Arbitron's sampling methodology is FAR more important than Mr orMrsDePetro's misdeeds

[Dan.Strassberg]

Chuck: Just because something has been done incorrectly for 40 years
doesn't turn the wrong way of doing it into the right way. If you can
look anyone in the eye and with a straight face tell them that you can
construct a statistically significant sample of the demographics of
households in a metro whose population is 600,000 or so by using a
sample that consists of, say, 100 individuals, six of whom live in the
same household or even live in the same multi-family apartment
building, you must either be incredibly gullible or you have some sort
of agenda. Since I don't believe that you are gullible, I assume you
have an agenda--to pooh-pooh the denigration of the flawed
methodology, perhaps because it has done well by you, personally, over
the years. Since you are a persuasive guy, I guess if you just keep
repeating your mantra, a lot of people are likely believe you, but
THAT won't make you correct either--except in the eyes of those you
have succeeded in duping.

If a sample can legitimately include six people from one apartment
building, why not get all 100 from the same building? Many
multi-family buildings are plenty large enough to have more than 100
residents. If my numbers are right and 100 people, in effect,
represent 600,000, each of the 100, in a mannier of speaking,
represents 6000. Six people from that one apartment building then
represent 36,000 people. There are entire communities in the
Providence market that don't have a population of 36,000. Carried to
an exteme, I could claim that I an qualified speak for the 40<some>
thousand people who live in my town of Arlington. Gimme a break! I
can't even legitimately claim to speak for the few hundred people who
live on my block. Heck, my next-door neighbor and I hardly agree on
anything.

-----
Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
eFax 1-707-215-6367

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chuck Igo" <chuckigo@maine.rr.com>
To: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>; "Boston Radio Interest"
<boston-radio-interest@rolinin.bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 11:36 AM
Subject: Re: Arbitron's sampling methodology is FAR more important
than Mr orMrsDePetro's misdeeds


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
> Subject: Arbitron's sampling methodology is FAR more important than
> Mr or MrsDePetro's misdeeds
>

> Dan -  if i were not broadcast/media affiliated, my household has 6
> people over the age of 12.  if we were willing and qualified to be a
> "diary household," it seems to me we would not be precluded.  and
> like anyone who has done a diary review in Maryland will tell you,
> there are a good chunk of those things that filled out in the same
> handwriting for several days at a time.  Maybe the head-of-household
> takes the time to try to make sure the diaries are return with at
> least something written in them - especially when the novelty of
> doing this has worn off for the remainder of the household after 2
> weeks of dutiful tracking.
>
> the "different apartment numbers" is another issue.  why would the
> company allow one person to speak for 5 (or 50) other residents in a
> single "apartment" building.  that portion of your question does beg
> some discourse.  although i have not personally seen any explanation
> of this mess that illustrated, as fact, 6 diaries for 6 separate
> apartments in one building.  i have seen 6 diaries for one address
> duly noted in just about every account of the story.
>
> yes - the system does leave some things to be desired.  but, like it
> or not, they are the company that has been issuing the listening
> estimates for the better part of 4 decades now.  the newer
> technologies won't make it any better, either.  the PPM will be
> designed to track the signals of stations being monitored.  so how
> do they explain 9 or 10 non-stop hours of listening to one station
> when they do not realize the PPM was left on the kitchen counter
> next to the small radio that is left "on" during the day to either
> keep the household pets company or to give the impression that
> someone is home?
>
> just sayin' that there are flaws in every system - but 6 people at
> one address does not an exclusion make.
>
> --Chuck Igo