The following information has been taken directly from RAJAR's press release this morning

Number tuning in to radio reaches new high

91.7% of UK population tune in to radio every week – new high*
Total radio listening hours reach 1,076 million per week
Listening via a digital receiver reaches 26.9% of all radio listening
Access to a DAB receiver up 11.1% year on year to 20.2 million adults
7.5 million (14.4%) of adults listen via a digitally enabled TV, up 11% year on year
Internet listening hours up by 15.4% year on year
Mobile phone listening up 16.1% year on year

The number of people listening to radio reached a new high in Q2, 2011, as 47.6 million adults or 91.7% of the population (15+) tuned in to their favourite stations each week†, it was announced today by RAJAR Limited (Radio Joint Audience Research). This figure is up by over three-quarters of a million listeners (845,000 listeners) in comparison with the same period in 2010 and exceeds the previous high of 47.3 million last quarter (Q1, 2011). The total number of radio listening hours has also increased year on year to 1,076 million hours per week or 22.6 hours per listener (c.f. 1,030 million hours in Q2, 2010 and 1,058 million hours in Q1, 2011).

Radio listening via digital platforms
Listening to radio via a digital platform in terms of weekly reach† has increased by 10.7% year on year, with 22.1 million people now tuning in to radio via a digitally enabled receiver (DAB, DTV, internet) each week (up from 20 million in Q2, 2010).

This increase is reflected in the digital listening hours for Q2, 2011 which are up 14.3%, from 253 million hours in Q2, 2010 to 289 million hours this quarter. DAB radio continues to retain its position as the most popular device when it comes to listening to digital radio, accounting for 63.8% of all digital hours, however listening via DTV (digital television) and internet have both continued to rise year on year, (hours up by 23.7% and 15.4% respectively) albeit from a smaller base.

DAB hours are 185 million (162m in Q2, 2010 – up 13.6%)
DTV hours are 52 million (42m in Q2, 2010 – up 23.7%)
Internet hours are 34 million (30m in Q2, 2010 – up 15.4%)

The share of radio listening via a digital platform accounts for more than one quarter of all radio listening increasing from 24.6% in Q2, 2010 to 26.9% in Q2, 2011, while remaining relatively stable quarter on quarter (c.f. 26.5% in Q1, 2011). DAB listening increased its share from 15.8% in Q2, 2010 to 17.2% in Q2, 2011, while the share of DTV listening increased from 4.1% in Q2, 2010 to reach 4.8% this quarter; and internet listening, which broke the 3% barrier for the first time in Q4, 2010, currently stands at 3.2% for Q2, 2011.

This is the highest weekly reach recorded since records began in 1992, irrespective of methodological changes in 1999 and 2007.
† Weekly reach is the number of people (adults 15+) in the UK who listened to a radio station for at least five minutes in the course
of an average week during the quarter.

Access to a DAB receiver
Access to a DAB receiver is up 11.1% year on year and is almost three times the level of five years ago. In Q2, 2011 almost two in five of the population (38.9%), or 20.2 million adults (aged 15+) claimed to live in a household which has a DAB set (c.f. 18.2 million in Q2, 2010 and 7.6 million in Q2, 2006).

Radio listening via mobile phone
Radio listening via mobile phone has increased by 16.1% year on year with 14.5% of adults aged 15+ in Q2, 2011 saying they have listened in this way (c.f. 12.5% in Q2, 2010). In the 25+ demographic 11.4% say they have listened to the radio via their mobile phone, up from 9.2% in Q2, 2010. In the 15-24 demographic nearly a third or 31% of those surveyed now claim to have listened to the radio in this way with 14.8% stating they listen at least once a week and 3.3% stating they listen every day.

Detailed data and individual radio station data, for both BBC and Commercial Radio stations, are available on the RAJAR web site at www.rajar.co.uk from 00.01hrs, Thursday August 4, 2011.

So today sees the start of the new product placement rules on British TV.

I can’t help but wonder what impact this will really have for the TV landscape and communications professionals.

Some reports suggest as much as up to 5% of total TV revenue will come via this route, but at the lower end some are predicting £35m per year . . . so is it really worth it . . . and what impact will it have on the communications and editorial sectors that focus on delivering the subliminal messaging of brand placement.



So as of today lets all be looking out for the P sign (above) at the start of a programme, which if based on current information would suggest only a few programmes as yet, and means that for now the only reference I’m going to see for a P will be if I’m watching reports of years gone by from decade of Bob Holness and Blockbusters and ‘Can I have a P please Bob’

As a broadcast evangelist it is my job to digest all information and understand it, and as such share it also so if you have any queries or want some information on how it could work or impact on you and your brand please feel free to email me at TVplacement@markettiers4dc.com

So, 16 years after we first opened our studio doors, whilst we've embraced TV, online and social media in our full broadcast offering, it's always encouraging to see research that confirms what we said all those years ago when we started banging the drum for radio PR.

Since those early days of our business, despite the launch of 24 hour news channels, and the growth of the online news distribution, more people still trust radio news (66% or radio listeners) compared to news websites (58 per cent of internet users) and TV news output (54 per cent of TV viewers). These latest findings are from Ofcom’s latest Media Literacy reports, which reveal the UK’s media consumption habits and attitudes.

More details can be found at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consumer/2010/05/uk-internet-users-becoming-more-security-conscious/

So, after a weekend of yet more conjecture having woken up on Friday to the news that no single party had won the election and that the exit poles appeared to have got it right, communication experts have begun to dissect the campaigns to look at where it went right or, more worryingly for some, where it went wrong and what lessons there are to be learned.

But what can we in the communications industry learn or, more to the point, be reminded of from this campaign?

As with many brands and organisations, the UK's political parties have tried to engage with an audience, build a community and deliver a call to action to ‘buy’ their brand i.e. to vote for them. One could argue that, collectively, they have done a very good job. Turnout was up and there were queues outside the ‘shops’ / polling stations of people keen to 'buy' one of them.

We’ve seen traditional marketing tactics deployed including above-the-line advertising. There has been print media editorial with some newspapers switching allegiances, point-of-sale with local sampling teams and broadcast, but what happened to Social Media?

It was only a few months ago that we were being told that this was the election where Social Media would take its place in influencing the political shape of the country in the same way perhaps Barack Obama’s campaign did in the US. However for me, with a vested and subjective interest, I will have to stand in the corner and raise my hand for the power of broadcast and how this media has, once again, shown its strength to influence.

For the first time we have had the Leader Debates, if we can describe them as such. I would argue they were more influential in mobilising an audience than the traditional TV ad of the party political broadcast. We can also analyse the debates themselves and the personal performances of the ‘brand spokespersons’ and draw conclusions and analogies to what we deal with day to day. There is no doubt they were effective in engaging an audience with a call to action to register and vote, but how much influence did each spokesperson have on us the electorate to 'buy' their brand? Nick Clegg most certainly used the opportunity to raise awareness for the Lib Dems and looks set to have a big say in the final outcome if the activity of the last few days is anything to go by.

As we all know, when you are dealing with a powerful media, its great when it goes in your favour but tread careful and be respectful to it, otherwise it can also work against you. One only has to observe Gordon Brown’s ‘gaffgate’ episode to see this in practice.

Rule one as anyone will tell you in broadcast is to assume the mic is live at all times until you are certain its been switched off. I watched with intrigue not only that moment unfold 'live' on television, but also as the TV cameras followed Brown into the radio studio to be interviewed by Jeremy Vine. This is a media which can mobilise itself very quickly and whilst being made aware of the recording and realising the severity of his comments, Brown importantly also realised the influence of broadcast media.

So whilst no one party can claim an outright victory, I hereby declare Broadcast the winner and a timely reminder of its power to influence.

It was only a few months ago that the conversation amongst commentators and marketing professionals was all about how this year's General Election was going to be the first influenced by social media, following the model of success used by Barack Obama in the USA.

However whilst one will acknowledge that yes social media is most definitely influencing our daily lives and those of customers and audiences, the election itself has also provided a stark reminder of the true power of traditional broadcast and in particular TV.

Whilst as an agency we have undertaken WebTV debates with the three main party leaders with excellent response, I do need to acknowledge the overwhelming power of the live TV debates. Nick who? a few months ago to now a genuine candidate who could yet have a big say in the final decision as to who is Prime Minister. What has interested me amongst all the goings on is the way the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg have mobilized the youth vote. Have they relied on social media; the media of choice for this age group?

As an observer with an interest in both media and politics I have been intrigued to see how they have used traditional methods to encourage young people to both register to vote and then show an interest. Was it Facebook & Twitter encouraging young people to vote or Nick Clegg . . . or was it the media playout i.e. the Live TV debates and his performance in front of camera? My view would be Social Media most certainly helped promote and bring it to the attention of many, but is was the performance and campaigning messages of Nick Clegg on TV that has potentially mobilized their audience to register and vote.

As I write this we are about to witness the second of the Live TV debates, and observers and commentators alike will analyze the performances once more and the tactics of each candidate to try and gauge what impact it has had on peoples choice of vote. At this point it would be good to remember we should be voting for our local MP and policy as technically we do not cross the box for who we want as Prime Minister.

So if we were to draw an analogy from the election to the world of commerce, does a strong orator and communicator automatically make a good leader ahead of their actual leadership or management skills. Is Richard Branson a better leader than Michael O’Leary?

One thing is for certain, the election has reminded us of how a strong interview on television can still have a huge influence on the masses.