Abstract:
This paper shows evidence that reach and frequency estimates used for print planning in the United States are likely flawed. Cumulative net reach appears significantly understated (and frequency is overstated) for magazines that distribute a high proportion of their circulation at newsstand (vs. magazines with less newsstand distribution). It is likely that the reach of pass-along reading is similarly understated. Advertisers who have heavy newsstand titles on their schedule are getting much greater reach than the readership numbers suggest, relative to those who rely more heavily on other titles. The culprit seems to be the self-reported frequency-of-reading data that is collected by readership surveys. These findings are applicable to all readership studies that use self-reported frequency-of-reading to build reach estimates.
This could also be of interest:
Research Papers
The readers view
Catalogue: Seminar 1995: Strategic Publishing And Advertising Accountability
Author: Martin Vogelmann
Company: CZAIA Marktforschung GmbH
November 1, 1995
Research Papers
Marie Claire in Italy
Catalogue: Seminar 1990: The Quality Of Media Information
Authors: Luisa Pogliana, Arnaldo Aisa
 
June 15, 1990
Research Papers
Do new digital media change deeply ingrained behaviors in European digital consumers?
Catalogue: ESOMAR Conference on Digital Futures 2005
Author: Idalina Cappe de Baillon
 
March 1, 2005
