Sponsor (Oct-Dec 1960)

RATINGS [Continued from page 35) Records" for local tv and radio stations with a rundown on how local merchants — presumably experts in the market — are spending their money. He suggested, too, that the local station or representative provide cumulative figures, which he terms "good sales-making ammunition.'" He contends that cume figures "deal more in a specific, in the household net coverage of an actual number reached rather than set counts, which represent only the potential audience or ratings which are mainly a yardstick of cost efficiency."" Commenting on the mountain of broadcast research, Matthews noted, "The print boys have sold circulation while broadcast is trying to evaluate it. This places broadcast at a handicap." Another difference cited by Matthews: "In broadcast you don't have a stable product. It varies from season to season, day to day, changes of scheduling to changes of scheduling. Publications have a fairly stable circulation, particularly where subscription is concerned."' He was one of the spokesmen most concerned about agency-client "control" in ratings research. "I feel very strongly that agencies and advertisers and the industry itself have put themselves in a questionable position in allowing private research organizations to determine the ways in which they're to receive information about what they are most concerned with: the scope and nature of the circulation of the medium." But Bumstead noted: "In order for us to take charge of directing how the rating services run their techniques, advertisers and agencies will have to pay the lion's share of the cost of these services rather than as at present when media usually pay the largest proportion of expense and sometimes influence the result." Discussing duplication of ratings services, Richfield of EWRR said the uses one service and doesn't think jit necessary "to subscribe to all that ;are available. And it's a downright (waste of money."' i The admen discussed their own (policies of subscribing to one or more ratings services, as well as the attendant discrepancies. But they seemed to igree that each service points out 'rends and general directions, even SPONSOR • 3 OCTOBER 1960 though the actual figures may be different, that can he weighted to form the basis of buying conclusions. Les Towne argued strongly in behalf of the small sample on which ratings are based. "If research companies were to raise the sample size, more people would feel that ratings are even more valid and we'd have more slide rule buving." No one, he said, thinks ratings are the one and only standard. Richfield felt the probability technique "is fundamentally correct and worthwhile, as accurate as a random sampling can be." Greig came out strong for radio, asserting. "Currently, surveys sell the radio industry very, very short." He wants duplication facts on radio to determine the reach potential. "Advertisers don't want to know they'll miss 60 ri of the homes in a market if they use only one radio station. They must know how many stations are required to reach 909? of the market. Then it is possible to make a comparison of costs, which could result in a budget for radio." Greig adds: "If you just measure homes, radio's going to look bad in relation to tv. But if you measure all the places that radios are you have about four times as many radios as tv sets." Most of the men were concerned with the frequency of rating projection, in which media representatives, particularly, project an isolated rating bevond reasonable limits. Commented Greig: "Projecting a rating outside the area in which it was made is done so often it's very shocking." The group cautioned media people to remember there are station-to-station and region-to-region differences, and that an established rating or tune-in pattern in one localitv is more often than not not typical of other stations or areas. Matthews summarized the point of ratings: "A rating service should be used as a relative circulation measurement. It should not be considered the answer to questions of advertising effectiveness, of the strength or appropriateness of the medium for a product purpose. Nor should it be used as a system of mathematics by which we determine whether we're getting values in c.p.m." Added Richfield: "It's no longer possible to achieve a rating that is far better than someone's else's. Things have leveled out." ^ IlTlitl JJ mwwm A legend in his own time. A personality without peer. Philosopher, story teller, news maker, catalyst, he brings to each listener an immediate sense of personal participation. As if that weren't enough, he just happens to be the greatest salesman in broadcasting history. In all radio, Godfrey is the kind of company you keep . . . raur ©SI BIS MI