Big question
When local channels count audiences differently, which number is good enough to move budget?
The position
Buy on the currency because the trade runs on it, and never argue a small difference in it. Treat a narrow age group in a low viewing daypart in a small market as directional only, and expose the uncertainty rather than forcing unlike currencies into one number.
Why it is live
Local currencies are audited at different levels and are changing at different speeds, and per-market panel sizes go to subscribers and are published nowhere. The MRC's Q2 2026 status update confirms accreditation is granted product by product and metric by metric, and the OAAA selected Ipsos for an out of home measurement pilot in March 2026.
The case for using the numbers
DocumentedThe trade transacts on them daily, and the scope of every accreditation is published on the same page as the accreditation.
The case against precision
UnknowablePer-market panel sizes are published nowhere, one out of home seller's own properties carried four different market counts and screen counts from 17,000 to 22,000 on a single day in August 2026, and no dated statement could be found either reinstating local television accreditation or continuing its suspension.
Where the weight sits
Against precision and for use. Buy on the currency, refuse to defend a small gap in it, and say which of those you are doing when challenged.
What would change this
The accreditation body publishing a dated decision on local television accreditation, or the measurement company publishing per-market panel sizes.
Where this is taught
Connected Local
Sources
- Media Rating Council television accreditation, accessed 5 Sep 2026primary
- Media Rating Council Q2 2026 accreditation status update, 14 Jul 2026primary
- OAAA measurement modernisation pilot, 31 Mar 2026secondary