• 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

Proper citation of Arbitron data

J

Jacmac

"A subscribing station, by virtue of its contract with Arbitron, has the
right to use the data to promote itself. So a single post by a subscriber
is not in violation.

A non-subscribing station has no rights to the data. Any use for commercial
purposes is a violation.

Hope that clarifies things.

Thanks for your query.


--
Thom Mocarsky
Vice President, Communications"

So any use for commercial purposes is a violation. I wouldn't call posting a rating for a station as a matter of discussion on this forum a use of Arbitron data for commercial purposes. Anyone disagree?
 
> "A subscribing station, by virtue of its contract with
> Arbitron, has the
> right to use the data to promote itself. So a single post
> by a subscriber
> is not in violation.
>
> A non-subscribing station has no rights to the data. Any use
> for commercial
> purposes is a violation.
>
> Hope that clarifies things.
>
> Thanks for your query.
>
>
> --
> Thom Mocarsky
> Vice President, Communications"
>
> So any use for commercial purposes is a violation. I
> wouldn't call posting a rating for a station as a matter of
> discussion on this forum a use of Arbitron data for
> commercial purposes. Anyone disagree?

Yes, because the answer you quoted above deals with radio station use of Arbitron data. We are not a radio station.

Try asking if a non-news website can quote data, and you'll get a different answer. Radio-Info is not covered by Arbitron's rules allowing news organizations to quote data. R&R? News site. AllAccess? News site. LARadio.com? News site. Radio-Info? Discussion board site.

The owners have had this discussion with Arbitron. The above is the legal distinction. What you or anyone else agrees on doesn't change Arbitron's corpoate mind ... or their lawyers' collective minds.

End of discussion. No ratings posting. Radio-Info rule.

<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
> Try asking if a non-news website can quote data, and you'll
> get a different answer.

There's a big difference between Radio-Info.com personnel quoting data for a commercial purpose and allowing people to talk about the data. It would be pretty easy for someone unconnected to the forum website to simply create a radio news web page (dedicated to news), post the information, then reference the "news" or a link to the "news" in a post. As far as the specific question I asked, here it is:

"If a posted message on an online radio forum contains a single Arbitron
rating for the latest quarter (for a particular station), does this violate
Arbitrons copyright or policies? For example "KOGO shot up to a 8.1 share
last quarter....", something like that."

> The owners have had this discussion with Arbitron.

I don't think you mentioned this before, if so I didn't notice.

>No ratings posting. Radio-Info rule.

Guess I'll have to live with it until something else comes along.
 
> As far as the specific question I asked, here it is:
>
> "If a posted message on an online radio forum contains a
> single Arbitron
> rating for the latest quarter (for a particular station),
> does this violate
> Arbitrons copyright or policies? For example "KOGO shot up
> to a 8.1 share
> last quarter....", something like that."

Arbitron didn't answer the question you asked. I reread the answer from them you posted and it is obvious they didn't read what you wrote.

> > The owners have had this discussion with Arbitron.
>
> I don't think you mentioned this before, if so I didn't
> notice.

I've said it on so many of the boards so many times (I moderate ten of them), I couldn't tell you whether I ever said that here or not. If this was the first time, I apologize for not saying so earlier as it might well have prevented the argument.

> >No ratings posting. Radio-Info rule.
>
> Guess I'll have to live with it until something else comes
> along.

I would still venture the opinion that the "something else" would have the same legal problems.
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
OK KM, how is that going to help me get KDIS?<P ID="signature">______________
+--
Chris
SDRadio.net</P>
 
> OK KM, how is that going to help me get KDIS?

Oh my ... Chris is channeling tfcwings!
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
> > Try asking if a non-news website can quote data, and
> you'll
> > get a different answer.
>
> There's a big difference between Radio-Info.com personnel
> quoting data for a commercial purpose and allowing people to
> talk about the data. It would be pretty easy for someone
> unconnected to the forum website to simply create a radio
> news web page (dedicated to news), post the information,
> then reference the "news" or a link to the "news" in a post.
> As far as the specific question I asked, here it is:
>
> "If a posted message on an online radio forum contains a
> single Arbitron
> rating for the latest quarter (for a particular station),
> does this violate
> Arbitrons copyright or policies? For example "KOGO shot up
> to a 8.1 share
> last quarter....", something like that."
>
> > The owners have had this discussion with Arbitron.
>
> I don't think you mentioned this before, if so I didn't
> notice.
>
> >No ratings posting. Radio-Info rule.
>
> Guess I'll have to live with it until something else comes
> along.

Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make KM's day!
 
> Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make KM's
> day!

{tongue in cheek mode on}

I think I'd rather see fewer posts than both of you arguing over rules on this board that none of us can change. I just enforce them, I don't make them.

{tongue in cheek mode off}
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
>
> Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make KM's
> day!
>

Let's see... you advocate pirate radi and stealing Arbitron's intellectual property. Let me guess... you are really an Anarchist.
 
> >
> > Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make KM's
>
> > day!
> >
>
> Let's see... you advocate pirate radi and stealing
> Arbitron's intellectual property. Let me guess... you are
> really an Anarchist.

I don't advocate stealing Arbitron's intellectual property. What I advocate is a "get real" attitude in not stifling free speech and free discussion in a forum dedicated for that purpose.

What we have is a country which is more and more slipping into a severe oligarchy and theocracy rather than a democracy where a free exchange of ideas and opinions take place.
 
> > >
> > > Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make
> KM's
> >
> > > day!
> > >
> >
> > Let's see... you advocate pirate radi and stealing
> > Arbitron's intellectual property. Let me guess... you are
> > really an Anarchist.
>
> I don't advocate stealing Arbitron's intellectual property.
> What I advocate is a "get real" attitude in not stifling
> free speech and free discussion in a forum dedicated for
> that purpose.
>
> What we have is a country which is more and more slipping
> into a severe oligarchy and theocracy rather than a
> democracy where a free exchange of ideas and opinions take
> place.
>

Let me guess.... you must be about 19. I remember when I thought like that as well. Then I grew up.
 
> > >
> > > Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make
> KM's
> >
> > > day!
> > >
> >
> > Let's see... you advocate pirate radi and stealing
> > Arbitron's intellectual property. Let me guess... you are
> > really an Anarchist.
>
> I don't advocate stealing Arbitron's intellectual property.
> What I advocate is a "get real" attitude in not stifling
> free speech and free discussion in a forum dedicated for
> that purpose.

Free speech is only protected from government interference. This is a privately owned board, and free speech does not apply.
>
> What we have is a country which is more and more slipping
> into a severe oligarchy and theocracy rather than a
> democracy where a free exchange of ideas and opinions take
> place.

You obviously should get a clue about how most of the rest of the world lives. The freedoms in the US are potentially excessive. There is plenty of freedom in most of Europe, Latin America and Asia, but not the kind of offensive attack-generating freedom we see in this thread. And, in contrast, you should live in an operssive regime a while to see what parts of freedom are really important. Playing a "better mix" of gangsta rap is not one of them.
>
 
> I don't advocate stealing Arbitron's intellectual property.
> What I advocate is a "get real" attitude in not stifling
> free speech and free discussion in a forum dedicated for
> that purpose.

To that, I say Get Real.

There's nothing stopping you from talking about who's going up and who's going down in the ratings. The only thing we ask is that you don't quote the exact numbers.

That's not very much to ask.<P ID="signature">______________
...co-moderator of the Satellite Radio, Phoenix, and San Diego boards...</P>
 
> Arbitron didn't answer the question you asked. I reread the
> answer from them you posted and it is obvious they didn't
> read what you wrote.

Bull, you're just trying to spin it now. I don't know why you bother; better to state what you know (like the radio-info.com rules which you are particularly adept at), rather than speculate on what you haven't got a clue about (like what the VP of Arbitron didn't or didn't read before sending me a reply).
 
> > Arbitron didn't answer the question you asked. I reread
> the
> > answer from them you posted and it is obvious they didn't
> > read what you wrote.
>
> Bull, you're just trying to spin it now. I don't know why
> you bother; better to state what you know (like the
> radio-info.com rules which you are particularly adept at),
> rather than speculate on what you haven't got a clue about
> (like what the VP of Arbitron didn't or didn't read before
> sending me a reply).

I will stand by my posts in this thread. People can read in context and decide whether your accusation is valid or not.
<P ID="signature">______________


</P>
 
I would think that another consideration would be whether or not radio-info.com is a for-profit venture. Is it?
 
> > What we have is a country which is more and more slipping
> > into a severe oligarchy and theocracy rather than a
> > democracy where a free exchange of ideas and opinions take
>
> > place.
>
> You obviously should get a clue about how most of the rest
> of the world lives. The freedoms in the US are potentially
> excessive. There is plenty of freedom in most of Europe,
> Latin America and Asia, but not the kind of offensive
> attack-generating freedom we see in this thread. And, in
> contrast, you should live in an operssive regime a while to
> see what parts of freedom are really important. Playing a
> "better mix" of gangsta rap is not one of them.

Don't go there, David...in fact...my family and I are direct victims of the Russian Soviet regime, and the current Russian regime...so get off your high horse...
 
> > > >
> > > > Of course we all could stop posting ANYTHING and make
> > KM's
> > >
> > > > day!
> > > >
> > >
> > > Let's see... you advocate pirate radi and stealing
> > > Arbitron's intellectual property. Let me guess... you
> are
> > > really an Anarchist.
> >
> > I don't advocate stealing Arbitron's intellectual
> property.
> > What I advocate is a "get real" attitude in not stifling
> > free speech and free discussion in a forum dedicated for
> > that purpose.
> >
> > What we have is a country which is more and more slipping
> > into a severe oligarchy and theocracy rather than a
> > democracy where a free exchange of ideas and opinions take
>
> > place.
> >
>
> Let me guess.... you must be about 19. I remember when I
> thought like that as well. Then I grew up.

No I'm not... Albeit I'm a registered Republican, I am an independent who sees the ugly face of capitalism where broadcast employees are being exploited by mega companies who can't think of more ways to squeeze more money out of them and by providing more and more excrement.
 
>
> Don't go there, David...in fact...my family and I are direct
> victims of the Russian Soviet regime, and the current
> Russian regime...so get off your high horse...
>

But YOU have not lived in such a regime, and, I suspect, have not lived outside the US. You take too much for granted and expect too much as a result.
 
>
> No I'm not... Albeit I'm a registered Republican, I am an
> independent who sees the ugly face of capitalism where
> broadcast employees are being exploited by mega companies
> who can't think of more ways to squeeze more money out of
> them and by providing more and more excrement.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.

I can't stop laughing. Man, is that funny.

In the period from the 50's through the 90's, most radio stations did not have much, if any, bvenefits. Few had insurance, fewer still had any kind of retirement benefit and many of the independent owners were tyrants and crackpots.

Today's radio employee has greater stability, much more in the way of benefits and far better working conditions.

Again, if you are not 19, you are probably 20. To remember radio a few decades ago was to remember a generally horrible work environment.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom