The Great Houston translator invasion

[The Rimshot]

Look, you can believe whatever you want to believe. We're all used to seeing that kind of opinion pass for knowledge. But until you do real verifiable polling...

If Nielsen told you that the majority of porn was viewed via magazines and VHS tapes and not via the internet, would you want me to believe that too?

Pass.

 

[TheBigA]

If Nielsen told you that the majority of porn was viewed via magazines and VHS tapes and not via the internet, would you want me to believe that too?

Pass.

Have they done that? No. Try to come up with something realistic. Either verifiable facts, or BS. What is it?

The source wouldn't matter. It's how they arrive at their information. They have quantifiable facts, and you have personal opinion.

 

[davideduardo]

If Nielsen told you that the majority of porn was viewed via magazines and VHS tapes and not via the internet, would you want me to believe that too?

Nielsen's only stock in trade is credibility. If they cease to deliver research that the users can confide in, they will no longer have a business.

So the possibility that Nielsen would provide totally inaccurate data is nil. All independent verification of both its delivered results and of its methodology produce validation for Nielsen's consumer research at all levels.

Media research is highly scrutinized, going back to the Congressional hearings in the early 60's. There are many other research projects, both proprietary and syndicated, that independently verify all or parts of the Nielsen radio research.

Pass.

Translation: do not confuse me with the facts.

 

[davideduardo]

I didn't mean "Sunny 99.1" as an example, silly billy, I meant an example of "proprietary research" vs "common sense."

The syndicated Nielsen radio ratings are not "proprietary research". "Proprietary research" is that done by companies for internal use only. These companies may be advertisers, ad agencies or broadcasters.

You can quote a source, but if you ACTUALLY believe that the majority of folks listen to "terrestrial radio" via a box radio, you are about as gullible as they come.

The actual data shows that about 20% of American households do not have radios. The other 80% do. And most of them are used.

I would go even further to say that the majority (50 percent plus one) do not even own a box that would access terrestrial radio stations at home.

And you are off by a staggering margin.

You might want to consult the facts: http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Arbitron-Radio-Today/HowAmericaListens-2016.pdf

I did a poll here at work, and no one here actually owns a radio at home. It's a small sample of about 20 people, but it is one that features all age segments and ethnic backgrounds.

You have a sample of 20. Nielsen has a sample of nearly 400,000 every quarter.

Your sample is not a random probability sample, necessary to do single-incident polling. Nielsen uses a stratified random probability sample for the diary, and a proportional panel for the PPM. They spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year to recruit, supervise and tabulate the sample and have to get annual reviews from the MRC.

My sister has a boombox in her barn that the horses listen to. It is locked into KKYX 24 hours a day. Maybe she is a part of the "Nielsen Family" and has no idea

PPM panel families are recruited and aggressively managed. The only case where listening in the barn might be reported is when an individual carrying a meter is in the barn working. Otherwise, neither the radio nor the horse will be reported.

You might want to look at how ratings are done: http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Arbitron/WI14DOM.pdf

 

[davideduardo]

Sometimes you have to process information, question the source, and use common sense..

I had to follow up on the highlighted part because you are obviously ignorant of what actually goes on at major radio operators.

First, broadcasters support the MRC.

http://mediaratingcouncil.org/

Their stated goals are first to secure for the media industry and related users audience measurement services that are valid, reliable and effective. Then, second, to evolve and determine minimum disclosure and ethical criteria for media audience measurement services. And third, to provide and administer an audit system designed to inform users as to whether such audience measurements are conducted in conformance with the criteria and procedures developed.

Second, most of the larger group operators have research analysts who are qualified to examine the products they buy, such as Nielsen radio ratings, and question everything from the sample to the tabulations to make sure no errors occur.

An example from my experience: going back to 1970 I have done regular reviews of Arbitron diaries by visiting the diary review facility the ratings company provided. I've looked at and searched through several million diaries in many markets looking for problems. And, on a couple of occasions I have found significant ones and caused three ratings books to be re-tabulated and reissued. I've also found errors of significance in one Arbitrend report causing the very unusual reissue of a trend report.

Just as I have scrutinized the ratings process on behalf of one employer, there are equally or more qualified folks at many other broadcast companies doing the same thing.

In addition, I've been a member of several industry groups that have "lobbied" Arbitron to improve its sampling, particularly in areas such as DST and language proportionality among Hispanics. In those cases, I was part of committees with representation from multiple station owner groups and advertisers who insisted that Arbitron enhance its measurement of certain segments of the population to guarantee true proportionality.

Yet you think we are blind and gullible. Nobody spends, as radio does, hundreds of millions of dollars a year without making sure the ratings product they get is the best that is possible commensurate with the investment.

 

[b-turner]

If I'm understanding what The Rimshot is saying is the rest of the world is being duped and worst yet, those of us that believe it are the gullible ones. From my view, I believe the companies that do the research because that's the way they make their living and the companies that use that data spend hundreds of millions of dollars based on that data. Since nobody is yelling and screaming about its inaccuracy except The Rimshot, I would not refer to myself as gullible. I suppose you suspect who I think might be.

 

[Night Hawk]

Geez, I have five (5) radio boxes, if you will, and I monitor 5 different stations!
And Coma puts me to sleep. BTW, the place where I get my hair coiffured (trimmed), once a month
at the same time, you'll find Coma plays the same dern songs every time. I mildly mentioned
it to the shop owner and asked if she could please change channels. Another person just
said "turn it OFF!" Ya know??

 

[First Fone 65]

Tube Televisions

[ That wasn't an issue with TV because the digital conversion happened at the same time that tube TVs were going away. So for many people, buying a new TV wasn't an issue because there was an obvious improvement. Not the case with radio. Digital radio isn't a substantial improvement from FM. There is a quality difference with AM, but that's why the FCC is suggesting FM translators. The problem there is the over-crowding of FM. The FCC doesn't seem to think that's a problem.[/QUOTE]

Tube TVs except for solid state TVs with a picture tube, went away in the 70s, digital TV didn't become mandated until June 12 2009, some 30 years later, however picture tube TVs were starting to be replaced by flat screen LED / LCD TVs about the same time as digital TV roll out in 2009.

 

[The Rimshot]

Have they done that? No.

Nielsen ratings that tell me most people listen to "terrestrial radio" on a boombox as opposed to listening in the car is the same as telling me most people watch porn on VHS instead of the internet.

 

[TheBigA]

Nielsen ratings that tell me most people listen to "terrestrial radio" on a boombox as opposed to listening in the car is the same as telling me most people watch porn on VHS instead of the internet.

Show me where they said that. Show me. The only person who has mentioned a boombox is you.

 

[davideduardo]

Nielsen ratings that tell me most people listen to "terrestrial radio" on a boombox as opposed to listening in the car is the same as telling me most people watch porn on VHS instead of the internet.

You are now trolling, and doing a minimally competent job of it.

 

[frankberry]

Lets get back to the original subject.

Thanks.

 

[robertsez]

Lets get back to the original subject.

Which one?

1. The Great Translator Invasion in Houston.
2. Whether most radio listening takes place in the home or in the car.
3. Why are Joe Donalson's threads being closed.
4. Why are the majority of LPFM applicants Hispanic churches.
5. Why is David Eduardo fixated on Joe Donalson.
6. Why is KIPS-LD operating as an analog radio station on 87.7 MHz.

By the way, the original topic of this thread was #3.

 

[davideduardo]

Which one?

1. The Great Translator Invasion in Houston.
2. Whether most radio listening takes place in the home or in the car.
3. Why are Joe Donalson's threads being closed.
4. Why are the majority of LPFM applicants Hispanic churches.
5. Why is David Eduardo fixated on Joe Donalson.
6. Why is KIPS-LD operating as an analog radio station on 87.7 MHz.

By the way, the original topic of this thread was #3.

Actually, you got #2 wrong.

Discussion has been about whether the majority of radio listening is in the car or not.

(In-home listening has not been in the majority for about half a century, give or take.)

 

[davideduardo]

Nielsen ratings that tell me most people listen to "terrestrial radio" on a boombox as opposed to listening in the car is the same as telling me most people watch porn on VHS instead of the internet.

Aside from the "boombox" comment being an inaccurate stereotype of where non-mobile radio listening occurs, it's not just Nielsen that tells us where listening occurs. There are other syndicated studies that show the proportions, and most larger stations and groups do their own proprietary research where listening locations are noted as part of a perceptual research project or even on occasion part of the data collection for an AMT.

 

[b-turner]

On the issue of the translator invasion:

There are certain requirements the FCC sets for where and if a translator can happen at a certain spot. The rules allow this. Some, it seems, feel because a translator interferes with their DXing, it must be illegal or at least immoral.

The people/organizations that are applying for these stations are doing so and getting granted. It doesn't matter if they have 1 or 10, it is okay if they meet the rules and to do that they get approved and licensed by the FCC. What it boils down to, there are doers and talkers. The doers do it. The talkers talk about it and some of the talkers become complainers, I suppose, because they weren't a doer and missed out. Any qualified person can have a translator.

There are lots of reasons for having a translator. In fact, with the non-commercial broadcaster, there is a certain amount of horsetrading that happens. You might get a station in an area that does not make sense for them, so might another group, so they trade to get that worked out.

For certain, the translator invasion is not over. It is just getting started. For some places, there might be nothing left on the dial. I suspect by the end of the filings, that list of places will be much longer. There will be losers and winners.

Translators are leased, bought and sold. Any entity that chooses to will lease buy or file for a translator if they have a purpose to do so. You actually can lease or buy a translator and you can choose the station it rebroadcasts within FCC Rules.

 

[latinoradio]

Well said B-turner!

 

[TheBigA]

For certain, the translator invasion is not over. It is just getting started. For some places, there might be nothing left on the dial. I suspect by the end of the filings, that list of places will be much longer. There will be losers and winners.

And once again, the reason why there is so much competition for translators, why people are willing to spend money for these things, take the time and jump through hoops to move translators into Houston is because so many people still listen to OTA radio. If nobody was listening, as suggested in other posts, nobody would be spending money on translators.

 

[robertsez]

And once again, the reason why there is so much competition for translators, why people are willing to spend money for these things, take the time and jump through hoops to move translators into Houston is because so many people still listen to OTA radio. If nobody was listening, as suggested in other posts, nobody would be spending money on translators.

Bing!

 

[b-turner]

That's absolutely true. There is a bit of faith involved for AM stations hoping their FM translator might actually help a little bit. For some it will a great deal and for others perhaps not much at all. Still, even broadcasters don't invest in what people don't listen to. Just like the bank (and maybe much worse than that loan officer) every dollar going out of that radio station bank account is carefully scrutinized for the return it will offer when it is spent.