CTV vs Radio Advertising for Law Firms

Radio has been a PI advertising staple for decades. But as audiences shift, is radio still effective compared to CTV? Here's how they compare.

The Fundamental Difference

56% attention rate for CTV vs. significantly lower for background audio media.

Reach Comparison

Radio Reach

• Local stations have loyal audiences
• Drive-time peaks
• AM/FM plus streaming audio
• Fragmented across many stations

CTV Reach

• 90% of households use streaming
• 44.8% of TV time is streaming
• Growing audience
• Consolidated through major platforms

Both reach substantial audiences—through very different contexts.

Engagement Comparison

Radio Engagement

Strengths:

• Frequency through repetition
• Voice familiarity (host reads)
• Captive audience (commutes)
• Local feel

Limitations:

• Background medium (partial attention)
• No visual recall
• Message must be simple
• Distraction competition

CTV Engagement

Strengths:

• 94-96% completion rates
• Full attention environment
• Visual + audio branding
• Premium content context

Limitations:

• Less repetition at same budget
• No portability
• Higher production requirements

Cost Comparison

Radio Costs

Factor	Typical Range
:30 spot (local)	$50-300+
Production	$500-2,500
Frequency packages	Varies
Effective CPM	$5-15

Radio is cost-efficient for frequency.

CTV Costs

Factor	Typical Range
CPM	$35-50
Production	$15,000-35,000
Minimum budget	$15,000-25,000/month

CTV requires higher investment but delivers more per impression.

True Cost Consideration

Radio's low CPM comes with:

• Lower attention per impression
• No visual branding
• Harder to measure
• Requires very high frequency

Production Comparison

Radio Production

• Simple to produce
• $500-2,500 typical
• Quick turnaround
• Easy to test variations
• Multiple versions feasible

CTV Production

• More complex
• $15,000-35,000 typical
• 4-8 week timeline
• Fewer variations at start
• Significant investment

Radio's production simplicity is a legitimate advantage for testing.

Measurement Comparison

Radio Measurement

• Very difficult to attribute
• "How did you hear about us?" relies on recall
• No click/visit tracking
• Lift studies possible but expensive
• Mostly faith-based

CTV Measurement

• Verified visit tracking
• Multi-touch attribution
• Call tracking integration
• Branded search correlation
• Accountable performance

CTV's measurability is a major advantage.

Targeting Comparison

Radio Targeting

• Station format (demo proxy)
• Geographic (signal area)
• Daypart
• Limited precision

CTV Targeting

• Geographic (zip code level)
• Behavioral signals
• First-party data
• Audience segments
• Precision targeting

CTV offers significantly better targeting options.

Creative Effectiveness

Radio Creative

• Must hook in 3-5 seconds
• Phone number repetition essential
• Jingles can aid recall
• Voice/personality driven
• Limited message complexity

CTV Creative

• Visual + audio storytelling
• Emotional impact possible
• Brand personality shown
• More message capacity
• Faces create connection

For law firms, the ability to show the attorney and build visual recognition is valuable.

Where Radio Works

Radio still makes sense for:

• Very tight budgets
• Frequency building (repetition)
• Specific drive-time capture
• Local personality endorsements
• Testing message concepts
• Supplementing TV presence

Radio Sweet Spots

Scenario	Radio Fit
$5K/month budget	May be only option
Drive-time commuter focus	Strong
Host-read endorsements	Effective
Message testing	Good
Primary awareness channel	Weak

Where CTV Wins

CTV outperforms for:

• Brand building
• Measurable performance
• Professional credibility
• Visual recognition
• Modern audiences
• Accountable ROI

CTV Sweet Spots

Scenario	CTV Fit
$20K+/month budget	Primary channel
Brand building priority	Essential
Measurement requirements	Only real option
Premium positioning	Strong
Multi-channel integration	Superior

The Integration Question

Radio + CTV

Some firms run both:

• CTV for visual brand building
• Radio for frequency extension
• Different audiences, same message

Works when:

• Budget supports both
• Messaging aligned
• Measurement accounts for both

Budget allocation: If doing both: 70-80% CTV, 20-30% radio

Radio Alone vs. CTV Alone

Given same budget:

• CTV provides more measurable impact
• CTV builds visual brand
• CTV audiences are growing
• CTV integrates with search

For most PI firms, CTV is the better primary investment.

The Audience Trend

Radio Listening

• Stable but not growing
• AM/FM → Podcasts/streaming audio
• Younger audiences leaving
• Drive-time remains strong

CTV Viewing

• 71% growth since 2021
• Audiences shifting from linear TV
• All demographics adopting
• Clear growth trajectory

Following audience trends favors CTV.

The Recommendation

For complete channel comparison, see the CTV vs traditional advertising guide.

References

• Decentriq. (2025). CTV advertising: The complete guide. https://www.decentriq.com/article/ctv-advertising
• Nielsen. (2025). Connected TV: Transforming advertising trends. https://www.nielsen.com/insights/2025/connected-tv-transforming-advertising-trends/
• Nielsen. (2025). Streaming reaches historic TV milestone. https://www.nielsen.com/news-center/2025/streaming-reaches-historic-tv-milestone/
• IAB & Innovid. (2022). CTV takes center stage. https://www.iab.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Innovid_CTV-Takes-Center-Stage.pdf