Broadcasting Telecasting (Jan-Mar 1958)

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.




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.

ADVERTISERS & AGENCIES c ONTINUED rather than "refreshing." Furthermore, alter Dr. Dichter's findings were collated, the ageaC} believed that late afternoon radio, rather than tv spots, would do a better job inasmuch as it could reach the housewife in time for her to prepare pitchers of iced tea for supper. The resultant jingle. "Why don't sou have iced tea more often'.'" proved to be so successful that WIBC Indianapolis found to Us surprise the jingle appeared on the top ten request list one Saturday morning. Since then, the council has stuck to radio for iced tea and television for hot tea. I he latter still needed further researching. In 1956, the council research director. Dr. Hans Zeisel. together with Burnett's Vice President-Account Supervisor Guy Saffold, Account Executive Charles Derring, Tea Council Executive Director Gerard L. Brant and his advertising director. John M. Anderson, sat down to map out yet another research project. Conducted by Columbia U. and titled "They Changed to Tea," it was an exhaustive six-month survey of 1,800 New Yorkers who had switched from coffee to tea. This motivational studv provided the ammunition the council now is shooting at its beverage rivals via tv. Of 3.8 U. S. members of the Tea Council, six also are in the coffee-packaging business. An executive at one of these firms is realistic about the Tea Council's efforts, feels that "to protest would come to no avail and furthermore would show a deploring lack of business sense. We can't afford to spend money on trv ing to keep people from switching, and furthermore, who says that a tea drinker must keep away from an occasional cup of coffee?" Hi-Fi Component Makers Plan Tv Series in 15 Top Markets Leading high-fidelity component manufacturers will join hands to underwrite a series of filmed classical and operatic music programs on tv stations in 15 major cities starting in March, it was announced last week hv Henry Goldsmith, president of Rigo Enterprises Inc.. a hi-fi exposition manager. Titled The High-Fidelity Industry Presents, the series was culled from a selection of over 100 musical films from various sources and was obtained through BarryGrafman & Assoc., Chicago, distributor. Commercial copy for four or five hi-fi manufacturers-sponsors is being prepared by Murray-McCarthy Assoc., Denver advertising agency, Mr. Goldsmith reported. Among components represented are record-changers, turntables, tuners, amplifiers, recorders, speakers, enclosures and tapes. The series, designed for Sunday afternoon televiewing, scheduled to start on K.DKA-TV Pittsburgh March 2 and will be carried later in the month, according to Mr. Goldsmith, on WATV (TV) Newark, N. J.; WGN-TV Chicago: KABC-TV Los Anseles; KSAN-TV San Francisco; WTTG (TV) Washington. D. C; KSD-TV St Louis; WTCN-TV Minneapolis; WGR-TV Buffalo, N. Y.: WXIX (TV) Milwaukee: KMBC-TV Kansas City: WJZ-TV Baltimore, Md.; WKRC-TV Cincinnati: KOMO-TV Seattle. Wash.: KBTV (TV) Denver. REVISED PGW 'SPOT RADIO GUIDE' AIDS AGENCY'S MEDIA STRATEGY lo the timebuyer. plans board executive or media strategist who needs a quick guide to costs of radio spot, there's helpful news from Peters, Griffin, Woodward, station representative. And to radio people everywhere a newlyrevised PGW booklet oilers some heavy ammunition as to the economy and savings provided by their advertising medium. PGW is coming out this week with a second edition of its "Spot Radio Pocket Guide," first issued in May 1955. The booklet is prepared with two goals in mind: (1) to assist the timebuyer and also the agency executive unfamiliar with spot radio in planning media strategy and ( 2 ) to promote spot radio and its use. How valuable is the PGW guide? For one thing, it places Nielsen Coverage Service (NCS No. 2) in perspective, that is, in terms of money and markets. The guide can be a touchstone to national coverage potentials and maximum cost estimates for planning national spot radio campaigns via daytime or nighttime schedules. As noted in PGW's second edition (the first was issued in 1955): "The fundamental purpose ... is to continue to give agencies and advertisers a means of comparing 97% of U. S. potential coverage via spot radio with circulation patterns and costs of a national magazine, a newspaper list or radio or television networks." The second edition makes it possible for the user to estimate time costs in relation to geographic extent of coverage, using stations in any number of top metropolitan areas, grouped up to 168 (161 areas in 1955). with an acceptable degree of accuracy. The "Spot Radio Pocket Guide" will be distributed to advertisers and agencies. The booklet covers 168 large and small "metropolitan areas," in population rank, as determined by the U. S. Census Bureau. The areas of audited coverage — figured separately for daytime and nighttime according to NCS No. 2 compilation — include 45.629.690 radio homes daytime, and 45.103,090 radio homes nighttime or 97.1% and 96%, respectively, of the 46,990,860 total U. S. radio homes. I he stations used were selected by Nielsen and generally are those with the largest circulation and highest rate in each market; all estimates reflect maximum costs. The guide cautions it does not intend to show "exact and accurate costs regardless of which station might be used in each market." It also is noted that the guide is not meant as a timebuying "tool" but as a pattern for estimating coverage and schedules to fit nearly any strategic or budgetary requirement. Pointed up: coverage summaries by states provided in the booklet show unduplicated coverage and "homes covered" again are total unduplicated radio homes in a measured county. (While a given county might have coverage from only one station of the 50 markets listed, it might have coverage from three or four stations on a 168-market basis. Coverage of only one station [that is. with the highest Nielsen level] in each county is credited in total coverage figures.) The first section groups the 168 largest U. S. metropolitan areas according to population rank into 50-, 75-, 100-. 125 and 168-market lists, summing up with this basic data: number of radio homes covered both daytime and nighttime and percentages, respectively, of total U. S. radio homes; cost of minute announcements day and night on the basis of 10, 20 or 30 announcements per week (chainbreaks approximately 20% less). In addition, costs for individual market groups are included in each market section. These permit determination of about how much money it takes to increase a market list, say from 50 to 75. 75 to 100, etc. SAMPLE SCHEDULES DAYTIME MINUTES Costs^ were determined from published rates of the "highest rate station" in each market— taking frequency and package" combinations into consideration. Thus, it is possible to estimate campaign costs with the knowledge u \ i £°Stl Wn are most likely t0 be maximum< and that in many cases economies can be achieved once a schedule has been determined and individual radio stations selected through regular media department practices. 10 Daytime Minutes per week 20 Daytime Minutes per week 30 Daytime Minutes per week Pace 52 March 1958 Homes Wo. of Covered % U.S. Markets (Millions) Total 13 Weeks 26 Weeks 52 Weeks 50 37 80.1 $190,621 $ 381,243 $ 762,486 75 41 87.9 238,869 477,739 955,479 100 43 93.1 277,750 555,500 1,111,000 125 44 95.7 305,667 611,335 1,222,670 168 45 97.1 352,727 705,455 1,410,910 50 37 80.1 330,275 660,550 1,321,101 75 41 87.9 414,960 829,920 1,659,840 100 43 93.1 481,460 962,920 1,925,840 125 44 95.7 533,304 1,066,608 2,133,216 168 45 97.1 615,726 1,231,453 2,462,907 50 37 80.1 449,514 899,028 1,798,056 .75 41 87.9 567,918 1,135,836 2,271,672 100 43 93.1 657,945 1,315,891 2,631,782 125 44 95.7 728,449 1,456,899 2,913,799 168 45 97.1 842,766 1,685,533 3,371,066 Broadcasting