Second Circuit greenlights antitrust injunction against radio ratings titan Nielsen

MANHATTAN (CN) — The Second Circuit blocked radio ratings provider Nielsen on Monday from implementing a policy change that would require its nationwide data subscribers to also purchase its local ratings data.

The policy has already been blocked since January, when a federal judge in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a preliminary injunction on behalf of Cumulus Media, which owns hundreds of radio stations around the United States and filed an antitrust suit against Nielsen over the rule change.

In a 55-page order, the Second Circuit affirmed that injunction, ruling the lower court was justified in finding Cumulus exhibited a “strong showing of irreparable harm” due to the policy.

“We find that the District Court did not abuse its discretion by determining that Nielsen effectively coerced Cumulus into purchasing its local data in certain markets that Cumulus did not otherwise want,” opined the three-judge appellate panel. “We also find that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in concluding that Nielsen’s conduct had anticompetitive effects in the tied market or in rejecting Nielsen’s proffered procompetitive justification.”

In its 2025 lawsuit, Cumulus claims the new requirements run afoul of federal and state antitrust laws by conditioning access to its national data on the purchase of its local analytics. In doing so, Cumulus argues Nielsen is abusing its dominance of national and local radio audience data to squeeze out more cash from its customers and stifle its opponents.

Cumulus claims this anticompetitive behavior prevented it from acting as a free buyer — it had hoped to purchase only Nielsen’s national data and get local analytics from one of its competitors.

Cumulus sent Nielsen a cease-and-desist letter over the issue, accusing it of violating antitrust law, and Nielsen agreed to waive its policy by offering Cumulus a standalone price for just its national product.

However, the lower court ruled this standalone offer was “priced so exorbitantly" — 10 times more than it normally paid for national stats — that it didn’t give Cumulus a meaningful choice at all.

“We agree,” the Second Circuit ruled Monday. “We conclude that Nielsen’s non-cost-justified and ‘exorbitant’ standalone offer for Nationwide within the context of negotiations here rises to the level of coercion by effectively forcing Cumulus to purchase unwanted local markets data from Nielsen.”

The court also agreed with the District Court’s finding that “Nielsen’s conduct had anticompetitive effects in the tied market.”

“That conduct coerced the purchase of the tied local data products and restricted competition in those markets,” the judges found. “And it is precisely the type of ‘economic pressure’ we have said is the hallmark of tying liability.”

Behind Monday’s ruling are U.S. Circuit Judge Myrna Perez, a Joe Biden appointee; U.S. Circuit Judge Alison Nathan, another Biden appointee; and U.S. Court of International Trade Judge Gary S. Katzmann, a Barack Obama appointee.

“We’re extremely pleased with the Second Circuit’s decision affirming the district court’s preliminary injunction,” a spokesperson for Cumulus said in a statement to Courthouse News. “The ruling reaffirms the strength of our position and the arguments we’ve made throughout this litigation.”

Nielsen didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Complicating matters is Cumulus’ ongoing bankruptcy claim, which the company attributes — at least in part — to its dispute with Nielsen. A bankruptcy judge in April greenlit a restructuring deal that will cut $592 million in Cumulus debt and give control of the company to its lenders.

Cumulus owns and operates 395 radio stations across 84 media markets across the country. Networks like it rely on data from Nielsen, which sells radio ratings analytics, to sell airtime to advertisers. And as a result of Nielsen’s new policy, Cumulus claims hundreds of millions of dollars of commerce have been affected.

It is seeking monetary damages and a permanent court order blocking Nielsen from enforcing the scrutinized rule change.

Follow @Uebey Follow @uebey.bsky.social