CTV vs Radio Advertising for Law Firms

CTV: 56% attention, 94% completion, 90% household reach with verified attribution. Radio: audio-only, unmeasurable. Split: 70-80% CTV.

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

Option A

Option B

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

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:

Limitations:

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

Cost Comparison

Radio Costs

FactorTypical Range
:30 spot (local)$50-300+
Production$500-2,500
Frequency packagesVaries
Effective CPM$5-15

Radio is cost-efficient for frequency.

CTV Costs

FactorTypical 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

ScenarioRadio Fit
$5K/month budgetMay be only option
Drive-time commuter focusStrong
Host-read endorsementsEffective
Message testingGood
Primary awareness channelWeak

Where CTV Wins

CTV outperforms for:

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

CTV Sweet Spots

ScenarioCTV Fit
$20K+/month budgetPrimary channel
Brand building priorityEssential
Measurement requirementsOnly real option
Premium positioningStrong
Multi-channel integrationSuperior

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

1

If Choosing One

CTV for most PI firms. Better brand building, measurable results, growing audience.

2

If Budget Allows Both

CTV primary (70-80%), radio supplementary for frequency and specific dayparts.

3

If Very Limited Budget

Consider radio for frequency, but know measurement limitations.

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

References