The map of Europe is deceptively simple as far as TV measurement is concerned. The same technique (a panel equipped with electronic set and people meters) is used in every country, or will be by the end of the year, and only 2 companies, AGB and GFK, control these panels in every country except France, Finland and Sweden. In practice, the meaning of a TV rating is different in every single country (and sometimes within countries), and key measures, such as viewing minutes, channel share and even audience demographics cannot be compared between countries because of the different ways in which they are calculated. This paper describes how this situation has developed, and why it is now likely to change. It details the main data needs of advertising agencies and advertisers from TV audience research, and then specifies those elements which currently have most effect on the differences between these measures in different European countries.
The main influence on gross press advertising revenue is the general health of the economy, as measured by GDP per capita. The same is not TRUE for TV. The size of the commercial audience on TV is limited both by the nature of the medium and by state legislative interference, in ways that don't affect press. For TV, the main influence on gross advertising revenue is the size of the actual commercial audience; GDP per capita is most closely correlated with the price charged in each country, ie. the cost per thousand gross impacts. In these circumstances it is difficult to see how changes in TV (of which there are many) can have a major effect on press revenues. The evidence from a number of countries over the last 10 years is that TV tends to be more complementary to press than competitive. Where press revenues fall on the introduction or expansion of commercial TV, it is as much due to general economic causes as to the introduction of TV itself, and tends to be very short-term. In general, real press revenues are more likely to rise than fall when TV expands.
This paper is concerned with how Young & Rubicam is tackling these 2 issues. It describes how we use the existing research to plan media, and what steps we are taking to augment it. These include working with the JICÃ system in the UK to try to adapt those surveys to our changing needs, co-operation with media owners regarding their own private research, encouraging new pan-European initiatives, and carrying out an active programme of supplementary European research ourselves. Examples are included of some of the results of the first of these surveys, a study of top European businessmen.