To: mike@stlmedia.net
Cc: Joe Kromer j.kromer@hatchglobalresearch.com
Sent: Wed, May 5, 2010 4:32:05 PM
Subject: HATCH POST
Hi Mike,
We were notified of your recent post on STLMedia.net regarding our research studies.
Ethnicity has NOTHING to do with our honorariums. In this particular example, the studies’ participation requirements (the length of time the participants are at Hatch ) are different. Subsequently, the payouts to respondents are different. In addition, these two studies were completely independent of one another so they cannot be compared fairly.
I respectfully urge you to remove the inaccurate post immediately or we will be forced to contact our attorney.
Please confirm receipt.
Thank you,
Lindsay Marsden
National Sales Director
Hatch Research
(contact info redacted)
I responded:
Ms. Marsden:
Over the years at STLMedia.net I have addressed the issue of the inadequacies of various research providers to deal with multi-cultural population segments. All sorts of ways have been utilized, most of them only marginally successful, to bring minority participation to a useable level that truly represents that given audience segment. Most of the ways have involved using more or less cash as a premium for response. More cash for more highly desired responses, less for others. One exception, particularly abhorrent, was floated briefly by Arbitron a few years ago when they suggested that adding costume-jewelry style decorations would actually increase the use of the PPM device among certain minority groups. The idea, to Arbitron's credit, was quickly sent down the memory hole.
For forty years, then, at least in my experience, I have seen research providers manipulate minority groups so as to use their responses to the research company's best advantage. This works as well, by the way, on the "front end" (concurrent and remembered listening) as it does on the "back end" (focus groups, music tests and so on). Different carrots and different sticks provide different results, of course.
In the end, research companies wind up diddling the numbers, "weighting" segments up or down and provide the client with "as if" results.
So I'm a little confused. What, exactly, was inaccurate about the post at STLMedia.net? I published your email message exactly as it was sent. I will be happy to publish your response but at the moment I'm disinclined to remove a post that is not inaccurate in any way and is, in fact, written by you and in your own words.
Please advise.
Mike Anderson
Editor/Publisher, STLMedia.net
(contact info redacted)
There's always a third-level associate lawyer eager to make his bones on his employer's monthly retainer or some schlub seeking his potential 33%...bring 'em on. Just call me Captain Pro Se.
