We now have more understanding of a federal judge’s decision to grant Cumulus Media a preliminary injunction against The Nielsen Company in its closely watched antitrust dispute that could prove a watershed moment for the audio measurement and ratings industry.
On Thursday night, US District Judge Jeannette Vargas’s entire 47-page Opinion and Order was published with some redactions, ruling that Cumulus showed a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of its Section 2 Sherman Act claims and made a strong showing of irreparable harm.
The court’s order blocks Nielsen’s challenged “Network Policy” while the case proceeds.
The fight over whether Nielsen can condition access to its national radio ratings product on a broadcaster’s purchases of Nielsen’s local ratings data is framed as more than a pricing dispute. Cumulus alleged Nielsen used a coercive tying arrangement to maintain monopoly power in national radio ratings data while reinforcing dominance in local radio ratings markets.
Nielsen argued that Cumulus could not show antitrust injury and cast the case as a contract dispute over money. The court rejected that narrowing at the preliminary stage, concluding the record supported a finding that the policy threatened competition in the tied local-ratings markets and constrained meaningful choice for networks that must carry comprehensive national ratings to compete for national advertising.
The judge’s opinion zeroes in on what she called a “constructive tie.” When Cumulus tried to purchase only the national ratings, Nielsen either refused to quote a price or presented one “so exorbitant as to make it economically unfeasible” – reportedly ten times higher than Cumulus’s existing rate. Judge Vargas wrote that the pricing effectively forced broadcasters to buy bundled services they didn’t want.
Nielsen remains the only provider of full national radio ratings in the US. Its network ratings product aggregates local market data across more than 250 metro areas into a twice-yearly national dataset used by advertisers and networks like Cumulus’s Westwood One. Because those national numbers are essential for ad sales, any missing data immediately damages revenue potential.
According to the ruling, Nielsen’s “Network Policy,” implemented in September 2024, capitalized on that dependence. Under the policy, if a network broadcaster didn’t subscribe to Nielsen’s local ratings in every market where it owned a station, Nielsen would withhold those markets’ data from the national product.
Judge Vargas noted that “because Nielsen’s Nationwide product is essential to selling national radio advertising, the loss of access to complete data would cause immediate and irreparable harm.”
In defense, Nielsen argued that bundling helped ensure data consistency, prevent “free-riding,” and recover local collection costs. The court rejected those claims, calling them “largely unquantified and hypothetical.” Judge Vargas found no credible evidence that the policy improved data accuracy or protected the company’s costs. Documents and testimony, she wrote, revealed a clearer motive: “to command subscriptions in local markets and prevent networks from getting data through the back door.”
The court also placed the Network Policy within a broader pattern of exclusionary behavior. In 2022, Nielsen implemented its “Subscriber First” policy, which removed non-subscribing stations from agency-facing data reports. Testimony from Eastlan CEO Mike Gould showed that even stations that wanted to use alternative measurement services felt pressured to stay with Nielsen, fearing invisibility to advertisers.
The injunction stops the Network Policy immediately and requires Nielsen to offer national ratings “on reasonable, standalone terms” during the case. Judge Vargas declined to dictate contract language but emphasized the goal of curing the “ill effects” of Nielsen’s “coercive” structure.
Again, the ruling is procedural, not final. It does not decide ultimate liability, damages, or permanent remedies. It does, however, set an early marker: at least on the present record, the court found the tying theory substantial enough to justify mandatory injunctive relief while the case proceeds.
Best argument for establishing a real Radio JIC (Joint Industry Committee, or Currency) I have heard some time. Consequently the JIC could offer buyers and sellers average minute ratings based on a PPM technology to feed into attention models to better compete with and complement other media. JICs, owned and manged by the industry for the industry, have consistently provided cost effective, meaningful, industry agreed, evolving and relevant neutral currency (singular) metrics to media around the world for years as I attempted to encourage when I worked for CBS radio.
Comments are closed.