Passive vs. Active TV PSA Evaluation: More Sophisticated Tracking Can Double Reported Value
by Bill Goodwill

Until recently, the only fairly reliable method of evaluating the usage of public service advertising was to place a business reply card (BRC) in the PSA package distributed to broadcast outlets.

Although everyone who used this evaluation technique knew that it was not entirely accurate, BRCs were the only method available to track usage, and the assumption was that it is better to have some data than none at all. Further, BRCs also allow feedback not available by any other means, such as the dub format preference for TV stations, the name of the public service director, and address.

However, any time there is human involvement in a process, particularly when that process gains no revenue to the organization providing the service, there is bound to be resistance and room for error. Such is the case with evaluating BRCs that public service directors must "actively" complete and return to the evaluator. Also, many television station public service directors are not sure of the airplay schedule for any given PSA.

Most TV PSAs are placed in automated "rotation," and the public service director normally does not get affidavits to show usage. Although stations are required to maintain broadcast logs, many of them are not computerized. And due to the tremendous number of PSAs in a station's inventory at any given time, it is not feasible to report PSAs aired for every PSA campaign used by a station. Accordingly, much of BRC reporting involves "guesstimates" based on likely or projected usage.

Adding to the problem, PSAs can get pre-empted by a paid commercial at the last moment, perhaps even after the public service director has returned the evaluation bounce-back card. Finally, our campaign experience shows that typically 80 percent of BRCs are not returned by stations unless the evaluator uses more aggressive follow-up techniques such as phone surveys or mailgrams.

To provide clients with a more accurate method of evaluation, Goodwill Communications has been testing the A.C. Nielsen "SIGMA" passive monitoring service since January, 1995. To track usage via this system, TV PSAs are encoded electronically prior to duplication. This invisible code is placed on the master tape at a location that is not used by the recipient station. Nielsen monitoring equipment tracks PSAs using this code in all 213 ADI markets and issues weekly raw data reports to Goodwill Communications. We then prepare cumulative PSA usage reports depicting airplay from both actual (SIGMA) and projected (BRC) sources.

In using SIGMA data for several different clients, it is clear that many stations that previously did not respond via bounce back cards do in fact use PSAs. More importantly, as the chart above shows, the total value from SIGMA evaluation can far surpass projected usage from BRCs.

Passive v. Active Monitoring

Another distinct advantage of passive monitoring techniques is that we can show clients the specific time when their PSAs aired. By analyzing the daypart for PSA usage, we have a much better idea of the types of audiences we are reaching with our PSAs than was ever possible using the BRC evaluation technique.

The chart below depicts SIGMA daypart data for one of a series of PSA campaigns we evaluated for the Peace Corps. About 55 percent of TV PSAs ran during the most desirable dayparts from 9 a.m.-1O p.m. This data contradicts the view that PSAs run only during "junk" time.

Network Monitoring

Until recently - even with the SIGMA system - there was no reliable and fairly affordable monitoring source for commercial and major cable network PSA usage. Although the four leading commercial networks inform distributors when a PSA accepted and fed to their affiliates, they do not provide actual usage data or dollar figures of air time value.

Through our work with four different military services, we have used Broadcast Data Services for many years to track commercial and cable network usage. Using an exclusive process that assigns an electronic "fingerprint" to each USA being monitored, BDS tracks exact usage for all network exposure, including daypart and the programs in which PSAs aired. Similar to SIGMA, it provides us with raw data on usage for a particular time period, and we cumulate and integrate this data with other tracking data in our client reports.

Our BDS evaluation studies indicate that network exposure can account for as much as two-thirds of the overall total for a PSA campaign. As shown in the chart below depicting BDS data for the U.S. Navy, dollar values reported for the three major commercial networks and major cable networks amounted to $5.2 million in network exposure, or 68 percent of their total PSA attainment in FY '95.

Since TV networks and stations generally place military PSAs in a lower priority, we believe the military USA usage data is conservative compared to the usage for nonmilitary clients. Without this type of monitoring, clients may be able to substantiate only a third of the actual exposure they receive from their PSA campaign. See the chart below for an example showing network attainment.

BRC advantages

In spite of the advantages of passive monitoring, very legitimate reasons exist for continuing to use BRCs to evaluate usage, even beyond confirmation of station information. No system does a very good job of tracking local cable television PSA usage, and cable is becoming increasingly important in the media mix. Other than for the very largest systems, BRCs are still the best method to obtain feedback from local cable, and our analysis shows consistency between SIGMA and BRC usage patterns.

Clearly the die has been cast, however, in favor of more sophisticated evaluation methods for TV - a trend that will continue as electronic tracking procedures proliferate among cable TV, and even for radio and print media.

Television Business Reply Cards are a valuable tool for keeping media lists updated. As an evaluation tool, they will become less important as more sophisticated tracking systems are developed.