U. S. Radio (Jan-Dec 1960)

question and answers THE QUESTION: GEORGE C. NEUMANN, VICE PRESIDENT GOOD HIIMOR CORP., NEW YORK: Today we are wrapped in a radio rating complex uliidi gives lis pages ol tonlliding results. Yet, there seems to be no major movement to rcalh soI\e the situation. The need is clear, especially with so many new stations operating and each evolving its own listenei profile. Cone arc the days when the buyer could apply his own knowledge of network shows to the majority of outlets. In today's tighter market he must have reliable local inIcjrmation. How can you criticize him when he jilans to purchase time in a city and finds that just about every station is in first place? And each representative has figures to Would a central rating system he practical? prove his claim. .Since the outlets are ecpial in standing, he liirns to rates. Piicc becomes the measure. .\n iiidiisiry sponsored service nuisl be made practical. There is too much national billing at stake ii it is not. .Media dollars are being justified lar more closely today by ageiu ics and achertisers, and indications are that this "auditing" will comnuie to increase. The problem seems as nuich a human as a technical one. The various services were born to fill specific needs: Speed, lower cost, depth of breakdown, coverage. Each system argues in its defense so that no compromise seems apparent from this direction. Stations, fighting lor budgets in a highly competitive market, invariably lavor the service which rales I hem best. There seems little chance of initiating reform here, or ihiough groups (he stations control. I believe the only practical way to lick this ])roblem is through the major advertising agencies. They badly need a reliable measiiremeiU of local listenership. Many technical problems exist: Sampling, speed, depth of information. But the industry's combined experience in the field should find solutions once the initiative is taken. MARVIN RICHFIELD, MEDIA DIRECTOR ERWIN WASEY, RUTHRAUFF & RYAN INC., N.Y.: First, let's examine whether or not a real need exists for improved radio research information. I believe the radio industry should sponsor a central rating service, .\pparently, the existing rating services do not go far enough. Current research is misleading to clients and agencies, not on a basis of honesty, but on a basis of technique. Advertisers are less interested in counting ears and dividing by two than in reaching sales prospects. They know radio "works," but they aren't certain that cost-per-prospec t in terms of actual sales is competitive to other media. They would like to know who listens to what and how many sales will result from the act of listening. How much would a central rating system cost and who would pay for it? I feel certain that radio stations and their representatives, together with leading advertising agencies, would find that a tiny percentage of total billing would be more than adequate for the task. The cost would be more than offset by a resulting rise in national billings. • • • 44 U. S. RADIO November 1960