by Gill Moodie (@GrubstreetSA) What an illuminating morning I spent today at the joint South African Audience Research Foundation (Saarf)/National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) presentation on the way forward for TV research now that the NAB has given notice of its resignation from Saarf (effective 31 December 2014). Last month I wrote a piece about what lies behind the Saarf/NAB fight and after today’s frank question-and-answer time (the most interesting were the questions from media planners), I’m sticking with what I wrote earlier but can a bit more.
[pullquote]Why are print media owners – represented on the Saarf board by the PDMSA industry body – in for the high jump when the NAB is out of Saarf? Because, for years, the print industry had benefited hugely from the unrealistic readership estimates in the Amps figures.[/pullquote]
What struck me at their recent presentation in Cape Town is that:
1. The broadcasters are relishing their role of rocking the boat;
2. That they are genuinely pleased that TV market research is now going to be more comprehensive and more credible; and
3. That there’s a general smugness about that fact that it’s maybe time for print to get its comeuppance (though this was never stated).
But first the backstory. The NAB walked out of Saarf last month, prompted by extreme frustration that it only had two places on the Saarf 
board, which consists of representatives of the media owners, advertisers, media planners and marketers.
The broadcasters contribute a lot of money to Saarf (78% of the total, according to the NAB) and they were unhappy with how the TAMS television audience research was being conducted.
Chiefly, they felt that the technology used to measure TV viewership was out of date and that older, wealthier, urban audiences were getting too much weight in the sample.
This tends to favour Naspers’ pay-TV behemoth, DStv MultiChoice, rather than free-to-air TV operations such as e.tv and the SABC. The NAB felt its voice wasn’t being heard (it wanted six seats rather than two) and it threw down the gauntlet and walked out.
Why are print media owners – represented on the Saarf board by the PDMSA industry body – in for the high jump when the NAB is out of Saarf?
Because, for years, the print industry had benefited hugely from the unrealistic readership estimates in the Amps figures.
Print publishers may tell you how important Amps are to media planners but all the editors and the journalists in the newsroom know that it is plainly ridiculous to claim that one edition of a paper may be read by 20 or 30 people.
Amps is at issue here because the NAB says it intends to fund and conduct its own establishment survey (i.e. its own Amps) as well as its own TAMS audience research.
With the NAB’s funding out of Amps, it is, in its current form, certainly at risk.
Ponying up for an establishment survey by themselves will definitely be a burden to the print owners – which are all struggling with squeezed revenue and falling circulation as it is.
Even if the NAB comes back to Saarf before the end of 2014 – or agrees to keep funding the same establishment survey as the print guys – they have now exercised their muscle, seen the resulting flurry of activity and I’m sure the next step will be to demand more realistic readership measures for print.
I know I would if I was a broadcaster.
There’s no reason for the broadcasters to care about print – especially when the figures have been skewed towards the print owners’ for so long.
Broadcasters have everything to benefit from levelling the playing field when it comes to competing for advertising revenue – and TV has a lot more going for it than print these days.
Are the print owners aware of the import of what’s going on at Saarf?
I’m told that they are but, for now, the PDMSA are not saying anything officially.
“We are busy with internal discussions and the formulation of proposals for discussion and decisions to be taken at the next PDMSA board meeting, scheduled for 29 August,” PDMSA’s CEO Ingrid Louw told Grubstreet today. “I should have a more defined response after that.”
It is clear, however, that if the NAB pursues its own TAMS research and establishment survey, that:
1. Life will become trickier for media planners, especially as they will have to work with different establishment surveys;
2. That the media planners are worried about the independence of TAMS figures overseen by the industry rather than a neutral body such as Saarf;
3. That the broadcasters will have to invest additional money in research if they go their own way;
4. That TAMS figures will represent the balance of our population better and use better, more modern technology to measure TV audiences (this has already been achieved by Saarf this year) because the broadcasters will control their own destinies; and
5. That Saarf needs to be beefed up with its own research people and statisticians to rule out future problems with the weighting of the sample sizes and the numbers in general.
What also stuck me is that not all in the NAB have the same view on the way forward and the broadcasters are clearly keen to keep the dialogue going with Saarf.
All feel it essential to sit down and talk to the marketers and advertisers about this and some even feel it key to sit down with the PDMSA to talk – and that a common establishment survey might be the way to go.
Acting Saarf chair Virginia Hollis, a veteran media planner herself, is stressing that none of this is a done deal – and that Saarf is working very hard to keep the NAB, PDMSA and the marketers talking and finding common ground and goals.
That’s a lot of tough talking and horse-trading that needs to be done.
Watch this space. It’s only going to get more interesting before we know the end game here. Either way, I do think things are going to get a whole lot tougher – as if they need that! – for the print owners.
Talk about kicking a dog when its down.
– SA’s leading media commentator, Gill Moodie, offers intelligence on media – old and new. Reprinted from her site Grubstreet.