Sponsor (Oct-Dec 1963)

II it m Ih ML JB ■I 111 ] 1 ] A.R.F. Ratings pervade the industry and are a basic buying /selling aid with any waste resulting frcjin duplication of effort, harmful. As part of the ARF agenda, Charles P. Howze, Jr., chief counsel of the special House subcommittee, charged that there seems to be "at least among some broadcasters and advertising people, a great reluctance to concede that the role of the rating services is as pervasive in American broadcasting as I am persuaded it is." He also said there was a wide disparity between the sample designed at company headquarters and the panel actually being sampled; there is a "susceptibility to manipulation" through the practioe of "hypoing," and that when the field work is complete, "all kinds of fascinating things happen" ( editing, weighting, averaging, etc. ) . Fallibility of ratings And looking to ranges, Howze said: "I have been wondering lateh' whether it might be a good idea for researchers to consider changing the format of rating reports to dramatize the fact of statistical variance. There are quite a few sophisticated users of ratings who understand the fallibility of absolute numbers, but I fear they are hopelessh outnumbered by those who don't." And commenting on so-called "trade secrets," Howze said "we have an analogous problem in the federal government. In that great sprawling enigma, the Pentagon, a bad habit has grown up that might be called "classifying" mistakes. Whenever events happen that make a document embarrassing to whoever was responsible for it, the temtation is strong to regard it, all of a sudden, as 'top secret.' Howze also referred to the results of the Securities Act of 1933 which insured "the a\ailability of reliable information for those investors who take the trouble to keep their eyes and minds open b- 26 fore they plunk down their money ... I hope that advertisers and broadcasters can profit from the lessons taught by the securities legislation of 30 years ago. I bring the subject up only to indicate that needed changes are not always so painful as they may seem at first." In its full statement, ARF noted it was "consulting with the Radio Advertising Bureau on a $200,000 project which will evaluate several measurement techniques . . ." Such consultation in the past, it is noted has been normal procedure in instances where ARF approval for a project's methods was sought, and does not imply RAB endorsement of the new ARF plan. Researchers themselves, were quick to comment, since they appeared on the ARF agenda immediately following the announcement. ARB's director, James W. Seiler, called it the best news in a long time, "excellent" . . . "couldn't support it more." A. C. Nielsen, Jr. was somewhat more reserved. "We may not see eve to eve with ARF on every detail, but if deeds reallv speak louder than words, I think we can be rated as vociferous rooters for the principle of researching research." But he also noted, that his compan\^ had alreadx acted upon "all four of the broadcast-audience measurement questions given as examples for future study." Researcher Politz speaks out "Let's not be too dogmatic about what should be or shouldn't be" was the ad\ice from .\lfred Politz. "I believe the farther the .\RF steers away from such ad\ice, the more it will contribute to the progress of media research." While sa\ing "the last thing we need is a further proliferation of methodologieal studies," W. R. Simmons said AHF could do the job best, and liad no "conflict of interest" as in sewral other instances 1 m The ARF The primary needs in ence measurement todr for the development ( ceptable research star within the present stat the art of advertising re: and the fulfillment of a ing need for scientific u gation into the method problems of audience urement. These needs e the measurements for zines, newspapers, radii television. ARF's future policies In the future, theref will be the policy of tf vertising Research Fc tion to concentrate a part of its activities in audience measurements conduct of mediodol studies designed to in techniques and advanc standards of audience urements. With the rapid exp of syndicated services audience measurement the ARF has already pn facilities for the anaK established individual ices, when voluntari quested by the service i anticipated that this m* \\hich in the long ru contribute to better an : measurement, will exp : the future. Research leaders on to I lowever, the cr\ si tion of specific sta through scientific in\ tion into methodoh problems not onl\' repi a fertile field for ii' progress, but is also p larly adaptable to the ties which ARF can p This organization cai heavily on all the res of our research comi which reflects a broat [losite of professional SPONSOR/7 OCTOBER 196;