• by September 30, 2005

INITIAL MEETING - Perhaps the most telling sign that the Audience Measurement Initiative may have trouble building a consensus among its members is the apparent lack of agreement over something that would seem fairly simple to start with: how they should pronounce its initials. This was evident Thursday during its official unveiling at an Advertising Research Foundation forum in New York where we observed a considerable amount of acrimony over the acronym. Is it "A-M-I," spelled out the way speakers referred to it some of the time? Or is it "Amy" - pronounced like the popular female name - that speakers used at other times? Or should it be said the way the French might, pronounce it "Ah-me?"

AMI's founders offered no clues. No one advanced any ideas for enumeration studies to discern how many people might pronounce it one way vs. another. And there certainly was no discussion about what methodological research might come up with the most accurate estimates for that. Even resident industry bean counter George Ivie said he was reluctant to audit the process or accredit the proper pronunciation. "If you think getting Nielsen to comply is tough, just try building a consensus around this one," Ivie, executive director of the Media Rating Council told the Riff, invoking one of the oddest elocutions of all: "Mommy!" But the strangest articulation of AMI came from Nielsen research chief Paul Donato, whom we could overhear intoning: "Hum-ana, hum-ana, hum-ana!"

In fact, Andy Fessel, the research muckety-muck at Carat's Freestyle Interactive unit, suggested the proper AMI intonation is actually in the ear of the beholder. If you think it's a good thing, as he apparently does, then, "You could take the French pronunciation of the word." That of course, means "friend." Univision research diva Ceril Shagrin noticeably winced at Fessel's suggestion, blurting out, "Amigo, amigo, amigo, por favor."

Others were less than friendly to such interpretations. Erwin Ephron, someone not known to mince words on such occasions, suggested the AMI crew alter one of its. Instead of "Audience" Measurement Initiative, Ephron implied AMI would be better suited if it were the "Advertising" Measurement Initiative. The focus on "audience," he said as too narrow at a time when advertisers are trying to understand not whether audiences were simply exposed to a medium, but whether they actually had a "probably to see" advertising in that medium.

That sparked some acronymic mimicry from consultant Nick Schiavone, who observed that a separate ARF initiative, MI4, appeared to be exploring an even higher order audience measurement issue - engagement - that might well be relevant to the AMI team. Instead of GRPs, Schiavone noted that MI4 is seeking to develop GEPs, or gross engagement points. But don't hold your breath for that development, said ARF chief Bob Barocci. "MI4 is about ten years from now. AMI is about today," said Barocci, noting that corporate media heavyweight, Procter & Gamble's Bernard Glock "thinks it will take at least 10 years." Apparently, this particular research task force requires that its members remain really, really engaged.

Someone who looked quite engaging during the AMI unveiling was Knowledge Networks' consultant Gale Metzger, and it wasn't just the knowing smirk he wore on his face through most of the festivities, but the snazzy fashion accessory knotted around his neck.

"Nice tie," gushed Targetcast research diva Michele Buslik, as Metzger made his way through the crowd. And after a bit of chatter about the AMI name, observed, "Now SMART was a smart name." SMART, of course, stood for System for Measuring and Reporting Television, the audience measurement initiative Metzger founded some years ago.