Understood, but the high ratings KEXP is getting seem to reflect OTA reception, as KEXP's stream doesn't seem to be as high as the OTA numbers. In fact, I just looked again at the 6+ ratings and KEXP's stream isn't on there. So it says a lot for the pull of their content, and possibly the importance of the location of their listeners, compared to the signal coverage.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
How is KPNW FM doing in the ratings? Particularly in the demos they’re after?
- Thread starter Cobra14
- Start date
There can be two reasons why a stream does not show in Nielsen:
1. It did not "make the book" with sufficient listening to qualify for inclusion.
2. It selected to be combined with an AM, FM or HD channel because it is a full simulcast and combined numbers are easier to sell.
Not sure how you arrived at that conclusion. Have you seen the zip code and demographic spread for that particular station?
Ah, you're basing your anecdotal conclusion above based on 6+ published ratings, got it. Why doesn't that surprise me?
RE: Question #1, no, have you? do you think that every participant in this forum has access to that sort of information?
RE: Question #2: same answer as number one.
If you have the specific information, bypass the condescension and share that info with the rest of us.
As for how I reached the conclusion I reached, look at the 6+ ratings. KEXP's stream isn't even on the chart.
If they had massive streaming ratings in the target demos, wouldn't it show up, in some form, on the 6+?
So, how much does streaming affect ratings, on average, in a metro like Seattle? There must be some percentages from studies and the like.
Since you made such a blanket assumption about what the ratio of OTS listeners to streaming, was wondering how you arrived at such a conclusion. To answer your question; I could get that information, sure, but not worth the effort.
So you're being redundant?
Don't like being called out? Don't make assumptions based on nothing.
Online analytics are separate, many times not published as part of 6+ listening numbers.
Again, not published as a separate category. David could probably answer this better than I, but I believe the 6+ published to the general public may, or may not include a streaming average. My guess is its rolled-up into that number.
"Streaming" does not "affect" ratings. Nielsen measures audio that encodes, and they want to change the concept from "radio" ratings to "audio" ratings.
When stations combine streams with broadcast signals, the average subscriber does not know how much each combination gets from over-the-air and streams. So, without getting Nielsen to do a tabulation, there is no real data synchronized with the ratings.
And each market has differences in media usage. Conditions like "lots of good signals" mean more FM listening, and things like the absence of certain formats in various markets influences streaming usage.
I am curious about the same things that motivate your question. I guess we will have to wait for a detailed and extensive data report from Nielsen. However, I doubt the owners of expensive FM stations want to show that they are shedding listeners to streams, so that may be a long time coming.
If streams are simulcast (including ads) owners will always pick "single line reporting" which means that the broadcast and the stream offerings are combined and the percent for each is not published.
Separate streams that "make the book" (meaning meeting minimum reporting standards) are reported in the public release if the stream is part of a subscription.
OK, you have just admitted that your assumptions here are based on the same anecdotal 'evidence', and 6+ ratings that I was using. I'm glad we're on the same page now.
As for KEXP's audience, this article apparently uses data given to the reporter by KEXP. They have 300K total listeners (streaming + OTA), and half of the streaming audience is in the Puget Sound area, and the other half is mostly in NY and other parts of the globe.
This Radio Station Devotes Hours Of Programing To Mental Health And Listeners Feel Heard
An independent radio station in Seattle has grown a massive, devoted following based on music, mental health, and helping people feel a little less alone.
www.buzzfeednews.com
Their cume appears to be 179.1K according to the ratings data published on RadioInsight. That would leave around 121K listeners using the stream, with maybe 60.5K of them being in the Puget Sound metro, and 60.5K in other parts of the US and the World -- all based on the article and cume figure. Which would indicate that maybe 2/3 of KEXP listeners are listening OTA.
But then, the real numbers, which Dave Eduardo talks about, aren't really given out here. So it's all just a guess.
Which is what most of us do here, when we have limited data to go on.
Seattle/Tacoma – RadioInsight
Nielsen Audio PPM Monthly Ratings Seattle/Tacoma (Market #11) Population: 4,099,200 Black: 310,400 – Hispanic: 413,200 Average Quarter Hour Share for Persons 6+, Mon-Sun 6AM-Mid All ratings are Copyright © 2005-2023 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved. Nielsen radio audience estimates and...
radioinsight.com
Not radio but TV; I saw research data just the other day that indicated GenZ and younger are starting to watch local TV newscasts solely because they're being made available on apps and streaming platforms like Roku, Sling, Hulu, AppleTV, etc. What the research essentially concludes, is this demographic has never intentionally watched what we know as TV news in their lifetime, other than what's available via a tablet or phone. The research brings to light the delivery gap of media consumption between what we grew up with, and the only way the upcoming generation understands what media is. And along those same lines; especially illustrated right here on this site; is how we as legacy traditional media consumers have lost touch with the younger generation's interest in media.
One has to believe there is a similar corollary with radio; in that how many younger consumers have never intentionally turned to radio, when everything they need is right on their phone? In other words; all this emphasis on signal and reception, means nothing to younger media consumers. Based on the evolution in consumption, I could honestly see the day, where there simply won't be the need for traditional TV or radio transmission sites, because delivery is/will be ubiquitous and transparent to the consumer. Winners and losers will be based solely on content, not who has the perceived better signal.
6+ numbers indicate how well a station is doing "overall."
No, and frequently they don't at all.
Not in demos or income, but time spent listening among all listeners (including those who "hear" a station if I am not mistaken.)
No, not true. There are plenty of "poor performers" in 12+ who do magnificently in their adult target demo. And many that look good but in the sales demos have terrible low result
TIme Spent Listening is a function of how long each listener spends and the total cume of each station. Neither cume nor TSL are generally used by advertisers to buy time... it is all about AQH ratings, which are not published openly. All we get is share (not ratings) and cume, neither of which is of much value.
How often do stations get data about their AQH ratings? (6+ are once a month.)
6+ is delivered to stations once a week, actually. But that report is not given to the public. And 6+ is just one report out of potentially thousands in each monthly book. But the monthly 6+ AQH share is the only one given to the press, as it is without any sales value to radio stations and, thus, worthless.
In PPM markets, subscribed stations get a weekly "trend" download that includes multiple demos and all the standard daypart with cume persons, cume rating, AQH share, AQH persons, AQH rating. Every month, they get the full "book", which can be viewed with custom dayparts, demos, ethnic breaks, ZIP code breaks, income and education breaks on all the ages, by men and women, and including Black and Hispanic data if there is an ethnic quota on either in each market.
Subscribed stations get data on all stations, even those not subscribed, if the station got a rating (not share) of 0.1 or over.
Subscribed ad agencies get the same data each month, but don't get the weeklies.
In all PPM markets there are 13 "monthly" 4-week books.
Continuous measurement diary markets get monthly "books" that cover the last 12 weeks. There are no weekly reports as the sample is way too small.
And outside of Nielsen, as streaming increases most major groups are getting separate streaming analytics on a daily basis. That data is even more granular than just cume and TSL. The difference being; the streaming data can only determine how long someone is connected to the stream, not that they have the audio level turned up or not. And, just like the data purchased as a Nielsen subscriber, that granular data is not published to the general public.
Do they have any kind of info on their competitors?
How much data would a station get from the streaming consumer via the actual app (as many stations have their own streaming apps that users download onto their device, and they use the app to stream the station).?
Doesn't the app communicate back to the station in some way?
Every subscriber gets full data on every measured station in the market that meets the minimum reporting standards.
In LA, for example, if I want to see how stations rank on share in the South Central zone of LA County in Spanish dominant women 25 to 49, I can get a report showing the share of every station against that demo. Or, for that matter, any of the possible age, gender, ethnicity, language usage, geographic zone or country, income, education, etc.
- Status