8-1-2012
From time to time we get criticized by readers for taking data and publishing it without drilling down or asking for more information. It's a fair criticism because all numbers can be massaged, stronger dayparts highlighted, or demos pushed out. After all, who's going to send out a press release that screams, "We came in 19th this month, please write about us."
One of the biggest struggles everyone is dealing with, when it comes to audio listening, is accurate measurement. How do you think the folks at ESPN feel? They are innovators when it comes to pushing listeners to their website and mobile or apps they've created. They will never get credit for those listeners when an ad buyer is looking at PPM data, yet everyone knows the numbers are huge.
Triton's monthly rankers have been consistently used to measure online listening. We do wonder though how many ad buyers and local advertisers understand how to incorporate "Average Active Sessions" and "Session Starts" into cash. Perhaps there are some, but its doubtful there are many. What radio -- or audio distribution -- needs is at least one reliable measurement service where over-the-air listeners can be combined with Web listeners and the combination used to increase rates. Those numbers for radio could be huge. Why shouldn't Clear Channel get credit for a Z100 listener in Texas who's consuming the audio on iHeartRadio? That listener is just as valuable to Home Depot or Progressive Insurance or Budweiser no matter where he or she lives.
Back to the criticism about publishing unchallenged data or research. Everyone noticed the Pandora numbers experienced a drop in June. As a result of that drop we received the following statement and questions about our coverage of the Pandora numbers from Vice President of Digital Digital Marketing & Research at Katz360 Maggie Hauck and EVP/Radio Analysis and Insights Katz Radio Group Mary Beth Garber.
?It?s interesting that Pandora?s press release said its June ratings were great and showed growth. But the data posted in the Triton Top 20 syndicated ratings actually show a slight decrease in Pandora?s usage in June.
"So we come back to the question that Pandora has always declined to answer with any tangible data: How do they calculate their share of 'total radio listening including satellite radio' if:
- There are no published reports that calculate the monthly total hours spent listening to satellite radio (let alone just commercial satellite radio).
- They cite Arbitron as a source but refuse to produce the number they used from its data (probably because they aren?t licensed to be selling with the information).
- Pandora tends to base its online share claims on just the Top 20 Stream Report by Triton. There are many more streamers that report to Triton but aren?t reflected in the Top 20 report. Which numbers do they use in their formula ? Top 20 or all Triton reporting streamers? And there is no way to calculate time spent listening to Spotify, lastFM, Rdio and other music streaming services that do not report to Triton, so they can?t calculate all of online radio listening ? no one can.
- Could they please provide a link to the Census data table that supports their claims and indicate what data they are using from it in their formula?
- Why won?t they simply show the components of the formula and cite the sources?
"Somehow, 'data from Arbitron, Triton and the Census' don?t really answer any questions. Especially when those of us with access to all three sources can?t replicate any of their claims. Are you really going to accept that vague answer from Pandora and be willing to continue publishing their claims without further documentation? Or will you ask them about these discrepancies before publishing their next set of claims?"
(8/2/2012 7:24:46 AM)
Anyone who believes Pandora is a "replacement" for terrestrial radio is not looking at the whole digital radio picture.
One sentence from the above should make everyone think: "And there is no way to calculate time spent listening to Spotify, lastFM, Rdio and other music streaming services that do not report to Triton, so they can’t calculate all of online radio listening – no one can." This is the true scope of what terrestrial radio faces; the unaccounted, accumulated digital audio listening that's not being reported.
If we reverse the logic used against Pandora it's simple to ask "how can terrestrial radio be confident that it is not losing more listeners to online than is reported." As stated, there's no way to quantify the universe of internet radio/audio listening. And Broadcast is, after all, only using extrapolated numbers to "guess" at its audience size.
Pandora is not radio's problem. Like Clear Channel, it's only the biggest competitor facing terrestrial. There are many more online audio companies knocking on advertisers' doors today, and there will be far more in the coming years. Just wait until the digital dashboard goes mainstream.
Pandora schmandora. No local news, no personalities, no fm presets. Phones are for talking not for listening. Next subject please.
(8/2/2012 5:26:35 AM)
Finally! Thank you so much for finally making sense about Pandora. Sure they have listeners, but they are NOT the replacement for terrestrial radio, and they should not reap the rewards that come from such questionable ratings.
Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend
