Is the jnlr a load of nonsense ?

It’s all about digital now, listeners online & smart speakers, The JNLR’s are so out of date.

The best analogy I can think of is

Rats refusing to jump or even acknowledge the ship is sinking!

To be quite honest there was a dip in all marketing spending that has affected all media outlets, print and broadcast. The ads that go out on RTÉ regarding Covid19 also go out on Independent stations and although they are paid for, they are charged and treated as public service announcements and bring in a fraction the income of regular ads.

That aside, RTÉ don't charge a fraction of what they could or should or ought to for their radio ads, nor do they carry as much as ad traffic per hour. Off peak ad traffic is minimal as well.

RTE do not appear to even attempt to sell and or promotional time to the same extent as independents. For which the independents should be quite happy

Always thought they were a pile of utter nonsense and lacking any credibility, other ratings releases are just beggars belief, how for example can it possibly be determined and so quickly a specific number watched a late late episode, Toy Show, All Ireland match etc, there are so many ways to view an event it just seems utterly nonsensical the figures released literally within hours on occasion.

Alot of the data released seems to be used to justify outlandish salaries in RTE and of course drive advertising rates.

Happy to be corrected on this, but as far as I know JNLR is based on self-reported filling out of forms. Blocks of fifteen minutes and you mark if you listened for eight or more minutes during any block. As well as potentially biasing the subjects, how could that method ever be expected to be accurate?

The RTE advertising rates are published. They show that higher charges are made for ads during programmes which according to JNLR have the biggest audiences.

The TV ratings are not undertaken like JNLR surveys.

They are done through set top boxes connected to the TV that lists what is being watched, for how long and by whom. All family members are separately identified and there is even scope to add visitors, if watching programmes. If anyone pops out to make a cup of tea, they are expected to push a button the remote to say when they start and stop viewing. The data can be collected and released so quickly because the boxes call back to base in the middle of the night and report their stats. Supplimentary stats are released later when online or on demand stats are calculated for the main stations that have those facilities.

The sample number of boxes polled for the info is statistically calculated to account for total population number and geographical spread. Further stats such as age and gender of viewers are calculated from the individual viewer login data - ie age and gender of each family member registered, or any visitor watching.

I did it for a few years, but gave it up when far more channels and viewing platform options became available and I didn't want the hassle of keeping track of all the options. It was interesting to see the process in action, but a pain to meet the requirements.

This is my point-that they are invariably useless.

It's not the JNLRs themselves, although they are invariably pointless, they are no doubt a nice payday for someone.

The issue is, every radio station in the country euphemistically pulls the stomach out of themselves every time the results come out.

I’ve always been curious as to how you can accurately calculate listenership/viewership of a broadcast medium. Personally I don’t think you can. There’s no return path so the device can’t phone home and say “hey, I’m tuned in”, and I’m sure there would be privacy concerns if it were ever tried. I know they use sample audiences but there’s surely limitations to that.

Yeah I agree but ... I would like to see them ... why have they on been published recently.

The JNLR is conducted as multiple lengthy face to face individual participant interviews - Covid restrictions have had a major effect on data gathering.

Last publication was Feb 10th 2022 - covering May - Dec 2021.

https://info.ipsosmrbi.com/assets/files/jnlr/user_information/20-101888-JNLR-Feb'22-Press%20Release-Final.pdf

There still could be staffing issues in getting people to undertake and process the surveys. There have been many businesses that have yet to resume normal activity levels, because of a shortage of staff. Or maybe the station representative committee has decided that general listenership habits were so drastically affected by the long Covid restricted period that it would be difficult to compare and contrast current results with previous reports, and therefore it might be best to delay the survey so that listener habits revert to a more directly comparable normality? I don't know the exact reason for the delay, but I do know that any, even slight, change to methodology or listener circumstance would cause concern for stations and advert agencies, because of the perceived difficulty in then doing direct comparisons on a 'book by book' basis. The industry overseers do not like any change that they can not plan, control and explain. Covid was/is an exceptional circumstance with exceptional consequences - I am sure there have been significant internal debates in JNLR circles about how results gathered during these exceptional times, should be considered and what relevance they would have.

I was never interviewed for the JNLR, I was however once a director of a station covered under the process, so I am very familiar with the methodology used. Like with the leaving cert, I still have nightmares about picking up JNLR results books from the MRBI office in Blackrock.

Radio related surveys conducted by telephone in those days were certainly not JNLR and more likely to be either other market research agencies doing general consumer related surveys and including a radio station preference question in the mix, or radio stations themselves doing 'tracking calls' to see how they might be getting on generally in terms of public awareness level, within their own franchise area. I am not sure if station conducted tracking surveys are still undertaken these days as with most people now using mobile phones, it would be difficult to get a specific coverage area response from random calls made. In the old days, Dublin based land line calls (for eg) could be looked up in the phone book and called quite easily.

Surely at this point most people under 50 are listening to digital music or podcasts as these provide a means of listening to something you are actually interested in, rather than a DJ asking people to text in their funniest 'I stubbed my toe stories'.

I occasionally listen to the radio on the way to work (20 mins) but usually only if I've accidentally turned off the bluetooth on my phone and can't be bothered sorting it out. Whenever I have listened to the radio I usually regret it, the quality just isn't there anymore. Sounds to me like the JNLR figures are skewed to make things look better than they are.

For info & reference :

JNLR Survey method : https://info.ipsosmrbi.com/assets/files/jnlr/methodology/JNLR%20Methodology%20Report%20Apr'18.pdf

IAPI statement on why the above method is still considered best for the Irish market : https://iapi.ie/blog/default/jnlr-committee-update

I am not defending it as a system of accurately recording actual listenership, but the data it collects is scientifically processed and verifiable as per the published methodology. I had many misgivings about it when I worked in radio, but you would need to go to a whole lot more effort than recalling personal anecdotes or quoting general social behavioral preferences, to argue against the JNLR and its findings.

In my current career I work with young people aged 12 - 25 and my own anecdotal evidence would say that absolutely no one in that age category is listening to the radio - but the biggest regularly undertaken research survey in the country, says otherwise and they have the groundwork generated checked figures to prove it.

In the end... it still comes back to the same basic fact, it only has to be acceptable to those who pay for it. No one else should get too worried about it.

TV viewer research is done in real time through use of a TV connected set top box and the data is uploaded and processed every night. Preliminary, but quite detailed TV stats can be released in 24hrs (for direct scheduled and viewed programmes), although these days there are added complications in calculating total audience over delayed viewing occurring through recording and streaming - this aspect has to be considered and adjusted later (becoming more of an issue as viewer habits and the range of devices used for viewing changes). The are also issues for TV view stats with illegal streaming - just because someone has seen a programme, it does not mean that they saw it on the station it was carried on, or more critically that they saw the adverts that the advertisers and sponsors paid for during its scheduled broadcast. This is one reason why the product placement in programmes approach has developed in recent years - the only way to prove that whenever and wherever you see the programme, you also see the advert/promotion.

Like the JNLR, the primary function of TV viewer stats, is to prove advertising coverage potential. The rate of change in content delivery models and platforms is making it difficult to see how traditional scheduled TV broadcasting, is going to compete... or survive. The fact that traditional broadcast sector giants like the BBC are investing considerable amounts of money and effort into producing online content, on various platforms, indicates where the market is heading. I don't think today's generation, who already don't listen to the radio, are going to engage in schedule based viewing. I have also asked young people what TV programmes they watch and this has produced puzzled responses. They see lots of programmes, but they are hardly ever viewed as scheduled for broadcast and on a TV. 'TV' to today's generation means, Youtube, Netflix, Disney+, Aamzon Prime, etc.... RTE, BBC etc are historic relics.

With regard to my experience of young people and their current listening habits ... they seem to be mainly consuming music on youtube and streaming platforms. Very disappointing for a music and radio fan, as they only consume material they are already interested in - there is little scope for new music exposure when you are being fed content by prescribed playlists or established interest associated algorithms.

After the very detailed arguments and links provided by Ger Roe, I'm surprised that someone can say "of course the JNLR is nonsense".

Read the Methodology link, and the IAPI link in post #41. This is a small extract from the IAPI link:

"Having undertaken a full review, at considerable cost, and having explored international best practice in radio audience measurement, the Committee concluded the current Day-After Aided Recall is best practice for the Irish market at this current time.

While the Committee is satisfied that Day-After Aided Recall is the best approach for radio in Ireland currently, the Committee is open to considering new ways of collecting the data beyond the current in-home approach, providing the integrity of the JNLR sample is maintained. New approaches to data collection will form part of the JNLR Research Tender 2020 – 2022 for which expressions of interest are currently being sought."

In the latest "book" published 69% nationally of 15 to 24 year olds listen to some radio on weekdays. Much lower in Dublin, and only 17% listen to a RTE station.

The system does not record data for under 15's.

16,850 out of what ever number of 15+ people there are in Ireland. Catering for all demographic and geographic divisions. I never got surveyed, but I think the chances of any one of us small number on the thread being included are remote. I never got a call from any of the organisations which are doing regular political polls either.

Adults Aged 15-24 Table 2: Average Weekday Yesterday Listenership on Page 4. That is what I converted to "some radio", just my choice of words.

I am seeing a pattern here of people using their own personal experience to decide radio listening figures, and a reluctance to accept the published data.