Helge Holbæk-Hanssen and Knut-Arne Futsæter EMRO, Tallinn 2006

1. From circulation to multimedia in Norway Helge Holbæk-Hanssen and Knut-Arne Futsæter EMRO, Tallinn 2006

2. Agenda 1. Introduction 2. More frequent and detailed reporting of readership figures 3. The Norwegian discussion 4. Circulation, readership and media houses 5. What did we learn?

3. 1. Introduction

4. Introduction • Competition from TV Meter and Internet • The demand for more frequent and detailed reporting of readership figures (From FRY to PRR EMRO 2000). • Daily and seasonal fluctuations in readership levels (EMRO 2003) • Cross media research and experiences (EMRO 2005) • How did the marked meet the new figures for weekdays and seasons?

5. 2. More frequent and detailed reporting of readership figures

6. Newspaper measurement in Norway • The Norwegian NRS has since 1988 been carried out on CATI. The reason is that the peculiar Norwegian newspaper structure, with its large number of local and ultra-local newspapers, still calls for quite a large sample and highly sophisticated sampling structure, which within reasonable cost limits could only be achieved using CATI. • Pure Recent Reading (PRR) is used for calculating readership figures for 146 newspapers. • The NRS has some advantages due to more frequent and detailed reporting: • Daily national representative sample. • Interviews distributed evenly across the days of the week. • Information on each newspaper’s publication days. • Information on which day each interview was conducted is recorded by the CATI system.

7. Reporting of historical figures • The number of interviews per paper varies from 200 to 32,395 yearly. • 200 interviews per paper is set as the minimum threshold for reporting. • Depending on the number of interviews for the paper, we can give figures for seasonal and daily fluctuations.

8. Rules for reporting of historical figures Sample size and irregular fluctuations • Minimum of 200 interviews per reporting unit. • Possible minimum and maximum (e.g. 10%) change. Changes in title level • Change of issue date • No reporting of weekdays. • New and combined papers • Must be published and measured for at least 12 months • Only the last 12 months are used for calculation and no trend reporting.

9. Daily fluctuations for total daily reach and number of newspapers Index The indices are calculated by dividing the claimed yesterday level for each day by the average for all days. 32,395 interviews in 2005.

10. Daily fluctuations for different newspaper groups Index The indices are calculated by dividing the claimed yesterday level for each day by the average for all days. 32,395 interviews in 2005.

11. Seasonal fluctuations for different newspaper groups Index The indices are calculated by dividing the claimed yesterday level for each day by the average for all days. 32,395 interviews in 2005.

12. 3. The Norwegian discussion

13. Background • From pure newspaper houses to consolidated media groups • The demand from our owners to present figures for the companies total reach • The demand for more and frequent data: • In September we gave the market for the first time readership figures for weekdays and seasons • …..in a time when the circulation figures have dropped the last six years:

14. 4. Circulation, readership and media houses

15. Norwegian newspapers: Circulation figures 1983 – 2005 (index, 1983 = 100)(110 comparable newspapers) Index 1983=100

16. Circulation figures for the national tabloids (index 1983 – 2005)

17. The presentation of the 2005 figures • Up to 2005 we used to present the circulation figures in mid. February and the readership figures in March: No problems • For the first time we presented the circulation and the readership figures at the same time: • Decline in circulation (-2,4%) • Stable readership • Biggest discrepancy: VG – the biggest newspaper in Norway and also the biggest newspaper on net.

19. VG: Paper and net Daglig antall tusen lesere

20. The reactions • ”This is an attempt to hide the circulation problems. The Norwegian newspapers are in deep shit.” • ”The readership figures must be wrong: Circulation down, readership up!” • ”It’s impossible to have three readers pr. copy!” • ”The media industry try to hide information about method and results” • ”The OTS measure is not good enough.”

21. But………….. • …..we did not get any reaction at all regarding our presentation of the new readership figures for weekdays and seasons. • Due to lack of dramatic results, the market received the new information with a big yawn.

22. What did we do? • We tried to explain the relation between circulation and readership: No short time relation! • We tried to explain how a newspaper can achieve three readers per copy. • We showed where to find information about method and results – information we have given the market every time we are publishing new data. • We showed that the number of readers can be STABLE even if the coverage is falling:

23. Percent coverage for VG, Dagbladet and Aftenposten 1992-2005

24. What did we do? • And we showed that there is a long term relation between circulation and readership figures:

26. 5. What did we learn?

27. What happened? • We had a meeting with MIO (Association of Norwegian Media Agencies) and ANFO (The Norwegian Advertisers Foundation) : We gave a common press release, saying: • We accept the content and the methodological quality of the existing newspaper survey (Forbruker & Media). • We agree the need for more media information in addition to reach • The three parts agree to establish a collaboration council. The council will discuss and propose any changes in the survey • From this month (May 2006) there is a new and a (nearly) full JIC in Norway.

28. Distance between buyer and seller Advertiser Sales effect? Comm. effect Advertising dependent Attention Reach - ad Reach - medium Advertising independent Circulation Ad sales rep

29. Thank you!