| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Radio Listening and IQ
Someone mentioned that while watching too much TV decreases IQ, Radio
listening is actually shown to increase IQ. Is there any concrete evidence/sites/publishings in this regard ? Thanks. Vijay |
How can ANYONE'S IQ increase listening to 40 minutes of REPEATING
commercials an hour? But, wait a minute! Someone says there is a fine line between genius and INSANITY! That must be why....(c; It would seem that listening to Clear Channel would only tend to melt the brain into a mass resembling chocolate pudding..... I almost lost it, last night, after I'd seen the stupid Gateway Computers cow feet come through the ceiling over the bed for the 72nd time in 2 hours. Who programs this ****? On 19 Dec 2003 17:55:15 GMT, (Vijay) wrote: Someone mentioned that while watching too much TV decreases IQ, Radio listening is actually shown to increase IQ. Is there any concrete evidence/sites/publishings in this regard ? Thanks. Vijay Larry W4CSC NNNN |
On 20 Dec 2003 02:49:11 GMT, Steven J Sobol
wrote: Larry W4CSC wrote: How can ANYONE'S IQ increase listening to 40 minutes of REPEATING commercials an hour? But Larry, that's the whole point. Repetition is the key to getting people to remember the commercial! I guess I'm just too old to listen to radio any more. I download lots of old shows off alt.binaries.sounds.radio.oldtime that have FOUR commercials in them, smoothly integrated right into the show itself so you don't actually realize Glenn Miller is selling you a Philco until it's almost over...(c; Oh, well, all the BBC stations are live on the net and archived so I don't miss my favs. I emailed them and offered to pay my radio tax to do my part because I'm on their servers quite often. That shook 'em up. They refused my offer but appreciated the thought. I listen to a 4 minute snippet of some talking head on news/talk, then when the 8 minutes of spots comes on I turn it back off and go back to my MP3 player. Radio is the reason for the MP3 explosion. Larry W4CSC NNNN |
Steven J Sobol had written:
| It's not a Clear Channel thing. Commercials are just as annoying on everyone | else's broadcast channels too. And while there are a few truly innovative, | entertaining or thought-provoking ad campaigns, most of them just... suck. Ah, yes, car dealer ads appear to be the worst. And don't forget the weekend remotes from the car dealer, the staple financial lifeline of small markets. I bet you have those in Victorville, too. The most clever *and* memorable of recent times (although with heavy repetition) seem to be the Epsom printer spots. Since they're running on KCBS in heavy rotation, I think I've got those memorized now. -- "Right here in Minnesota!" "Bullwinkle, that's Florida!" "Well, if they're gonna keep adding states all the time, they can't expect me to keep up!" -- Rocky & Bullwinkle, episode 5, 1960 |
In article , Larry W4CSC wrote:
I listen to a 4 minute snippet of some talking head on news/talk, then when the 8 minutes of spots comes on I turn it back off and go back to That is a good question for the radio programmers on this newsgroup. Why is the spotload so heavy? Breaks on talk stations like WABC used to be three or four commercials. Now it's more. All news WCBS used to tout that it only played one commercial at a time between news capsules. Now they sometimes play two. WINS sometimes plays three in a row when they used to do one or two spots about 8 years ago (pre all this consolidation). Infinity some years back made all their stations up the spot loads. Ditto, why cluster all the spots in 10 minute sweeps twice an hour instead of breaking them up into frequent two or three minute breaks so it SEEMS like less commercials are being played? -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
Sven Franklyn Weil wrote:
Ditto, why cluster all the spots in 10 minute sweeps twice an hour instead of breaking them up into frequent two or three minute breaks so it SEEMS like less commercials are being played? That's the part that confuses me. We've got music stations that announce "coming up next -- 9 in a row". They mean 9 songs, but if you listen often enough you quickly learn that also means 9 minutes of advertising [0] - i.e., that announcement is your cue to change stations... I suppose since the ratings don't show whether someone was listening during the ads - only that they were listening - that if clumping the spot load increases the numbers the rest of the hour it makes short-term economic sense. One just has to wonder what will happen when the advertisers start finding they get a smaller increase in sales per thousand "ears" bought? (indeed I note the station in the bad example above has begun to promote "fewer commercials, more music" and indeed appears to have broken up their spot load across the hour) -- Doug Smith W9WI Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66 http://www.w9wi.com [0] not 100% certain I'm exaggerating! |
"Sven Franklyn Weil" wrote in message ... Ditto, why cluster all the spots in 10 minute sweeps twice an hour instead of breaking them up into frequent two or three minute breaks so it SEEMS like less commercials are being played? Tons of research has been done on this, and fewer stops create far less tune out. Generally, tune out occurs in the first spot, so there is no disadvantage to running many at a time. In general, stations that went to fewer stops have increased ratings while those adding more have gone down in ratings. The "never more than a minute from music" sounded good, but did not work. |
The other thing that REALLY turns me off is when they run out of
things to say/do and start saying "News Talk 1250, WTMA" over and over and over ad nauseum. "News Talk 730, WSC" (WSCC is more ashamed of its call letters. Being a Clear Channel station, they think they should be able to use RCA's WSC station call, assigned to marine band use.) Dan Moon, who switched from 1250 to 730 after being on WTMA for 30 years, once asked the call in listeners what they never wanted to hear on WTMA, again. I called in and waited my turn after 6 spots played. "Dan, if I never heard 'News Talk 1250, WTMA' again, it wouldn't be too soon. Every one of us out here listening KNOWS what the station's call letters are and KNOWS what frequency it is on. We don't need to be told 37 times every 10 minutes. Why don't you put on some music if you all run out of things to talk about." His answer was truly funny and he didn't want to talk to me further. Three more callers followed me up. I swear it was uncoordinated, but very effective. It took 'em three weeks to get the self-promotion spots back up to 37 every 10 minutes in the aftermath. Over on Clear Channel's WSCC, ol' Dan says the call letters/frequency nearly continuously, now. Of course, he says WSC, not their real call until the hour when they have a quickie spot to satisfy the FCC. I'm for an FCC regulation on all of them that makes it ILLEGAL to say the stations call letters EXCEPT once during the 2-minute-to-the-hour requirement and makes it illegal to quote the station's frequency all together! Any takers?! Larry W4CSC NNNN |
|
"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... The other thing that REALLY turns me off is when they run out of things to say/do and start saying "News Talk 1250, WTMA" over and over and over ad nauseum. "News Talk 730, WSC" (WSCC is more ashamed of its call letters. Being a Clear Channel station, they think they should be able to use RCA's WSC station call, assigned to marine band use.) Except for the legal ID, the station can call itself anything it wants, as long as what they want is not trade marked by someone else. Except for yourself, how many listeners care that WSC is a marine call? None. Dan Moon, who switched from 1250 to 730 after being on WTMA for 30 years, once asked the call in listeners what they never wanted to hear on WTMA, again. I called in and waited my turn after 6 spots played. "Dan, if I never heard 'News Talk 1250, WTMA' again, it wouldn't be too soon. Every one of us out here listening KNOWS what the station's call letters are and KNOWS what frequency it is on. We don't need to be told 37 times every 10 minutes. Why don't you put on some music if you all run out of things to talk about." His answer was truly funny and he didn't want to talk to me further. Three more callers followed me up. I swear it was uncoordinated, but very effective. It took 'em three weeks to get the self-promotion spots back up to 37 every 10 minutes in the aftermath. However, you can look at arguably the nations most successful AM, KGO in San Francisco. 25 years, 102 ratings in first place. They give the calls 50 to 60 times an hour. Always have. 11.6% of Arbitron diaries have unidentifiable listening in them. It is nearly all to stations that do not identify enough who they are. Most listeners listen to multiple stations. Most do not remember where they tuned at a specific time unless constantly reminded. Over on Clear Channel's WSCC, ol' Dan says the call letters/frequency nearly continuously, now. Of course, he says WSC, not their real call until the hour when they have a quickie spot to satisfy the FCC. So? They have named the station WSC to make it easy to remember. This is like WWWE in Cleveland (now WTAM) using 3-WE as an identifier. No one but you cares. I'm for an FCC regulation on all of them that makes it ILLEGAL to say the stations call letters EXCEPT once during the 2-minute-to-the-hour requirement and makes it illegal to quote the station's frequency all together! Any takers?! You are kidding, right? Except for the legal ID, a station can use any identifier it wants. Find something really important to worry about. |
Every one of us out here listening KNOWS what the station's call letters are
and KNOWS what frequency it is on. We don't need to be told 37 times every 10 minutes. I deduce from this that you've never seen a filled-out Arbitron diary. If you actually worked in radio, the sight of a filled-out diary would scare the bleep out of you. There are many stations that run more call-sign and/or frequency and/or slogan mentions than your example, and yet diaries continue to contain error after error after error. I have seen call signs absolutely butchered, dial positions listed as "right next to 92 on my radio" or "my fifth pushbutton," and station slogans that bear no resemblance to any station in the market being surveyed. The fact that stations actually get credit for some diary-keeping listeners I can only ascribe to some sort of miracle. Every one of you out there listening does NOT know the call sign or frequency, in fact more listeners don't know than those who do know. Most radio listeners are not hobbyists who follow radio and know all its ins and outs. They are casual listeners who have it on in the background, or are listening for the programming, and don't give a hoot in h*ll what the call sign or frequency are. |
David Eduardo wrote:
"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... The other thing that REALLY turns me off is when they run out of things to say/do and start saying "News Talk 1250, WTMA" over and over and over ad nauseum. "News Talk 730, WSC" (WSCC is more ashamed of its call letters. Being a Clear Channel station, they think they should be able to use RCA's WSC station call, assigned to marine band use.) Except for the legal ID, the station can call itself anything it wants, as long as what they want is not trade marked by someone else. I beg to differ. If anyone called the FCC on that Central Pennsylvania station that id'd itself as WHOT-FM all of the time except at the top of the hour, would the FCC not spank the station? (I'm referring to a station that was mentioned in the Airwaves Digest a few years ago. WHOT-FM is the legal callsign of a station at 101.1 in Youngstown, Ohio, and has been for years.) Over on Clear Channel's WSCC, ol' Dan says the call letters/frequency nearly continuously, now. Of course, he says WSC, not their real call until the hour when they have a quickie spot to satisfy the FCC. So? They have named the station WSC to make it easy to remember. This is like WWWE in Cleveland (now WTAM) using 3-WE as an identifier. Bull. There is no way anyone will mistake "3WE" for someone's call letters. Nor will anyone mistake "Power 106", "Hot 97", or "Z92.5" for another station's calls. It's *not* the same thing. No one but you cares. It *is* misleading and shouldn't be allowed. I just don't care enough to complain. You are kidding, right? Except for the legal ID, a station can use any identifier it wants. So if I license a station and ID myself properly as, say, KIYS at the top of the hour, and I'm at 102.7, but during the rest of the hour I call myself 102.7 KIIS, no one will care? There is, of course, a station on 102.7 with those calls. Wink 106 FM in Corning, New York, used to play that game a few years ago... I'd hear it when I was driving through Corning on the way to Albany or Boston. The jingles said "Wink 106, W-I-N-K". WINK-FM, if I'm not mistaken, is in Tampa, or was a few years ago anyhow. Even at the top of the hour, the DJ would ID the station correctly ("You're listening to WNKI, Corning/Elmira") and right after that you would hear the rest of the jingle, which used the wrong calls (WINK). I never cared enough to file a complaint with the FCC, but it's still not right. I'd be ****ed if I owned or worked for the stations whose calls were being improperly used. -- JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * |
So, the constant mention of the station call/freq isn't working. They
all do it and the Arbitron diary is still full of the information the three replies mention. I suppose it does make the rating higher, the only reason they are all on the air any more. Thanks for the information. Probably best Arbitron doesn't call me...(c; On 22 Dec 2003 06:16:34 GMT, ospam (Sid Schweiger) wrote: Every one of us out here listening KNOWS what the station's call letters are and KNOWS what frequency it is on. We don't need to be told 37 times every 10 minutes. I deduce from this that you've never seen a filled-out Arbitron diary. If you actually worked in radio, the sight of a filled-out diary would scare the bleep out of you. There are many stations that run more call-sign and/or frequency and/or slogan mentions than your example, and yet diaries continue to contain error after error after error. I have seen call signs absolutely butchered, dial positions listed as "right next to 92 on my radio" or "my fifth pushbutton," and station slogans that bear no resemblance to any station in the market being surveyed. The fact that stations actually get credit for some diary-keeping listeners I can only ascribe to some sort of miracle. Every one of you out there listening does NOT know the call sign or frequency, in fact more listeners don't know than those who do know. Most radio listeners are not hobbyists who follow radio and know all its ins and outs. They are casual listeners who have it on in the background, or are listening for the programming, and don't give a hoot in h*ll what the call sign or frequency are. Larry W4CSC NNNN |
Doug Smith W9WI wrote in
: Sven Franklyn Weil wrote: Ditto, why cluster all the spots in 10 minute sweeps twice an hour instead of breaking them up into frequent two or three minute breaks so it SEEMS like less commercials are being played? Isn't the point to increase "Time Spent Listening" to be full 15 minute blocks so the station gets credit for that? If you run two 10 minute breaks, you can have 20 minutes of programming between them gaining 40 minutes Time Spent Listening over the course of the hour assuming one comes back after the commercials. If you had only 5-10 minute blocks of programming with commericlas in between, you would never get the 15 minute blocks of Time Spent Listening that radio stations seem to want. Am I correct on this or way off? Mike |
Steven J Sobol wrote in
: I beg to differ. If anyone called the FCC on that Central Pennsylvania station that id'd itself as WHOT-FM all of the time except at the top of the hour, would the FCC not spank the station? (I'm referring to a station that was mentioned in the Airwaves Digest a few years ago. WHOT-FM is the legal callsign of a station at 101.1 in Youngstown, Ohio, and has been for years.) This was the old 103.9 WHTO Muncy, PA. Muncy, PA is east of Williamsport, PA along I-180. All this would have been going on in the early 90's as I was going to school in Lock Haven (west of Williamsport) at the time and 103.9 was the best Top 40 station around (for the area). I remember that they would use "103.9 WHOT" when the jock would talk on the air, but at the top of the hour Legal ID, the fast-talking voiceover guy would use the proper "WHTO Muncy, Williamsport". I also have an old bumper sticker of theirs that reads "103.9 WHOT is Red Hot". By the mid to late 90's 103.9 had moved to another frequency and moved their location to somewhere southeast of Williamsport. I assume for better coverage of the area. I remember when I listened to the station and wanted to call them looking for a phone number under WHOT and not seeing anything. I don't know how I finally figured out it was WHTO, but what I do remember was I was confused! Was it WHTO or WHOT? I didn't know for sure, but I did know I was listening to 103.9 FM. I guess that counts for something. A question related to all of this: In the Williamsport ratings, who would get credit if someone wrote down in their diary that they were listening to WHOT? WHOT at the time was not in Williamsport, it was elsewhere - Youngstown, Ohio as Steven Sobol mentioned. On the same vien would 103.9 WHOT or just 103.9 give credit to WHTO - the real 103.9 in Muncy (Williamsport)? Obviously, a radiophile who put down WHTO would do the station best since they'd definitely get credit. To me, a situation like this is where a radio station shoots itself in the foot by using calls on the air that are completely different than those that they are legally assigned. It confuses the average listener, but it would seem to me that it really confuses the ratings book which is what all radio stations live an die by. Mike |
On 22 Dec 2003 17:53:53 GMT, "M. Hale"
wrote: A question related to all of this: In the Williamsport ratings, who would get credit if someone wrote down in their diary that they were listening to WHOT? WHOT at the time was not in Williamsport, it was elsewhere - Youngstown, Ohio as Steven Sobol mentioned. On the same vien would 103.9 WHOT or just 103.9 give credit to WHTO - the real 103.9 in Muncy (Williamsport)? Obviously, a radiophile who put down WHTO would do the station best since they'd definitely get credit. If WHTO had "WHOT" registered with Arbitron as their on-air slogan, they'd get credit for any "WHOT" in the diaries. Probably full credit, as the Youngstown station's signal comes nowhere near the Williamsport market. They'd also get credit if someone marked down "103.9", since they automatically get credit for on-frequency mentions. So, if they registered "WHOT" and someone marked down "103.9 WHOT", there's no doubt who they're hearing. Mike |
On 20 Dec 2003 02:49:11 GMT, Steven J Sobol
wrote: Larry W4CSC wrote: How can ANYONE'S IQ increase listening to 40 minutes of REPEATING commercials an hour? But Larry, that's the whole point. Repetition is the key to getting people to remember the commercial! There are other ways... Apple did that memorable TV commercial during the Superbowl one year and it still gets replays just because it was so interesting. Stan Freberg did a few radio commercials for Chung King which also attained notoriety. It's not a Clear Channel thing. Commercials are just as annoying on everyone else's broadcast channels too. And while there are a few truly innovative, entertaining or thought-provoking ad campaigns, most of them just... suck. This is one reason why I like sponsorship advertising. You don't have to claim a thing. You just tell the public what you do for a living. Has anyone done studies to show where each type is most effective? Jake Brodsky "Never mind the Turing Test, what about the Turing Graduates?" |
Jake Brodsky wrote:
There are other ways... Apple did that memorable TV commercial during the Superbowl one year and it still gets replays just because it was so interesting. You mean "Macintosh... so that 1984 isn't like _1984_" with the runner carrying the big sledgehammer? -- JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services 22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950 Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * |
"M. Hale" wrote in message Isn't the point to increase "Time Spent Listening" to be full 15 minute blocks so the station gets credit for that? If you run two 10 minute breaks, you can have 20 minutes of programming between them gaining 40 minutes Time Spent Listening over the course of the hour assuming one comes back after the commercials. If a person listens form 5:55 to 6:20, the station gets 45 minutes of credit. Credit is given for 15 minutes as long as the listener has 5 minutes or more of recorded listening in any quarter hour. There is no way to get "40 minutes" of credit as the system is based on quarter hours. If you had only 5-10 minute blocks of programming with commericlas in between, you would never get the 15 minute blocks of Time Spent Listening that radio stations seem to want. You only need 5 minutes to get credit for a quarter hour. However, few listeners are so precise, most writing down hour and half hour blocks. |
"Steven J Sobol" wrote in message ... David Eduardo wrote: "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... The other thing that REALLY turns me off is when they run out of things to say/do and start saying "News Talk 1250, WTMA" over and over and over ad nauseum. "News Talk 730, WSC" (WSCC is more ashamed of its call letters. Being a Clear Channel station, they think they should be able to use RCA's WSC station call, assigned to marine band use.) Except for the legal ID, the station can call itself anything it wants, as long as what they want is not trade marked by someone else. I beg to differ. If anyone called the FCC on that Central Pennsylvania station that id'd itself as WHOT-FM all of the time except at the top of the hour, would the FCC not spank the station? (I'm referring to a station that was mentioned in the Airwaves Digest a few years ago. WHOT-FM is the legal callsign of a station at 101.1 in Youngstown, Ohio, and has been for years.) That is an interesting point, and one to ask in Florida, where a bunch of Clear Channel talkiers are all called "WFLA" except at the top of the hour. They are not networked, either. they only ID with real calls on top of hour. Or in Puerto Rico, where the news net of WKAQ (AM) has been called "WKAQ Radio Reloj" for 4 decades on a network of about 5 or 6 stations, some 24/7, and none IDing with true calls except onthe hour. I don't think a formal complaint has been made, although I know some DXers have written complaints of an informal type. Over on Clear Channel's WSCC, ol' Dan says the call letters/frequency nearly continuously, now. Of course, he says WSC, not their real call until the hour when they have a quickie spot to satisfy the FCC. So? They have named the station WSC to make it easy to remember. This is like WWWE in Cleveland (now WTAM) using 3-WE as an identifier. Bull. There is no way anyone will mistake "3WE" for someone's call letters. Nor will anyone mistake "Power 106", "Hot 97", or "Z92.5" for another station's calls. It's *not* the same thing. No one but you cares. It *is* misleading and shouldn't be allowed. I just don't care enough to complain. Since this has been going on for 4 decades with no action by the FCC, I guess they don't fcare, either. You are kidding, right? Except for the legal ID, a station can use any identifier it wants. So if I license a station and ID myself properly as, say, KIYS at the top of the hour, and I'm at 102.7, but during the rest of the hour I call myself 102.7 KIIS, no one will care? There is, of course, a station on 102.7 with those calls. Anyone at 102.7 can call themselves 102.7 Kiss, but only if they license the Kiss name from the mark holder. Wink 106 FM in Corning, New York, used to play that game a few years ago... I'd hear it when I was driving through Corning on the way to Albany or Boston. The jingles said "Wink 106, W-I-N-K". WINK-FM, if I'm not mistaken, is in Tampa, or was a few years ago anyhow. Even at the top of the hour, the DJ would ID the station correctly ("You're listening to WNKI, Corning/Elmira") and right after that you would hear the rest of the jingle, which used the wrong calls (WINK). I'll bet it would be hard for anyone to say that the station, whose name is Wink, could not spell wink so diary keepers would know how to write it down. I never cared enough to file a complaint with the FCC, but it's still not right. I'd be ****ed if I owned or worked for the stations whose calls were being improperly used. As long as the signals don't overlap, it probably makes no difference to them unless they have an interest in preserving a national service mark. |
"M. Hale" wrote in message ... .. A question related to all of this: In the Williamsport ratings, who would get credit if someone wrote down in their diary that they were listening to WHOT? The station probably registered WHOT as a slogan, along with the Hot moniker. Since there is no other similar call in the MSA (Metro Survey Area or Metropolitan statistical Area), the one with the fake calls used as a slogan will get credit as long as Arbitron was notified. WHOT at the time was not in Williamsport, it was elsewhere - Youngstown, Ohio as Steven Sobol mentioned. On the same vien would 103.9 WHOT or just 103.9 give credit to WHTO - the real 103.9 in Muncy (Williamsport)? Obviously, a radiophile who put down WHTO would do the station best since they'd definitely get credit. Again, if the staiton registered "WHOT - Hot" they would get credit. In general, most diary entries are by frequency, so the point is almost moot. To me, a situation like this is where a radio station shoots itself in the foot by using calls on the air that are completely different than those that they are legally assigned. It confuses the average listener, but it would seem to me that it really confuses the ratings book which is what all radio stations live an die by. Since no one else uses the calls in the market area, I don't think the listener would be confused at all. |
"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... So, the constant mention of the station call/freq isn't working. They all do it and the Arbitron diary is still full of the information the three replies mention. I suppose it does make the rating higher, the only reason they are all on the air any more. The constant repetition does work. What does not work is not saying the name or calls often. |
On 22 Dec 2003 14:50:30 GMT, Steven J Sobol
wrote: David Eduardo wrote: "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... The other thing that REALLY turns me off is when they run out of things to say/do and start saying "News Talk 1250, WTMA" over and over and over ad nauseum. "News Talk 730, WSC" (WSCC is more ashamed of its call letters. Being a Clear Channel station, they think they should be able to use RCA's WSC station call, assigned to marine band use.) Except for the legal ID, the station can call itself anything it wants, as long as what they want is not trade marked by someone else. I beg to differ. If anyone called the FCC on that Central Pennsylvania station that id'd itself as WHOT-FM all of the time except at the top of the hour, would the FCC not spank the station? (I'm referring to a station that was mentioned in the Airwaves Digest a few years ago. WHOT-FM is the legal callsign of a station at 101.1 in Youngstown, Ohio, and has been for years.) I'm going to start calling myself WCSC on 75 meters......it must be ok.....(c; Larry W4CSC NNNN |
In article , Larry W4CSC wrote:
I'm going to start calling myself WCSC on 75 meters......it must be ok.....(c; Why not? You got the licence, Larry. It's perfectly legal...and if you were talking with other ham radio operators, they'd recognize you instantly. :-) -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
In article , David Eduardo wrote:
The constant repetition does work. What does not work is not saying the name or calls often. It's funny. Some people get teed off because the station "overannounces" the call sign or name. Yet...some of these people also get annoyed when you DON'T hear a call sign or name until the top of the hour. That is the case with a lot of college stations where deejays just slap on record after record (or CD after CD) on the air, mumble a couple of words every half hour but that's about it....then back to another 30-in-a-row. -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
|
On 22 Dec 2003 17:53:52 GMT, "M. Hale"
wrote: Isn't the point to increase "Time Spent Listening" to be full 15 minute blocks so the station gets credit for that? If you run two 10 minute breaks, you can have 20 minutes of programming between them gaining 40 minutes Time Spent Listening over the course of the hour assuming one comes back after the commercials. Part of it is to get 2 quarter hours before listeners tune away. In the case of the limited number of breaks, "research has shown" that listeners are more aware of the number of elements than they are of their length. A :60 is perceived the same as a :30. Each is an element. The hope is that listeners will perceive fewer elements in a limited number of breaks than they would with more breaks with fewer spots. When the breaks were 5 minutes it was tolerable. Now that the spots seem to outnumber the songs, listeners are wearing out their radio's presets. Especially young listeners. I have a couple of my young nieces and nephews visiting. Not only do they change stations when a single song they don't like plays, they immediately change stations when a break begins. I thank MTV for creating generations with 3 second attention spans. I asked why. They said "it'll be a long time before the music starts again." That's not something a programmer wants to hear. Both radio and TV are so riddled with clutter that it amazes me anyone stays tuned. Listen to your favorite station for an hour. Write down every time a new element begins. Music, news, spots, promos, jingles and jock chatter each constitutes an element. TV has taken clutter to awesome heights, both aural and visual. Vitually every channel has a "bug" supered over all but commercials. Annoying as hell. During shows there's a crawl or a super about an upcoming show. Crawls used to be used only for emergency information. I can only imagine the anger of a movie director when he sees his masterpiece splattered with material that destroys the mood he tried to create. Often one super overlaps another. Rich |
On 22 Dec 2003 22:06:30 GMT, Steven J Sobol
wrote: You mean "Macintosh... so that 1984 isn't like _1984_" with the runner carrying the big sledgehammer? yes Jake Brodsky "Never mind the Turing Test, what about the Turing Graduates?" |
Rich Wood wrote:
TV has taken clutter to awesome heights, both aural and visual. There is (was) one channel out there (Bloomberg News?) that looked more like a web page than a TV channel, with all the crawls, windows, etc. on the screen .... Vitually every channel has a "bug" supered over all but commercials. Annoying as hell. During shows there's a crawl or a super about an upcoming show. Crawls used to be used only for emergency information. I can only imagine the anger of a movie director when he sees his masterpiece splattered with material that destroys the mood he tried to create. Often one super overlaps another. Rich |
Guess your nephews and nieces are giving new meaning to the phrase "baby
changing station." They're showing good sense, and radio will have to adjust to the choices that technology offers them. I'd argue though that as MTV shortens the attention span of young people, it creates acceptance of audiovisual clutter rather than resistance to it. And inevitably a bit of impatience with audio alone. Jerome "Rich Wood" wrote in message ... On 22 Dec 2003 17:53:52 GMT, "M. Hale" wrote: Isn't the point to increase "Time Spent Listening" to be full 15 minute blocks so the station gets credit for that? If you run two 10 minute breaks, you can have 20 minutes of programming between them gaining 40 minutes Time Spent Listening over the course of the hour assuming one comes back after the commercials. Part of it is to get 2 quarter hours before listeners tune away. In the case of the limited number of breaks, "research has shown" that listeners are more aware of the number of elements than they are of their length. A :60 is perceived the same as a :30. Each is an element. The hope is that listeners will perceive fewer elements in a limited number of breaks than they would with more breaks with fewer spots. When the breaks were 5 minutes it was tolerable. Now that the spots seem to outnumber the songs, listeners are wearing out their radio's presets. Especially young listeners. I have a couple of my young nieces and nephews visiting. Not only do they change stations when a single song they don't like plays, they immediately change stations when a break begins. I thank MTV for creating generations with 3 second attention spans. I asked why. They said "it'll be a long time before the music starts again." That's not something a programmer wants to hear. Both radio and TV are so riddled with clutter that it amazes me anyone stays tuned. Listen to your favorite station for an hour. Write down every time a new element begins. Music, news, spots, promos, jingles and jock chatter each constitutes an element. TV has taken clutter to awesome heights, both aural and visual. Vitually every channel has a "bug" supered over all but commercials. Annoying as hell. During shows there's a crawl or a super about an upcoming show. Crawls used to be used only for emergency information. I can only imagine the anger of a movie director when he sees his masterpiece splattered with material that destroys the mood he tried to create. Often one super overlaps another. Rich |
In article , Charles Hobbs wrote:
There is (was) one channel out there (Bloomberg News?) that looked more like a web page than a TV channel, with all the crawls, windows, etc. on the screen .... There is a reason for that. They're not trying to SELL you stuff, they're trying to give you stock ticker, news capsules, time and weather so that they can devote the "talking head" portion of the screen to news and interviews that would otherwise would be impossible to do if you had to break for all of the stuff that's running on the crawls and tabs. It's an efficient screen space use for an all-news channel. However, it is annoying when the soap-opera, comedy or movie you're watching gets blasted by this flash and then a crawl for an ad or promo starts appearing at the bottom or top of the screen. It was fine when they started doing ad crawls for the World Cup soccer games so you didn't have to interrupt the fast moving games years ago, but now it's gotten out of hand. Maybe I wouldn't mind as much if the TV stations and cable channels would just run ad crawls at the bottom and ditched the "spot" method of advertising. -- Sven Weil New York City, U.S.A. |
Hmmmm.....Radio TIVO....."local processing"....(c;
Once you teach the computer where the spots are in time, it could be automated..... Larry W4CSC NNNN |
On 24 Dec 2003 07:54:42 GMT, Tom Desmond wrote:
Broadcasters and cable networks are truly killing the value of their media with all this clutter. I get irate when the computer crawlers are superimposed over the ACTION. All during the war all this computer crap blocked us from seeing the pictures they spent millions to bring us. How stupid. I'm told the reason for the source label in the corner of all the programming is required by the copyright holders' contracts. It's so the lawyers can tell where the copyrighted program material was recorded from. Laughingly, they live with a grand vision the crap on the screen has some kind of post-transmission value...(c; Larry W4CSC NNNN |
On 23 Dec 2003 22:43:28 GMT, "Cooperstown.Net"
wrote: I'd argue though that as MTV shortens the attention span of young people, it creates acceptance of audiovisual clutter rather than resistance to it. And inevitably a bit of impatience with audio alone. I think we may be saying the same thing. I believe MTV's (and now everyone else's) technique of fast-paced editing has reduced their tolerance for long (in time) shots over a few seconds. I don't believe they have greater tolerance for clutter. By and large, radio advertising is boring stuff. it's usually some screaming jock or business owner hawking something that has no relevance to the audience. Agencies are so devoted to TV that radio is a second thought. I can't remember the last radio spot I heard. I can remember spots made years ago by people like Stan Freberg who believed in theatre of the mind. Rich |
"Sven Franklyn Weil" wrote in message ... It's funny. Some people get teed off because the station "overannounces" the call sign or name. Yet...some of these people also get annoyed when you DON'T hear a call sign or name until the top of the hour. Radio is a mass medium, and you can't keep everyone happy. So the station must make decisions based on what they perceive the audience wants, and what is good for the station. Another classic example can be local severe weather. Two people can be listening to the same broadcast, and one thinks you're not doing enought to cover the weather situation, while the other thinks you're over-reacting and trying to scare people and would you please shut up about the damn weather! Of course when we get them hurricanes here, nobody thinks you're broadcasting too much weather! HI! Paul Jensen Florida's Emerald Coast |
That's the part that confuses me. We've got music stations that
announce "coming up next -- That's when I tune out. Once they say "coming up" that tells you that what's really coming up is a truckload of commercials and mindless promos. Listeners know that. Stations that do this are telegraphing their stopsets. Paul Jensen Florida's Emerald Coast |
"Steven J Sobol" wrote in message
... Wink 106 FM in Corning, New York, used to play that game a few years ago... I'd hear it when I was driving through Corning on the way to Albany or Boston. The jingles said "Wink 106, W-I-N-K". WINK-FM, if I'm not mistaken, is in Tampa, or was a few years ago anyhow. Even at the top of the hour, the DJ would ID the station correctly ("You're listening to WNKI, Corning/Elmira") and right after that you would hear the rest of the jingle, which used the wrong calls (WINK). I never cared enough to file a complaint with the FCC, but it's still not right. I'd be ****ed if I owned or worked for the stations whose calls were being improperly used. I've been out of the business for awhile, but isn't there a rule prohibiting a station from misleading or pretending to be another station? This wouldn't apply to the WSC case that started this thread, but the 102.7 KIIS scenerio would. Paul Jensen Florida's Emerald Coast |
|
On 25 Dec 2003 16:42:55 GMT, Rich Wood wrote:
On 24 Dec 2003 15:18:30 GMT, (Larry W4CSC) wrote: I'm told the reason for the source label in the corner of all the programming is required by the copyright holders' contracts. No. It's simply so you have the channel or logo in front of you all the time. Copyright holders have no authority over the network or the stations in this case. This is one of the reasons my DVD collection is so large. Rich alt.binaries.movies.divx This is the reason MY movie collection is SO large....(c; Larry W4CSC NNNN |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:55 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com