The Three Most Important Things with the Three Minute Rule

The "3-Minute Rule" refers to a recent change in how Nielsen measures radio listenership, specifically within their Portable People Meter (PPM) system. Previously, stations received credit for a quarter-hour of listening only if listeners had tuned in for at least five minutes. The new rule, which took effect in January, credits stations after just three minutes of listening within a quarter-hour. This change aims to align more closely with how listeners engage with radio content today, acknowledging shorter attention spans and the increasing variety of content formats and competitors.

Last week (August 5) Steve Allan of The Research Director Inc and I participated with Radio Ink’s Editor in Chief Cameron Coats in presenting Part 2 of a discussion about Nielsen’s change in listening requirements for inclusion in PPM market ratings. Part 1 presented at the start of the year focused on the changes implemented by Nielsen. The spring sweep gave us an opportunity to look at real results and evaluate the benefit of the adjustment, reconsider tactics designed to take advantage of the previous requirements, and to consider those things that encourage rating growth given the new inclusion rules.

Nielsen clearly saw benefit to making the change or they wouldn’t have offered it. They have the information and trends from previous years and that led to this change. Radio should be embracing the change and thankful for it. It gets us closer to being able to sell impressions versus average quarter hour listening. Although Nielsen’s original projection was for 28%+ demo increases. Actual results, while up, have been significantly lower in most markets. AQH across formats averaged 11-15% growth. Which raises the question was the growth potential oversold. That’s not to, as the saying goes, look a gift horse in the mouth. Simply a question.

This projection “miss” makes one question what would we have seen if the rule didn’t change from 5 minutes to 3 minutes. What did Nielsen see in 2024 as they ran test numbers that led them to project we could see 28%+ demo increases …  and we didn’t. I’m confident that as critical as the analysts at Nielsen are, they felt confident we’d see such listening growth. It leads me to ask if radio listening and AQH are both in fact down from last year and the new rule is buoyant. These questions are ponderous.

When Voltaire first arrived on the scene we saw an increase in meter detection in PPM markets. The Voltaire “bump in ratings” was good for the first 12 months of growth potential for most broadcasters, but after the first year the playing field became level. We were comparing “Voltaire Enhanced” audio detection to “Voltair Enhanced” audio detection. It would be greatly beneficial if Nielsen were to rerun all of 2024 using the 3 minute rule.

Steve presented information that showed strong Time Spent Listening growth for CHR/Top 40 and for Christian Formats. News/Talk saw growth, but that could be driven by the news cycle. Country and Urban formats underperformed expectations, but I am of the belief that these two formats were already performing at high levels and a change in requirement wouldn’t necessarily show as much of an increase. If you already have strong TSL, shifting from 3 minutes to 5 minutes may not have much of an impact. When it comes to 18–49 and 25–54 demos, AQH was up but also below predicted growth.

The real benefit to showing increased AQH should be in an increase in sales. Its doubtful that anyone believes that they’ll see an 11-15% increase in revenue from Nielsen’s adjustment, but that is at the core of the purpose of ratings. We have seen no evidence of a rate increase tied to AQH gains, but certainly welcome such information if anyone would like to share. There is a concern that some national buyers may see the AQH rise as “already paid for” … meaning that they can cut their budget citing “bonus” impressions, or that what they’ve been paying for is what should be expected. The proper response is that they’ve been getting greater impressions that they bought.

Our approach on the webinar was to suggest sellers pushback against spend reduction due to AQH gains. Frame AQH increases as proven value, not discount justification. Theoretically, stations should be able to reduce unnecessary value-added (promotions, naming rights, non-prime bonus schedules), and avoid using promotional messaging to inflate an advertisers exposure as a way of closing a deal. The audience is there and they have value. As one of my early mentors in radio used to say of our competitors who cut rates or offered value added “they must know what their airtime is worth.”

It was of interest to note that nights and weekends showed strength. These two segments have long been thought of as fringe dayparts, but this change in Nielsen requirements shows the value of Saturday and Sunday listening as well as the weekday and weekend evening daypart. This adjustment warrants consideration of adding talent, syndication, voice tracking or repeating content in these windows. While I understand that national ad buyers ask for Monday-Friday 6:00am-7:00am, Nielsen is showing us that actual listening windows are greater than that.

I’ve written in the past the disappointment I have when I hear a station mindlessly segueing music without a talent at the helm, or “flipping a switch” on syndication and not working to localize their content in what has been referred to as fringe times. Nights and weekends lead to increased overall ratings. They’re not throwaway dayparts. Weekends and Nights lead to habitual listening and a habit is formed. Habits build loyalty and that builds an audience. Nights and weekends deserve a discussion as part of building loyal listeners.

When the change was first presented another of my initial thoughts was that it may be a smart tactic to move from two long stop sets to four shorter stop sets. We have no proof that such a move will improve ratings. I am somewhat afraid to try it. The reality of the situation is that we’ve spent two decades educating the audience that when we stop for commercials, they’re going to hear a long stop set with many units. It could in fact decrease TSL. More and shorter breaks is scary. If you go to shorter commercial breaks and air more of them, you need to be very vocal that the break will be short.

A three minute commercial break would need to be called out. “We’ll be back in three minutes.” Television does it during sporting events with split screen or a crawl that notes what’s coming up and how soon. Because we have one sense to engage, that of sound, you would have to be obvious that the break will be quick. This tactic also magnifies the importance of teasing upcoming content with an incentive to listen. Content, spoken word or music, needs to be solid and positioned to reward the listener who stays through a commercial break. Appointment listening becomes even more important.

Many years ago, when I was at WMJI in Cleveland, we first launched with four hourly commercial breaks of two minutes maximum each. The eight minutes per/hour commercial load was further enhanced by selling a unit rate. Sixties and thirties were the same price. The purpose was to encourage advertisers to buy sixty second commercials. We were very aware that listeners count units and not minutes. Two minutes of commercials sounds shorter than four thirty second commercials in one break. The tactic worked, but it was our central focus and the biggest message we promoted. “You’re never more than two minutes from music.”

More recently, while working in a corporate programming role, we were tracking the erosion of AQH in major markets. We found one market where AQH had grown. Only one out of 49 PPM markets showed AQH growth. It was Seattle. Entercom (now known as Audacy) was presenting two minute stop-sets multiple times in an hour on a couple of their stations. iHeart matched it on a couple of their owned stations. Time spent listening in the market grew. To be fair that was one market, and didn’t last long, but it did validate that shorter commercial breaks can build time spent listening.

My hesitation in endorsing or embracing shorter commercial breaks and more of them is that it’s untested. A number of broadcast companies who own in PPM markets have one or two stations showing lesser audience shares that could experiment with this tactic. What we don’t know is what we don’t know. Will the type of listener who tunes out when commercials come on the air sit through a break if they know it’s going to be a very short break.

The three most important things with the three minute rule fall into three areas. They are Programming, Sales, and Promotion.

Programming; Teasing into stop sets, regardless of length of break, is important. What can you say that incentivizes the audience to stay through the break or come back following the break. Content has to be on point.  The importance of branding and retraining audience is magnified. If you go to shorter and more frequent commercial breaks, promote that programming returns quickly. Be specific on the length of the break i.e. “Back in three minutes.” Create forward-promotion strategies to manage stop-set exits. Leverage the gains in fringe and weekend listening.

Sales; Push back on increased value-added expectations. Build from strengths: reinforce radio’s reach and resiliency. Reject that a 15% increase in AQH growth allows for a lesser ad schedule. The previously unrecognized audience is a bonus in exposure that was not accounted for in pricing. If you do go to shorter stop sets with fewer messages, market that as an advantage to advertisers.

Promotions; Because the minutes needed to qualify for a quarter hour of listening is less than in the past, promotional messaging should be shorter, can be presented in sweepers and imaging production, versus longer commercial length produced commercials. The audience hears produced promotional messaging as if it’s a commercial. Such promotional messages have greater impact when delivered by a trusted personality.