David Eduardo wrote:

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
...so I spent some time here arguing with a rock, er, an, um, "radio
consultant," who is convinced that by the flawed methodology used by
his clients and the ratings service that all radio listening is local,
and he uses those same flawed methodologies to show that his stations
are now number 1.

All radio listening is not local. But nearly all of it is. The main point
YOU do not get is that advertisers do not care about out of market
listening. They will not look at it and will defininately not pay for it.

In the case of AM, sykywave listening only happens at night, and advertisers
buy very little night advertising on AMs unless it is local sports.

Int he case of FM, out of market listening is generally from adjacent
markets, and the out of market signals generally do not cover all the
geography of the peripheral market, so advertisers buy local stations that
cover the entire local market, not just one area of it that is next to
another market.

The out of market listening on AM skywave is so small as to be unmeasurable.
It is unwanted by advertisers, so the whole argument is moot.

The phrase that is important here is "flawed methodology."

...and so it goes with radio. As long as the methodology is skewed to
deliver the wanted results, it is as meaningless as AmEx's absurd
"market research."

Radio ratings diaries do not ask questions. They record day by day, hour by
hour listening in blanks the diarykeeper fills in. The only instruction is
to fill in each day what you listened to and when you listened. There is no
questionnaire bias as there is no questionnaire.

So they will go on, with IBOC and so-called "HD" radio with all its
artifacts and dropouts, to the detriment of people who actually
listen.

IBOC and HD are the same thing. One is the technical term, the other is the
marketing term. And it sounds great.

Really? It sure sounds like QRM here.

dxAce
Michigan
USA