Isn’t it strange how we seem to spend most of our lives attempting to classify the various things, people, places around us. Its almost as if we require this process in order to fully understand, to put things into perspective as it were. Racket sports as opposed to motor sports, dairy products, horror movies…
However as media planners and buyers will agree, there are certain classifications that are imperative to our work. Geographic segments, income brackets and of course demographics generally. And its the latter of these three that I think deserves some inspection.
According to NRS the Social Grading classifications were born from a survey dating back over 50 years. They also claim “it remains a highly effective way of classifying readers of different publications”. Certainly the natural hierarchy of Doctors and Lawyers still holds true, but surely there must be instances of social migration; leading to a shift in the traditional running order? For example, teachers (according to NRS) are classified as B, whilst Junior Managers come in at C1. Subtleties aside I think it’s fair to assume that teachers are generally considered underpaid for their efforts and that it’s certainly not the desirable austere profession it was some 50 years ago.
More obvious discrepancies include skilled tradesmen (sparkies, plumbers etc) that can demand a very high premium for their services now that they’re seemingly in short supply. Then there’s musicians, celebrities, and sports personalities… where do they fit into this antiquated rank?
In my opinion it no longer ‘remains a highly effective way of classifying readers of different publications’ but rather an old fashioned way of doing business that’s no longer relevant to today’s consumer.