Weekly television digest (Jan-Dec 1963)
Reading and Downloading:
Record Details:
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!
Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.
Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.
View OCR Text
We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
NEW SERIES VOL. 3 No. 17
TELEVISION DIGEST-9
ilies in areas comprising total of 2.9 million households. Most interviewing was conducted during last 3 weeks of Oct. 1962.
TV study covers all sets-in-use in homes of interviewed families, which therefore reflects yearly changes in brand preferences only slightly. Rankings aren't necessarily representative of country as whole, showing ownership only in markets surveyed. Survey does show variations in regional brand preferences.
Tabulations of TV ownership rank 13 brands according to percentage of households owning them in markets covered. Survey isn't directly comparable with last year's (Vol. 2:19 p7), because of different markets covered. Last year's study tallied 17 markets, including 4 not represented this year. Two new markets have been added this year — Des Moines (survey results represent entire state of Iowa) and West Palm Beach.
RCA was listed as top brand-in-use in all but 2 markets. Like last year. Zenith & Philco were first in one market each. Here are top-place ronkiags by ownership, with last year's figures as general guide:
RCA ranked first in 13 markets, 2nd in 2 Gast year first in 15 and 2nd in 2). Zenith, first in one, 2nd in 5, 3rd in 6, didn't rank below 6th place in any market Qast year, first in one, 2nd in 3, 3rd in 6). Philco was first in one, 2nd in 4, 3rd in 2, didn't rank below 7th in any market Gast year, first in one, 2nd in 3, 3rd in one).
Admiral was 2nd in 2 markets, 3rd in 4, didn't rank below 7th in any market Gast year, 2nd in 4, 3rd in 4). GE was 2nd in 2, 3rd in 2, didn't rank below 7th Gast year, 2nd in 3, 3rd in one). Motorola was 3rd in one market, some as last year.
For direct comparisons of sets-in-use ratings with past surveys, check your back files of Television Digest— 1962 (Vol. 2:19 p7), 1961 (Vol. 17:28 pl5), 1960 (Vol. 16:35 pll), 1959 (Vol. 15:26 pl6), 1958 (Vol. 14:28 pl2), 1957 (Vol. 13:40 plO).
More detailed tabulations of brand preferences in individual markets (including, in some cases, radio <Sr stereo brands as well as TV) will be found in Consumer Analysis reports published by each of the CCA member papers. These participating newspapers will supply copies of own areas' analysis on request: Denver Post, Des Moines Register & Tribune, Duluth Herald & News-Tribune, Honolulu Star-Bulletin & Advertiser, Indianapolis Star & News, Long Beach Independent Press-Telegram, Milwaukee Journal & Sentinel, Omaha World-Herald, Pensacola Journal & News, Phoenix Arizona Republic & Gazette, Providence Journal-Bulletin, Salt Lake Tribune & Deseret News-Telegram, St. Paul Dispatch-Pioneer Press, Palm Beach Post & Times, Wichita Eagle & Beacon.
Television Set Ownership in 15 Markets, 1963
(See story above)
Copyright 1963, Consolidated Consumer Analysis Newspapers. Reprinted by Permission.
CITY
ICA
Victor
Zenith
Philco
Admirol
General
Electric
Motorola
Silvertone
Pockard*
Bell
Emerson
Westlnghouse
Magnavox
Sylvanio
Hoffmon
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Place %
Denver
1.
18.1
2.
li9
6.
8.7
4.
12.0
5.
11.1
3.
12.7
8.
5.1
7.
5.7
10.
4.0
12.
3.6
13.
3.5
15.
2.6
16.
2.1
Des Moines (u
1.
16.5
3.
10.9
2.
11.8
5.
8.2
6.
7.8
4.
10.2
9.
3.3
12.
2.5
7.
4.4
13.
2.3
8.
3.9
17.
1.1
Duluth-Superior
1. 25.5
5.
8.3
3.
9.6
4.
1
8.4
r—
2.
17.3
9.
5.1
10.
4.3
6.
6.9
8.
5.4
11.
2.5
18.
1.2
Honolulu
2.
20.2
1.
20.3
5.
8.7
7.
7.6
3.
13.8
6.
8.5
4.
11.0
9.
3.7
10.
3.2
11.
3.1
12.
1.7
8.
5.8
Indianapolis
1.
19.8
3.
10.5
4.
9.6
2.
15.4
5.
7.0
6.
6.5
8.
4.4
9.
3.6
10.
2.3
7.
4.6
' Long Beach
1.
21.2
2.
13.8
7.
8.7
4.
11.2
3.
11.3
10.
5.4
5.
10.4
6.
10.2
11.
2.7
13.
2.5
9.
7.2
14.
2.0
8.
8.4
^ Milwaukee
1.
27.6
3.
14.9
5.
9.7
2. 18.6
6.
7.3
4.
10.4
7.
5.5
10.
2.5
9.
3.2
8.
3.9
10.
2.5
Omaha
1.
22.7
3.
14.6
2,
16.7
6.
9.0
4.
10.1
4.
10.1
7.
5.1
9.
4.3
10.
3.0
8.
5.0
16.
1.2
18.
1.1
Pensacola
1.
22.8
3.
16.9
2.
18.2
5.
9.6
7.
8.0
4.
11.5
6.
8.4
9.
2.3
10.
1.8
10.
1.8
8.
2.6
Phoenix
1.
11.1
4.
9.2
7.
5.5
3.
9.8
2.
10.7
5.
7.0
8.
5.3
9.
4.6
6.
6.6
11.
3.7
10.
4.0
12.
3.3
1.3.
3.2
Providence
2.
12.0
3.
10.7
1.
12.4
4.
10.4
7.
6.4
6.
9.4
12.
2.4
5.
9.7
8.
4.2
9.
3.6
11.
.3.1
. Salt Lake City
1.
18.2
6.
7.5
2.
13.2
3.
11.9
4.
11.8
5.
8.2
8.
5.2
9.
4.9
13.
2.8
7.
6.1
11.
4.5
12.
4.0
10.
4.6
St. Paul
1.
23.8
2.
13.9
5.
9.7
3.
12.5
4.
11.9
5.
9.7
19.
1.1
13.
2.0
10.
3.4
9.
3.7
17.
1.3
West Palm Beach
1.
24.4
2.
15.4
3.
12.5
7.
5.6
5.
8.0
5.
8.0
4.
8.7
10.
4.3
11.
2.7
7.
5.6
1.3.
1.9
Wichita
1.
13.7
2.
11.2
4.
8.4
3.
10.6
6.
7.2
5.
7.7
8.
4.4
19.
1.0
10.
3.3
7.
4.6
1.3.
1.9
9.
4.0
(I) All figures arc for the state of Iowa.