of the population to correct for this problem? When this occurs, it may only take a few new panelists with different tastes, say for WNYC or WPLJ, replacing the former panelists whose tastes were for other stations. The result being big shifts like that described by @johndavid237.
Not true. The PPM is a panel, not a random probability sample. It is designed to always be proportional on all the age, gender, ethnicity, income, education and county population counts. The minor variations due to panel turnover are balanced by weighting.
Not in a panel, in theory. In the event of an under or over sample in a cell, then weighting is done to balance the sample. In a panel, it is as likely to have a slight oversample as undersample.
Wrong. There are around 4,000 panelists in the the NYC Metro Survey Area PPM, so one or two will not have a significant difference.
Keep in mind that stations have recourse. If they disagree with the ratings or question the validity of the statistics or the makeup of the panel, they can appeal to Nielsen, and dig deeper into the results of the survey in order to find "hanging chads" or any other mistakes in the results. Published ratings are not the be-all and end-all of the process, and most people look at three surveys to determine if there are mistakes.
Since I'm wrong about everything, why don't you provide your definitions of a panel, a cell, an under/oversample. Because a universe of 400 in a total population of 18 million (or whatever the current number if for the tri-state market) does not strike me as adequate, especially when that sample is sliced and diced into counties, ethnicities, racial minorities, etc. Maybe even sex. Your statistical universe might work for the population as a whole -- and even there I'm skeptical -- but not when it's carved into little statistical subsets.
There was recently a poll of 800 people that the entire media is taking as an accurate representation of who a nation of 331 million people would vote for President a year from now. Compared to that, I'd say a survey size of 400 people in a metro area of 18 million has a far better shot of being accurate.
Not to the same extent and
New music or not, when a religious station beats urban stations, urban being the more popular format in a city like New York, it is clear to me that the majority of youth is getting it's music from other sources than terrestrial radio. Spin it however you want.
There are lots of urban stations in NY, and most of them are beating WPLJ.
Remember, the "city of New York" does not have radio ratings. The "New York Metro Survey Area" does have
ratings, and that area includes the City, the Boroughs, all of Long Island, part of a county in CT, several counties all the way up to Putnam in NY, and 9 counties in
The market is 43% non-Hispanic white, 17% Black, 13.3% Asian and 27% Hispanic. With nearly 50% Hispanic and Black, there is a huge market for rhythmic based formats, and not such a large group for formats that appeal only to non-Hispanic whites.
Correction: there are 9 counties in NJ, not CT.
Last edited:
Perhaps related to this, WKTU's new evening host will be "DJ Prostyle." According to RadioInsight, he has worked at WWPR, and other Urban outlets.
From RadioInsight
17% Black + 27% Hispanic = 44% combined, not "nearly 50%".
That's not to say it's not a good market for rhythmic formats but there is no need to exaggerate the statistics. Or, to trivialize the importance of serving the remaining 56% of the market that is not Black or Hispanic.
By your own statistics, 43% of the market is non-Hispanic white. That is the largest segment on the list so i don't see how you can say it's not such a large group. You consistently use this narrative though, and it sounds rather biased to be honest.
Last edited:
It sure looks close to half to me. Add in the fact that in every market with large Black and Hispanic percentages, the non-Hispanic white audience tends to lean rhythmic due to the overall flavor of the market, and you have a weak audience base for mainstream CHR, rock and other formats.
Asian and first generation non-Hispanic immigrants are another 20% roughly. That leaves only about 20% for those "white only" formats. And, again, the flavor of the market majority determines the overall music mood of a market, as we can see comparing very white markets with those with large ethnic components everywhere in the US.
Does it? Ask the politicians if they can win an election with 44%
Are you trying to gaslight us?
CHR - Z100 is currently #2 across all the major demographics,
Rock - Q104.3 is often in the top 5
Again, your statistic says 43% non-Hispanic white, not Asian or "other".
That's a perfect example of comparing radio data with elections, sports events and gambling. A station in the NYC market that ranks 20th very likely is quite profitable.
I'm saying that the sum of non-rhythmic formats is growing and large compared to the non-rhythmic ones. And, as I mentioned, a lot of the rhythmic listeners don't use FCC licensed radio due to the lyric restrictions.
At present, in 18-34 in NYC the average rating for radio is around 5. In 2000, it was over 19. A huge percentage of listeners just don't want radio with ads, but a similarly large group can't hear their songs on FCC licensed radio so they go elsewhere.
In this case, about 20% of the market is first generation that is neither Asian, Black or Hispanic. Those groups don't listen to classic rock, alternative rock and other purely "American" formats. That 43% includes those first generation immigrants who are not members of the 3 ethnic groups that Nielsen enumerates.
There aren't nine counties in Connecticut, in total. (And you already included the part of Fairfield that's adjacent to the New York line.) You meant New Jersey.
Or, we could say that the market is 4% Jews-that-haven't-yet-decamped-to-Florida and 96% other. @Theater has a point. You see the statistical world through a lens that many of us don't necessarily agree with. As demonstrated with my somewhat ridiculous example, those same stats can be sliced and diced in different ways that don't divide the population into, effectively, Hispanics and everyone else.
- Status