PPM and Talk Radio

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I see articles describing programming changes that are happening because of the PPM mechanism for measuring audience. Comparing PPM results to a log orf recording of a program quickly reveals what causes people to switch away from a program. Too much chatter. etc.

What I have not come across is information about PPM and Talk Radio. Since Talk Radio has relatively lower listener counts that some other programming types, it could be that the sample size for Talk Radio is not large enough to reliably tie tune-outs to specific content events or sequences.

Does PPM enable "Talkers" to know what topics are audience killers and what topics are "hot to trot"?

Will PPM have significant effect on the future of Talk Radio?

Are there articles on-line about this... if I knew where to look? Do any of you have experience dealing with this issue?

 

[flybynight]

I see articles describing programming changes that are happening because of the PPM mechanism for measuring audience. Comparing PPM results to a log orf recording of a program quickly reveals what causes people to switch away from a program. Too much chatter. etc.

What I have not come across is information about PPM and Talk Radio. Since Talk Radio has relatively lower listener counts that some other programming types, it could be that the sample size for Talk Radio is not large enough to reliably tie tune-outs to specific content events or sequences.

Does PPM enable "Talkers" to know what topics are audience killers and what topics are "hot to trot"?

Will PPM have significant effect on the future of Talk Radio?

Are there articles on-line about this... if I knew where to look? Do any of you have experience dealing with this issue?

Unfortunately, if PPM demonstrates a moment of tune-out, it is then up for debate among managers as to WHY they actually tuned out:

• Was it the topic?
• Was it the host?
• Was it the way the host was handling the topic?
• Was it a signal issue?
• Was it a caller the audience found annoying?

The problem is, more managers may end up analyzing even more data that gives a false impression of what is going on and why. Making more subjective decisions based on subjective data interpretation is the last thing the format needs.

God help us.

 

[JeffM]

Wonder how long this thread will last before the cons take it over...

 

[TheBigA]

What I have not come across is information about PPM and Talk Radio.

Because that's the kind of information people charge for. Put it online, and it's less likely clients will pay for it.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Because that's the kind of information people charge for. Put it online, and it's less likely clients will pay for it.

I knew that when I posted the question. And I expected folks like you and David Eduardo to be very guarded in any responses you might be able to make, because specifics about ratings are indeed valuable property. I guess the foundational question I am asking and I hope this could be commented on without violating agreements with the PPM vendor is this: Is PPM affecting decisions in Talk radio, or is Talk Radio flying so low in ratings it is beneath the radar?

No, I had no expectations that anyone could or shoud put PPM data on line.

 

[flybynight]

Wonder how long this thread will last before the cons take it over...

They've destroyed talkradio, so why not also the newstalk section of this website.

 

[wadio]

There's the element of coincidence too. I question minute-by-minute audience reaction, as in the graph that appears beneath the Frank Luntz segments on Hannity's TV show. Those segments are a tune-out all the way through, IMO. ;-) I don't like everything I hear on every talk show but I'll stay with the hosts I know are entertaining much of the time and don't bother to tune in to others. I somehow don't think talk listeners are as nimble as the music button pushers. Just my hunch.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I question minute-by-minute audience reaction, as in the graph that appears beneath the Frank Luntz segments on Hannity's TV show. Those segments are a tune-out all the way through, IMO. ;-)

I have not seen the Frank Luntz segments. Tell me about them... and the graphs... and what you think is happening.

Do you like or not like the Frank Luntz segments?

What is you understanding of Frank Luntz's place in the universe?

 

[wadio]

Frank Luntz is a pollster who asks questions of a group of people who showed up at a meeting in Sometown, USA.

Then, another group of people in some parallel universe turn dials to register their reactions to what is being said. The results of the dial twisting are shown in real time on three graphs at the bottom of the screen: Republicans, Democrats and Independents.

That's my understanding of it. What it proves I have no idea.

 

[JeffM]

PPM...minute-by-minute audience ratings...we really ARE living in Max Headroom's world of "20 minutes into the future!'

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Frank Luntz is a pollster who asks questions of a group of people who showed up at a meeting in Sometown, USA.

Then, another group of people in some parallel universe turn dials to register their reactions to what is being said. The results of the dial twisting are shown in real time on three graphs at the bottom of the screen: Republicans, Democrats and Independents.

That's my understanding of it. What it proves I have no idea.

There is a much bigger picture. Frank Lunzt does get people together and observe their reaction to various questions, and various words. Yes, he has corporate clients, but for our discussions here, it is probably of most interest to understand what Frank Luntz does for Republicans. (I assume that is because they are a client of his and they pay him money to do what he does for them. I have no idea what his personal political views are.)

The thing that Frank does that has probably been the most productive and useful thing for Republicans is to understand how people react to certain words. He teaches Republicans to NEVER say "estate tax" but to always refer to it as the "death tax". I read that he advised them to not say Obamacare or ACA, but to constantly refer to the new law as "the government take-over of healthcare." I couldn't find an archive copy during a quick search last night, but I remember a Bill Moyers program where for 30 minutes Bill and Frank discussed various word choices that he had advised the Republicans to use to get a warm-and-fuzzy feeling for things Republicans like, and to get a bit of angst, anger and anxiety for things Republicans don't like.

I have no quarrel with the service Mr. Luntz sells to Republicans. Some of the choices border on childish, some border on insanity, but most are simply well chosen words for the circumstances. Savvy Democrats realize that they have not been too bright on choice of words at times, but they, too, work on "talking points" and words that charm and words that anger.

I did find on the Internet (via Google) a summary of a bit of a kerfuffle recently. Frank was speaking to a class (of would be researchers?) on a university campus and some of the students really began to press him for some answers that he didn't want to be quoted on. So he stopped, explained he would be happy to give them some academic insight on the topics, but he needed a pledge of confidentiality. He asked: "Are there any recorders being used?" One student raised his hand/held up a recorder. "If you will agree to turn that thing off, I will proceed with some candid answers." Unfortunately, there was another student in the room who was not blessed with the genes of integrity and he quietly, secretly turned on his recorder and got part of the discussion, and then later blabbed about it. The gist of what he shared was that Luntz was critical of Limbaugh for using words that are sometimes too fiery for the circumstances... but Luntz did not want to be critical of Limbaugh in public for it would "turn-off" some conservatives that Luntz is trying to rope-in and get them to use well chosen words.

Just for fun, look up "crisis management" or "crisis managers". I have a friend who is retired, who sold his services for a number of years as a Crisis Manager. When it turns out that your corporation has a plant that has been polluting a pond adjacent to an elementary school for a number of years, you want to be very, very careful what you say. You want the public to know that you are sorry, but you don't want to use words that some lawyer will throw back into your face a couple of years later during a law suit. Crisis Management is not about lying, but it is about choosing your words carefully, and getting out front with the story you WANT to tell before some journalist blows things wide open with the story that makes you look very, very bad.

When historians write the history of the last 50 years, Frank Luntz is likely to have a paragraph or two, maybe a page or two in the history publication. And I expect history will paint him as one of the "good guys".

 

[Avid Listener]

Does PPM tell the difference between turning your radio off because you didn't like what you just heard and turning the radio off because you got to where you were going and turned your car (and radio) off?

 

[JeffM]

Does PPM tell the difference between turning your radio off because you didn't like what you just heard and turning the radio off because you got to where you were going and turned your car (and radio) off?

Does PPM tell the difference if you're living in your car?

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Does PPM tell the difference between turning your radio off because you didn't like what you just heard and turning the radio off because you got to where you were going and turned your car (and radio) off?

We could probably make a rather long list of things that can trip-up the PPM machine. It would be interesting to know if studies have been done to indicate how often a listening status is interrupted by something other than listener choice.

I happens if you have a radio at your desk at work, and you get a call from the boss to step into his office and join a conversation going on in there.

If happens if you are listening at home and you next door neighbor comes over and says: "My lawn mower just quite. You are better at this stuff than I am.. would you come at look at it and see if you can make it run."

And it happens when you are sitting at home organizing your briefcase for tomorrow while listening to the radio and your wife returns from bowling with the girls, and after a bit of small talks sends the signal via a wink and a smile that maybe there is something back in the bedroom that we need to discuss.

Then there is the other side of the coin: How often does a PPM pick up a radio while you sit at the receptionist desk waiting to make a sales call. Or because the bloke behind the counter at the driving range is listening to the most un-favorite radio station in the world in your mind... but you are his captive while he steps into the back room to bring out a few more buckets of balls.

So the question is: Does all of this "random noise" make a significant error in the ratings?

 

[TheBigA]

Does PPM tell the difference between turning your radio off because you didn't like what you just heard and turning the radio off because you got to where you were going and turned your car (and radio) off?

Does the voting booth know if you're voting for a person because he's the best qualified for the job, or because you're just voting the party line, or because you feel the person is the lesser of two evils, or if you were affected by signs and representatives outside the polling place, or does it even know if you're making a mistake? I've seen situations where candidate placement on the ballot has affected vote totals.

The PPM doesn't know the circumstances, but neither does the diary.

So the question is: Does all of this "random noise" make a significant error in the ratings?

The assumption is that if the meter hears the station, then you hear the station, regardless of whether you choose to or not. But this applies to all stations across the board, and everyone understands this. That's why you examine the data afterwards, and don't simply look at totals.

 

[Avid Listener]

So the question is: Does all of this "random noise" make a significant error in the ratings?

To those whose careers live and die based on working the ratings systems, the answer would be that the ratings are totally accurate, and that the issues raised are all handled through scientific mumbo-jumbo that adjusts for such discrepancies so that they are filtered out and don't skew the results. To the rest of us, the truth is that the ratings are slightly more reliable than reading the entrails of a chicken. Of course, those who believe in reading the entrails of a chicken are as worthy of respect as anyone else, so if they believe that reading the entrails of a chicken is a reliable way to run a business, then their position must be given the same respect as someone who believes that accurate information is more important.

 

[TheBigA]

To the rest of us, the truth is that the ratings are slightly more reliable than reading the entrails of a chicken.

I think a lot of the same things apply to the way we vote. The way political parties and state legislatures have handled redistricting, it's hard to figure out if a Congressman really represents his district, or if he's just serving the party. Couple that with new rules about voter registration, and it becomes more difficult for people to vote. So if you have a primary where less than 30% of the people vote, and slightly more than half of them vote for a college professor instead of the established candidate, how different is that from reading the entrails of a chicken? I don't know. But somehow we base our democracy on it.

 

[davideduardo]

So the question is: Does all of this "random noise" make a significant error in the ratings?

No.

First, the "random hearing" where you are carrying a meter in a public place and the meter detects enough listening (5 minutes in a single quarter hour) to earn the station a credit. In these cases, the amount of listening is not enough to affect listening to the station overall, as the listening was for a short time. Radio is not sold by cume... but by how many average people are listening when an ad is run. And the averages show that about half of a station's cume makes up around 92% of the station's AQH listening.

Then there is the interrupted listening. You listen a while. The meter detects, and the station gets credit. You turn the radio down to take a phone call or you go on a break or you take the trash out. You don't give the station credit. You come back or turn the radio up again. The station gets credit. A day's worth of listening may be made up of 8 or 10 little bursts with interruptions.

These things don't "Trip Up" the PPM... the PPM just measures actual usage, interruptions and tune outs and all.

 

[davideduardo]

Does PPM tell the difference between turning your radio off because you didn't like what you just heard and turning the radio off because you got to where you were going and turned your car (and radio) off?

The advertiser does not care. And ratings are bought by stations to essentially "give" to advertisers.

The PPM and the diary both are used to give advertisers a metric on which to base pricing. They care about impressions... how many people heard the station at any given time. They know that not everyone is paying attention, that some listening is accidental. It's just like when they buy TV they know that a percentage of people use DVRs to skip´ads, and other people get up and get snacks or use the bathroom during ads. It's factored in to the price model.

 

[flybynight]

and after a bit of small talks sends the signal via a wink and a smile that maybe there is something back in the bedroom that we need to discuss.

...and the boards just got a bit creepy.