Sponsor (Jan-June 1953)

r CBS IN THE LAND MILKandtjQNEY WBAY GREEN BAY 5,000 WATTS Same old story in Rochester . . . WHEC WAY OUT AHEAD! Consistent audience rating leader since 1943. WHEC ROCHESTER, N.Y./// 3,000 WATTS \ *«pr«i«nfafr'v»i ... IVillTT-McKINNir. Inc., N«w Tarh, Chlc.g. LII f. O'CONNI U CO , L.i Angtl*., S-n Franclic* by 30. And then go on and make good that brag. It is hardly likely today, under present taxation. Hardly likely. Heck, it can't be done." The underlying question has been put recently in a two-part article in Printers' Ink. Ira W. Rubel, financial consultant to agency owners, asks "Why Don't Agency People Want To Work?" Interestingly, Rubel casts doubt upon ordinary bonus plans, profit-sharing plans, pension plans, and even stock options. He advocates instead more authority for account executives under a service control scheme designed to "recreate" incentive. * * * Such discussions as the foregoing always come full circle round, ending where, properly, they always begin, with human nature. For all that some of the old rugged individualists scoff at a craving for security as a "feminine" trait unworthy of the old pioneer traditions, the modern guy does not want to play the game blind. And if his desire for some security from snakepit in-fighting is an echo of the "feminine," it may be that he prefers to stay married to his present wife. • • • MEDIA BASICS {Continued from page 48) And as a comparison with that, determine how many people read not the best ad in a magazine but the lead editorial feature. The Starch organization won't give out any figures on specific magazines tested for editorial content, but it agrees that a figure of 60% for the number of people who read any article or story in a general magazine is high. Applying this 60% to the gross magazine audience figures, where obtainable, and comparing them with the best programs on radio and TV, you work out a table showing this fact: The top programs on three TV networks outrank Life, but the latter has a greater audience than any leading radio show.* The above of course is no longer in the realm of science but merely a rough comparison. For an even rougher estimate of "ad noters" for print media and "commercial noters" for air media, you divide the figures above by half. And to confuse yourself further, you *3. PEOPLE REACHED BY EDITORIAL CONTENT (Lead article or story vs. best program) Au iience^ Ran k Medium Programj (Millions) 1 CBS TV I Love Lucy 38.9 2 NBC TV Colgate Comedy Hour 31.3 3 ABC TV Lone Ranger 19.0 4 Life Lead article 18.5 5 CBS Radio Jack Benny 17.8 6 This Week Lead article 13.1 7 Satevepost Lead article 11.7 8 Better Homes & Gardens Lead article 10.5 9 DuMont TV Bishop Sheen 10.5 10 NBC Radio Groucho Marx 8.2 11 Mutual Radio True Detective 8.1 12 ABC Radio Ozzie & Harriet 8.0 13 Time Lead article 2.1 tPrint audience figures are Crossley's for "Life," "Saturday Evening Post." and "Better Homes & Gardens.'-' Starch is used for 'Time" and "This Week." Air audience figures are based on Nielsen homes multiplied by Videodex, ARB. or Pulse persons-per-set figures for one specific week earlier in 1953. The persons-per-set range from 1.9 for Groucho Marx (radio) to 3.64 for "Colgate Comedy Hour" (TV). remember that Starch gives you three sets of figures for ad readers: (1) "noters," (2) "seen-associated." and (3) "read most." The statistical difference between the first and third grade of ad reading can be seen from a sample Starch study of a general weekly shown to SPONSOR. The two ads which attracted the most men "noters" each scored 61%. But only 33% of the men read most of one ad and only 10% read most of the other. The ad that attracted most women "noters" scored 67%, but only 11% of the women readers read most of it. The average ad has a rating of around 25%. There is nothing in radio or TV at the moment to compare with Starch, yet you recall wryly that air media never fail to compare gross audience figures for programs (editorial content) with Starch figures for advertisements. "This," one researcher told SPONSOR, "is like comparing saints and streetwalkers." "Of course," one network researcher added, "this does not apply to integrated commercials." Costs can't be compared: Since it's impossible at present to determine the total number of people (gross audience) who hear or see a specific commercial, it's therefore impossible to compare costs per ad impression in print and air media. Here's how Dr. Starch, who's been in the ad readership business for 21 years, explained it to sponsor: "You can't compare media dollar vs. dollar, for each represents a different value. Comparing them on a dollar basis would be like comparing shoes and overshoes, or a suit and an SPONSOR