Sponsor (Apr-June 1964)

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.

RADIO BUYING OUTLOOK 1964 TIME SPENT LISTENING TO RADIO In 1964 cur you planning to I radio more, about the same, less than in 1963° Compari-d with a y cm nrjo do you I that pi-oplf In your mortal or* li to radio now more th< scim< !•«•? SEVEN MARKET COMPOSITE DATA INDIVIDUAL MARKET DATA •"• 5*-. • acs Lni About ' SEVEN MARKET COMPOSITE DATA r INDIVIDUAL MARKET DATA JOTE Differences between 100°o and the sum of the data for each market is the extent of non response S his Music." rhese local •pinions arc expected to supply t-of-town buyers with an analsis they can respect. I Ik use of production devices eh as sound effects for news and .i\> use of call letters has long a subject of discussion. Smith sked his respondents: "Do VOU tlievc these devices 'help.' "hinder' Tiave no effect' on the commer4.1I impact of the si.it ion's advertisNine devices were listed: )pen Mike"' sho\s s. heavy use of ersonal appearances (by station ersonalities), listener contests. etvy use of call letters, sound efCtS for news. I he response \aried om market to market in these five categories. In lour other categories, the great majority of respondents in all markets either expressed no opinion or believed those devices had DO effect. I he one device a majority agreed "hindered" the commercial effect was "sound effects tor news " On the other hand. a majority agreed that "Open Mike" shows "help" commercial impact \ encj people had little difficulty associating specific production devices with particular stations in their market Moving into the important news element, the media people « asked a two-part question "In your judgment, which radio station in your city does the b '-<'// job of news? Has the most capable and active /"<i>/ news department?*1 In every market examined, one or two stations dominated the chok I nderstandably, the stations which stood out m news s almost universally rated high with the media people when they wi .isked "In your judgment which radio station in >our market ; forms the greatest service to your community? Which one divs the most effective editorializing In addition to the individual market studies, the Smith study combined information from the ious markets into a composite Taking questions which pr> lly applk s »y 11 1964