Nielsen secured a significant legal victory when the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted the company's request to stay a preliminary injunction on February 3, 2026. The decision effectively reverses a lower court order that had prohibited the measurement company from enforcing its controversial radio ratings policy against Cumulus Media.

According to court documents, Circuit Judges John M. Walker Jr., Barrington D. Parker, and Joseph F. Bianco determined that Nielsen "met the requisite standard for a stay pending appeal" as established in Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009). A Nielsen spokesperson confirmed that the injunction is no longer in effect during the appeal process.

The appellate ruling suspends the December 30, 2025 preliminary injunction issued by United States District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas. That lower court order had found Cumulus demonstrated a strong likelihood of proving Nielsen violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by using monopoly power to coerce purchases of local ratings data.

The contested network policy

The dispute centers on Nielsen's "Network Policy" announced in September 2024. The policy conditions the sale of comprehensive national radio ratings data to networks with affiliated local stations upon those local stations subscribing to Nielsen's local radio ratings data in every geography where both Nielsen and the stations operate.

Cumulus operates nearly 400 radio stations across the United States and owns Westwood One, which produces national programming including NFL and NCAA broadcasts. The radio broadcaster filed its antitrust lawsuit on October 16, 2025, alleging that Nielsen maintains monopoly power in both national radio ratings data markets and 80 separate local radio ratings data markets where Cumulus owns stations.

The practical implications prove stark. Cumulus owns one local radio station in Los Angeles that does not currently purchase Nielsen's Los Angeles local radio ratings data. Under the contested policy, national radio ratings data sold to Westwood One would exclude all data from any radio stations in Los Angeles despite Los Angeles data being critical for national advertisers seeking comprehensive audience reach.

Nielsen executive Rich Tunkel characterized the implications on a July 25, 2025 call with Cumulus, describing national ratings data without these excluded geographies as "Swiss cheese" with "holes" that would not constitute the "real" or "useful" product, according to the complaint. Tunkel admitted Nielsen was tying its local and national products together.

Measurement ecosystem fundamentals

National radio ratings data and local radio ratings data serve fundamentally different purposes in the advertising ecosystem. Local ratings measure listening within a single geographic area, showing how individual stations perform against competitors in audience size, demographics, and time spent listening. Nielsen refers to its comprehensive national product as "Nationwide," which includes radio ratings from all geographies Nielsen measures across the United States.

Westwood One requires national radio ratings data to sell advertising inventory to national advertisers and agencies. Most national advertisers and advertising agencies refuse to purchase advertising inventory from national networks without Nielsen's national radio ratings data. When advertising agencies issue requests for proposals to national networks like Westwood One, the networks use Nielsen's national ratings data to generate proposals showing advertising inventory and rates. Advertising agencies then upload these proposals to media-buying platforms such as Mediaocean.

National networks also rely on national ratings data for post-buy analyses. If programming fails to garner sufficient impressions compared to what the network promised, the network may be required to provide additional advertising inventory or cash payments to make the advertiser whole.

Local radio stations purchase local radio ratings data to sell advertising inventory to local businesses and advertising agencies targeting specific geographies. The local data contains metrics important to advertisers including audience size, demographic reach, and time spent listening. Advertisers and agencies often consult Nielsen's summary-level local ratings data when determining which stations to approach for advertising purchases.

Market concentration and pricing

Nielsen faces limited competition in local radio ratings markets. Eastlan Ratings provides local ratings in some geographies but most frequently operates in areas where Nielsen does not provide data. Upon information and belief stated in the complaint, Eastlan has the ability, willingness, and incentive to enter new geographies with even a single local station purchasing its data.

In 75 of the 80 markets where Cumulus owns stations, Nielsen is the only provider of local radio ratings data, possessing a 100% market share, according to the complaint. In five markets where Eastlan also provides data, Nielsen receives the vast majority of revenue paid for local ratings provision.

Nielsen is the sole provider of national radio ratings data in the United States. No other company offers comprehensive national radio ratings used by national networks, advertisers, and advertising agencies to buy or sell advertising inventory.

The measurement company holds this position despite consistent price increases and quality issues. Nielsen unilaterally raised the price of its product sold to Cumulus by almost 36% in 2022, according to court documents. The company lost Media Rating Council accreditation in 17 geographies representing roughly 43% of the total population ages 12 and above in geographies measured by Nielsen's Portable People Meter method.

Previous anticompetitive allegations

The Network Policy represents Nielsen's latest attempt to maintain market power through exclusionary conduct, according to the complaint. In 2022, Nielsen forced upon Cumulus its "Subscriber First Policy," which excluded all non-subscribing local stations from summary-level local radio ratings data typically purchased by advertising agencies.

As a result, Cumulus was required to purchase local radio ratings data from Nielsen for geographies where its stations wished to appear in any summary-level data. For example, Cumulus did not subscribe to Memphis local radio ratings data from Nielsen despite owning local stations there. Nielsen's exclusion of Cumulus's Memphis stations from summary-level data resulted in advertising revenue losses. One advertising agency explicitly attributed its decision to stop purchasing any advertising inventory from Cumulus's local stations to those stations no longer appearing in Nielsen summary-level data.

The Subscriber First Policy prevented local radio stations from purchasing and using Eastlan data. Upon information and belief, the policy resulted in other local stations purchasing local radio ratings data from Nielsen instead of Eastlan to avoid removal from summary-level data.

Notably, Nielsen did not implement a similar policy for national and local television ratings data provided to television networks with affiliated television stations. Comscore operates as a strong competitor in the television market, limiting Nielsen's ability to take anticompetitive actions in that sector, according to the complaint.

Infrastructure barriers to competition

Nielsen's conduct creates substantial barriers preventing Eastlan and potential competitors from entering local and national radio ratings markets. At every step of the advertisement buying process, competitors face systematic exclusion from critical industry infrastructure.

Neither Act 1 nor Mediaocean accepts national radio ratings data from anyone except Nielsen, according to the complaint. Act 1 provides the portal through which national networks and advertisers analyze national ratings data, while Mediaocean serves as one of the more prominent media-buying platforms used by national advertisers and agencies for network buys and national spot buys. National networks and local stations would be unable to sell advertising inventory to advertisers and agencies on these platforms if they purchased Eastlan data.

Tapscan, Nielsen's analytical software for local radio ratings data, previously accepted Eastlan data but no longer does. Tapscan only accepts Nielsen data as input, and its output can easily be uploaded to media-buying platforms such as Strata or Mediaocean, according to court documents.

These barriers exist despite Eastlan offering improvements over Nielsen's products. Eastlan uses a hybrid recruitment methodology of e-diaries and telephone interviews providing larger, more representative samples. The company balances samples against day of week, age, gender, race, and zip code, allowing samples to better mirror markets and provide more accurate information to advertisers and agencies.

Eastlan's products are also more affordable than Nielsen's in most markets, often significantly so. In Memphis, the price of Nielsen local radio ratings data exceeded six times what Cumulus currently pays for Eastlan's Memphis data, according to the complaint.

The preliminary injunction's terms

Judge Vargas found that Cumulus satisfied its burden of demonstrating that a preliminary injunction was necessary to prevent irreparable harm, that Cumulus has a strong likelihood of succeeding on the merits, that the balance of hardships weighs toward Cumulus, and that the public interest favors a preliminary injunction.

The order specifically prohibited Nielsen from enforcing its Network Policy and from charging commercially unreasonable rates for its Nationwide Report as a complete, standalone product. For purposes of the order, a rate equal to or lower than the highest annual 2026 rate Nielsen charges any broadcaster for Nationwide was presumptively reasonable.

This pricing benchmark proved significant because Nielsen sells Nationwide as a standalone product to national networks without affiliated local stations for amounts similar to what Cumulus paid before the Network Policy implementation, and substantially less than Nielsen currently proposes charging Cumulus. These national networks do not own any local stations that could purchase local radio ratings data.

The court's detailed reasoning remains under seal due to competitively sensitive information about parties and nonparties. An accompanying sealed opinion was docketed, with the court delaying public filing to allow parties to propose redactions. The parties were required to submit proposed redactions by January 7, 2026.

Financial and operational stakes

If Westwood One loses access to comprehensive national radio ratings data, the impacts would prove severe. The national network would face material financial losses and reputational harm, including loss of goodwill in relationships with advertisers, advertising agencies, affiliates, and content and service partners.

Missing data from even one or two major geographies could significantly lower metrics measuring the national audience for a network, underreport the audience of programming, reduce revenue opportunities, and render shows and programs less competitive and less marketable to advertisers.

Advertising agencies may require that responses to requests for proposals include data from certain markets such as San Francisco. If radio ratings data from San Francisco do not appear in Westwood One's analyses, the network may be automatically excluded from consideration, may not have its proposal seriously considered, and may be unable to sell advertising inventory to that advertiser.

Westwood One's relationships with content and service providers would also suffer damage. Content and service providers sign revenue share agreements with Westwood One, and any decrease in revenue from impaired ability to sell advertising inventory would likely result in content and service providers leaving. Any sense of impaired ability to sell advertising inventory would sow doubts and raise concerns driving providers to exit.

The network's relationships with thousands of affiliates would face jeopardy as well. If Westwood One loses access to the Nationwide product, the network would be unable to accurately monetize the inventory of affiliates in affected geographies, damaging relationships and causing affiliates to broadcast programming from competitors instead.

Even before Westwood One loses access to the Nationwide product, advertisers and agencies would likely elect not to purchase inventory from Westwood One, knowing the network faces likely access loss later in 2026. Many advertisers want to sign contracts in late 2025 for advertising inventory running throughout 2026. If these advertisers expect Westwood One to lose access to the Nationwide product later in 2026, they will likely purchase inventory from entities not facing these issues.

The Second Circuit's decision to grant a stay pending appeal follows established legal standards for such motions. Under Nken v. Holder, courts evaluate four factors when considering stays pending appeal: whether the applicant has made a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits, whether the applicant will suffer irreparable injury absent a stay, whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure other parties, and where the public interest lies.

The three-judge panel's determination that Nielsen "met the requisite standard" suggests the court found sufficient merit in Nielsen's appellate arguments to warrant suspending the district court's injunction while the appeal proceeds. However, the order does not provide reasoning for the stay decision, stating only the conclusion that the standard was met.

Cumulus opposed Nielsen's motion for a stay, according to the court record. The radio broadcaster also moved to seal its opposition to the motion, which Nielsen did not oppose. The Second Circuit granted Cumulus's motion to seal its opposition, keeping the arguments contained in that filing confidential.

The appellate case is designated as Case No. 26-88 before the Second Circuit. The original district court case remains pending in the Southern District of New York under case number 25-CV-08581 before Judge Vargas.

Broader antitrust enforcement context

The Nielsen case arrives amid intensifying antitrust enforcement across the advertising and technology sectors. Multiple companies have filed follow-on antitrust lawsuits following a federal court's April 17, 2025 ruling that Google illegally monopolized digital advertising markets.

OpenX Technologies filed suit on August 4, 2025, seeking damages for monopolization. PubMatic followed on September 8, 2025, alleging systematic anticompetitive conduct including unlawful tying arrangements and auction manipulation. Magnite filed on September 16, 2025, and Index Exchange sued on November 10, 2025.

The pattern reflects growing willingness by industry participants to challenge dominant measurement and advertising technology providers through antitrust litigation. Private plaintiffs increasingly leverage government antitrust victories to establish liability foundations for financial recovery.

Major publishers have also pursued antitrust claims against technology platforms. Vox Media filed a comprehensive federal antitrust lawsuit on January 14, 2026, alleging Google's monopolization of advertising technology markets deprived the publisher of billions in revenue. Penske Media filed on September 12, 2025, targeting Google's AI content use practices.

Technology companies face antitrust scrutiny beyond advertising markets as well. Apple faces trial after a federal court denied the company's motion to dismiss a major antitrust lawsuit brought by the Department of Justice alleging illegal smartphone monopolization.

Television measurement transformation

While Nielsen fights legal challenges in radio measurement, the company has pursued significant changes to its television measurement business. Nielsen ended stand-alone panel-based TV ratings in the fourth quarter of 2025, transitioning to its Big Data + Panel methodology that combines traditional panel data with device-level information.

The company launched Big Data + Panel measurement as the standard currency for the 2025 TV season, implementing enhanced measurement that combines 42,000 panel homes with inputs from 45 million households and 75 million devices. Nielsen received Media Rating Council accreditation for the combined approach in January 2025.

Nielsen has secured major television measurement deals despite competitive pressure. The company locked in a comprehensive partnership with Gray Media extending local television measurement across all 113 designated market areas where the broadcaster owns stations, representing approximately 37% of the U.S. television audience.

The measurement company also expanded its strategic partnership with Roku on December 22, 2025, incorporating Roku's viewing data into Nielsen's advanced campaign measurement while granting Roku access to Nielsen's Streaming Platform Ratings.

Radio industry implications

Nielsen's response to the preliminary injunction reversal remains to be seen. The measurement company has steadfastly refused to provide market-by-market pricing for local radio ratings data in individual markets, despite Cumulus's repeated requests over months. Instead, Nielsen has stated that local ratings pricing depends on Cumulus's purchase of other Nielsen products, according to the complaint.

In September 2025, Nielsen made a proposal to Cumulus purporting to offer the Nationwide product separately but for almost ten times what Cumulus currently pays. Nielsen also offered an alternative allowing Cumulus to purchase the Nationwide product and local ratings data in 32 geographies Cumulus wants to purchase, but at a price intended to disqualify itself as an option. The complaint characterizes these offers as chimeras made at price points Nielsen knew would force Cumulus to accept the original overtly tied product terms.

The case carries broader implications for the radio industry. If Westwood One faces difficulties selling advertising inventory, the entire radio advertising ecosystem suffers. Content providers lose revenue share payments. Affiliates lose monetization opportunities. Advertisers lose access to audiences. Local businesses lose effective advertising channels.

The stay provides temporary relief for Nielsen while the underlying antitrust claims proceed through the appellate process. Cumulus seeks treble damages under the Sherman Act, along with permanent injunctive relief prohibiting Nielsen's anticompetitive conduct and mandating steps to restore competition. The company also brings claims under California's Unfair Competition Law for Nielsen's conduct affecting California stations and radio markets.

Nielsen faces allegations it willfully maintained market power in local radio ratings markets through multiple exclusionary and anticompetitive practices. The Subscriber First Policy degraded the quality of summary-level local ratings data for advertisers, agencies, and local stations by excluding stations that did not purchase Nielsen's overpriced data. The policy also discouraged local stations from purchasing Eastlan data, as they would not appear in Nielsen's summary-level data purchased by anyone in that geography.

The company stands accused of monopolization in the national radio ratings market as well. Nielsen's actions preventing Eastlan from gaining footholds in local markets also prevent the competitor from developing the scale, reputation, and relationships necessary to enter the national market, according to the complaint.

Despite offering improvements over Nielsen's products and more affordable pricing, Eastlan cannot overcome the systematic barriers Nielsen has erected across the measurement ecosystem. The result is reduced output, less innovation, reduced choice, and higher prices than would exist in a competitive market, according to Cumulus's allegations.

Next steps in litigation

The appellate stay suspends the preliminary injunction while Nielsen's appeal proceeds. The Second Circuit will review Judge Vargas's determination that Cumulus demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits of its antitrust claims and that the balance of hardships weighs in favor of the preliminary injunction.

The district court litigation continues separately from the appellate proceedings. Cumulus's underlying antitrust claims remain pending, with the case potentially proceeding to trial on the merits of whether Nielsen violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act through its Network Policy and related conduct.

The sealed opinion explaining Judge Vargas's preliminary injunction reasoning may eventually become public with redactions, providing more detailed analysis of the antitrust issues and competitive dynamics in radio measurement markets. The deadline for parties to propose redactions passed on January 7, 2026.

Radio measurement operates differently from television measurement where Nielsen faces stronger competition. Nielsen's audio research shows radio still captures nearly 70% of average daily time spent by listeners on ad-supported audio, demonstrating the format's continued importance for advertisers. The measurement company's quarterly reports on U.S. audio listening trends track consumption across radio, podcasts, streaming services, and satellite radio.

Second quarter 2024 data revealed Americans spent an average of 4 hours and 5 minutes daily with audio content, with radio continuing to dominate the ad-supported audio landscape at 67% of daily listening time among adults 18 and older. The continued strength of traditional radio formats underscores the commercial importance of accurate measurement data for advertising sales.

The outcome of Nielsen's appeal and the underlying litigation could reshape how radio audience measurement operates across the United States. Whether courts ultimately determine that Nielsen's Network Policy violates antitrust law remains to be determined through continued proceedings in both the district court and the appellate court.

Timeline

  • September 2024: Nielsen announces "Network Policy" conditioning national ratings access on local ratings purchases
  • July 25, 2025: Nielsen executive Rich Tunkel admits to Cumulus that national data without excluded geographies would be "Swiss cheese"
  • August 18, 2025: Cumulus sends Nielsen cease-and-desist letter explaining why the policy violates antitrust laws
  • September 16, 2025: Nielsen responds with proposal to sell Nationwide product at almost ten times previous price
  • October 16, 2025: Cumulus Media files antitrust lawsuit against Nielsen in Southern District of New York
  • December 30, 2025: Judge Jeannette A. Vargas grants preliminary injunction blocking Nielsen from enforcing Network Policy
  • January 7, 2026: Deadline for parties to propose redactions to sealed opinion
  • February 3, 2026: Second Circuit grants Nielsen's motion for stay pending appeal, suspending preliminary injunction
  • 2022: Nielsen implements "Subscriber First Policy" excluding non-subscribing stations from summary-level local ratings data
  • 2022: Nielsen unilaterally raises price of national radio ratings data sold to Cumulus by approximately 36%

Summary

Who: The Nielsen Company LLC appealed a preliminary injunction to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, with Circuit Judges John M. Walker Jr., Barrington D. Parker, and Joseph F. Bianco ruling on the motion against Cumulus Media New Holdings Inc., owner of nearly 400 radio stations and parent company of Westwood One national network.

What: The Second Circuit granted Nielsen's motion for a stay pending appeal on February 3, 2026, suspending United States District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas's December 30, 2025 preliminary injunction that had blocked Nielsen from enforcing its "Network Policy" tying access to comprehensive national radio ratings data to purchases of separate local ratings products and prohibiting commercially unreasonable pricing for its Nationwide Report as a standalone product.

When: The appellate court issued its order on February 3, 2026, determining that Nielsen "met the requisite standard for a stay pending appeal" under Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009), effectively suspending the preliminary injunction that had been in effect since December 30, 2025, with the underlying antitrust case filed October 16, 2025.

Where: The case is being heard in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under case number 25-CV-08581 before Judge Vargas, with the appeal designated as Case No. 26-88 before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, affecting radio broadcasting and advertising across all 275 radio markets in the United States, particularly the 80 markets where Cumulus owns stations.

Why: The Second Circuit determined Nielsen satisfied the four-factor test for stays pending appeal including likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable injury absent a stay, substantial injury to other parties, and public interest considerations, temporarily reversing the district court's finding that Cumulus demonstrated a strong likelihood of proving Nielsen violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by using monopoly power in national radio ratings markets to coerce purchases of local ratings data while the appeal proceeds.

Share this article
The link has been copied!