Latest RAJARs

[Lat-Literal]

We talk about the ClassicFMification of Radio 3, but in fact the two stations are different. But the BBC/R3 totally ignore the aspects which are deliberately most like Classic FM, designed to attract a wider, more casual listenership. Because mornings are the time when most radio listeners tune in, that's the time R3 stands the best chance of getting new listeners. And hard cheese to the existing audience which also wants to tune in in the mornings.

But we know that Classic FM listeners can be attracted to Breakfast and Essential Classics without a survey:

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/2019507-Classic-FM-Ads-are-too-depressing

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/radio_addicts/1583872-Anyone-moved-from-Classic-FM-to-Radio-3

just as we know what others, apart from forumistas here, think:

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_be...ned-to-Radio-3

Yes although I'm not sure that we/they have captured the essence of the stalwart CFM enthusiasts. Are there any? Stephen Moss wants a station that is so ambitious and demanding it gives you a headache. That's you as in us and not him. He's not listening anyway. I don't - although I don't mind ambitious and demanding. He is of the Gompertz school in which most tv and radio would be full of people shooting guns in the back of people's heads in the name of art and talking heads like him putting forward a load of old pretentious waffle. Waffle that is on no higher level than the manufactured drama in Jeremy Kyle. We have it already in droves. Now That's What I Call a Headache Vol 2018. In the case of Childish Gambino. literally.

[french frank]

Don't know a lot about RAJAR figures, but are they national or global these days?

Just UK stations. RAJAR (Radio Joint Audience Research) is a company jointly owned by the BBC and RadioCentre, the umbrella group for the UK commercial stations, to provide nationally reliable listening figures. Theoretically, the commercial broadcasters need the figures to generate advertising revenue; the BBC in order to make programming/commissioning decisions.

I did notice that Q1 seems, historically, to have recorded a spike but the most confusing point is that Q1 in 2017 was very poor for Radio 3 which gives the impression, if year-on-year comparisons are made, that Radio 3 has done spectacularly well this quarter. It's very comfortable, but the 11% rise quoted as somehow being a great triumph is rubbish. If a station does very badly one year and recovers the next year, it's a relief not a spectacular success.

[Constantbee]

I did notice that Q1 seems, historically, to have recorded a spike but the most confusing point is that Q1 in 2017 was very poor for Radio 3 which gives the impression, if year-on-year comparisons are made, that Radio 3 has done spectacularly well this quarter. It's very comfortable, but the 11% rise quoted as somehow being a great triumph is rubbish. If a station does very badly one year and recovers the next year, it's a relief not a spectacular success.

That's true enough. Suddenly realised last night that the change in the spike pattern would be entirely consistent with a Brexit effect (Q1 in 2016) in a sector of the economy that would be badly hit by apprehension of changes due to weakened ties with mainland Europe, although why this effect the broadcasting 'reach' I can't tell. Also, a bit dense of me, but I think I got the quarters wrong If the Q1-Q4 figures tie in with the financial year, then Q1 is going to be April - June, isn't it?

[french frank]

Also, a bit dense of me, but I think I got the quarters wrong If the Q1-Q4 figures tie in with the financial year, then Q1 is going to be April - June, isn't it?

Q1 (Jan-Feb-March) marks the end of the business year, in this case 2017/18, which is the subject of the BBC Annual Report, published in July.

[Andrew Slater]

Thanks for this. I'm curious about the seasonal peaks in Q1 for 2013, 2014 and 2015. If I understand this correctly Q1 must be the winter quarter, so that would be January to March, then. The trend changes in 2016, though. We see the same rise but continuing into Q2, so we might be seeing the continuation of a seasonal effect. Then the peaks become more frequent. You'd can't say a lot without a closer look at the data, but I would like to know what happened in 2016. A possible explanation might be a move away from live listening to 'listen again'. Competition with Cfm is an obvious explanation, but then a lot of forumites are actually going over - at least temporarily - to foreign based serious music stations, like France Musique, so there is competition from elsewhere.

Don't know a lot about RAJAR figures, but are they national or global these days?

Don't pay too much attention to the individual quarter's figures or individual spikes; it's the trends that are important, as I think ff has said upthread. The samples are very small and are multiplied up by a huge factor to get the reach figures.
For example, for Q1/2018 the assumed UK radio-listening population is 54466000. The sample for the 12 weeks of the quarter was 22219. Therefore for every person who claimed to listen to R3 for at least 5 minutes in a week the calculated reach is 54466000*12/22219, i.e. 29415.9.

Therefore to get the Q1/2018 reach figure for R3 of 1933000 requires an average of 65.7 respondents claiming they've listened to R3 for 5 minutes in a week, or 788.6 over the quarter.

The change in reach from the previous quarter of -18000 requires a change of only -0.6 respondents per week, or 7 over the quarter. I would think that this is well within any sampling error.

Similar figures for the Breakfast reach are 21.6 per week for the reach and +0.9 per week for the change.

The updated chart is below. Note that I've averaged over 4 quarters (green line) and 20 quarters (red line) to give some smoothing and to show a trend.




The next chart shows the changes quarter to quarter for a number of stations, showing the volatility of the numbers. It seems that for R3, swings in the range of roughly +/- 10% per quarter are the norm.



I'll add another chart later which shows the trend of reach against population, which is quite interesting.

[french frank]

This one's fascinating - it clearly shows the level of volatility where R3's figures are concerned. And yet, and yet, the figures aren't completely random. Having 12 or 13 completely different panels each week in a quarter still somehow ends up with a roughly (all right, very roughly) ballpark figure. No quarter ever sinks to 1.5m (or less), nor rises to 2.5m (or more). So the figures are registering something …

The next chart shows the changes quarter to quarter for a number of stations, showing the volatility of the numbers. It seems that for R3, swings in the range of roughly +/- 10% per quarter are the norm.

[Andrew Slater]

This one's fascinating - it clearly shows the level of volatility where R3's figures are concerned. And yet, and yet, the figures aren't completely random. Having 12 or 13 completely different panels each week in a quarter still somehow ends up with a roughly (all right, very roughly) ballpark figure. No quarter ever sinks to 1.5m (or less), nor rises to 2.5m (or more). So the figures are registering something …

Yes, a steady base and some sampling noise. Notice that the stations with the largest audiences and therefore the largest sample sizes, have the narrowest range (see R2). There's an interesting spike of about 9% against a usual range of about +/-4% for R4 at Q2/2016: the referendum probably caused more people to tune in - so not all spikes are spurious, particularly when they are out of the ordinary.

A better plot might be deviation from long term average.

[Nick Armstrong]

In today's Telegraph (I don't subscribe so for detail, I will await the actual speech of which this seems to be a 'the Sunday Telegraph has seen' leak): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...enge-podcasts/

So perhaps one can hope for a return to quality mattering over total priority being given to numb-skulled attempts to seduce some sort of mythical/only-on-a-whiteboard-in-a-BBC-conference-room 'great new audience'....?

[cloughie]

In today's Telegraph (I don't subscribe so for detail, I will await the actual speech of which this seems to be a 'the Sunday Telegraph has seen' leak): https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...enge-podcasts/

So perhaps one can hope for a return to quality mattering over total priority being given to numb-skulled attempts to seduce some sort of mythical/only-on-a-whiteboard-in-a-BBC-conference-room 'great new audience'....?

So, hopefully Suzi and Skellers will be given a new formula remit for Essential Classics. My breath is, however, not being held just yet!

[Lat-Literal]

You can um and an ah but it looks like competition for the sake of competition. Not this one so that one. I can hardly be bothered unless and until they aren't all power merchants with no ideas. Look - a politician's favourite word - I've stuck on commercial puppets and people arguing the toss. With that spirit, they have quite entertaining facts in their head and are not Love Island. Clear blue water.....I meant it.....not the BBC and not formulaic. But for heaven's sake, Spotify and ilk. One is the master of one's own domain there. There is no Zoe or Petroc around which to decide "well they are alright really but they have chosen what they like or what is liked by the production people who reel then in". It makes no sense. What are they going to do? Turn every BBC radio station into the pre pubescent 30s? It won't work. They will be on their I-extensions which have already put paid to that phrase "my other half". I'm pleased in a way. It means they aren't ostensibly cannibal towards human bodily juices. Other than that, I'm seeing money munching, trite, and aimlessness, Purnell at the helm.

This is bloody marvellous - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXkM11kp_tg

[Zucchini]

Purnell's speech to EBU on Tuesday:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2018/james-purnell-ebu

(Mainly puff with escape routes if challenged on anything … )

[subcontrabass]

Purnell's speech to EBU on Tuesday:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/speeches/2018/james-purnell-ebu

(Mainly puff with escape routes if challenged on anything … )

Hmm:

"I care about audience figures. We want audiences to love our programmes. We want to attract audiences who don’t use us. We want young people to spend more time with us."

[DracoM]

" we want young people to spend more time with us."
Well, in that case they need to try a bleeping bleeping deal harder then.

[Sir Velo]

" we want young people to spend more time with us."
Well, in that case they need to try a bleeping bleeping deal harder then.

Be careful what you wish for methinks. Things might just be about to get a whole lot worse (see BBC News app for what attracting "young people" does for quality journalism)

[french frank]

Stop press: R3 has sickly RAJAR figures this quarter … again (1.908m, from Q-o-Q 1.933m, and Y-o-Y 2.062m). Percentage reach down from the magic 4% to 3% (I'd wondered whether 3.48% would be rounded up to 3.5%, to be rounded up again to the usual 4% - but RAJAR not having any of that nonsense).

Breakfast figures have held up pretty well (636k), and I'll assume Essential Classics has also continued to do well so … since the overall reach has been struggling to reach 2 million for four quarters in a row, what part of the day is losing the listeners? Is the solution to dumb down the rest of R3 to the level of the morning programmes?

[Thought on a use of the term Dumbing Down: it marks the relationship between the content and the supposed audience e.g. popular music could be 'dumbing down' if the audience is expecting classical music, but not if it's on a popular music station. A programme for 10-year-olds is 'dumbing down' if the expected audience consists of adult classical music lovers, but not if the audience is 10-year-olds.]