Options or answers? what are we all doing here?

This paper could have been written about television or radio audience research. It is about the conflict between pure, research-led standards and the grubby commercial considerations of the real world.
There is, for example, a clear and consistent methodological bias in the radio and television diary method, one which benefits larger, longer-established stations and penalises newer, smaller ones. Yet the diary continues to be the main form of radio audience measurement around the world, while the television diary survives in most of the US local markets. Perhaps things are changing however. Over the summer, the US radio industry has been debating what journalists have dubbed ‘Version 2.0 of audience measurement’ . How, in other words, to update or replace the current diary measurement system. The same debate has been going on elsewhere in the world – some markets, including Canada, Belgium, Singapore and Switzerland have already moved forward with electronic measurement. In July Forrester published what it dubbed an economic impact study concluding that the US radio business stood to gain $414 million of incremental revenue if it switched over to electronic measurement, while it would likely lose $282 million if it failed to move ahead.

Download Paper (PDF)


Symposium: ,
Topics: ,