NAFB Wave Research Study
I’ve been meaning to write about the National Association of Farm Broadcasting’s Wave Research Study. Looking at this month’s Agrimarketing Magazine prompted me to go ahead. I found it ironic that there’s an ad for Farm Journal Media early in the publication touting their position compared to other major ag pubs and quoting the NAFB study. Then NAFB has an ad later in the magazine which has information superimposed on a GPS unit (why?).
The bottom line from NAFB’s standpoint seems to be that farmers still turn to the radio as their main source of daily information and that makes sense to me. There’s a lot of information in the study which I’m sure you can obtain from the NAFB office if you haven’t seen it.
Some things that caught my eye in the summary information includes the fact that NAFB acknowledges the changing farm media landscape with the internet playing a key role. The study shows that 69 percent of Class 1A farmers have internet access. That’s even higher than the most recent USDA NASS Farm Computer Usage and Ownership study, “For farms with sales and government payments between $100,000 and $249,999, the figures are: 70 percent have access to a computer, 66 percent own or lease a computer, 51 percent are using a computer for their farm business, and 61 percent have Internet access. The number keeps growing and at a fast pace. The study also shows that almost half of these farmers have high speed internet access (44.2%). It also says that producers under 49 years old and with higher levels of income are heavier users of the internet.
I’m going to make an assumption that when the summary says that web site choices “are so abundant that fragmentation is occurring – there are no individual sites or categories that clearly are “most valuable” to farmers” they mean they didn’t get a consistent unaided answer from the surveys. I don’t see this as a weakness though. That’s the strength of the web and why it’s so important to be a part of the conversation. Farmers are all over the web for the same reasons any of us are (searching for information, entertainment, etc.). The web isn’t about “mass audience numbers” but “niche audience numbers.” If I’m looking for weather I’m going to focus on a weather site, for news, a news site, for equipment, equipment sites, and on and on it goes. The web gives farmers lots of choices and I think that’s what they want!
Your thoughts?
It's time to thank our farmers and ranchers for all their hard work to feed us.
3 Comments
Mark Jewell
Chuck,
I agree with your statement, “The web isn’t about “mass audience numbers” but “niche audience numbers.” It requires a mind shift for some. You have to be okay with not having all the attention – but if you are gaining the attention of that niche audience that cares about what you have to say, there is a lot of power in that. Marketers should pay attention to this as well. Figure out who you are exactly trying to advertise to – identify the ag bloggers/podcasters are that speak regularly to that audience, and sponsor them. I believe there is more value there, than a spendy add that falls on deaf ears.
Andy Vance
I think you’ve read the data correctly Chuck. The higher up the gross farm income (GFI) curve you go on these producers, the more likely they are to have broadband access, and the more likely they are to use it on a more regular basis than their lower-income counterparts. This is somewhat intuitive if you assume that the “higher end” producers have higher information needs regarding their marketing strategies and how the news and weather affect those plans.
From a marketers standpoint, the beautiful thing for radio is that the fragmentation with web-based media, as with print-based media, means you have to buy many more properties to achieve a similar saturation. Because radio is “broadcast” instead of “narrowcast” – like niche print and web tools – a marketer can but a relatively small number of NAFB-member networks and stations to achieve an exceptional penetration into a given segment of the market.
The beauty of the internet, of course, is that is – in theory – quantifiable in a way that neither radio nor print can possibly be. I say in theory simply because the industry hasn’t decided on the best way to do the quantification; an internet version of AMR, in other words. It may be that something as simple as Google Analytics, which many of us use, will be sufficient. NAFB’s Marketing and Promotion Committee is working with our partners in the agrimarketing community to determine that very thing. As we determine that, I think NAFB members’ web-presences are uniquely positioned to make the combined radio-web mix the most useful tool in the agrimarketers’ toolbox.
I look forward to your thoughts.
Chuck
Ah, quantification. Which leads to justification. Which leads to ??? I think this is our biggest challenge in online (interactive or whatever you want to call it). I think media planners and buyers know that web sites and other forms of new media are reaching their target audience but they want to know “who” the numbers represent. As one client put it to me (paraphrased), “I don’t care how many you can directly identify, I just need a number which includes a demographic.”
This is tough to do. It’s why so many companies are still trying to control the visitor experience (log ins, registrations, premium content). That way they can identify, quantify and justify to advertisers and sponsors. However, that puts up a barrier that many won’t cross so then you’re leaving out potential customers.
With AgWired I can identify the almost 3,000 people who receive ZimmNews, which is really a promotional mechanism for the website (and our other ones too). This does give me some demographics to point to but leaves out the 10,000+ other visitors/rss feed subscribers.
There are efforts going on with the IAB and ADM to create standards but I haven’t seen anything really meaningful yet. I hope that groups like NAFB will include their efforts in the mix.
Comments RSS feed —