Sponsor (Jan-June 1952)

Pin Up Shoot YOUR EVERYDAY GUIDE TO CURRENT SONG HITS The broadcaster faces a dailv challenge of providing the best in recorded musical entertainment. To help meet this challenge BMI issues its monthly "Pin Up" sheet of BMI-licensed songs which can honestly be classed as Hit Tunes. Most broadcasting stations keep the BMI "Pin Up" sheet prominently posted as a convenient reference. Complete record information is provided, as well as a handy calendar listing dates and events mportant to broadcasters. // you'd like your own personal copy — write to BMI Promotion Dept. BROADCAST MUSIC, INC. 580 FIFTH AVE., NEW YORK 19 110,700 TV SETS IN THE QUAD-CITY AREA lained In Quad Citv wholesalers serving this area. Actualh. the total of I V homes reached In \\ II It I I \ is cc.nsideiahU lamer as out I V signals / the Brorb] study, these were the figures which sent NARTSR racing to a calculating machine: \l it MED] \ M I 1>Y 1941 1951 1952 "1 ime Cost Index Inn 167 171 (oveianc Index 100 132 110 ( ..si pei \l Index 100 127 155 It's of interest to note some additional remarks by Brorby on the subject of daytime radio. His base index of 100, as earlier, is for the year 1941. "The time cost index for daytime network is very little different for daytime from that of nighttime. Instead of 123 for the year 1952, it is 121. The coverage index, however, is very different for daytime as against nighttime. For example, instead of 132, which is the nighttime network index figure for 1951. we have an index of 195 for daytime radio. For 1952. this becomes 179 instead of nighttime's 110. "These sharp differences result principally from the known fact that setsin-use have not fallen off for daytime as much as for nighttime, due to TV. Also, during these past four years, there has been a trend upwards in daytime audiences due to better daytime programing. "The cost-per-1,000 index figures likewise are very different for daytime. Instead of the evening 1951 index of 96, we come up with 64 for daytime; 67 for 1952 instead of 112. Thus, for the past year, daytime network radio time costs are down less than 4' ', . hut coverage is off 8'/, , accounting for a cost-per-1,000 increase of 5%. This compares with a cost-per-1,000 rise of 16' < for nighttime from 1951 to 1952." The differences of opinion which exist between NARTSR and the Brorby report are not necessarily the kind that exist between two radically different schools of thought. They are more a matter of interpretation of similar figures from different viewpoints. However, as Brorby pointed out to the AAAA, and later the ANA, "statistical data can only provide a springboard for the use of seasoned judgment — judgment to be sure which may be sharpened by an awareness of facts." And. as he stated in his summary, "it takes more dollars today to make a product and to sell it. But the target is bigger, and the advertiser must decide how best to allocate all costs to meet today's competition — and to maximize profits." It may take more ad dollars to buytoday's spot radio, but the medium has proved its value. • • • TVCOMMERICALS (Continued from page 29 i within the time given to a commercial. 9. While the word count per minute of TV commercials depends on the text and the announcers' capabilities and st\lc. most of them tend to run too fast, or. to put it in Starch language. "good" commercials tend toward a slower word count than "poor" ones. 10. Last, but not least, it must be emphasized that "good" commercials usually make the video aspects dominant over the audio. A TV commercial is not a radio commercial on film. Starch finds that this fact has been a hard lesson for admen to learn but they're catching on gradually as they learn the feel of the medium. It should not be inferred that these rules apply to any and all TV commercials; they are considered guide posts by the Starch researchers. Every commercial presents unique problems that must be taken into account: time of <la\. type of program, type of listener, t\pe of product. Nevertheless, the Starch people feel that their comparative analysis technique has a great deal of validity and their faith in it has been confirmed by the passage of time and results obtained. Before shoving off into TV waters, Daniel Starch and Staff was well known for its magazine readership studies. They have been doing this work for 20 years for a number of the leading consumer magazines. During this period, among other things, they have studied every issue of the Saturday Evening Post and Collier's. There is no similarity in technique between the magazine readership studies and the Starch analysis of TV commercials, although some of the knowledge gained by magazine ad analysis has been applied. When the Starch organization first considered entering the TV field, it queried a cross section of advertising leaders to find out what they wanted to know most about commercials. According to a Starch prospectus explaining their evaluation of TV commercials: "Almost unanimously, expressed in one way or another, was the demand for a measurement of the selling effectiveness of commercials. It was felt that audience reaction on the likedislike scale was a very uncertain guide, and that self-conscious responses in terms of memorability and believabil SPONSOR