Nielsen Requested Sealed
Court in Antitrust Case by
Westwood One Inner City Press
Partial Win as in Ho
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Sept 1 -- In
the ongoing antitrust case of Cumulus, owner
of Westwood One, against Nielsen for monopoly
over-charging for nationwide data, both
parties on August 31 filed that their
September 1 evidentiary hearing should be
sealed.
Inner
City Press went to the courtroom and spoke in
opposition, from the podium. One of Nielsen's
lawyers from Gibson Dunn, Joshua Lipton,
insisted commercial harm could trump all other
issues. U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York Judge Jeannette A.
Vargas, noting the Press' First Amendment
arguments, said only the first part of the
proceeding would be sealed.
Later on September 1, she ruled similarly but
in more detailed in a 13 page order on Inner
City Press' (and the defendant's) objection to
sealing Daubert hearings in US v Ho
And
so here, Nielsen (soon, Ho):
Cumulus'
lawyer
Jennifer Fleury of Hogan Lovells Cadwalader:
Nielsen's expert excluded I-Heart and Audacy,
then Salem, to drive up the presumed
reasonable rate. [Inner City Press is here
voluntarily not publishing the actual dollar
amount, said apparently in error]
Now
Cumulus' cross of Nielsen's expert Mark
Zmijewski pka "Professor Z"
Prof
Z: My model is applicable to any customer.
Cumulus'
lawyer:
So there are five to 15 companies which buy
"nationwide" from Nielsen on a stand-alone
basis?
Prof
Z: There are 10. Not tracked by BIA, so out
Prof
Z: They were so small- Cumulus' lawyer: What
do you mean? Prof Z: Cumulus has $175.3
million in revenue. Smaller companies, I
excluded. Nielsen told me they didn't have any
information Cumulus' lawyer: You had pricing
data? Prof Z: Not from BIA. I needed that
Prof
Z: No contract is going to be exactly like
that of Cumulus' Westwood One. But I used a
benchmark. It's like looking at prices of
houses - you don't use ones that are not
comparable.
[Then Prof Z said something and quickly
apologized- courtroom sealed
Can't
go back in - but will follow the case.
The
case
is Cumulus Media New Holdings Inc. v. The
Nielsen Company (US) LLC, 1:25-cv-8581 (Vargas)
***
Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station,
NY NY 10013
Other, earlier Inner City Press are
listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2026 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
|
,
