[BC] Interesting survey: TheStern Factor

[Rich Wood]

------ At 08:32 AM 1/27/2006, WFIFeng at aol.com wrote: -------

>We received this Press Release at our main e-mail address, and I thought it
>was interesting. I pass it along since it's quite relevant!

No. Most of it is irrelevant. It might provide fodder for a media 
broker trying to prove someone should buy a station, but when it 
comes to Howard Stern or any other show it's just plain dumb.

>The 'Howard Stern Factor' is overrated:
>few Americans expect to purchase satellite radio,
>a survey by American Media Services finds
>
>Nearly two-thirds of those surveyed say radio listening habits are about the
>same or have increased over the past five years
>
>     CHARLESTON, S.C. - Despite recent media attention about shock 
> jock Howard
>Stern's widely publicized transfer to satellite radio, a nationwide survey
>indicates a large majority of Americans (86 percent) are not likely 
>to consider
>the purchase of satellite radio in the future because of his move.

Even on real radio 86% of the population didn't listen to Stern. If 
all of radio went to satellite I wouldn't expect that figure. They're 
comparing apples and Studebakers. All but the most popular syndicated 
shows get ratings (percentage of the population) measured in tenths 
of a point. Rush Limbaugh at his height got about a 4 rating, if 
memory serves. That means 96% of the population isn't listening and, 
possibly don't even know who he is. To media buyers he's important. 
To the population of the nation, they couldn't care less.

Of course 86% of the population won't buy satellite because of Stern. 
They never listened in the first place. To be legitimate, the survey 
should have asked existing Stern listeners if they'll move. From the 
get go this was badly flawed research.

I realize you hate Stern but you really need to be more careful what 
you quote to back up your fondest hopes that he'll fail. It looks 
like this "survey" was intended to do nothing more than prove radio 
is doing well. It fails miserably when it makes Stern the headline 
without explaining that the base of the survey wasn't Stern's 
composed of Stern listeners.

>     "We have long suspected that all the national media interest in 
> Stern and
>satellite radio did not reflect what was going on with the American
>consumer," said Ed Seeger, President and Chief Executive Officer of 
>American Media
>Services (AMS), which commissioned the survey.  "These are dynamic times for
>conventional broadcast radio; there are lots of new opportunities 
>with the emerging
>technologies, and radio has proven again and again that it is here to stay."

Radio is here to stay and stations will continue to be sold. I'm 
really getting tired of press release-ese. He even admits the survey 
was commissioned to prove "We have long suspected that all the 
national media interest in Stern and satellite radio did not reflect 
what was going on with the American consumer,"

The national news media look for stories. Stern moving to satellite 
will have an effect on CBS Corp. but the rest of radio will do just 
fine. As big as he was, he wasn't the driving force in all of 
broadcasting. This smells of a carefully orchestrated survey intended 
to get a desired result, not an accurate picture of anything. If this 
had been a religious survey I would guess Paul Cameron (the 
discredited anti-gay psychologist) had done it.

>     The survey also revealed that almost two-thirds of those surveyed - 64
>percent - responded that they are listening to radio more, or about the same
>amount of time, as they were five years ago.

I can buy that. It's just a shame it's tied to the rest of this dumb survey.

>AMS Findings Bolstered by Second Survey
>
>Seeger noted that the AMS findings are supported by another survey released
>in January by the Center for Media Research that found conventional radio
>listenership beginning to stabilize.  "This supporting finding is a 
>result of radio
>owners' decisions to lower commercial loads and concentrate on content," he
>added.  "We believe that there are compelling numbers in these results that
>indicate radio will continue to be a strong contender for consumers' 
>attention."

Puff, Puff, Puff. It seems to me the reduction of commercial loads is 
a matter of not replacing unsold inventory with other forms of 
clutter. Most programmers understand the it's the number of elements 
in an hour, not their length, that causes tune-out. A separate issue 
is the length of time between the end of program content and the 
beginning or continuation of content.

I believe the "stabilization of radio" has more to do with the 
novelty of gadgetry wearing off. As much as I'd like to believe much 
of what your puff piece contains it loses credibility when the 
methodology sucks.

If I brought this to an Ad Agency the laughter could be heard over 
rush hour trains.

Rich

Rich Wood
Rich Wood Multimedia
Phone: 413-303-9084
FAX: 413-480-0010