Sponsor (Jan-Apr 1958)

ARB area studies rather than projecting ratings to a coverage base. Going "beyond the numbers," the survey found a considerable interest in qualitative data among panelists. Most important was audience composition. Interestingly, audience composition data was used by nearly all buyers in the purchase of announcements; 96% said they used it either "always" or ■•frequently" in this type of buy. Furthermore, about 75% felt audience composition was important enough to be included regularly on availability sheets. Five other qualitative factors were mentioned frequently. These were: 1 1 ) personality cooperation, ( 2 ) merchandising services, (3) station prestige, (4) sales success stories and (5) mail pull data. Their relative importance differed a little between the larger and smaller agencies. The percent of buyers who said they could "usually" be influenced by these five factors were as follows: Among the larger agency group — 50$ could usually be influenced by personality cooperation, 43% by merchandising services, 37% by station prestige, 27% by sales success stories and 16%) by mail pull data. Among the smaller agency group — Of, by personality cooperation, 59% 1>\ merchandising services, 50% by sales success stories, 46% by station prestige and 33% by mail pull data. In addition to specific questions on ratings, the questionnaire gave panelists a chance to sound off on the use and validity of ratings. More than three out of four panelists took the opportunity to get something off their chests. Most of these signed their questionnaires. As a matter of fact, out of the total of 326 returns received by the tabulation cut-off date, only 22 preferred anonymity. The general responses fell into three categories: • A small minority believe in buying by the numbers. This group considers ratings honest and claim they provide, says NBC, "the only method of justifying business decisions in unfamiliar markets. They feel that strict adherence to ratings is likely to produce sales results with far greater consistency than guesswork or contradictory station and representative claims." • A small minority took exactly the opposite tack. This group says that using ratings as an absolute measure ( Please turn to page 63) 22 march 1958 TV VIEWING IN FEBRUARY UP OVER 1957. IS RECESSION THE REASON? A striking increase in tv viewing during February compared with the same month last year is shown by the latest ARB setsin-use tally. A rundown of hourly averages during February's first week shows viewing hikes in practically every daytime segment in each time zone. While there has been no probing to see whether unemployment is spurring daytime viewing, it remains a strong possibility. ^ Average tv sets-in-use by time zones, Feb. 1958 Monday thru Friday daytime Eastern Central Pacific Total U.S. Time 1958 1957 1958 1957 1958 1957 1958 1957 7:00 AM 7.1 7.8 10.2 9.7 4.4 2.5 3.9 4.4 8:00 16.7 15.8 19.1 17.0 8.0 8.3 11.9 11.8 9:00 14.3 13.7 21.6 17.9 13.7 11.3 13.9 12.8 10:00 17.5 16.4 24.6 21.8 13.8 10.5 17.0 15.0 11:00 22.1 19.3 22.7 22.3 20.6 17.6 20.8 18.5 12:00 Noon 21.7 22.7 22.7 17.9 23.2 19.2 20.7 20.8 1:00 PM 15.8 13.0 21.9 18.3 18.8 16.1 17.8 14.0 2:00 15.5 14.3 20.4 17.8 13.5 11.4 18.3 16.0 3:00 22.2 17.0 25.8 21.9 16.3 11.1 21.6 17.5 4:00 29.0 25.6 30.9 25.4 20.9 17.4 26.4 23.0 5:00 31.8 36.4 38.5 37.0 30.7 32.9 28.8 29.6 Sunday thru Saturday evening 6:00 PM 41.5 37.8 54.1 49.9 54.8 43.8 35.7 34.6 7:00 55.7 52.3 70.1 66.8 69.1 60.7 50.8 47.4 8:00 52.2 68.6 71.8 68.0 73.5 66.3 56.5 63.5 9:00 68.9 65.5 62.0 62.3 66.9 60.8 68.4 63.7 10:00 54.3 53.6 34.2 33.4 44.8 42.6 59.2 57.4 11:00 25.4 22.8 16.0 15.0 20.1 16.5 35.5 32.2 12:00 Midnight 13.6 10.5 3.5 4.3 6.9 5.4 21.8 18.fi :iiiji!!iii!!: ■.:..'. .:..:.:.. .1.7...