July 26, 2011
RadioInk.com has embarked on a new series called "living in a PPM world." Our goal is to get a feel from the radio rank-and-file about how things have changed, in their world, now that many markets have been receiving consistent electronic ratings over the antiquated written diary system. Deny it if you will, but everyone knows, and today's top story confirms, so much is dependent on ratings in our industry. The anticipation of the "new book" being released can drive General Managers and Program Directors to the gin till as they ponder the possibilities of what a bad book can do to their revenue, not to mention their jobs. Media buyers will grind you down on the numbers if it looks like you are starting to slip in any way. That's their job and there's not a whole lot you can do about it when you know a station down the street is waiting to scoop up the dollars you are willing to leave on the table.
We thought it would be interesting to ask programmers if they have changed anything now that they seem to understand how the Portable People Meter works and have been able to analyze it over a period of time. CBS RADIO Senior Vice President of Programming Gregg Strassell says just playing to PPM will not help stations in a digital world. "Stations must be loved by their listeners, no matter what the ratings methodology. Program to the audience, win their hearts and minds. Stand for something they want, and make your station reflect those values. It?s pretty simple. PPM programming is making our words more efficient, but the key to being a great brand now and in the future is not necessarily overtly playing to a ratings methodology. We are asking our programmers to spend a great deal of time on the listener benefits of their radio stations, and feel that is a long-term solution to winning, and requires a lot of attention."
Van Harden is the Program Director at the legendary WHO Radio in Des Moines. Harden says legendary status means less in a PPM world. "It appears to me, in comparing PPM with the diary system, that PPM is much more of a "what have you done for me lately" system, rewarding heritage less and content more. Even though I'm at a station with incredible heritage, that's probably good, not bad. There's nothing wrong with more reasons for us to have more great content more often."
Harden adds, "I think the fact we live in a PPM world doesn't so much change things as it does emphasize what we already knew and were acting upon. We know we have to hook listeners early to keep them tuned in and engaged. That may be one of the biggest things PPM has clearly validated. Get to the point. Get to the meat. And set appointments to use the listeners you already have for even more numbers."
Jim Hicks is a retired Program Director now living in Nashville. Hicks has programmed stations in Nashville and Grand Rapids. He says the diary system was easy to corrupt. "Finding a person or two with a diary was not very difficult, as well as other tricks programmers learned along the way all focused on keeping their jobs. So many people lost their jobs based on 'ratings' that later proved to the wrong conclusion. Programmers can no longer ignore certain formats that are really having a market impact. Now the device listens. In terms of the PPM I think the industry is better off because it is hard to argue with automated listening. As soon as many of us became technically aware in the 80s we knew there had to be a better way." Hicks says with the PPM, there is greater accuracy in the information.
Harden says the industry is better off with the PPM. "Yes, I think so, even though PPM is far from perfect. It seems to be more trustworthy and there is a lot to be said for the speed of it's reporting to us. Strassell agrees radio is better off in a PPM world. "The industry needed strong actual behavior data as the media landscape has become more digital. The ratings system had to move into a digital age. The feedback is faster, allowing stations to experiment and see payoff quicker."
(7/26/2011 11:48:01 AM)
The problem with responding to the PPM world too quickly, as Arbitron will admit, is that there is a significant lower number of monitors out there than the number of diaries that were distributed in the same market. Sure, the data from a source is more accurate, but the pool is almost statistically meaningless to your market size. This means you can't use PPM numbers without looking at several books, which is similar to what had to be done with diaries, thereby almost negating the benefit.
Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend
