IRS 2017: Code of Conduct issued to subscribers to access full report
The full survey is expected to be available later today
Published - Jan 19, 2018 2:57 PM Updated: Jan 19, 2018 2:57 PM
In one of its first kind, the MRUC has given out a code of conduct for publicity of the IRS 2017 results. “The Subcriber may not compare the IRS 2017 data with any previous IRS rounds,” the code of conduct reads.
The Code of conduct also says that “Any claim for “leading”, “No.1” or to establish top position by any parameter/s should ONLY be based on a like to like comparison,i.e. the same set of readership/listenership / viewership data to be compared amongst publications/radio stations / TV channels / any other media, sourced only from IRS 2017.”
The other conditions in the code of conduct which the subscribers mandatorily need to accept to have access to the full survey includes:
· Comparison should be restricted to publications of similar publishing frequencies, i.e., Daily newspapers to Daily newspapers, weekly newspapers to weekly newspapers and magazines to magazines.
· Comparison should be between similar readership frequencies – i.e. AIR to AIR, 1-3 days to 1 – 3 days, 1-7 days to 1 – 7 days and TR to TR.
· For any specific demographic, geographic, product profile category the comparison should be done with the same set of comparable readership/listenership / viewership numbers for all publications/radio stations / TV channels / any other media
· Users may not promote gain/loss in variables reported in IRS 2017, versus any previous rounds of IRS for reasons enumerated in Para (a) above.
Also, it has to be noted that the subscribers cannot use the survey for publicity without specifying the georaphical area (city, state, country) “in the same font size has the headline”
The conditions that are to be included for “variant editions” are:
· The readership of the “main” edition of a newspaper should not be clubbed along with that of readership of the “variant” editions of the respective newspaper/s
· The “main” edition and the “variant” edition should be treated as two different newspapers
· Publishers should refrain from issuing misleading communication wherein readership numbers of Main+Variant are reported as a single readership number for that publication.
· Media planners should verify readership being used for comparison between publications, i.e., Main or Variant, and ensure like-to-like comparisons are used for selection of publications
· Readership numbers of Main issue of one publication should be compared only with the Main issue readership numbers for other publications.
· For any cost comparisons, it is essential to verify whether the right rates, from the Main issue or Variant issue rate cards, are being used for all selected publications to ensure no incorrect comparisons are made.
While the report was being written, the full survey was not available. It is expected to be available by later today.
WhatsApp, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook & Youtube