"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...

That's true, but there was always someone to break the model. When
DJs were forced to use boring playlists after the Payola scandal,
Wolfman Jack did just fine with his border blaster clear up to L.A.
He also made a ton of money doing so.

Radio stations used rudimentary research and tightly controlled playlists
from the time the first Top 40 station debuted in August of 1952. The reason
they were called Top 40 was that they played the top 40 selling / requested
/ jukebox played songs. The jocks could not change the songs, and those
stations, often with numbers like a 40 share, prospered enormously.

Except that they weren't Top 40 at that time. They did the scandalous
thing of playing black artists for white audiences, and played the new
artists.


The payola incidents were hardly a scandal. Most of the nation knew nothing
about them.

Nice revisionism.

The Miami scandal, congressional hearings, Alan Freed, no one noticed.


Today... well, the model may not be broken. We'll see what the
classical and jazz stations do.

The only jazz stations are non-cpommercial,

*snork*
and there are very few
commercial classicals left, either. Neither format generates ratings. I have
worked at a jazz station, and both managed and owned a classical one, so I
am not against the format... it is just not viable today.

I'll remember that next time I see one on the dial.


I've stated my position and have staked it out. See Brenda-Ann's post
in this thread for another dissenting opinion.

And one which is based on a total refusal to look at facts about radio
listening.


If your above statements are based on "facts," I'll stick with
Brenda-Ann's view any time. Brenda-Ann talked about engineering
standards and physics... but we know marketing is the ultimate law in
the universe, not the laws of nature.

Idiot.


--
Eric F. Richards,
"It's the Din of iBiquity." -- Frank Dresser