InTIMadate said:Told you the PPM was junk research. The trades today are full of stories about how Arbitron is on the ropes for selling radio their smoke and mirrors. Beware the board posters here that are in Arbitron's pocket. They will fill your head and mouth with false tales and false facts about PPM. This is not about how "radio should be supporting PPM." It's how Arbitron should come clean and improve their sample before selling it at a premium as fact.
There are no mirrors and no smoke. Arbitron simply could not get the sample proportional and the cells at the right level. Nobody has done a panel synidcated radio survey before, and the problems of panel recruitment and maintenance have been shown to Arbitron's dismay.
The industry is working to make sure that the sample is correct in size and proportional in every cell on the stratification variables. Most of us think this will happen, and everyone will be satisfied if not happy with the results.
I welcome the coming congressional investigation where Arbitron will have to expose their dealing with the Media Rating Council.
There is no congressional investigation. NABOB suggested one might be appropriate, as some broadcasters did with the Nielsen LPM, as you state. But, so far, no hearing or action has been scheduled. If the system is correct and transparent (the job of the MRC) then there will be no issues.
There’s something wrong with their methodology.
There is nothing wrong with the methodology, there is a problem with achieving a full and proporitonal panel.