Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
"New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio"
By Jerry Del Colliano My longtime friend Dan Mason, the CBS Radio President who is leading the dramatic turnaround of the company made a statement the other day about technology and radio. Dan reportedly told his new media road show in New York that "$1 billion in ad dollars were telling you that the iPod or satellite radio will lead to the death of radio. That's a myth. To say that an iPod or satellite radio, with little or no human connection, will ever replace radio is absurd." (from PaidContent.org). Well, maybe not satellite radio, but iPods have already changed the dynamic for radio. Just ask a young person who is not listening to a Walkman and is listening to an iPod. Not radio. But an MP3 player. CBS is moving in the direction of trying to get radio into new technology. It revealed a new media player that will feature several radio stations at once including Internet brands. They've jumped into the personalized radio business with Last.FM. Have a deal with AOL. Their own individual station streams and so on. My experience with the next generation does not bode well for any strategy that proliferates traditional radio onto new delivery systems. The next generation doesn't like radio. Not the stations. Not the concept. There's simply less need for it in their lives. New technologies will not only replace radio among the next generation, they already have. And this generation is huge -- with as many Gen Y'ers as there are baby boomers. I agree with Dan that the idea that new technologies will replace radio is -- to use his word -- "absurd" if you're talking about older Gen X'ers and baby boomers. This group loves radio and will appreciate receiving something they already like on their computers or mobile devices. But that's as far as you can go. Without the next generation the radio business will continue to hit the wall. Once the present economic downturn ends -- still a long way off -- there won't be enough new young listeners to help radio continue to grow. It becomes a losing proposition. More radio listeners die and fewer new radio listeners use traditional radio. The next generation wants to stop, start, time-delay and delete its programming. This generation wants to mash it up -- have a say in what it sounds like or how it is used. They want to deliver it to each other -- share it -- at will. They want community (what we used to call local radio) through social networking online. One of the hardest things for me to deal with in my years of working with the next generation is that they don't like radio and don't understand what I like about it. When I describe it, they say what I am describing is not what they hear on the radio. We're an industry in denial that technology has changed the game. But only radio people have the power to adapt and create new content for a new generation and on the devices they use. But to begin, we have to understand that more has changed than how to deliver radio programming. It's not about the technology. It's the sociology. http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...replacing.html Hey, Eduardo - dah ya think HD Radio will save terrestrial radio? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
On May 8, 7:08*am, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote: "New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio" By Jerry Del Colliano My longtime friend Dan Mason, the CBS Radio President who is leading the dramatic turnaround of the company made a statement the other day about technology and radio. Dan reportedly told his new media road show in New York that "$1 billion in ad dollars were telling you that the iPod or satellite radio will lead to the death of radio. That's a myth. To say that an iPod or satellite radio, with little or no human connection, will ever replace radio is absurd." (from PaidContent.org). Well, maybe not satellite radio, but iPods have already changed the dynamic for radio. Just ask a young person who is not listening to a Walkman and is listening to an iPod. Not radio. But an MP3 player. CBS is moving in the direction of trying to get radio into new technology. It revealed a new media player that will feature several radio stations at once including Internet brands. They've jumped into the personalized radio business with Last.FM. Have a deal with AOL. Their own individual station streams and so on. My experience with the next generation does not bode well for any strategy that proliferates traditional radio onto new delivery systems. The next generation doesn't like radio. Not the stations. Not the concept. There's simply less need for it in their lives. New technologies will not only replace radio among the next generation, they already have. And this generation is huge -- with as many Gen Y'ers as there are baby boomers. I agree with Dan that the idea that new technologies will replace radio is -- to use his word -- "absurd" if you're talking about older Gen X'ers and baby boomers. This group loves radio and will appreciate receiving something they already like on their computers or mobile devices. But that's as far as you can go. Without the next generation the radio business will continue to hit the wall. Once the present economic downturn ends -- still a long way off -- there won't be enough new young listeners to help radio continue to grow. It becomes a losing proposition. More radio listeners die and fewer new radio listeners use traditional radio. The next generation wants to stop, start, time-delay and delete its programming. This generation wants to mash it up -- have a say in what it sounds like or how it is used. They want to deliver it to each other -- share it -- at will. They want community (what we used to call local radio) through social networking online. One of the hardest things for me to deal with in my years of working with the next generation is that they don't like radio and don't understand what I like about it. When I describe it, they say what I am describing is not what they hear on the radio. We're an industry in denial that technology has changed the game. But only radio people have the power to adapt and create new content for a new generation and on the devices they use. But to begin, we have to understand that more has changed than how to deliver radio programming. It's not about the technology. It's the sociology. http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...logy-is-alread... Hey, Eduardo - dah ya think HD Radio will save terrestrial radio? * *I had lunch with Kipper McGee, the Program Director at WLS, about a month ago. We caught up on old times, talked about new technology, the future of HD, the future of Radio, and generally solved the world's ills. Most everything we discussed would be debatable ad nauseum, but there was one comment that came out and laid on the table that caught both of us off guard, and even silenced the table next to us...also radio people. The comment: * *"When you're in the car and reach for a remote to rewind Rush Limbaugh, you realize just how much TiVo has impacted our lives." * *That was an 'Ah-HAH!'moment. * *Now, I don't use TiVo. But I did build my own DVR, and with an outboard ATSC tuner, I do get to record, pause, and rewind live TV. Something I can also do with satellite radio. And more than once I've caught myself trying to rewind WBBM, or WGN (IBOC noise has made it impossible to get WLS most of the time, now, in Grayslake). * *The author, here, makes a good point...the younger generation has no use for low tech entertainment like radio, anymore. * *No, it's not going away anytime soon. And Dan Mason is right...technology with no human connection will never replace radio. However, with radio moving to more and more automation, voice tracking, or just tracking songs one after the other on weekends, the difference between terrestrial radio and some satellite channels is often times no more than the number and frequency of the commercials. And the difference between Radio and the iPod content is dramatic. Audio programming is now available through many sources, not just Radio. With content delivery through cellphones staged to become the most convenient, and the most practical. But the emphasis is on the content...not the technology. Radio has always done what is best for Radio...broadcasting for themselves. Room cume. And the listeners, often, be damned. Take what we offer and like it. And, oh yes, alternative choices...we'll just render those unlistenable. * *This thinking will render terrestrial radio stations, eventually, unnecessary. * *What is driving new media listening is content. Unless Radio focusses on content, and not just new and impressive ways of cluttering up the air with sales gimmicks, listening will move to where the desireable content is. That could be podcasts, Wi-Fi radio, cell phones...pick a path. But it certainly won't be HD radio. And it may not, in the long haul, be Radio at all. * *That will be up to Radio to decide. It's Radio's game to lose. But it'd better move quickly. The public taste landscape is shifting. And it's not toward terrestrial radio. * *As for IBOC....IBOC is to radio what DAT was to audiophilia. It is a technology that at the time conceived was a great idea. But wrangling and maneuvering, like what happend to DAT, or AM Stereo for that matter, delayed IBOC into the marketplace when there were already developing alternatives. IBOC was leapfrogged into irrelevance. IBOC brought interference to the bands, and orphaned enough listeners to move them to alternatives. Here in suburban Chicago, my $1200 tuner sits idle, because there is so much noise, both AM and FM, now, on my favorite stations that it's no longer enjoyable to listen. So, I do with Satellite. Podcasts. And the occasional webfeed. * *I'm certainly not alone. * *That's not to say that Radio is dead. Nor, for that matter is IBOC. There's just too damned much money invested for either to simply go away. There will be a fight to keep alive until the last drop of everyone's blood. And that includes appeals to the courts, the Congress, the FCC for laws, rulings, regulations and mandates to create a 'level playing field.' for HD/IBOC in particular, and Radio in general, against alternative media. * * And that's happening already. Radio, and iBiquity, have appealed to FCC to mandate inclusion of AM/FM and HD into new satellite receivers. Radio has appealed to FCC to slap satellite radio with content restrictions. Radio has appealed to FCC to mandate Radio companies to satellite Access. And put heavy restrictions on satellite broadcast operations. * * Hmmmmm....Odd behaviour for a market driven medium claiming to be in such fine health. * * The truth is, that the listeners will decide which way they wish to go. Which techologies they wish to support. And they'll do it on the basis of CONTENT. They'll go where they get to hear what they want to hear. It's time for Radio, and especially HD Radio, to start embracing that reality and put some effort into content. * * Before they really are broadcasting only to themselves.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - DPM - An 'interesting' Read ~ RHF All new All Mode All Digital AM/FM/DCB Radios should have a Card Slot or Memory Stick feature for : User Defined "Content". |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
D Peter Maus wrote:
Here in suburban Chicago, my $1200 tuner sits idle, because there is so much noise, both AM and FM, now, on my favorite stations that it's no longer enjoyable to listen. So, I do with Satellite. Podcasts. And the occasional webfeed. I'm certainly not alone. I use an FM Stereo transmitter to broadcast web radio throughout the house, here in exurban Los Angeles. My Tivoli Model One and my BA Recepter never sounded so good. Localism = News. News costs money. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
On May 8, 10:08�am, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote: "New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio" By Jerry Del Colliano My longtime friend Dan Mason, the CBS Radio President who is leading the dramatic turnaround of the company made a statement the other day about technology and radio. Dan reportedly told his new media road show in New York that "$1 billion in ad dollars were telling you that the iPod or satellite radio will lead to the death of radio. That's a myth. To say that an iPod or satellite radio, with little or no human connection, will ever replace radio is absurd." (from PaidContent.org). Well, maybe not satellite radio, but iPods have already changed the dynamic for radio. Just ask a young person who is not listening to a Walkman and is listening to an iPod. Not radio. But an MP3 player. CBS is moving in the direction of trying to get radio into new technology. It revealed a new media player that will feature several radio stations at once including Internet brands. They've jumped into the personalized radio business with Last.FM. Have a deal with AOL. Their own individual station streams and so on. My experience with the next generation does not bode well for any strategy that proliferates traditional radio onto new delivery systems. The next generation doesn't like radio. Not the stations. Not the concept. There's simply less need for it in their lives. New technologies will not only replace radio among the next generation, they already have. And this generation is huge -- with as many Gen Y'ers as there are baby boomers. I agree with Dan that the idea that new technologies will replace radio is -- to use his word -- "absurd" if you're talking about older Gen X'ers and baby boomers. This group loves radio and will appreciate receiving something they already like on their computers or mobile devices. But that's as far as you can go. Without the next generation the radio business will continue to hit the wall. Once the present economic downturn ends -- still a long way off -- there won't be enough new young listeners to help radio continue to grow. It becomes a losing proposition. More radio listeners die and fewer new radio listeners use traditional radio. The next generation wants to stop, start, time-delay and delete its programming. This generation wants to mash it up -- have a say in what it sounds like or how it is used. They want to deliver it to each other -- share it -- at will. They want community (what we used to call local radio) through social networking online. One of the hardest things for me to deal with in my years of working with the next generation is that they don't like radio and don't understand what I like about it. When I describe it, they say what I am describing is not what they hear on the radio. We're an industry in denial that technology has changed the game. But only radio people have the power to adapt and create new content for a new generation and on the devices they use. But to begin, we have to understand that more has changed than how to deliver radio programming. It's not about the technology. It's the sociology. http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...logy-is-alread... Hey, Eduardo - dah ya thinkHD Radiowill save terrestrial radio? � �I had lunch with Kipper McGee, the Program Director at WLS, about a month ago. We caught up on old times, talked about new technology, the future of HD, the future of Radio, and generally solved the world's ills. Most everything we discussed would be debatable ad nauseum, but there was one comment that came out and laid on the table that caught both of us off guard, and even silenced the table next to us...also radio people. The comment: � �"When you're in the car and reach for a remote to rewind Rush Limbaugh, you realize just how much TiVo has impacted our lives." � �That was an 'Ah-HAH!'moment. � �Now, I don't use TiVo. But I did build my own DVR, and with an outboard ATSC tuner, I do get to record, pause, and rewind live TV. Something I can also do with satellite radio. And more than once I've caught myself trying to rewind WBBM, or WGN (IBOC noise has made it impossible to get WLS most of the time, now, in Grayslake). � �The author, here, makes a good point...the younger generation has no use for low tech entertainment like radio, anymore. � �No, it's not going away anytime soon. And Dan Mason is right...technology with no human connection will never replace radio. However, with radio moving to more and more automation, voice tracking, or just tracking songs one after the other on weekends, the difference between terrestrial radio and some satellite channels is often times no more than the number and frequency of the commercials. And the difference between Radio and the iPod content is dramatic. Audio programming is now available through many sources, not just Radio. With content delivery through cellphones staged to become the most convenient, and the most practical. But the emphasis is on the content...not the technology. Radio has always done what is best for Radio...broadcasting for themselves. Room cume. And the listeners, often, be damned. Take what we offer and like it. And, oh yes, alternative choices...we'll just render those unlistenable. � �This thinking will render terrestrial radio stations, eventually, unnecessary. � �What is driving new media listening is content. Unless Radio focusses on content, and not just new and impressive ways of cluttering up the air with sales gimmicks, listening will move to where the desireable content is. That could be podcasts, Wi-Fi radio, cell phones...pick a path. But it certainly won't beHD radio. And it may not, in the long haul, be Radio at all. � �That will be up to Radio to decide. It's Radio's game to lose. But it'd better move quickly. The public taste landscape is shifting. And it's not toward terrestrial radio. � �As for IBOC....IBOC is to radio what DAT was to audiophilia. It is a technology that at the time conceived was a great idea. But wrangling and maneuvering, like what happend to DAT, or AM Stereo for that matter, delayed IBOC into the marketplace when there were already developing alternatives. IBOC was leapfrogged into irrelevance. IBOC brought interference to the bands, and orphaned enough listeners to move them to alternatives. Here in suburban Chicago, my $1200 tuner sits idle, because there is so much noise, both AM and FM, now, on my favorite stations that it's no longer enjoyable to listen. So, I do with Satellite. Podcasts. And the occasional webfeed. � �I'm certainly not alone. � �That's not to say that Radio is dead. Nor, for that matter is IBOC. There's just too damned much money invested for either to simply go away. There will be a fight to keep alive until the last drop of everyone's blood. And that includes appeals to the courts, the Congress, the FCC for laws, rulings, regulations and mandates to create a 'level playing field.' for HD/IBOC in particular, and Radio in general, against alternative media. � � And that's happening already. Radio, and iBiquity, have appealed to FCC to mandate inclusion of AM/FM and HD into new satellite receivers. Radio has appealed to FCC to slap satellite radio with content restrictions. Radio has appealed to FCC to mandate Radio companies to satellite Access. And put heavy restrictions on satellite broadcast operations. � � Hmmmmm....Odd behaviour for a market driven medium claiming to be in such fine health. � � The truth is, that the listeners will decide which way they wish to go. Which techologies they wish to support. And they'll do it on the basis of CONTENT. They'll go where they get to hear what they want to hear. It's time for Radio, and especiallyHD Radio, to start embracing that reality and put some effort into content. � � Before they really are broadcasting only to themselves..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Excelent points! FM-HD may be around for a while (but, remember that IBOC offers no ROI, and broadcasters continue to pay fess to iBiquity), but it looks like AM-HD is a bust: "Editorial: More Than Half Full" "AM-HD continues to fight uphill. Several manufacturers showed impressive new transmitter models designed to optimize and maintain HD performance. Yet the growth of AM-HD stations coming on the air appears stalled and we hear murmurings about some broadcasters pulling back on AM-HD or wishing to renegotiate their commitments with Ibiquity. That does not bode well as the AM service struggles to remain relevant." http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0044/t.13363.html Of course, the little comment from RW that IOBC somehow will make AM revlevant. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
On May 8, 10:08�am, D Peter Maus wrote:
wrote: "New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio" By Jerry Del Colliano My longtime friend Dan Mason, the CBS Radio President who is leading the dramatic turnaround of the company made a statement the other day about technology and radio. Dan reportedly told his new media road show in New York that "$1 billion in ad dollars were telling you that the iPod or satellite radio will lead to the death of radio. That's a myth. To say that an iPod or satellite radio, with little or no human connection, will ever replace radio is absurd." (from PaidContent.org). Well, maybe not satellite radio, but iPods have already changed the dynamic for radio. Just ask a young person who is not listening to a Walkman and is listening to an iPod. Not radio. But an MP3 player. CBS is moving in the direction of trying to get radio into new technology. It revealed a new media player that will feature several radio stations at once including Internet brands. They've jumped into the personalized radio business with Last.FM. Have a deal with AOL. Their own individual station streams and so on. My experience with the next generation does not bode well for any strategy that proliferates traditional radio onto new delivery systems. The next generation doesn't like radio. Not the stations. Not the concept. There's simply less need for it in their lives. New technologies will not only replace radio among the next generation, they already have. And this generation is huge -- with as many Gen Y'ers as there are baby boomers. I agree with Dan that the idea that new technologies will replace radio is -- to use his word -- "absurd" if you're talking about older Gen X'ers and baby boomers. This group loves radio and will appreciate receiving something they already like on their computers or mobile devices. But that's as far as you can go. Without the next generation the radio business will continue to hit the wall. Once the present economic downturn ends -- still a long way off -- there won't be enough new young listeners to help radio continue to grow. It becomes a losing proposition. More radio listeners die and fewer new radio listeners use traditional radio. The next generation wants to stop, start, time-delay and delete its programming. This generation wants to mash it up -- have a say in what it sounds like or how it is used. They want to deliver it to each other -- share it -- at will. They want community (what we used to call local radio) through social networking online. One of the hardest things for me to deal with in my years of working with the next generation is that they don't like radio and don't understand what I like about it. When I describe it, they say what I am describing is not what they hear on the radio. We're an industry in denial that technology has changed the game. But only radio people have the power to adapt and create new content for a new generation and on the devices they use. But to begin, we have to understand that more has changed than how to deliver radio programming. It's not about the technology. It's the sociology. http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com...logy-is-alread... Hey, Eduardo - dah ya thinkHD Radiowill save terrestrial radio? � �I had lunch with Kipper McGee, the Program Director at WLS, about a month ago. We caught up on old times, talked about new technology, the future of HD, the future of Radio, and generally solved the world's ills. Most everything we discussed would be debatable ad nauseum, but there was one comment that came out and laid on the table that caught both of us off guard, and even silenced the table next to us...also radio people. The comment: � �"When you're in the car and reach for a remote to rewind Rush Limbaugh, you realize just how much TiVo has impacted our lives." � �That was an 'Ah-HAH!'moment. � �Now, I don't use TiVo. But I did build my own DVR, and with an outboard ATSC tuner, I do get to record, pause, and rewind live TV. Something I can also do with satellite radio. And more than once I've caught myself trying to rewind WBBM, or WGN (IBOC noise has made it impossible to get WLS most of the time, now, in Grayslake). � �The author, here, makes a good point...the younger generation has no use for low tech entertainment like radio, anymore. � �No, it's not going away anytime soon. And Dan Mason is right...technology with no human connection will never replace radio. However, with radio moving to more and more automation, voice tracking, or just tracking songs one after the other on weekends, the difference between terrestrial radio and some satellite channels is often times no more than the number and frequency of the commercials. And the difference between Radio and the iPod content is dramatic. Audio programming is now available through many sources, not just Radio. With content delivery through cellphones staged to become the most convenient, and the most practical. But the emphasis is on the content...not the technology. Radio has always done what is best for Radio...broadcasting for themselves. Room cume. And the listeners, often, be damned. Take what we offer and like it. And, oh yes, alternative choices...we'll just render those unlistenable. � �This thinking will render terrestrial radio stations, eventually, unnecessary. � �What is driving new media listening is content. Unless Radio focusses on content, and not just new and impressive ways of cluttering up the air with sales gimmicks, listening will move to where the desireable content is. That could be podcasts, Wi-Fi radio, cell phones...pick a path. But it certainly won't beHD radio. And it may not, in the long haul, be Radio at all. � �That will be up to Radio to decide. It's Radio's game to lose. But it'd better move quickly. The public taste landscape is shifting. And it's not toward terrestrial radio. � �As for IBOC....IBOC is to radio what DAT was to audiophilia. It is a technology that at the time conceived was a great idea. But wrangling and maneuvering, like what happend to DAT, or AM Stereo for that matter, delayed IBOC into the marketplace when there were already developing alternatives. IBOC was leapfrogged into irrelevance. IBOC brought interference to the bands, and orphaned enough listeners to move them to alternatives. Here in suburban Chicago, my $1200 tuner sits idle, because there is so much noise, both AM and FM, now, on my favorite stations that it's no longer enjoyable to listen. So, I do with Satellite. Podcasts. And the occasional webfeed. � �I'm certainly not alone. � �That's not to say that Radio is dead. Nor, for that matter is IBOC. There's just too damned much money invested for either to simply go away. There will be a fight to keep alive until the last drop of everyone's blood. And that includes appeals to the courts, the Congress, the FCC for laws, rulings, regulations and mandates to create a 'level playing field.' for HD/IBOC in particular, and Radio in general, against alternative media. � � And that's happening already. Radio, and iBiquity, have appealed to FCC to mandate inclusion of AM/FM and HD into new satellite receivers. Radio has appealed to FCC to slap satellite radio with content restrictions. Radio has appealed to FCC to mandate Radio companies to satellite Access. And put heavy restrictions on satellite broadcast operations. � � Hmmmmm....Odd behaviour for a market driven medium claiming to be in such fine health. � � The truth is, that the listeners will decide which way they wish to go. Which techologies they wish to support. And they'll do it on the basis of CONTENT. They'll go where they get to hear what they want to hear. It's time for Radio, and especiallyHD Radio, to start embracing that reality and put some effort into content. � � Before they really are broadcasting only to themselves..- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Struble may regret demanding that Satrad receivers be opened up to new tachnologies, as this will open up competition with iPods, the Internet, etc. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
The young genration have no need for radio.
When wireless internet access become the norm, like cell phones today and it's avaialbe in your car. Then guess what a lot of listeners will have no need for radio as we know it. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
New Technology Is Already Replacing Radio
On May 12, 2:46*pm, "Scooter" wrote:
- - The young genration have no need for radio. - - When wireless internet access become the norm, - like cell phones today and it's avaialbe in your car. - Then guess what a lot of listeners will have no - need for radio as we know it. Scooter, Free Over-the-Air Radio - can only truly be replaced by - Free Over-the-Air [What Ever] The Average Hourly Radio Program offers a Variety of Content that most Mono-Programming Formats can not 'match'. When you will be able to 'program your Wire-Less Device to Sequence through as Series of Media 'choices' to give you a Variety of Media selections then may be it will be a valid replacement for Free Over-the-Air Radio. My "Self-Programming" Media Hour Minutes : Media Selection 00~05 : FOX News 06~07 : Weather Channel Radio 08~19 : Smooth Jazz 20~25 : BBC World Service News 26~39 : Singers & Standards 40~45 : NPR Nationa News 46~59 : Soundscapes {New Age} Free Over-the-Air Radio : I Don't Touch It : I Just Listen and Enjoy It ! ) ~ RHF |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Top 10 Technology Radio/TV Successes . . . | Shortwave | |||
Popular Mechanics Article on New Technology that May Impact Shortwave Radio | Shortwave | |||
New wave in radio technology | Shortwave | |||
'Spectrum Destructive' technology threatens SWL/Ham/HF radio | Shortwave |