For a number of years print has been on the defence. Advertisers and media planners have increasingly aired the need for print to produce numbers that are more accurate and in a better way actually measure advertising exposure instead of AIR.
Print has been accused for not adopting to the emerging environment of accountability.
And it is not so hard to understand the advertisers’ complaints – considering the growing number of brands, media and GRP:s , which clutter our everyday lives. When competition is growing fiercer the need for new GRP:s
increase and there are more media than ever to choose from. To survive in this environment the advertiser needs
to be lean and mean and he has little understanding for methodological questions or media politics. Hence great efforts have been made by print to develop new or supplementary figures aiming higher in the
hierarchy of the ARF model. We have today a good insight in how and when newspapers and magazines are consumed, in detail penetrated and described in literally thousands of studies, but yet the information is paid little, if any, attention by media agencies and advertisers. Nothing print has done in this line of work has been actionable enough to be included in the everyday planning process. In short, print actors have done their best to meet the advertisers needs but have not really made it.
Symposium: 2003: Cambridge, Massachusetts, Session 4 - Quality of Reading
Authors: Callius, Peter, Sandstrom, Morgan
Organisations: Research International, Sweden
Topics: Page Exposure, Quality of Reading