From the Corner Office

The recent public confrontation between broadcasters and Arbitron about the rollout of the PPM is unfortunate for our industry.  At the very time that we need better measurement to instill a new level of confidence in our medium, the implementation hits a large speed bump, and the reaction to it becomes an unnecessary and divisive public distraction. 

I do have definite opinions about the PPM issues, which I will communicate privately to the appropriate managers within Arbitron.  I do not believe that there is any lack of commitment on Arbitron's behalf to produce the best research that will benefit the industry.  However, this is about much more than research;  there is an entire economic ecosystem that is dependent on the credibility of their estimates and everyone is grappling with the potential effects on their business. 

Radio managers are not looking to "kill" PPM, as some trades have reported.  We are expecting (and paying for) an electronic measurement service that will be reliable at a reasonable level of detail, credible as currency for businesses, and that will create more faith in our medium, not less.  Arbitron is being unrealistic if they think that the radio industry can be patient while they work out the imperfections in the system. We've been told and sold that PPM  was ready for prime time, and now it turns out that's just not the case.

I think that the industry and Arbitron have fallen once again into the trap of public negotiation, and that is good for no one.  Buyers and sellers alike need Arbitron to prove to all that this is a system we can have faith in and, more tangibly, risk our money on.  Every month that goes by without a resolution of these issues and with increasingly heated rhetoric is damaging to all of us.  It is imperative that Arbitron get PPM right, and  we all need to use this time to insure that we focus on the economic impact of PPM as well as its research validity.

It would be helpful if the best minds sat in the same room and focused not so much on the in-tabs, but on the buying and selling community's needs as they try to work with these estimates.   It took us years to understand the diary system; we have to do better with PPM.   From what I've seen so far, PPM tells us:

1. The results will be different; expect the change and adapt to it.  There will be winners and losers and we cannot blame the measurement system.

2. Ranker buying is the worst possible way to use the data. With the parity that PPM shows for many stations, we need to stop arguing about where we rank and start showcasing our delivery of the desired audience target.

3. Qualitative information will become increasingly important to show the distinctions between stations and formats. Use it.  Train your buyers to ask for it and buy on it.

4. Radio stations reach many more people than the diary ever gave us credit for.  If we believe in our medium, we need to impress this finding on every advertiser; they've been getting a bargain and it’s time to start paying fair market value.

I believe that neither our customers nor our sellers are prepared for the change that PPM will make in our business.  Arbitron may have had educational sessions with the large national agencies, but the smaller shops and independent buyers of radio have not been brought along; that's where most broadcasters live and die.   Everyone needs to get serious about this, because it's in all of our self-interests.  This is not just Arbitron's problem; it is a challenge for broadcasters, the ratings company, and those in the advertising community who champion our medium. We all need this to work, and we ought to admit that we need help.  We need the RAB, the NAB, broadcasters and advertisers to commit time and resources to educate, market and sell this ratings system.  But, first, Arbitron has to convince us.  I’m not sure they will get a third chance.

Please feel free to e-mail me by clicking on the "Ask Peter" icon posted below. I would love to hear your feedback or answer any questions you may have.