Roy Greenslade commented in a recent blog that there is a disparity between the readership figures compiled by the National Readership Survey (NRS) and ABC’s circulation figures.  According to Greenslade, neither system accurately takes into account the modern readership.

Greenslade speaks to the need for a way to determine the “reach” of publications, which cannot be done by mere audit.  The ABC figures are faulty because they rely on circulation only, but the NRS figures are not reliable either.  Referring to the NRS statistics, Greenslade comments that, “these measurements, despite the polling sophistication employed, no longer provide an accurate assessment of the pulling power of newspapers and magazines. Unless the industry agrees to a new form of measuring its combined print and online audience then it will not be serving itself properly.”

Charles Valan of ABC seeks to defend the company’s methods in his article for the Media Daily News.  He stresses that the Consolidated Media Report is for business publications only, which are significantly different from other publications.  In addition, the CMR is not a new audit service; it is merely a new compilation of existing ABS audits defined as “Total Audience Reach.”  Mr.Valan encourages his detractors to offer suggestions instead of criticism.

I believe Mr. Valan will be hard pressed to find many viable ideas for the reform of audits such as ABC and NRS.  The enormity of the press since the development of new media is too complicated to calculate in any traditional way.

Sources: Greenslade, Media Daily News