More fun with radio markets: Part III

"Will grant of this application result in the applicant or any party to this application having a cognizable interest in more than one commercial or noncommercial full-power radio station located in (i.e., having its community of license within) or 'home' to the same metropolitan area (Metro), as defined by Arbitron and reported by BIA?"

Thus begins the multiple ownership worksheet for radio on FCC Forms 301, 314 and 315.

A footnote goes into a bit more detail: "Note that BIA may report a particular station as 'home' to more than one Metro and have its community of license in a separate Metro. Each such Metro is 'applicable.'"

The BIA on-line market data, MEDIA Access Pro, is necessary, if you want noncommercial stations to apply to the total home to the market. That shows 42 stations in the relevant market, rather than the 33 that we referenced before. Neither the source Arbitron data, nor BIA's two excellent radio reference books, BIAfn Radio Yearbook 2004 and the BIAfn Investing in Radio Market Report 2004, list noncommercial radio stations, but they are part of BIA's on-line data.

As for Arbitron, it is neither for nor against the use of its data for this purpose. Arbitron's Thom Mocarsky told RBR that the company produces its research by its own methods and for its own purposes, and whatever use the FCC puts it to is a question for the FCC. Arbitron provided the FCC with basic information about what it does, but has no role whatsoever in the regulatory process.

RBR observation:
Mocarsky also said that when it comes to drawing up markets, there is "no whimming." He was objecting to our comment that radio markets as defined by Arbitron "...are fluid, invented - - often by the station owners - - and often quite arbitrary." He said that we were overstating the case - - there are specific guidelines which the Arbitron follows when defining markets. It is not an arbitrary process, and it is not something a client can simply waltz in and order up off some kind of market menu. We apologize for allowing our prose to go over the line (may we excuse ourselves by saying it's one of the hazards inherent in the RBR style?)

Anyway, our exploration of the new radio market definition regime is not a witch hunt. We are not trying to identify any villains - - not at Arbitron, not at BIA, not at the FCC, not on Capitol Hill, not among station group owners. What we're trying to do is figure out how the new rules are going to play out in real life, after the catalytic multiple ownership filing for a Burlington AM station (11/15/04 RBR Daily Epaper #223).

More to come.