{"id":24288,"date":"2021-11-12T20:06:00","date_gmt":"2021-11-12T19:06:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/goldbach.com\/media-professionals-are-often-wrong-in-their-assessment-of-media-usage\/"},"modified":"2025-12-16T17:37:39","modified_gmt":"2025-12-16T16:37:39","slug":"media-professionals-are-often-wrong-in-their-assessment-of-media-usage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/goldbach.com\/en\/studies\/media-professionals-are-often-wrong-in-their-assessment-of-media-usage\/","title":{"rendered":"Media professionals are often wrong in their assessment of media usage"},"content":{"rendered":"

In autumn 2021, Goldbach Media and the Swiss Interest Group for Electronic Media (IGEM<\/a>) conducted a study in cooperation with WEMF<\/a> AG für Werbemedienforschung on the media usage of marketing and media professionals (Ad<\/a> People) compared to the general population. Over 650 people took part in the Online survey. The study is intended to use concrete figures to show Ad<\/a> People whether their assumptions about general media usage differ from the actual usage of the population and to what extent they use the media differently. <\/strong><\/p>\n

Zurich, 9 November 2021 – In August and September 2021, Goldbach Media and the Swiss Interest Group for Electronic Media (IGEM<\/a>) conducted the study «Media Bias: Media Usage of Marketing and Media Professionals Compared to the Swiss Population» with over 650 media professionals (Ad<\/a> People). The participants were asked about their media usage behavior and their assumptions about general media usage. The questions on electronic media came from the questionnaire of the IGEM-Digimonitor, so that comparability with the survey of media usage of the general population was given. The MA Strategy was chosen as a comparison study for the use of Print. <\/p>\n

Background and objective of the study<\/strong><\/p>\n

With the help of the study, IGEM<\/a> and Goldbach Media want to use concrete figures to show whether and to what extent the media usage behavior of Ad<\/a> People and their assumptions about general media usage differ from the actual usage of the population. The aim is to start a discourse in the industry in order to become aware of the possibly distorted perception and its consequences in media planning<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Conclusion: Ad<\/a> People are on average 10 percentage points off in their estimation<\/strong><\/p>\n

The media usage behavior of Ad<\/a> People differs in some cases significantly from that of the general population, with Ad<\/a> People using media more on average. While both groups use the classic media (Print, TV & Radio) very heavily, the newer media (streaming<\/a> services, social media, messenger services, etc.) are used significantly more by Ad<\/a> People. Depending on age, professional experience and hierarchical level, however, the usage behavior of Ad<\/a> People differs. The greater the professional experience and the higher the hierarchical level, the more they use the classic media – the opposite is true for most newer media. A central finding of the study is that Ad<\/a> People are on average 10 percentage points off in their assessment of the media usage of the general population: Underestimation of the classic media and overestimation of the newer media. These results underline once again why it is worthwhile to conduct media usage research and to use the data for marketing decisions. <\/p>\n

Most important results and findings<\/strong><\/p>\n

Different usage patterns lead to distorted estimates, whereby classic media tend to be underestimated and newer media tend to be overestimated. It is all the more important that decisions in media planning<\/a> are made on a fact-based basis by drawing on research data. <\/strong><\/p>\n