Sponsor (Jan-June 1951)

\ X Things are really jumping at WKOWCBS where National Advertising sales have jumped over 100% within six months. Smart advertisers know that only WKOW's 10,000 watts cover the big, rich dairyland where there are buckets of "moo-la" just for the asking. To jump your sales in Wisconsin you need both WKOW power and WKOW coverage. WISCONSIN'S ONLY* 10,000 WATT STATION 1070 K.C. MADISON, WIS. Represented by Head ley-Reed Company port asks the general Industry, with a capital "I," to pay the tab, and it suggests: "It is the hope of the committee that the Broadcast Audience Measurement will undertake to set up the machinery for implementing the plan in the report." SPONSOR, in making an intensive survey of the situation, met with a divergency of suggestions from people in the industry. But it was most uniformly agreed that it should be a joint effort, paid for equally by the networks, stations, station representatives, advertising agencies, and even the research organizations— and with sponsors having their representation on the joint industry-wide committee. Either Dr. Baker or Dr. Forrest Whan (who conducts annual in-home and out-of-home listening studies for WIBW, Topeka. WHO, Des Moines, and other Midwest stations) were recommended as project managers. Here are some typical reactions from individuals queried by SPONSOR: John W. Clissold, sales director, Anahist Company. Inc.: "It sounds like a good idea. But broadcasters in the main should pay the bill, with the advertisers having a voice on the final committee through their agencies. Avoid, at all costs, researchers dominating the project. The slide rule boys quibble too much." Donald Stewart, advertising manager, the Texas Company: "There is a danger that the project would be virtually asking many of the research services to cut their own throats. But if a study would serve to standardize audience measurement, I'm for it. The broadcasters and ad agencies ought to foot the bill, since they're the ones who sell ratings to the sponsors. But the sponsors should have representation on the final evaluating committee." Mel Goldberg, research director, DTN: "I don't think its a Utopian concept at all, if there is co-operative action. Certainly, there ought to be enough brains in the industry to devise one acceptable audience measuring stick. The networks, stations, research bureaus, and ad agencies should contribute toward the $140,000.*' Ernest Lamoureux. business manager of the research department. McCann-Erickson, Inc.: "Though I have my doubts whether the industry is willing to get together on this, it's a step in the right direction. The networks and stations should foot most of the bill to achieve a standardized rating. A timebuyer of a leading agency : "The acceptable techniques should be narrowed down to tyvo — one for national measurement, one for local. For example, in Indianapolis, the telephone coincidental technique is cheapest, but on a national scale it seems impractical. If this project could achieve eiri illation standardization, just as the BMB did. then the broadcasters should pay most of the $140,000. with other elements of the industry also kicking in money and time. The 4A's, and the ANA should work on it with the NAB.'" William R. Seth, vice president and account executive, Needham & Grohmann. Inc.: "With rating chaos in radio and chaos compounded in TV, the Baker project could be a godsend. The research services should contribute toward the $140,000, as each is trying to establish itself as the No. 1 service. Also, the networks and stations — the sellers of time — should pay their share." SPONSOR found others — largely rep UNGWRW sm ™oG,UMS SEU cl.OTH»NG* LANG-WORTH FEATURE PROGRAMS, Inc. 113 W. 57th ST., NEW YORK 19. N. Y. Mduvrk Calibre Programs at Coral Station Cost 64 SPONSOR