|
Does commercial radio has a future?
November 24, 2004
Got an email from a friend, asking me what I thought about commercial radio. What I like, dislike? How they can attract a following? Can they? What's the future? I asked if I could reply in the form of a post... here it is... I don't call it commercial radio, I call it McRadio: ....the Alt Rock station in Albany plays the same songs by the same artists as the Alt Rock station in Wichita. Just like a burger at McDonalds, radio has become packaged and predictable. The reason for this is well known, the radio stations are essentially bought and paid for by the record companies through what is known as Payola. So, they aren't in the business of helping you and I enjoy music, they are in the business of making money... at the end of the day, organizations have to make money to stay in business, but if that is all that they care about, they will need to figure out a way to do without relying on people listening to the radio, because I don't think that the scheme will be available in 10 or 20 years. Let me explain... As we all know, the on thing that is certain is that the future brings two things: More Choices and Change. Today, I have several options for hooking up an MP3 player to my car; from cassette adapters to units that allow me to integrate my iPod into the car - the iPod becomes my personal library of music that I have an interest in. Over time, more and more cars will offer other built-in functionality beyond commercial radio and CD players. Today, plenty of cars come with satellite radios, hard drives, and integration kits for MP3 players, etc. This adoption curve will continue and the technology will improve that is required to enable people to share their music collection among devices (car, home stereo, portable device, etc) and the tools for getting music will improve as well. Imagine the next iteration of public, high speed, wi-fi and and a car stereo with an internet connection: want the new Alicia Keys CD? Download it to your car. When you get home, you can transfer it to your home computer, stereo, etc. Is that realistic? Yeah, all the technology exists to do that today, it will probably be a couple of years before anyone puts it all together and several more years before it is enjoys wide spread adoption, but it is totally possible. Will this be available in 3, 5 or 10 years? Who knows, but it will be available. One example of this is that I can easily stream music to my stereo from my PC today. So, now that I can stream it, why can't I save a copy there if I want? There might even be something comes before this - and who knows, this might be available to today - imagine a TiVo like music service. Recording a stream of radio and then jumping through it, saving and deleting songs as you go. So what you end up with is an archive of songs you've recorded from radio, building a library as you go. This might help radio extends its lifetime, but this seems like a klunky solution. Now, some people will say that satellite radio is the future and with the narrowly focused channels and the absence of payola, the assumption is that people will be content for a while. I don't agree with this. This is still a push model. Someone else deciding what I'm going to listen to. I don't like that. As things like TV on demand, which is available today, get integrated into our lives we will be less likely to put up with someone else dictating when we have to listen to something. Can radio overcome this uncertain future? Can they build audience loyalty? In short, NO. I think they have something major working against them: You can't be all things to all people, which is what they are relying on with a push model. Now, I think that radio needs to better understand what people want. Some radio stations will exist longer than others, there will always be demand for Top 40 or news, those stations will last the longest - regardless of the underlying technology infrastructure delivering the music (satellite, etc). But the radio stations that want to be in business 10 years from now will need to better understand how consumers choose music. Let me give you an example, we just got a new radio station in my area - Smooth Jazz 92.7, they play (shockingly) smooth jazz (FULL DISCLOSU I know one of the DJs). It isn't that I like or even know half the artists on the station, but the music is essentially all the same and I know how I will feel when I listen to it, actually, they've transcended "genre" and they're offering "mood". The radio station that can do that, does have a future, albeit a short one. Genre can be all over the map, mood is a much better programming method. If a radio station decides that they will go this route, they'll have to understand that they will give up listeners because not everyone will be in that mood all the time (yikes, did I just write that?). For instance, I listen to the Jazz station mostly in the evening, when I'm reading, etc. When I'm driving to work, for instance, I don't want to listen to Stairway to Heaven - I want Master of Puppets. On the drive home however, I want to know about traffic and Master of Puppets isn't quite right... perhaps some Jeff Buckley or Alicia Keys. Think about it, radio stations program their music by genre, but most peoples CD collection is all over the map. Right? Our CD collection, currently around 400, is so diverse and eclectic that it defies categorization. Sure, there are some CDs of mine that my wife will never listen to... and some of hers that I will never, ever listen to, but it is all over the map - from ABBA to Zebra - and there is probably no radio station in the world that has played songs from both of those artists. Wow, I sort of went all over the place on this one... So, do you think that commercial radio has a future? What can they do to build loyalty? http://jstrande.typepad.com/blog/200...ture_of_r.html |
"Mike Terry" wrote in message ... November 24, 2004 ...the Alt Rock station in Albany plays the same songs by the same artists as the Alt Rock station in Wichita. Just like a burger at McDonalds, radio has become packaged and predictable. What is unusual in the idea that all Americans would like the same songs within a particular genre? You are saying taht ER or West Wing or CSI should only be run in one city, because running them on a network is predictable? Gimme' a break. Go back to the mid-50's. One of the popular TV shows was a top 10 countdown, with a group of 4 singers who sang "covers" of the weeks's most popular songs. So, going back 50 years, there was nationbal consensus in the hits in different types of music. An no one listens to an FM in Albany and then switches to one in Wichita. Your comparison is without validity. The reason for this is well known, the radio stations are essentially bought and paid for by the record companies through what is known as Payola. Payola is a crime. There has only been one indictment for it in the last 10 years, since it is so serious. And one station, in upstate NY, fired their PD last week for suspicion of impropriety with a record company. All group broadcasters have a severe policy against payola and will fire instantly anyone involved in it. So, they aren't in the business of helping you and I enjoy music, they are in the business of making money... at the end of the day, organizations have to make money to stay in business, but if that is all that they care about, they will need to figure out a way to do without relying on people listening to the radio, because I don't think that the scheme will be available in 10 or 20 years. You also have the term "payola" totally wrong. Payola only exists if a staff member of a station takes money for play of music without the knowledge or consent of management. Since DJs don't select music at 99% of music stations anymore, this is a moot point anyway... only the PD does, and staions have safeguards to supervise their PDs. If a station takes money, it is advertising revenue, but paying a record for play must be disclosed ounder another part of FCC rules. Anyway, the record companies are in such bad shape due to piracy and dowloading they certainly do not have the ability to influence the $23 billion dollar radio business. Today, I have several options for hooking up an MP3 player to my car; from cassette adapters to units that allow me to integrate my iPod into the car - the iPod becomes my personal library of music that I have an interest in. Over time, more and more cars will offer other built-in functionality beyond commercial radio and CD players. Today, plenty of cars come with satellite radios, hard drives, and integration kits for MP3 players, etc. This adoption curve will continue and the technology will improve that is required to enable people to share their music collection among devices (car, home stereo, portable device, etc) and the tools for getting music will improve as well. Imagine the next iteration of public, high speed, wi-fi and and a car stereo with an internet connection: want the new Alicia Keys CD? Download it to your car. When you get home, you can transfer it to your home computer, stereo, etc. Is that realistic? Yeah, all the technology exists to do that today, it will probably be a couple of years before anyone puts it all together and several more years before it is enjoys wide spread adoption, but it is totally possible. Will this be available in 3, 5 or 10 years? Who knows, but it will be available. One example of this is that I can easily stream music to my stereo from my PC today. So, now that I can stream it, why can't I save a copy there if I want? You know, they said the same thing about the 45 RPM record and the cassette. The problem with everything you indicate is that it either takes a lot of time (and thus for only hardcore music fans) or costs money. Radio will be around for many decades. There might even be something comes before this - and who knows, this might be available to today - imagine a TiVo like music service. Recording a stream of radio and then jumping through it, saving and deleting songs as you go. So what you end up with is an archive of songs you've recorded from radio, building a library as you go. This might help radio extends its lifetime, but this seems like a klunky solution. Now, some people will say that satellite radio is the future and with the narrowly focused channels and the absence of payola, Arguments based on payola are, by definition, faulty. There is no such practice. In fact, stations spend lots of money to research what listeners want to hear locally. I know of some stations that spend as much as $250,000 a year for this... so that tey will play the songs their listeners want to hear. Can radio overcome this uncertain future? Can they build audience loyalty? In short, NO. I think they have something major working against them: You can't be all things to all people, which is what they are relying on with a push model. This is true. Radi can satisfy well over 90% of the people most of the time. This has been true "forever" since for many decades radio has not been the only music delivery system. Yet in the long run, most people find the free and convenient aspects of radio to be useful in most instances. Now, I think that radio needs to better understand what people want. Some radio stations will exist longer than others, there will always be demand for Top 40 or news, those stations will last the longest - regardless of the underlying technology infrastructure delivering the music (satellite, etc). Actually, Top 40, which has been called CHR since the 70's, is a tough format. And all news is a shrinking format with very few stations left. But the radio stations that want to be in business 10 years from now will need to better understand how consumers choose music. Let me give you an example, we just got a new radio station in my area - Smooth Jazz 92.7, they play (shockingly) smooth jazz (FULL DISCLOSU I know one of the DJs). It isn't that I like or even know half the artists on the station, but the music is essentially all the same and I know how I will feel when I listen to it, actually, they've transcended "genre" and they're offering "mood". That is the whole idea... to create a mood. Otherwise, you are a jukebox or an MP3 player in random mode. I presume you are talking abot WSJW in Starview (York MSA) which has had excellent ratings increases (more than double) since switching from Oldies in late 2003. This format is highly researched, and the whole appeal is in the blend, just as the same was true for the enormous success of Beautiful Music in the 70's... mood creation, relaxation, stress relief, etc. The radio station that can do that, does have a future, albeit a short one. The first smooth jazz station debuted in around '86 or '87 in Los Angeles, and is still top 5 in 25-54, the demo that matters for sales. This is a healthy format wherever it is done, and has true staying power. Genre can be all over the map, mood is a much better programming method. If a radio station decides that they will go this route, they'll have to understand that they will give up listeners because not everyone will be in that mood all the time (yikes, did I just write that?). For instance, I listen to the Jazz station mostly in the evening, when I'm reading, etc. When I'm driving to work, for instance, I don't want to listen to Stairway to Heaven - I want Master of Puppets. On the drive home however, I want to know about traffic and Master of Puppets isn't quite right... perhaps some Jeff Buckley or Alicia Keys. This is why your radio has buttons and knobs. Eveyone in the US averages 3 to 4 radio stations they make frequent use of, and several more for occaisonal usage. Listeners know where to go at any time for the particulary programming they are in the mood for. Radio does not set a mood, it complements a listener mood. If I am in the mood for rock (heaven forbid), I know where to go. It is not the station job to change my mood. Think about it, radio stations program their music by genre, but most peoples CD collection is all over the map. Right? Our CD collection, currently around 400, is so diverse and eclectic that it defies categorization. Sure, there are some CDs of mine that my wife will never listen to... and some of hers that I will never, ever listen to, but it is all over the map - from ABBA to Zebra - and there is probably no radio station in the world that has played songs from both of those artists. Wow, I sort of went all over the place on this one... So? This is why recorded music has one purpose and radio stations another. And I have well over 3,000 CDs, but spend the better part of my leisure time listening to radio, not CDs. |
On 25 Nov 2004 09:04:59 GMT, "Mike Terry"
wrote: ...the Alt Rock station in Albany plays the same songs by the same artists as the Alt Rock station in Wichita. Just like a burger at McDonalds, radio has become packaged and predictable. How many people travel often between Albany and Wichita and spend enough time there to know the playlists are similar? Are you proposing that if Wichita plays a song, Albany can't? Who will keep the database of permitted songs in specific markets? The reason for this is well known, the radio stations are essentially bought and paid for by the record companies through what is known as Payola. So, they aren't in the business of helping you and I enjoy music, they are in the business of making money... So, record companies should produce songs for individual communities and forego mass markets? I've programmed music stations in Boston, San Diego and New York, as well as hundreds via syndication over the years. Not once has any record company ever offered me anything that could be considered Payola. Where did I go wrong? All I got was a stinking phony bubble gum machine. In New York, my station was a Radio & Records reporting station. That should have been worth something - maybe at least a political-type junket to a warm, hooker-filled resort. Today, I have several options for hooking up an MP3 player to my car; from cassette adapters to units that allow me to integrate my iPod into the car - the iPod becomes my personal library of music that I have an interest in. That's really the issue, not "cookie-cutter" formats. You want what you want when you want it. You're still a profit center for the record companies because I'm sure you're not illegally downloading or ripping CDs you haven't purchased. I'm sure you've paid for every cut that resides in the iPod (ripping other people's CDs isn't kosher, either). Remember, we're assuming you're honest. With the legal and honesty issues out of the way we need to deal with all those people who still can't figure out how to get rid of the flashing 12:00 on their VCRs. My car and home are wired and wireless. Like you, I'm what used to be called a Geek (now Techie). I can plug anything into anything. Even my Tivo updates itself wirelessly. Can radio overcome this uncertain future? Can they build audience loyalty? In short, NO. I think they have something major working against them: You can't be all things to all people, which is what they are relying on with a push model. The "push" model is essentially the same as the mass marketing model. If every person demands a different music mix (with legally purchased music, of course) radio will go away, as will MTV and other sampling sources that now let you hear what music you want to legally purchase to fill your iPod. You are buying the music you're recording? Remember, I'm assuming you're honest. No swapping; by the letter of the law that says you can make an archival copy for your own use. Let's go back to the labor-intensive nature of your model. I assume you have many small electronic devices. Each one has 97 more functions than you'll ever use. Do you remember all of them without going to the manual? My VCR requires 23 button pushes to set the clock. Some require two hands. Since I only use that sequence once or twice a year I haven't committed it to memory. My car's battery went dead not long ago. I had to reset 2 clocks, a terrestrial radio's 18 per band station presets, 18 XM presets and 20 SIRIUS presets. I was living in New York during the last power failure. 29 hours without power. Everything had to be reset. I won't even attempt to calculate the number of button pushes needed. How many people do you know who make regular computer backups? I have a 30gb MP3 player. The general rule in computing is not IF your hard drive will die, it's when. You are making backups of all that legally purchased music and are prepared to reload everything? So, the mass market is gone. Not much new music is being produced except by those willing to let you legally purchase and download the few songs they cut in their garage (without egg cartons on the wall). Now we're reduced to recording ourselves in the shower. When I sing in the shower the tiles shatter, so that's not an option. I know many, many people with gadgets. After a while they get tired of the work they require and either listen to terrestrial radio or silence punctuated by some obscenity hurled from the car in the next lane. Too much work for all but the Geekiest among us. Rich |
Mike Terry wrote:
The reason for this is well known, the radio stations are essentially bought and paid for by the record companies through what is known as Payola. So, they aren't in the business of helping you and I enjoy music, they are in the business of making money... No, not at all. Payola is long gone. Back when there was payola, PDs were happy to play new music, because the record companies paid them to play new music. Now everybody is terrified of playing new music, so they all have become followers. Payola is what kept radio fresh and interesting for years, and what you're seeing with the current homogenization of commercial radio is what has happened as a result of it being eliminated. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
In article ,
Rich Wood wrote: The "push" model is essentially the same as the mass marketing model. ....which has been effectively dead for most of the past decade if not longer, according to what I see in the business (not radio trade) press. For that matter, "mass marketing" radio went the way of the dodo at least as long ago. Have you ever heard a commercial station with both Tim McGraw and Eminem in its playlist? Yet I remember, as recently as the early 1980s, hearing Kenny Rogers and The Clash on the same station. Even "We Play Everything" WRZA has settled down into its "males 25-54" niche; I venture to say (based on my admittedly limited listening experience) that their "everything" does not include either Celine Dion or Buddy Guy. Talk to some of your advertising clients.... Even what were once considered to be the ultimate in mass-merchandised products (soap, hamburgers, Coke, tires) are now marketed just as narrowly as radio formats. (This should come as no surprise to anyone, as the narrowing of radio formats was driven by the economics of advertising.) Of course, narrower radio formats don't help advertisers who are seeking an audience that doesn't use commercial radio at all (e.g., educated adults 18-30, like most of my co-workers). Given the rate of cultural fragmentation currently observed in this country, the days of any sort of sustained mass audiences are long over and unlikely ever to return. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) |
Rich Wood wrote:
So, record companies should produce songs for individual communities and forego mass markets? I'd much rather see the majors continue to mass-produce, and the local radio stations offer a little better focus on local indie artists from time to time. Nine Inch Nails, formed by Trent Reznor, sounds incredible, but Reznor moved to my hometown from Mercer, PA to try to break into the business, and was spectacularly unsuccessful. I understand he hates Cleveland as a result, and given the abject lack of ANY kind of airplay he got from ANY of the commercial stations in town, I can't blame him for being angry. I'm not saying indie rock is all the big stations should play, but it would be nice if more of them made an effort to help break new talent from time to time. Reznor had a sound that probably would have worked on WMMS (the local album-rock station back then), but did he get into the rotation there, ever? Ha. I never heard him on 'MMS. Not once. I heard more buzz from people I talked to working near a local college campus than I heard anywhere else, even a couple years later when the local Top-40 station flipped to "modern rock". (A few years later, however, the modern rock's station airplay of "Ballad of Peter Pumpkinhead" by XTC prompted WMMS to play the song too, which was rather amusing because I never figured I'd hear XTC on the radio at all.) stinking phony bubble gum machine. In New York, my station was a Radio & Records reporting station. That should have been worth something - maybe at least a political-type junket to a warm, hooker-filled resort. Hey, you want to go to the Caribbean? Manhattan is only a few mintues away from Jamaica, right? (Oh, wait, that Jamaica isn't in the Caribbean...) My car's battery went dead not long ago. I had to reset 2 clocks, a terrestrial radio's 18 per band station presets, 18 XM presets and 20 SIRIUS presets. Hey, I solve that problem by only listening to FM :P -- JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. |
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... [...] For that matter, "mass marketing" radio went the way of the dodo at least as long ago. Have you ever heard a commercial station with both Tim McGraw and Eminem in its playlist? Yet I remember, as recently as the early 1980s, hearing Kenny Rogers and The Clash on the same station. Even "We Play Everything" WRZA has settled down into its "males 25-54" niche; I venture to say (based on my admittedly limited listening experience) that their "everything" does not include either Celine Dion or Buddy Guy. Yeah, isn't that a shame? No, really! (I had to confirm that I wasn't being sarcastic, since a comment like that referring to Dion could be considered snarky). That's exactly what I miss in radio today....way too predictable, no coliones to just play something that's good, regardless of its genre. Gone are the days when you could have a crossover pop hit, as in the days when Country was so big it crossed-over to pop, or (from the sublime to the ridiculous) when the Bee Gees went disco, thus infiltrating AOR stations with the first beachhead for that abomination. This effect appears also on satellite radio, where the music channels are so researched and segregated that it's YOU, the listener, who has to go search out diversity, because you're not going to find anything outside of the channel's target. Given the rate of cultural fragmentation currently observed in this country, the days of any sort of sustained mass audiences are long over and unlikely ever to return. Which only goes to show that we, the American public, have lost our edge. If we can't embrace the slightlest little thing like music as a chance to see a little bit more of the world, then how in the world can you expect that we'll even listen to something as important as where our country is going? Ray Charles was, by most estimations, a great artist. In my opinion, the reason why he is considered so is because, as he said himself, the only thing he required of his music was that it was "good music." His search for "good music" changed our culture, adding jazz, blues, country, rockabilly, rock and so much more, making us the richer for it, and in large measure, even, makiing it possible for acts like the Beatles and other milestone rock acts to effect their own changes. So here we are....stuck at a wall we will not climb. I think I'm going to go out back and slash my wrists. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there's nothing that offends you in your community, then you know you're not living in a free society. Kim Campbell - ex-Prime Minister of Canada - 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!- |
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Mike Terry wrote: The reason for this is well known, the radio stations are essentially bought and paid for by the record companies through what is known as Payola. So, they aren't in the business of helping you and I enjoy music, they are in the business of making money... No, not at all. Payola is long gone. Untrue. A PD was fired in Rochester for accepting the latest record company scam, giving gift cards 2to give to listeners" which the PD kept... that was last week. There were a half-dozen indictments about 5 years ago in CA, resulting in two convictions. Back when there was payola, PDs were happy to play new music, because the record companies paid them to play new music. The practice was never prevalent, and most PDs knew it was illegal and a firing offense, too. Few station staffers ever took payola. And even when givin, it affected only the biggest stations in the biggest markets. Now everybody is terrified of playing new music, so they all have become followers. Everyone realizes the average listener only wants to hear a small bit of new music. Payola is what kept radio fresh and interesting for years, and what you're seeing with the current homogenization of commercial radio is what has happened as a result of it being eliminated. It was never widespread. Your theory is wrong. |
"David Eduardo" wrote in message ... "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Mike Terry wrote: The reason for this is well known, the radio stations are essentially bought and paid for by the record companies through what is known as Payola. So, they aren't in the business of helping you and I enjoy music, they are in the business of making money... No, not at all. Payola is long gone. Untrue. A PD was fired in Rochester for accepting the latest record company scam, giving gift cards 2to give to listeners" which the PD kept... that was last week. There were a half-dozen indictments about 5 years ago in CA, resulting in two convictions. I wouldn't call that payola, though, David. That's just fraud or larceny. But the problem remains that in its executed form (where said gift cards actually go to said listeners), it's still a corruption of the way things should be. The gift cards would have augmented the station's promotion budget, thus enabling the station to, perhaps, capitalise on the opportunity to greater financial rewards...and all the PD had to do was "give a moment of consideration" to the list of otherwise unremarkable recordings. Payola or not, anyone having an interest in the music business should be barred from offering any rewards to the outlets or their representatives who make decisions on whether or not that outlet should be playing the output from the music business. Like that's going to happen anytime soon. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there's nothing that offends you in your community, then you know you're not living in a free society. Kim Campbell - ex-Prime Minister of Canada - 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!- |
In article ,
David Eduardo wrote: Everyone realizes the average listener only wants to hear a small bit of new music. Only if you accept the thesis that "the average listener" is a drooling idiot. Of course, since two decades of radio programming directed towards morons has driven many non-morons away from radio entirely (at least as a source on musical entertainment), this could now reasonably be stipulated as the audience living up (or rather, down) to programmers' expectations. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) |
"Bob Haberkost" wrote in message ... "David Eduardo" wrote in message Untrue. A PD was fired in Rochester for accepting the latest record company scam, giving gift cards 2to give to listeners" which the PD kept... that was last week. There were a half-dozen indictments about 5 years ago in CA, resulting in two convictions. I wouldn't call that payola, though, David. That's just fraud or larceny. It's clear payola. every communications attorney in the US sent a note to clients saying about the same thing, too. The record company said, "Hey, Mr. PD, here are a few thousand dollars in gift cards for on air promotion. (wink, wink). why don't you give them away on the air... if you want." the idea was that if they did nto get given away, the record duck was not going tocompalin, and the PD could go on a shopping spree. Clear and present payola. But the problem remains that in its executed form (where said gift cards actually go to said listeners), it's still a corruption of the way things should be. There was no intent to give anything to listeners. Payola or not, anyone having an interest in the music business should be barred from offering any rewards to the outlets or their representatives who make decisions on whether or not that outlet should be playing the output from the music business. Artist based promotions have been a legal and legitimate synergistic promotion with radio for many, many decades. As long as there is disclosure, it is legit. The minute management approves, there is no payola possible. |
On 27 Nov 2004 23:46:06 GMT, "Bob Haberkost"
wrote: Payola or not, anyone having an interest in the music business should be barred from offering any rewards to the outlets or their representatives who make decisions on whether or not that outlet should be playing the output from the music business. Like that's going to happen anytime soon. Hmm. I've signed several employment agreements as well as employee manuals that require me either to not accept anything above a certain value (lunch not included) or return the gift to the sender. Boston Gas sent a toy locomotive to me at Christmas one year. I was working for GE's WJIB(FM). Their campaign was called the "Montreal Express," named for the cold winds from the North. I had to return it. Rich |
|
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... In article , David Eduardo wrote: Everyone realizes the average listener only wants to hear a small bit of new music. Only if you accept the thesis that "the average listener" is a drooling idiot. Only if you actually ask, as I do, tens of thousands of listeners a year what they want to hear. essentially non want to hear more than a small number of new songs each week. Of course, since two decades of radio programming directed towards morons has driven many non-morons away from radio entirely (at least as a source on musical entertainment), this could now reasonably be stipulated as the audience living up (or rather, down) to programmers' expectations. This is true of most human beings, radio listeners or not. The unfamiliar is harder to assimilate than the familiar. Go to a club sometime and see which songs the folks dance to... is it the unfamiliar or the known? Go to an artist concert... when do the folks applaud? I'll bet it is when the artist sings the big hits, not when they sing the unfamiliar new stuff they want to hype from the new album. 95% of Americas listen to radio. Either you are wrong, or there are not many bright people in America any more. |
In article ,
David Eduardo wrote: 95% of Americas listen to radio. I don't believe that number for a moment (even stipulating the typo). If you had said "are exposed to radio every week", I might be willing to go along. But exposure and the sort of attention that is implied by "listen" are very different things -- something advertisers are beginning to understand. (That's also one of the flaws in Arbitron's "portable people meter" methodology: it's as good a measure as the sample size allows for *exposure*, but can't measure *listening*.) As an advertiser, a potential customer who is merely exposed to my message is not worth nearly as much as a potential customer who is actually paying attention.[1] Although the current talk about shorter stop sets is evidence that both broadcasters and advertisers are getting this message, it's not clear that they will really benefit, now that they have trained the audience to tune out (either mentally or physically) as soon as the first spot begins. (How do you promote shorter stop sets? "Only five commercials up next before another long music set on Q-92?") Meanwhile, we have a whole generation growing up in today's toxic media environment who neither look to radio for entertainment nor are particularly influenced by current modes of advertising. (Brings a new meaning to "you're soaking in it!") Compare the size of a suburban teenager's music collection to the playlist of one of your radio stations; I'll bet you nine times out of ten, your hypothetical teenager enjoys a greater variety of music than you play. For most of the past forty years, music radio has been the leader in introducing people to new music, which they could then go out and buy. (That's why over-the-air radio only has to pay license fees to the songwriters and composers, and not to the performers or record labels: it's considered a promotional expense to sell more recordings and concert tickets.) Today, with a few bright exceptions, radio has made itself largely irrelevant to this marketplace. Is it any wonder that audiences no longer expect radio to provide new music? Either you are wrong, or there are not many bright people in America any more. There never were, by definition. Garrison Keillor to the contrary, there is no place were "all the children are above average". -GAWollman [1] A good example: I was at my dentist's office last week. As an observant person and radio junkie, I noticed that she had WCRB on, rather than her usual WROR-FM. If I had been wearing a PPM, it would have credited WCRB with 45 minutes of my time -- even though I paid no attention to it (or to the advertising messages) after recognizing the source. I know from talking to my dentist that she puts the radio on to provide soothing background noise; only a patient who has arrived early for an appointment has enough attentional resources to notice the actual content of the programming. I regularly freak out Jennifer, the dental assistant, when I make an off-hand comment about something that just came out of the radio, and she had so completely tuned it out as background noise that she has absolutely no idea what I'm talking about. -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) |
I don't see AM/FM radio having a future.Other than news,what reason is
there,to listen to AM/FM radio anymore? And how many news stations can you really have in an area? Annoying dj's,cheesy contests,etc..not for me! And AM/FM stations have an average of what,15-16 minutes of commercials per hour? As far as music,I've gone to satellite radio. |
"David Eduardo" wrote in message ... "Bob Haberkost" wrote in message ... "David Eduardo" wrote in message Untrue. A PD was fired in Rochester for accepting the latest record company scam, giving gift cards 2to give to listeners" which the PD kept... that was last week. There were a half-dozen indictments about 5 years ago in CA, resulting in two convictions. I wouldn't call that payola, though, David. That's just fraud or larceny. It's clear payola. every communications attorney in the US sent a note to clients saying about the same thing, too. The record company said, "Hey, Mr. PD, here are a few thousand dollars in gift cards for on air promotion. (wink, wink). why don't you give them away on the air... if you want." the idea was that if they did nto get given away, the record duck was not going tocompalin, and the PD could go on a shopping spree. Clear and present payola. But the problem remains that in its executed form (where said gift cards actually go to said listeners), it's still a corruption of the way things should be. There was no intent to give anything to listeners. Payola or not, anyone having an interest in the music business should be barred from offering any rewards to the outlets or their representatives who make decisions on whether or not that outlet should be playing the output from the music business. Artist based promotions have been a legal and legitimate synergistic promotion with radio for many, many decades. As long as there is disclosure, it is legit. The minute management approves, there is no payola possible. Fair enough, on all counts. Certainly the issue of intent has a lot to do with it. I still think that artist-oriented promotions are bad for the business, though, since it gives the established major labels more of an advantage than the indies. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- If there's nothing that offends you in your community, then you know you're not living in a free society. Kim Campbell - ex-Prime Minister of Canada - 2004 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!- |
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... In article , David Eduardo wrote: 95% of Americas listen to radio. I don't believe that number for a moment (even stipulating the typo). If you had said "are exposed to radio every week", I might be willing to go along. But exposure and the sort of attention that is implied by "listen" are very different things -- something advertisers are beginning to understand. Advertisers are not making distinctions because what they care about is getting the message across, not who turned the radio on. In any case, many different methodologies, including Arbitron, show that 95% of average Americans... or Canadians... or Mexicans... listen to the radio at least once a week with enough awareness to identify such listening. Such surveys can even be replicated with simple phone samples. It is a fairly uncontested fact in media and ad circles. (That's also one of the flaws in Arbitron's "portable people meter" methodology: it's as good a measure as the sample size allows for *exposure*, but can't measure *listening*.) First, no one cares. Second, the People Meter is not in use yet in the US and it will probably not be until,perhaps, 2007 at the earliest. As an advertiser, a potential customer who is merely exposed to my message is not worth nearly as much as a potential customer who is actually paying attention.[1] There is no way of telling this with any kind of sample. Advertisers know this, and know that a percentage of messages are not noticed for a variety of reasons. You won't see this discussed in AdAge... just here, where no national advertisers are paying any attention. Although the current talk about shorter stop sets is evidence that both broadcasters and advertisers are getting this message, it's not clear that they will really benefit, now that they have trained the audience to tune out (either mentally or physically) as soon as the first spot begins. (How do you promote shorter stop sets? "Only five commercials up next before another long music set on Q-92?") Shorter stop sets are intended to improve the effectiveness of messages and to keep listeners longer. Many boroadcasters were not running excessive spot loads anyway... and none were running the loads common in the 50's and 60's. Meanwhile, we have a whole generation growing up in today's toxic media environment who neither look to radio for entertainment nor are particularly influenced by current modes of advertising. (Brings a new meaning to "you're soaking in it!") Compare the size of a suburban teenager's music collection to the playlist of one of your radio stations; I'll bet you nine times out of ten, your hypothetical teenager enjoys a greater variety of music than you play. Radio does not target teens in most markets since there is little ad money against them. For most of the past forty years, music radio has been the leader in introducing people to new music, which they could then go out and buy. (That's why over-the-air radio only has to pay license fees to the songwriters and composers, and not to the performers or record labels: it's considered a promotional expense to sell more recordings and concert tickets.) Wrong. the reason the RIAA never got performance rights such as are common in other developed nations is that they did not get to the table early enough, and now it is too late. As to being considered promotional expense, that is pure malarky. Today, with a few bright exceptions, radio has made itself largely irrelevant to this marketplace. Is it any wonder that audiences no longer expect radio to provide new music? They never did, except in small amounts. what has happened is that more now music is being exposed today, as there are more formats available on more stations in every market. A couple of weekly adds a week across 10 formats is a lot of songs; in the 50's and 60's you got 2 to 3 adds on a mass appeal top 40 station, and that was all. [1] A good example: I was at my dentist's office last week. As an observant person and radio junkie, I noticed that she had WCRB on, rather than her usual WROR-FM. If I had been wearing a PPM, it would have credited WCRB with 45 minutes of my time -- even though I paid no attention to it (or to the advertising messages) after recognizing the source. No different than a person who puts on a radio and leaves it on during work... may only hear part of the ads. Advertisers know that. Always been that way. |
In article ,
David Eduardo wrote: Radio does not target teens in most markets since there is little ad money against them. Today's teens are not going to magically "grow into" radio listeners when they hit 21. I work with a lot of twenty-somethings, and when I ask them about what their radio listening preferences are, the answer I invariably get (and have gotten for at least the past five years) is "none". They have no use for it.[1] Not having formed the radio habit, they are unlikely to suddenly start listenting when they leave school. -GAWollman [1] Just look around at college stations whose affiliated schools do not have broadcast, communications, or journalism programs. Many of them have great difficulty getting actual students (whose activity fees often pay for the station) to take any interest at all in radio as anything other than "a bigger music collection than I have at home". All too often, the program schedule is dominated by alumni, unaffiliated community members, and others from the previous generation. -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) |
In article ,
David Eduardo wrote: [I wrote:] an advertiser, a potential customer who is merely exposed to my message is not worth nearly as much as a potential customer who is actually paying attention.[1] There is no way of telling this with any kind of sample. Advertisers know this, and know that a percentage of messages are not noticed for a variety of reasons. You won't see this discussed in AdAge... just here, where no national advertisers are paying any attention. Actually, there is a very easy way for an advertiser to tell whether their message is reaching customers who are paying attention: ask the customers! I can't think of any major purchase I've made where the seller did not do so, either at the time of sale/service or during post-sales followup. I've also been the recipient of a number of brand-awareness telephone surveys which measure the same thing for non-durable goods. Today, with a few bright exceptions, radio has made itself largely irrelevant to this marketplace. Is it any wonder that audiences no longer expect radio to provide new music? They never did, except in small amounts. That's odd. Evidently you were not listening to the same radio stations as I was in the 1980s. what has happened is that more now music is being exposed today, as there are more formats available on more stations in every market. A couple of weekly adds a week across 10 formats is a lot of songs; Nobody listens to ten formats in one week. -GAWollman -- Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every | generation can invoke its principles in their own Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom. MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003) |
"Bob Haberkost" wrote in message ... Fair enough, on all counts. Certainly the issue of intent has a lot to do with it. I still think that artist-oriented promotions are bad for the business, though, since it gives the established major labels more of an advantage than the indies. -- Artist promotions are seldom done with unknown artists. Usually, stations limit such activities to tie ins with major artists or newer ones who have a string of recent hits. So, the issue for big vs. small labels is in getting initial airplay or sales or alternative media promotion (like clubs for dance music), since stations will not do a promotion with a "small" artist as a general rule. the idea, of course, is to tie in with the bigness of the artist to enhance the station image. |
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... In article , David Eduardo wrote: [I wrote:] an advertiser, a potential customer who is merely exposed to my message is not worth nearly as much as a potential customer who is actually paying attention.[1] There is no way of telling this with any kind of sample. Advertisers know this, and know that a percentage of messages are not noticed for a variety of reasons. You won't see this discussed in AdAge... just here, where no national advertisers are paying any attention. Actually, there is a very easy way for an advertiser to tell whether their message is reaching customers who are paying attention: ask the customers! That only shows a tiny portion oflisteners... those who at that moment have an interest in the particular product or service. For example, a person who buys a new car every 4 years only pays attention to car ads when the time comes to look for a new car. Otherwise, they do not hear the ads at all. I can't think of any major purchase I've made where the seller did not do so, either at the time of sale/service or during post-sales followup. I've also been the recipient of a number of brand-awareness telephone surveys which measure the same thing for non-durable goods. That does not measure whether people heard the ad or not. It only measures the effectiveness of the ad in getting people who are potential consumers to buy or inquire. Today, with a few bright exceptions, radio has made itself largely irrelevant to this marketplace. Is it any wonder that audiences no longer expect radio to provide new music? They never did, except in small amounts. That's odd. Evidently you were not listening to the same radio stations as I was in the 1980s. Stations in the 80's introduced new songs into their formats at about the same rate as in any other decade. In fact, the 80's was the decade when music research other than tracking sales came into its own, and that caused a reduction, if anything, in new music adds. what has happened is that more now music is being exposed today, as there are more formats available on more stations in every market. A couple of weekly adds a week across 10 formats is a lot of songs; Nobody listens to ten formats in one week. No, the average is 3 to 4. But who cares? I don't want to hear new or old music in a format that I do not enjoy. However, the fact that so many different formats are exposing some new songs each week means that there are more opportunities to break a song. |
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... In article , David Eduardo wrote: Radio does not target teens in most markets since there is little ad money against them. Today's teens are not going to magically "grow into" radio listeners when they hit 21. Actually, most do. Once a person has more concerns in life, like a job, family, and such, they find the time needed to download, burn CDs and such is much more limited. So radio take a place in thier lives gradually in the 18-24 period. I work with a lot of twenty-somethings, and when I ask them about what their radio listening preferences are, the answer I invariably get (and have gotten for at least the past five years) is "none". They have no use for it.[1] Not having formed the radio habit, they are unlikely to suddenly start listenting when they leave school. Actual market measurements done scientifically show that, even in 18-24, over 90% of people use radio weekly. |
"David Eduardo" writes:
"Garrett Wollman" wrote in message ... In article , David Eduardo wrote: Radio does not target teens in most markets since there is little ad money against them. Today's teens are not going to magically "grow into" radio listeners when they hit 21. Actually, most do. Once a person has more concerns in life, like a job, family, and such, they find the time needed to download, burn CDs and such is much more limited. So radio take a place in thier lives gradually in the 18-24 period. But what happens when it doesn't take any time to download, and there's no burning? When your local-wireless (Bluetooth or whatever) enabled pocket music library device just gets an automatically downloaded playlist of recent stuff (based on an automatically learned profile of the types of things you like and how adventerous you are)? You just pick it up and carry it with you, and play it wherever you go. Your wireless mobile network device picks up your news, weather, and traffic, in the car, office, or home. And there are no commercials in all this (except maybe the ones you actually ask for). I think there's just about one more generation left before that's the way it all works. There will still be a need for content, but the broadcasting mediums and economics might be very different from what we've had up to this point. |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:47 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com