A Counter Argument

September 17, 2026

Image by Canva from Pixabay.

Last week, David Hill wrote a column for Barrett Media titled: “Why Radio’s Breakup With Nielsen Might Be Good for Programming Decisions.” His central point, as I interpret it, is that because of radio’s dogged pursuit of 25-54 numbers, our products have suffered. It seems that programming decisions are questioned or challenged by the sales department because the ratings were soft. Hill avers that without ratings, programmers are freed up to create great radio because of a lack of outside pressure.

I have thoughts.

First, radio’s focus on 25-54 has always been an issue. The reality is that 25-54 is a family reunion, not a demographic. Few, if any, formats can appeal to that wide age swath. Smart programmers look to dominate a segment of that demo in order to generate competitive overall numbers.

Second, Nielsen is our currency, but it is also flawed. PPM does a great job capturing real radio listening, but the sample sizes are too small. Don’t get me started on the flaws in diary methodology.

Third, Programming and Sales have been butting heads forever. They have always had competing audiences. Strong programmers know how to protect their product while creating opportunities for sales to thrive. But “making budget” has always been the #1 priority. Smart programmers know how to form compromises with sales without compromising their product.

Fourth, how will any programmer know if their “great radio” is working without some sort of ratings system?

To lay the troubles radio is facing at the feet of sales is, in my opinion, myopic at best.

Perhaps there are other contributing factors.

Corporate oversight and interference coupled with incessant cutbacks could be an issue.

Programmers handling multiple stations and formats—often in multiple markets—are overwhelmed. They almost have to simplify (read: automate) many processes just to get the job done. That leaves precious little time for creative thought.

On-air performers are often voicing multiple stations in the same day part. That “one size fits all” approach does not create a canvas for great radio.

In theory, great radio will attract great audiences and (eventually) great ratings. However, in today’s environment, a lot of mediocre radio accomplishes the same thing.

I would argue that radio needs more ratings data, not less. Nielsen is only one metric at a programmer’s disposal. Xperi’s DTS AutoStage and a station’s streaming numbers paint a more complete picture of a station’s success (or lack thereof).

David Hill theorizes that eliminating ratings is nothing more than a business reason to stop using demographics as the default proxy for programming excellence. What he seems to miss is that the pressure will just come from another direction. Ads will still need to be sold. Budgets will still need to be met. And whatever “great radio” is created will still need to be measured.

He does understand that programmers should not be chasing numbers. You don’t play to Nielsen, but there are ways to make the system work for you.

Great radio is not just about what comes out of the speakers. It is about creating a great culture inside the building. That means there is harmony between all departments and a unified belief in pursuing one goal—winning.

Feel free to tell me I’m full of it: sallan@researchdirectorinc.com

• Tweet