News

February 18, 2010 8:22 AM

Geoff Smith Blog: The Sky Is NOT Falling

It’s always disconcerting when a debate centers on an incorrect or incomplete fact. Here’s how 2009’s big debate got skewed by an incorrect focus.  During the past year the TV. ratings of the Sprint Cup race broadcasts were used by the “sky is falling” faction as conclusive proof not only that the fans were losing interest in the sport, but also as proof that fan attendance at the events themselves had declined due to “waning interest.”

A corollary of that proposition claimed the recession was merely a cover to justify that decline.  So suddenly the TV. “fact” somehow proved that lowered track attendance was due to “lack of interest.:” That is simply crazy. Those of us at the race tracks knew from post-race fan surveys at the tracks that the level of satisfaction for those attending races was incredibly high (above the 95th percentile), and that many other obvious economic indicators conclusively pointed to the recession as the reason attendance suffered a “correction.”  Clearly TV ratings had no direct connection to the recession’s impacts. Why do we have to even answer to this kind of logic? 

Well, TV ratings did decline and that single fact was used as the only symptom necessary to predict the eminent death of the patient.   What most people don’t realize is that the TV ratings of the race broadcast are only one portion of the media/exposure of the sport that is consumed by NASCAR fans.  But, it happens to be a fact that TV ratings are totally relevant to the ongoing negotiations that sports leagues have with the TV networks,  so it becomes a commonly discussed topic between the league and the networks and all too often, the sole topic of discussion in the media. Yet, overall TV ratings declines were pervasive throughout television, and NASCAR’s declines were less than many other important comparables. 

So, the issue really is whether the audience is gone, or whether they went to consume the sport elsewhere. Most experts agree that the rise in “viral” communications is having an adverse impact on the core rating.  We at Roush Fenway have been arguing that these “viral” communications add to the TOTALITY of the overall audience from all consumption sources and it is the totality of all communications media that is the correct measure of the health of the sport, and is the salient point to demonstrate to present and future sponsors.  

“Totality” means measuring not only the TV race broadcast audience, but the audience that follows “shoulder programming” (special weekly programming), digital distribution from the networks, NASCAR, from the teams and so forth.  The presence of team sponsors is unique to NASCAR amongst all the major sports.  The teams themselves distribute media content.  And the sponsors of the sport collectively invest tens of millions each year toward TV commercials, digital media, sales promotions, marketing campaigns, intra-company communications, mobile marketing platforms and other forms of communication that is also consumed by the race fan.  

We clearly need some form of “total audience measurement index” (TAMi) that will capture all of these exposures.  I read in the Wall Street Journal that NBC is using a TAMi to evaluate the Olympic coverage this year.  I am certain that if we actually take the energy to measure all of the communication consumption that goes on each year, we will find the TV debate has been centered on a sliver of the overall fact, and that the aggregate communication consumption triggered by TV radio, team communications, NASCAR communications, sponsor communications, digital communications will be simply astonishing.

NESN.com

VISIT THE ROUSH FENWAY RACING PAGE

on The New England Sports
Network (NESN.com) for more of the latest news on your favorite Roush Fenway teams.

VISIT TODAY >>

Follow Roush on

Copyright 2012 Roush Fenway Racing. All Rights Reserved