Reviews
Part of A scoring method is what makes radio advertising reviews useful
Why a radio advertising product comparison needs a scoring method
A radio advertising product comparison works when every product is scored on the same weighted criteria, with compliance checks done up front.
What to take away
- The ICO's enforcement action page lists fines and reprimands issued against organisations that broke marketing rules, so it is the first stop when you weigh compliance risk.
- A product comparison scores each option on named criteria, such as audience measurement, clearance route and data duties, rather than ranking by headline price.
- Compliance and sanctions checks belong before shortlisting, because a cheaper product with a poor record costs more to fix.
- One scorecard should cover a single station spot, a national network buy and a streaming audio placement, so the numbers are comparable.
Comparing products on one scorecard
A radio advertising product comparison is a scoring exercise, not a price list. The products rarely look alike: a local analogue spot, a national network buy and a streaming placement each carry different measurement, clearance and reporting.
A documented comparison scores each product on criteria and weights agreed before scoring, as the radio advertising reviews and comparison methods for 2027 page sets out.
Each product brings its own contract length and reporting cycle. The scorecard exists to make those differences visible before budget is committed.
Criteria that separate the products
Five criteria do most of the work. Audience measurement shows how the product is verified; for UK broadcast radio, RAJAR is the industry currency.
Clearance route covers who approves copy and how long that takes; commercial radio copy is cleared by Radiocentre against the BCAP Code. Data duties cover consent and targeting under the ICO and CAP rules.
Reporting covers what you receive after transmission. Commercial terms cover minimum spend, cancellation and make-good.
Five scoring criteria
- Audience measurementhow the product is verified
- Clearance routewho approves copy, how long
- Data dutiesconsent and targeting rules
- Reportingwhat you receive after transmission
- Commercial termsminimum spend, cancellation, make-good
Weight the criteria to match the campaign: a brand campaign may put measurement first, a direct response campaign reporting and make-good.
Define each criterion before you score anything. For measurement, that means naming RAJAR and the reporting interval. For clearance, it means the Radiocentre route and the turnaround.
Compliance and sanctions first
Before scoring, check the ICO and ASA records. The ICO enforcement action examples show the kinds of penalties that follow unlawful marketing, which is the risk you are pricing when a product handles consumer data. Date each check, because those records are updated and an old note can mislead a shortlist.
Compliance checks before scoring
- Check the regulator record
- Date each check
- Review ICO enforcement action examples
- Review ASA sanctions information
- Record checks in the shortlisting stage
The ASA sanctions information covers the further action available when advertisers breach the BCAP Code or CAP Code. Both checks take minutes and belong in the shortlisting stage, alongside any agency review you commission, such as our radio advertising agency reviews in England.
Where products differ most
Single station spot
- Measurement
- RAJAR
- Clearance
- Radiocentre clearance
- Data duties
- Limited targeting
- Reporting
- Transmission log
- Minimum spend
- Low (non-market example: £500)
National network buy
- Measurement
- RAJAR network totals
- Clearance
- Radiocentre clearance
- Data duties
- Limited targeting
- Reporting
- Consolidated report
- Minimum spend
- High (non-market example: £10,000)
Streaming audio placement
- Measurement
- Platform-reported delivery
- Clearance
- Platform ad review
- Data duties
- ICO and CAP rules apply
- Reporting
- Dashboard metrics
- Minimum spend
- Auction-based
The £500 and £10,000 figures are non-market examples, not quoted rates. The pattern matters more than the numbers: streaming audio shifts risk towards data and platform rules, while analogue buys shift it towards clearance and scheduling.
Where products differ most
Single station spot
- Measurement
- Station audience data
- Clearance
- Station copy team
- Data duties
- Limited targeting
- Reporting
- Transmission log
- Minimum spend
- Low, e.g. £500
National network buy
- Measurement
- Network-aggregated data
- Clearance
- Network clearance desk
- Data duties
- Limited targeting
- Reporting
- Consolidated report
- Minimum spend
- High, e.g. £10,000
Streaming audio placement
- Measurement
- Platform-reported delivery
- Clearance
- Platform ad review
- Data duties
- Consent and targeting rules
- Reporting
- Dashboard metrics
- Minimum spend
- Auction-based
Agency and operations fit
A product that scores well on paper can still fail on operations. Ask who books, who approves copy and who reconciles the invoice. If an agency sits in the middle, its buying process becomes part of the product. LinkedIn's ad resources for marketing agencies cover agency buying workflows.
Scoring and reweighting
Score each product from one to five on each criterion, multiply by the weight, and add the totals. Keep the raw notes, because the reasoning is what a client or finance team will question.
Agree what a score of one and a score of five mean for each criterion. Without that anchor, two reviewers will score the same product differently.
The worked example below is illustrative, not a market rate.
| Criterion | Weight | Score (1-5) | Weighted score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Measurement | 20% | 4 | 0.80 |
| Clearance | 15% | 3 | 0.45 |
| Data duties | 20% | 5 | 1.00 |
| Reporting | 30% | 2 | 0.60 |
| Commercial terms | 15% | 4 | 0.60 |
| Total | 100% | 3.45 |
The example scores one product at 3.45 out of 5. The weights reflect a direct response campaign, so reporting carries the most weight. A brand campaign would use different weights.
Review the weights quarterly. Measurement panels, platform policies and clearance processes all move, and a scorecard built last year may rank products differently today.
Before and after the scorecard
Before
- Shortlisting
- Price-led, ad hoc
- Compliance
- Checked late, if at all
- Comparison
- Products judged separately
- Decision
- Buyer preference
- Review
- Annual, informal
After
- Shortlisting
- Criteria-led, documented
- Compliance
- Checked before scoring
- Comparison
- Shared weighted score
- Decision
- Evidence and weights
- Review
- Quarterly reweighting
The change is mostly ordering: compliance checks move ahead of shortlisting, and decisions rest on recorded weights.
Common questions
How many products should a comparison cover?
Three to five is workable. Fewer gives no real choice; more than five usually means the criteria are too loose to separate them.
Should compliance checks come before or after scoring?
Before. A product with an unresolved enforcement or sanctions issue should be priced with that risk included, or excluded from the shortlist.
Can one scorecard cover analogue and streaming audio?
Yes, if the criteria describe the job rather than the technology. Measurement, clearance, data duties, reporting and terms apply to both.
How often should the weights change?
Quarterly is a reasonable default. Change them sooner if a measurement source, platform policy or clearance route shifts mid-campaign.
