Failure of Alternate Ratings System?

[MediaSavant]

What happens when you come up with a better ratings system, but the viewer won't cooperate? (from Medialifemagazine.com)

R.I.P.: Arbitron's Portable People Meter?

Can't find enough people to carry device around
By Kevin Downey

While still regarded by many media buyers as the next best device to measure television and radio audiences, Arbitron’s Portable People Meter has hit a snag that may prevent it from ever replacing aging measurement systems in this country.

After being tested in the Philadelphia market for one year, response rates are still too low for the mostly passive meter to go to market. That is according to Arbitron, which reported the finding in a paper released to coincide with the ongoing ESOMAR research conference.

Simply put, Arbitron is having trouble recruiting enough people to carry the device around and go through the bother of uploading the data. It's not an uncommon problem for research companies.

There are no plans for Arbitron to start using the PPM in the U.S., but attempts to improve the response rate will continue here while it is introduced into a number of international markets.

They may be more accepting of the device because they are less concerned with response rates abroad.

“Arbitron has joined with Nielsen Media Research to test recruitment methods to raise PPM response rates,” says Thom Mocarsky, vice president of communications at Arbitron.

The companies are conducting dual tests with results expected this summer.

“My sense is that a lot of people in the American advertising scene have given up on the PPM in America,” says Tony Jarvis, senior vice president and director of strategic insights at MediaCom. “That’s pretty sad. I think it will make it to market in the rest of the world, though.”

The PPM is a pager-sized device that picks up inaudible signals from TV, radio and the internet and is intended to replace the paper diaries now used to measure radio audiences and local TV’s demographic audiences.

“It’s not perfect, but in terms of what it does, it’s elegantly simple – measure the person, forget about the set,” says Jarvis.

Arbitron launched its test in the Philadelphia area in January 2002 – following a test in the U.K.-- and has worked in partnership with Nielsen to develop it.

The development of any new measurement system is never without its problems, and Arbitron has had its share, including a response rate that grew weaker as the test wore on.

While the panel recruitment rate in the first half of last year was 44.3 percent, it dipped to 38.9 percent in the second half of the year.

Arbitron attributes the falloff to a smaller pool of homes contacted later in the study. A large number of people were contacted to get the study off the ground, but the number fell as people were recruited to replace participants who fell out of the study.

At the same time response rates fell, Arbitron was able to improve the turnover rate, meaning the percentage of people who dropped out of the test. Early on nearly 13 percent of participants fell out of the study, but that slowed to roughly 6 percent later in the year.

The number of people who were actively being measured each day – the in-tab sample – was stable, with the percentage going from 74 to 75 percent later in the year.

While Arbitron is working out the problems it’s having with response rates, the data that resulted from the Philadelphia test, which was conducted with a panel of 1,500 people and 90 media outlets, was encouraging to many media buyers.

The results, perhaps as expected, however, varied sometimes dramatically from the audiences measured by Arbitron’s diary and the diary-household meter system Nielsen uses to measure TV viewers in some markets.

Although radio listening patterns were similar between the new and old system, the PPM found people generally listened to about twice as many stations as those measured by the diary, but for shorter periods of time.

TV watching went up for broadcast and cable channels, which largely reflected the PPM picking up out-of-home viewing, which Nielsen does not currently measure, and viewing to small stations that diary-keepers may have forgotten about.

“I do hope they resolve [the response rate issue] because I am so much in favor of the PPM over the diary,” says Nancy Haynes, communications director at Collins, Haynes & Lully Advertising. “And I am confident that between Arbitron and Nielsen they will resolve this.”

[LiLOrion]

So I guess the best way to know what/when people are watching/listening to is to NOT let them know that you know what/when they are watching/listening to it. :)

And for gods sake dont make them actually have to DO something to get that info to you as it seems like writing down things or downloading data are TOO much work for some participants. :)

-------
Betcha if Nielsen contacted a bunch of people from this board they would have almost 100% cooperation. :D

[MediaSavant]

Originally posted by LiLOrion
Betcha if Nielsen contacted a bunch of people from this board they would have almost 100% cooperation. :D

I wonder what percentage of them would have prior to their awareness being heightened by the cancellation of Farscape.

[Shipscat]

I would have.

I used to do secret shopper stuff- I loved it. It felt like I was giving a voice to consumers.

[MediaSavant]

I myself definitely would have also. In fact, I was a diary household twice in my life--when I was sixteen and filled it out for a family of seven people and when I was about 24 and it was just myself. Three summers ago, I did an Arbitron radio diary.

I'm very cooperative with researchers because I understand its importance and I am one myself.

[LiLOrion]

Out of curiosity, when they are asking people/families permission to install Nielsen boxes in their homes do they TELL them exactly what their ratings are used for? For instance, do they tell them that Nielsen ratings (whether in part or fully depending on the network/executives/advertisers using them) are responsible for making or breaking a TV show?

It just seems to me that not that many people outside the industry really UNDERSTAND the "importance" that is placed on Nielsen ratings until their favorite show has been canned.

I knew of ONE Nielsen family (of course since they really werent supposed to TELL anyone, I could have known more). :)

How long do people/families keep their Nielsen boxes installed?

[Darth Buddha]

That term has lost a lot of its punch due to the presence of corporate researchers (i.e. research for profit), push researchers (i.e. research designed to get a certain result), and researchers who are actually stealth sales or contributions pushes (i.e. "Do you think we should protect the environment?".... "Yes? Then contribute to the Sierra Club! How much would you like to contribute?" So now when you use the term, people get suspcious.

Moreover, there's much greater suspicion that your data could be sold in personalized form... how many sites have you had relationships with in terms of sales that swore they'd never sell your data, but then they are sold to somebody else, and you receive notice (or not!) that you have to opt out in 48 hours before your individualized data is sold.

Programming research is sort of grey area... yes it is for profit, but it could also be seen as public service in terms of giving people what they want (and they want... "Scare Tactics" and "Anna Nicole"). I'd bet income is likely to be a key question though (more people balk at that than balk at answering income questions than balk at questions about I.V. drug use). Personally, this is probably the only sort of market research I WOULD participate in. But overall, market researchers have gotten a pretty bad name, mostly deserved.

[MediaSavant]

Originally posted by LiLOrion
Out of curiosity, when they are asking people/families permission to install Nielsen boxes in their homes do they TELL them exactly what their ratings are used for? For instance, do they tell them that Nielsen ratings (whether in part or fully depending on the network/executives/advertisers using them) are responsible for making or breaking a TV show?

How long do people/families keep their Nielsen boxes installed?

I believe they do try to tell them how important it is to make cooperation go up. Some people just don't care.

The maximum time you can have a meter is two years.

[MediaSavant]

Originally posted by Darth Buddha
Programming research is sort of grey area... yes it is for profit, but it could also be seen as public service in terms of giving people what they want (and they want... "Scare Tactics" and "Anna Nicole"). I'd bet income is likely to be a key question though (more people balk at that than balk at answering income questions than balk at questions about I.V. drug use). Personally, this is probably the only sort of market research I WOULD participate in. But overall, market researchers have gotten a pretty bad name, mostly deserved.

It's fun to be hated for what you do. :D

But, you know, I have picked up a lot of insights about Farscape fans just from visiting this site and reading the posts. In this day where people bare their souls on the internet, you can be researched and not even know it. :D

[Darth Buddha]

May be true in general. Since I am currently involved in "research" of the medical and survey type, I'm keenly aware of the regard the word "researcher" has or has not. But that was more descriptive of the lay of the land, not my opinion of YOU!

No hatred from this bald head, MS. There are times I do see your arguments very much colored or limited by the context in which you work, but that's expected of anyone. Just as often, I find your arguments quite enlightening, because you are aware of levels of complexity that I am not.

(note, the following is NOT for MS's benefit, I'm sure she already knows this:)

There's a degree to which you are what you do. Every discipline pounds reality flat to be able to work it. Different contexts pound different elements out. The trick is always remembering that you HAVE done that, that the model is NEVER the reality!

[Roland]

WOW! I must be totally mind clenced! I don't get anything of that :confused:

Yie, I missed a couple of the really BIG words. Mayby I should :flee:

Way out of my leauge! heading for another thread..... :D

[Darth Buddha]

Roland, I didn't put it well. In fact, I'm kinda at a loss for how to put in well in under 30 pages.

Maybe this would do... Engineers frequently have to ignore lots of variables that have minor effects. If they didn't simplify out effects that really have very little impace, let's say, between -100 F to +120 F, then the math would be impossible.

Do that too often, and you start to forget that those "nuisance terms" are still there. You oversimplify. So suddenly you apply your overgeneralization outside that "comfort zone" and there is disaster. Think the O-Rings on the Challenger Space Shuttle.

Ad research is mercenary. To them, the concept of whether SG-1 had advantages over Farscape due to their past airing histories doesn't matter. They see ratings, period. There's a lot more too it, and you'd think programmers would see that. But don't expect advertisers to think that deeply. They pound it flat and all they see is ratings. From N-dimensional space to 1-dimensional space in one easy pound (and actually, since I'm ignoring demographics, I'm pounding the circumstance a little too flat here too!).

Doing that is fine, so long as you know you are doing it.

Any better this time, Roland?

[LiLOrion]

If it is any consolation, I understood you Darth Budda. :D

[Shipscat]

Yeah, but Darth, the people at the top shouldn't be pounding things flat. They should be people that are able to think and plan long term strategies and maybe have a little desire to turn out good things instead of more crap in the world. They're only supposed to use the data-not be used by it.

About the secret shopping- I did it for years for this movie chain in town- they finally asked me to quit complaining about the bathrooms as they were unable to change the bad design! I didn't want to cease and desist- they irked me every time I was there, regardless of what they could or couldn't do to fix it.

And I totally agree that you can pick up a lot about fandoms and what your programming decisions are doing from the net-something scifi has totally failed to take advantage of.

[DRD2001]

Originally posted by Shipscat
I would have.

I used to do secret shopper stuff- I loved it. It felt like I was giving a voice to consumers.
I would love to have participated too. Currently, I also do Nielsen Homescan. I keep track and transmit information on everything I buy. It takes a few minutes of time every week, but there are benefits. However, I do know people who would not participate in such a program, because of their...paranoia (for lack of a better word). They don't want everyone knowing what they buy, what they listen to, where they shop, blah, blah, blah...Me, I could care less. I think its fun. I just wish they asked for more of my opinion.

[MediaSavant]

Originally posted by Darth Buddha
Ad research is mercenary. To them, the concept of whether SG-1 had advantages over Farscape due to their past airing histories doesn't matter. They see ratings, period. There's a lot more too it, and you'd think programmers would see that. But don't expect advertisers to think that deeply. They pound it flat and all they see is ratings. From N-dimensional space to 1-dimensional space in one easy pound (and actually, since I'm ignoring demographics, I'm pounding the circumstance a little too flat here too!).

I'm ad researcher. Thanks for telling me how deeply I think.

You are right. I don't think how SG-1 got to where it got matters. What does matter is whether the demographics of its audience matches the demographic target of the products being advertised in it. What's their age, income, sex, etc.?

Is the median income of the Stargate viewer lower or higher than Farscape's? Is the audience older or younger? More Male or more female?

If, for instance, the person watching is in the market to buy some KFC, why does it matter that the show has been on in syndication? That's history. Why should that matter?

Maybe you need to convince me why it does. Use simple words, though. Remember. I don't think very deeply.

[Darth Buddha]

Oh, you think quite deeply enough, my dear! I've read your posts! You play devils advocate all too well.... though there's naught thats devilish about you.

But you are right, for you in your professional role, it doesn't matter the circumstances. Your complexity is in the demographics, and maybe what kind of people respond to what kind of ads (an advertising type I once shared an apartment with told me there were seven types(?) -- unfortunately I was the type that wasn't influenced by ads -- so that pissed her off!).

You would think that a programmer, however, might see the overall system and identify what variables can be pushed or pulled or whatever to create some value down the road. Farscape was more or less hung out to dry, when instead some cross promotions (like re-runs on USA again, espeically after maybe a Trek Movie showing?).

You might also expect them to see that riding a circumstantial wave on SG-1 isn't a long term solution, but a short term expediency. If SG-1 burns out, where is that gonna leave Skiffy? No flagship series, just mounds 'o drivel. Suddenly they may find themselves with a real dry spell until "Galactica", and do you want your future riding on just that?

A programmer needs to take care of the stuff they've got, not burn it, and look toward development of future staples. Throwing out Farscape when it was still performing respectably was short sighted. Probably the product of a corporate order to maximize cash NOW and forget about programming LATER.

Short term thinking like that led NBC to drop Star Trek rather than develop it into the dynasty it later became.

Short term expediencies always fail in the long run. Think ABC with 'Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?'

[Sparky]

What does matter is whether the demographics of its audience matches the demographic target of the products being advertised in it. What's their age, income, sex, etc.?

Everything I read about the ratings in the press relates that advertisers ONLY want 18-49 yr. old males, and THEY determine what lives or dies on TV. True or False?

If true, why? Aren't there products for WOMEN and the men who are 50+????
Don't those type of people have money to spend? OK, so then the reason advertisers only care about 18-49 yr old males is
1. they are vulnerable and impulsive enough to be influenced to BUY because they saw an ad AND Women and older men aren't
or
2. They have MORE money and buy MORE product than the rest
or
3. the advertisers are all 18-49 yr old men and want to control TV for their peer group.

I don't get it. I don't get it. I don't get it.
Can we sue for discrimmination by advertisers?

:grr: :eye: :wall: :eye: :grabbounc

[LadyCrais]

It's never made any sense to me either Sparky. Especially given the number of times I've read that women control the vast majority of disposable income in this country, regardless of who the product is for. I seem to recall an article about car manufacturers, I think it was, who have decided that their advertisements must be geared towards women as they are usually the final decision maker on purchases of products in that price range.

[LiLOrion]

Thats cause most men that are married have to go through the "boss-lady" first when laying down a chunk of change like that. :D

[LadyCrais]

LOL! We understand that part LilO!!

The question is, then why is the young male the holy grail of advertising? Get 'em before they're married or have any common sense and sell 'em a few bridges? Somehow I don't think the guys in that demo on this site would agree they're that gullible! ;)

[LiLOrion]

Frankly (and not to insult any males in that age group that frequent this board), I dont think men pay attention to commercials unless there are half naked women and alcohol involved, oh, and sports, and grunting. :)

I've been watching the commercials on SPIKE TV and MTV (especially those Maxim hair color commercials)... my GOD! it took me almost to the end of the commercial to figure out what the hell they were trying to sell. :)




Is it really only the MALE group of 18-49 that they are worried about or the WHOLE 18-49 group?

[Darth Buddha]

Not really offended.

What gets my attention in an ad is humor. Usually I fastforward right through, and I garauntee that bikinis or sports are not going to get me to stop.

Make me laugh, and I'll watch.

[guyricardo]

Ditto. :)

[LiLOrion]

I should have specified MOST men....and those closer to the age of 18 then 49.

I guess I also should have said that it seems like the "newer breed" of commercials focusing on MEN have one or more of those elements.

[Darth Buddha]

Truthfully, the only thing that ticks me off regarding any of this conversation is the advertisers who seem to think that I, as a guy, would actually want to see ads with scantily clad women or sports (well, if there were an ad with Lance Armstrong on a bike, I'd watch -- just out of bike envy) or grunting. I can count the ads that have actually influenced me on anything on one hand... though one of them was definitely an auto ad that I saw via Farscape.

There must be guys out there supporting The Man Show, ads like that, and other pandering, but I don't know any of them (though I did catch The Man Show doing skit where they finally punished that evil woman who runs around selling roses at exorbitant prices in some restaraunts -- where if you don't buy one, your date will find you to be cheap -- ya ha ha take that evil rose woman!).

I'm much more of a Triumph the Insult Dog man anyway!