I too remember that HHCL study which rocked the TV world all those years ago, and thought the Mark Ritson’s study didn’t break much new ground – everyone knows the BARB figures are not altogether accurate, and that the same is true for every media audience measurement system. Mark Ritson did spend two years with his team researching this, so presumably the fact that it confirms the earlier HHCL findings is worth discussion rather than dismissal.
Thames TV was so miffed, it fired its agency. I can imagine that beleaguered agencies and TV contractors are also pretty miffed about these findings, and can TV afford another shock-horror story, particularly after the BARB panel debacle of 2001? Is there some papering over the cracks here?
Posters are naturally having a field day on the back of this and, imperfect though Postar is, it does take account of the total opportunities to see, so that people who walk past a poster but don’t look at it are not counted. I would have thought that Carat would have known that – I’m sure Mark Ritson does.
Attention factors are therefore already applied to outdoor audience data. Isn’t it about time other media became a little more honest?