RSH Legal and 10 competitors make up the relevant legal-advertising field in Cedar Rapids-Waterloo-Iowa City-Dubuque, IA year-to-date, running roughly 48% Broadcast / 28% vMVPD / 25% CTV. This view measures delivered viewing volume — eyeballs on screen.
Across Cedar Rapids-Waterloo-Iowa City-Dubuque, IA, 302+ legal advertisers were detected in market year-to-date. RSH Legal's competitive set of 11 firms runs roughly 48% Broadcast / 28% vMVPD / 25% CTV/Streaming. The bars below contrast the full detected market with that set, by share.
| # | Firm | Share of Voice | Channel Mix | Streaming % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Majors | ||||
| 1 | RSH Legal RSH | 47.3% | 37% | |
| 2 | Hupy and Abraham, S.C. | 17.7% | 15% | |
| 3 | Eells & Tronvold Law Offices | 15.4% | 10% | |
| 4 | Hope Law Firm | 15.1% | 9% | |
| 5 | Ball, Kirk & Holm, PC | 3.4% | 18% | |
| Mid-Pack | ||||
| 6 | Postman Law | 0.3% | 87% | |
| 7 | Nicolet Law Accident & Injury Lawyers | 0.3% | 88% | |
| 8 | Black & Jones Attorney At Law | 0.2% | 83% | |
| 9 | AW Smith Law | 0.1% | 25% | |
| 10 | Kingree Law | 0.1% | 88% | |
| 11 | Pitman Kalkhoff Sicula & Dentice | 0.1% | 83% | |
Share of Voice is each firm's share of the 11-firm competitive set's impressions — not the full market.
Share of voice across the competitive set — the 11 firms competing in Cedar Rapids year-to-date, by publisher.
Each card is one publisher. Top 5 advertisers ranked by SOV on that publisher. Click Show all to expand to every competitor in the set with measurable impressions.
Active spots running in the Cedar Rapids market this period.
Our platform uses Automatic Content Recognition (ACR) to capture real-time viewing data from the "glass" of over 23 million opted-in U.S. households, across a diverse panel of devices (Vizio, LG) and peripheral inputs. Each captured ad is fingerprinted and matched against a comprehensive ad library to verify when and where it aired.
This report covers the legal advertisers competing for clients in the market — firms based here or in a neighboring state with a genuine local presence and dedicated local advertising. Non-law advertisers and national advertisers whose impressions are incidental spillover from national campaigns are excluded, so the field reflects real local competition.
Because the underlying data shows where impressions were detected — not how the inventory was purchased — we use a firm's share of local-broadcast delivery as the signal of whether it is buying locally. National advertisers running connected-TV into the market at scale (for example Morgan & Morgan and Dimopoulos) register only 1–2% local-broadcast delivery here, versus 40–60%+ for the local firms, so they read as national spillover and are set aside. Share of voice and all channel splits are measured across the local competitive set.
Each advertiser's activity is split across three mutually exclusive channels.
Publisher definitions
Why vMVPD is its own line. When a viewer watches a local broadcast affiliate through a streaming bundle (YouTube TV, DirecTV Stream, Cox Streaming, Hulu Live, etc.), the delivery is internet-based but the content is broadcast-originated linear. Buyers and sellers treat vMVPD distinctly from both pure broadcast and true OTT — so we report it as a separate line rather than rolling it into either.
Satellite vs. streaming MVPDs. DirecTV satellite dish is reported as Cable. DirecTV Stream (the internet-delivered linear app) is reported as vMVPD.
OTA (Over-the-Air). Free broadcast signals received via antenna from local ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX affiliates. Reported under Broadcast.
A predominantly broadcast-led advertiser will still show single-digit-to-low-teens CTV/Streaming exposure in this view because ACR captures actual viewing across the connected-TV panel — including incidental impressions on Roku, Fire TV, Tubi, Apple TV, Pluto, Peacock, network broadcaster apps, and similar ad-supported streaming platforms. Those carry their own ad inventory distinct from the linear feed (and from vMVPDs), so they're reported under CTV / Streaming.