The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 2:22*am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message

...





"David Eduardo" wrote in message
.. .
The station, without knowing it, failed because it was a Class IV on 1340
in a very sparsely populated county... where even today, a C2 FM only
puts a decent signal over 60,000 persons. And that county, unlike in the
50's, is now invaded by many usable FMs from other nearby locations...
yet it had a monopoly when it went on in 1950.

1) *KAPA was a damn fine station, with great local flavor and a good
community presence. I listened to it while I lived there most of the time,
even though KOL in Seattle put in a very good signal to the south, and
continued to listen when I lived in Astoria, because the signal they put
in there was quite good, and they had a better program than the (then) two
locals and a semi-local (KVAS, KAST and KSWB).

The problem is that, given a station with good programming that is
entertaining, listeners abandon "community presence" and "local flavor"
instantly just as they abandoned the local hamburger joint when McDonalds
openened.


that is changing fast. in my metro area, even during this brutal
recession, i am seeing old time restaurants opening again. i just ate
at one, nice service, good food, and the place was packed.


Lots of really good local AMs have been swept away by big FM signals coming
on the air in the 70's and 80's. The smart ones bought FMs, too. The others
failed and go through new owners every few years.


that happens in any business. it does not mean that we like
mediocrity, and corporate blandness.


2) To quote a certain shill person "nobody listens to radio outside the
64dBu city contours" and "stations don't care about anyone outside their
own city contours... they do not count in the ratings." *I know there was
other BS in there somewhere..

The minute that little market was penetrated by numerous FMs it was over for
the Class IV no matter what you think of its programming.


you are citing a different problem than what we are discussing. then
you say they went under not because of the programming, but because
f.m. became popular right? you cannot have this both ways.


And analysis of millions of listener weeks of recorded listening over nearly
a decade shows that there is very little listening outside the 64 dbu of FMs
at work or at home, and much of that is because the radios of the last few
decades can't pick up much of anything less than that with acceptable
quality. When I see nearly no exceptions that would validate your
contention, I must conclude that you are imagining things.

hmmmm, are you telling me that the f.m. band, cannot play a large
wide selection of music, is there something wrong with the spectrum,
it can only broadcast corporate chosen bland conservative playlists?

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 9:10*am, dave wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

The idea that there are musicologist-type DJs rummaging through
thousands of records is a myth, and in the few cases such exists or has
existed, most have failed.

Myth? How so? *Community stations have such programmers to this day.
When I was in Top 40 (50 actually) radio in the '60s we were told where
to choose the next record from, e.g. top 10 current out of the top of
the hour ID; *power oldie out of news headlines, etc. *We were never
told to play a specific song at a specific time.

We had music meetings where we auditioned new records and informally
voted on them. *We discovered and broke new acts. *Our musical knowledge
and opinion was valued.

I blame Lee Abrams more than Ron Jacobs.

thank you for your statement. its what i saw as a kid also. the
truth, its refreshing. back in the 60's, in my area, garage bands were
the thing. my local radio exposed them, and many went national,
remember the trashmen and surfer bird, the gentrys "keep on dancing"
the castaways 'liar liar", today, they would never get heard.
conservative corporate america, is looking for the next well built,
screamer, no matter what sex, who cannot carry a tune, but screams,
and the screaming does not even rhymes, and if it does, its sounds so
out of place and simple that it only appeals to the immature.
we are arguing with a apologetic corporatist.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 10:14*am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"dave" wrote in message

m...

David Eduardo wrote:

The idea that there are musicologist-type DJs rummaging through thousands
of records is a myth, and in the few cases such exists or has existed,
most have failed.

Myth? How so? *Community stations have such programmers to this day.

I have trouble documenting the effectiveness of this... since, even when one
creates custom geography areas, 99% of these suckers seem to have no
detectable listeners. This is, again, "if a tree falls in a forrest...."

When I was in Top 40 (50 actually) radio in the '60s we were told where to
choose the next record from, e.g. top 10 current out of the top of the
hour ID; *power oldie out of news headlines, etc. *We were never told to
play a specific song at a specific time.

That is how it worked even in the largest markets until computers took over
the manual job of selection. Still, you chose out of 10 songs that were on
the playlist at the top of the hour, not among thousands of songs. All you
did was manually shuffle them.

The defect is that a person given this power, as limited as it is, to
shuffle will skip the songs they don't like quite often... and never play
them, although much of the audience may wish to hear them.



We had music meetings where we auditioned new records and informally voted
on them. *We discovered and broke new acts. *Our musical knowledge and
opinion was valued.

That, in some form or another, is still how new music is picked. Only now,
we know fairly quickly with things like callout, if we had a hit or a miss.
And we get the bad songs out of the system early. 99% of "favor play" gets
nuked when the listeners vote .



I blame Lee Abrams more than Ron Jacobs.

Neither created the systems for identifying hits. And "hit" in radio simply
means any song listeners want to hear, today. And, conversely, it means any
song that a significant percentage of listeners would not like to hear and
which might cause them to tune out is not played.

ROTFLOL!!!! wow, you can really land on your feet. you got called out.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 10:57*am, Joe from Kokomo wrote:
Nickname unavailable wrote:
who cares what some right wing lying nut cases say. the truth is,
that bush broke the law,

yes

and trampled on the constitution,

Yes

he should be in jail for high crimes.

and YES!

thank you.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...
On Jul 12, 1:42 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

The problem with stations with thousands of songs is that nobody listens
to
them.

you cannot have it both ways. you say that a broad selection means
that people will not listen, yet in the same breath out of the other
side of your mouth, you say people are turning to the net in droves
for just that sort of selection.

I said no such thing. When people go to the net, for music, they go to find
a selection of songs that they personally like. They do not generally go for
a large number of songs... they go for their personal favorites.

all one has to do is take a peak at a download site, its full of
music and movies, and lots of them are never seen nor heard on
american corporate owned media.

And that is because the word "broadcasting" contains the word "broad" which
means that a radio station must appeal to a fairly large group of people
with some common taste; obscure music and deep cuts appeals almost to the
individual and not a group.

When you find out the high scoring songs with an individual, you will find a
group of songs that may not be on the radio. But you do the same with
another individual, and the list of songs not on the radio will be there,
but will be different songs. by the time you are through, there will be lots
of songs one or two individuals like, but which nobody else likes or wants
to hear.

Individuals buy music, while groups listen to the radio. The fringe songs a
few like but the majority dislike or don't even know have no place on radio
because the job of radio is to please masses, not each person individually.

And 90% of US radio stations are owned by individuals, families, small
partnerships and small companies. They program the same way because they
understand that listeners in their majority do not want what you suggest.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...
On Jul 12, 1:52 am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
KSWB).

2) To quote a certain shill person "nobody listens to radio outside the
64dBu city contours" and "stations don't care about anyone outside their
own
city contours... they do not count in the ratings." I know there was other
BS in there somewhere..

when i was a kid, there was a radio station in of all place, little
rock arkansas, i am in minneapolis/st.paul, that rock station would
come in late at night, and really good if it was a clear night, and
they would play all sorts of rock music that was obscure, and that was
back in the 60's and 70's. i really miss them.

The reason why folks listened to out of town stations 50 years ago is that
there were still no Top 40 (or other "hip" formats) in many markets. So kids
in Ruidoso, NM listend to KOMA from Oklahoma City and those in Northport,
Michigan, listened to WLS and so on.

Now, there are many more stations. For example, in the case of Northport,
they had two AMs giving day, but not night service, in 1960. Today, it has
over a dozen usable signals day and night. They have 8 or 9 distinct formats
to chose from, and have no need to listen to static and fading on distant
AMs.

they used to play a song about hemp rope, and the hippe that craved
the rope, it was hilarious. today if you dare criticize a
conservative, you are banned from air time, censored like the nazi's
used to do. conservatism, just say no, its the healthy thing to do.

Yes, I am sure that not-so-subtle references to drugs amuse you... uh,
pardon me, befuddle you.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...


then it shows you that concentration had to start somewhere. last
time i checked, oslo norway, pop. a little over 3 mil. still has 3
dailys.

As I mentioned before, what sustains European papers, and will for a while
longer, is the immense use of public transit systems. What percentage of
newspaper users buy the paper to read on the train or bus?

No US city, save New York, has anywhere near the use of public transit, and
most of the use is by those who can't afford cars. What drives public
transit in Europe is far denser population, resulting in an ease in creating
transit routes very near each person's residence.

Without public transit, the reading time for papers would be reduced
enormously and many papers would fail.

In Buenos Aires, the southernmost city in Europe, one major daily, Clarín
observed that nearly half its daily circulation was bought at Subte (subway)
stations and bus and train stops. And that is why in Europe and Latin
America, Sunday circulation falls way off, while in the US it is much higher
than the Monday-Firday press run.

The US depends on home delivery for most circulation... in other parts of
the world, there is often no home delivery... all copies are sold on the
street.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...
Must have been a bad station in a small market or a really bad on in a
bigger one. In any case, nobody who knows radio would call the person on
the
air a "jockey." Jockeys ride horses. Disk Jockeys may be called DJ's or
Jocks, but they ain't called jockeys.


minneapolis/st.paul. hardly small. it was am radio then. today they
are talk, but back then, they were the rock power house.

I presume you mean "rock and roll" powerhouse. "rock" stations were an FM
phenomenon, starting in the very late 60's.

Nit picking on terminology aside, the two Top 40 powerhouses in the Twin
Cities were KDWB and KDGY (630 and 1130 AM)

KDWB was a Crowell Collier station, and like KEWB and KFWB, it had a very
limited Top 40 playlist and never deviated from it. WDGY was owned by Storz,
where format violations were subject to immediate dismissal.

Of course, KDWB is no more... the allocation moved once as far as Wisconsin,
and is now a small station doing Regional Mexican programming..

today, corporate america has ruined not only radio, but t.v. and the
papers. they have loaded them up with debt, and severe restrictions
that make them bland, conservative in nature, safe.

There are 14,000 radio stations in the US, and perhaps 1000 are burdened
with seemingly irresolvable debt issues. None would have had any trouble
were it not for the recession, so you are doing the equivalent of blaming
debt for the failure of Chrysler and GM, when it was the perfect storm of
labor commitments, bad designs and horrible quality that came about due to
the recession.


and most are owned by a few companies, that loaded them up on debt
because of the purchase price, and gave us a bad product, a product
that was costing them customers before the recession. and as we always
see with conservative economics, they cannot pay their bills. who
would have ever thought.

Untrue. If you go down in size to groups that own 50 stations or less, which
excludes only about 10 or 11 companies, you will see that about 12,200
stations are not owned by big companies.

There are, among them, only a couple that are severely burdened by debt,
representing maybe 1000 stations. On the other hand, every station,
newspaper, corner story and working person is burdened by the economy. Any
bankruptcies are due to the economy, not the business model.

Yes, a few companies are in trouble in radio due to debt. Most are not.

we shall see.

We can already see. There are as many endangered single station Ma and Pa
operations that can't pay the bills today as there are big "corporate"
stations.

And among the biggest, there are those like Cox and CBS that have no debt
issues and use the very same programming models because they work and please
listeners.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...
On Jul 12, 2:22 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

you are citing a different problem than what we are discussing. then
you say they went under not because of the programming, but because
f.m. became popular right? you cannot have this both ways.

Brenda Ann made two NUMBERED points... one about programming, the other
about the facility. In this case, the cause of the demise of the station had
to do with it being AM when AM began dying as well as loose, uncontrolled
programming in the face of more structured and focused FMs.

And analysis of millions of listener weeks of recorded listening over
nearly
a decade shows that there is very little listening outside the 64 dbu of
FMs
at work or at home, and much of that is because the radios of the last few
decades can't pick up much of anything less than that with acceptable
quality. When I see nearly no exceptions that would validate your
contention, I must conclude that you are imagining things.

hmmmm, are you telling me that the f.m. band, cannot play a large
wide selection of music, is there something wrong with the spectrum,
it can only broadcast corporate chosen bland conservative playlists?

FMs have essentially all the music audience, so there is no issue between AM
and FM here. It is just a radio issue, with no band distinction.

Radio uses techniques to determine the appeal of each individual song in a
specific genre (or "format") and they play, as a rule, all the songs that
have wide appeal and don't play the ones that a significant numbers of
listeners don't want to hear. In each format, there are different numbers of
songs that tend to define these formats, in every market, often even in
different countries.

Country stations average in the 600 to 700 songs, Tallahassee or Spokane.
Soft ACs go from 300 to 350 songs. CHR's (today's term for Top 40) around
120. And so on. The reason there are no more is that listeners as a group
don't like any more songs, no matter how deep the research goes.

And every so often there is a station that plays 1500 songs in a 700 song
format, and dies, proving the rule. The reason playlists are the size they
are is that the listeners who selected the songs indicated that that was all
they liked enough to play.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

David Eduardo wrote:

And that is because the word "broadcasting" contains the word "broad"
which means that a radio station must appeal to a fairly large group of
people with some common taste; obscure music and deep cuts appeals
almost to the individual and not a group.

Individuals buy music, while groups listen to the radio. The fringe
songs a few like but the majority dislike or don't even know have no
place on radio because the job of radio is to please masses, not each
person individually.

This is where you are completely wrong. Radio is one-on-one. People
listen to the radio alone, or in very small groups.
----
Freeform stations

Freeform radio stations in the United States:
This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it.

* k94rocks.com Your Rock Station US,VIRGINIA
* KANM (Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas)
* KAOS (Olympia, Washington)
* KBOO (Portland, Oregon)
* KCMP (St. Paul, Minnesota)
* KCR (San Diego State University, San Diego, California)
* KDVS (University of California, Davis, Davis, California)
* KEOL (Eastern Oregon University, La Grande, Oregon)
* KEXP (Seattle, WA)
* KFJC (Foothill College, Los Altos Hills, California)
* KHUM (Ferndale, California)
* KJHK (University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas)
* KMNR (Missouri University of Science and Technology, Rolla, Missouri)
* KLOS (Los Angeles, California)
* KPSU (Portland State University, Portland, Oregon)
* KRFH (Humboldt State University, Arcata, California)
* KRUI (University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa)
* KTEC (Oregon Institute of Technology, Klamath Falls, Oregon)
* KTRU (Rice University, Houston, Texas)
* K-UTE (University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah)
* KUGS (Western Washington University, Bellingham, Washington)
* KUOI (University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho)
* KVRX (University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas)
* KVSC (St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota)
* KWRP (Pecos, New Mexico)
* KWUR (St. Louis, Missouri)
* WARC (Allegheny College, Meadville, Pennsylvania)
* WBGU (Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio)
* WCBN (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan)
* KCRW (Santa Monica College, Santa Monica, California)
* WCNI (Connecticut College, New London, Connecticut)
* WESS (East Stroudsburg University, East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania)
* WESU (Wesleyan University, Middletown, Connecticut)
* WETX-LP (Tri-Cities, Tennessee)
* WEVL (Memphis, Tennessee)
* WEXP (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
* WFMU (Jersey City, New Jersey)
* WGDR (Plainfield, Vermont)
* WHRW (Binghamton University, New York)
* WIKD-LP (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach,
Florida)
* WKDU (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
* WLRA (Lewis University, Romeoville, Illinois)
* WMBR (MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts)
* WMFO (Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts)
* WMSC (Montclair State University, Upper Montclair, New Jersey)
* WMSR (Miami University, Oxford, Ohio)
* WMUC (University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland)
* WNJR (Washington & Jefferson College, Washington, Pennsylvania)
* WOBC (Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio)
* WPKN (Bridgeport, Connecticut)
* WPRK (Rollins College, Winter Park, Florida)
* WRCT (Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)
* WRFL (University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky)
* WRFW (University of Wisconsin-River Falls)
* WRNC-LP (Northland College (Wisconsin), Ashland, Wisconsin)
* WRUR (University of Rochester, Rochester, New York)
* WSPN (Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs, New York)
* WRVU (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee)
* WSGR-FM (St. Clair County Community College, Port Huron, Michigan)
* WSUM (University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin)
* WUMD (University of Michigan–Dearborn, Dearborn, Michigan)
* WUSB (Stony Brook University SUNY, Stony Brook, New York)
* WVBR (Ithaca, New York)
* WXBC (Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, New York)
* WXDU (Duke University, Durham, North Carolina)
* WXYC (UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina)
* WZRD (Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, Illinois)
* WKCO (Kenyon College, Gambier, Ohio)

Freeform radio stations in Canada:

* CKCU (Ottawa, Ontario)
* CKUT (Montreal, Quebec)
* CKRL (Quebec, Quebec) is the longest running french speaking
community radio station
* CKIA (Quebec, Quebec)

Freeform radio stations in Europe:

* Radio Centraal (Antwerp, Belgium)

[edit] Freeform radio vs. eclectic radio

Eclectic radio describes radio programming encompassing diverse music
genres. Unlike freeform radio, the eclectic radio format involves
prescribed playlists. While freeform radio stands in contrast to
commercial radio formats, a number of commercial radio stations offer
programs showcasing an eclectic variety of music.

Some eclectic radio stations in the United States a

* KALX (Berkeley, California)
* KCRW (Santa Monica, California)
* KEOS (College Station, Texas)
* KEXP (Seattle, Washington)
* KFAI (Minneapolis, Minnesota)
* KGLT (Bozeman, Montana)
* KNYE (Pahrump, Nevada)
* KUOM (University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota)
* KUSF (San Francisco, California)
* KUT (Austin, Texas)
* KXUA (Fayetteville, Arkansas)
* WERS (Boston, Massachusetts)
* WHPK (University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois)
* WJCU (University Heights, Ohio)
* WUSM (Hattiesburg, Mississippi)
* WXPN (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
-wikipedia

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

David Eduardo wrote:


Untrue. If you go down in size to groups that own 50 stations or less,
which excludes only about 10 or 11 companies, you will see that about
12,200 stations are not owned by big companies.


How many potential listeners?

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...
On Jul 12, 9:10 am, dave wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:

The idea that there are musicologist-type DJs rummaging through
thousands of records is a myth, and in the few cases such exists or has
existed, most have failed.

Myth? How so? Community stations have such programmers to this day.
When I was in Top 40 (50 actually) radio in the '60s we were told where
to choose the next record from, e.g. top 10 current out of the top of
the hour ID; power oldie out of news headlines, etc. We were never
told to play a specific song at a specific time.

We had music meetings where we auditioned new records and informally
voted on them. We discovered and broke new acts. Our musical knowledge
and opinion was valued.

I blame Lee Abrams more than Ron Jacobs.

thank you for your statement. its what i saw as a kid also.

Of course the statement is untrue. Playlists, based on consumer feedback,
were shortened going back nearly 20 years before Abrams developed his
successful format at WQDR in Raleigh.

As for proof, Abram's SuperStars(c) format was contracted all over the US,
where it rapidly decimated the remaining free form stations that ran under
the label of "progressive rock."

the
truth, its refreshing. back in the 60's, in my area, garage bands were
the thing. my local radio exposed them, and many went national,
remember the trashmen and surfer bird, the gentrys "keep on dancing"
the castaways 'liar liar", today, they would never get heard.

The eqivalent songs would get played today... adding music is a pure
emotional call, verified only weeks later by research. Most program
directors are blind to label... we look at the aritst, obviously giving
prefernce to the new song by the biggest acts and the newer acts with a few
consistent hits under their belts. Then, just as in the 50's and 60's we
look for good songs by unknowns.

No PD in the 60's would have postponed adding a new Beatles or Stones or
Supremes cut to play the Castaways chanting "Liar, Liar, you're pants are on
fire..." But enough of the new songs get played that we have a nice crop of
newcomers in country, CHR, Urban, and every other format that plays an
amount of current music.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:

Individuals buy music, while groups listen to the radio. The fringe songs
a few like but the majority dislike or don't even know have no place on
radio because the job of radio is to please masses, not each person
individually.

This is where you are completely wrong. Radio is one-on-one. People
listen to the radio alone, or in very small groups.

You miss the point. To reach each listener individually, a station can not
play any, or more realistically, more than a few songs that each listener
does not care for. To do this means on radio finding the songs that everyone
likes, at least a little, and discarding the ones that irritate some of the
listeners.

So to make the experience personal, a station has to make sure that more
than one person is satisfied. So it takes a large group of listeners with an
affinity to make each individual happy with the station.
----
Freeform stations


(List cut).

Most of the stations you list that are in rated markets have essentially no
listeners. A few, like the stellar KUT in Austin, are highly rated (KUT is
5th in Austin) because they have focus and structure and are definitely not
free form.

The ones that have no plan fail.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

Dumbass.
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/r...?ArtNum=269094

I didn't wrote the title of that article about DUMBASS B HO the
USURPER, somebody else did.I might plagiarize it though.
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

Haw Haw Haw!
B HO the DUMBASS!
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 1:56*am, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...
On Jul 12, 12:56 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:



It was always so for the vast majority of decades and stations. Just as
someone at a supermarket determines what products, sizes and varieties of
products to stock... and not stock, someone in each radio station
determines
what songs are played and not played.

today, a playlist from some corporate goon in new york determines
what gets played, and what does not. in my youth, i got to hear lots
of local garage bands get air time, then make it national.
*today, that would not happen, its the playlist, and nothing else.

Actually, in most rated markets significant stations do local music research
and determine the playlist based on that local data. Given the hard economic
times, many stations have reduced such costs, but they make themselves
vulnerable to competitors...


yea right, 10 companies, own 90% of almost all media. in some small
cities, one or two companies own it all. you switch the channel, and
hear the same thing. you really do need to get out more.


It´s precisely the local research that shows that there is no interest in
the generally bad songs by the local bands, so they don't get played.



a corporatists response.



And just like the supermarket, which uses research, sales tabulations and
such to deteermine desirable procuts, radio does the same thing to decide
on
each song.

you are a kool aid drinker aren't you. many local grocery stores
stock products from small suppliers, with out all of the above goobly
gook.

How many people go to little local grocery stores if they have a choice? The
prices are higher, the assortment is limited, etc. *In any case, customers
are going to want their preferred products no matter where they buy. The
bigger markets analyze sales data, and combined with promotional allowances
and such, calculate what will sell and have the most shelf turns and most
profit. They can even analyze how many inches of facing to give and at what
level and the resultant sales.



have you even been in the natural, or organic stores in your area? or
smaller chains, you would be amazed. in my metro area, there are 3
smaller grocery store chains, one has a whole aisle of soda pop, made
with pure cane sugar, in glass bottles mostly, but also pony kegs, and
many brands get wiped out over the weekend, and the pony kegs go even
faster. you really need to get out more. you are locked in a
corporatist mentality.



The idea that there are musicologist-type DJs rummaging through
thousands
of
records is a myth, and in the few cases such exists or has existed, most
have failed.

most have been taken over by corporate america, then came the play
lists.

Not so. Playlists existed back to the time of live bands at local radio
staitons... someone determined the songs the bands would play. And since
recorded music has been a staple of American radio, going back to the
rejection of the AFM rules and Petrillo's policies, stations have
pre-programmed music in almost every instance. In fact, the format concept
that "saved radio" in the early and mid-50's, Top 40, was based entirely
on
the concept of a playlist and zero deviation from it.

*yes there has been in the past, except, they were flexible. today,
see if a jockey was to sneak in something not on the playlist, see
what would happen to such jockey. its why independents can no longer
get airtime, but when i was a kid, they did.
*you are simply a hard wired free market apologist.

Stations had playlists in the 30's, just as they had lists of the
commercials they had to run, called a log.

yes they did. but the disk jockeys would not get fired if they dared
to play something not on the play list.

Hmm... in the mid 60's, the first person I fired as a PD was a guy who
played one song that was not approved.

*at your station. back then, there were 1000's of independently owned
stations. are you telling me that they all operated the same?

And if you worked for Storz or McLendon or Burden or Crowell-Collier or
any
of the big operators of music stations in the 50's and broke format, you
were gone.

*but, was there 10 companies or less that own just about all radio
stations in america? not!

nice try, in free market america, you have tons of choices, that are
almost all the same.

And that, in radio, is quite untrue.

i live in a metro area with about 3.5 million people, not only is
radio ****, so is t.v., and both daily papers. prior to 1981, it was
not so.

Probably the stations have adjusted to contemporary taste of the target
audience, which is generally 18-49 or 25-54, and you are either out of the
demographic or have not kept up with current taste.

*snicker, infomercials are entertainment, that is how far we have
sunk. you are part of the problem, that is why corporate media is
failing.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

Hey Nickname, My alter ego nickname is Alice.
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message
...
On Jul 12, 1:56 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

Actually, in most rated markets significant stations do local music
research
and determine the playlist based on that local data. Given the hard
economic
times, many stations have reduced such costs, but they make themselves
vulnerable to competitors...


yea right, 10 companies, own 90% of almost all media. in some small
cities, one or two companies own it all. you switch the channel, and
hear the same thing. you really do need to get out more.

The top 10 commercial broadcast companies in radio own around 1600 stations
today, with the #10 clocking in at just over 70 stations. That's out of
14,000 and some stations in the US, not counting LPFMs and translators.

So the top groups own 12% to 13% of all stations, and the next tier, 11 to
20, represents only about 300 stations, and among them is a group in the
Dakotas and surrounding areas where some of the markets are 30,000 people.

It´s precisely the local research that shows that there is no interest in
the generally bad songs by the local bands, so they don't get played.

a corporatists response.

Nah. I've watched local unsigned artist music, with one or two exceptions,
tank quite royally from the Bay Area to Buenos Aires. And by watching, I
mean this... local people who listen to local stations and go to local shows
and local clubs... take a look at it
http://www.davidgleason.com/Radio%20Research.htm

How many people go to little local grocery stores if they have a choice?
The
prices are higher, the assortment is limited, etc. In any case, customers
are going to want their preferred products no matter where they buy. The
bigger markets analyze sales data, and combined with promotional
allowances
and such, calculate what will sell and have the most shelf turns and most
profit. They can even analyze how many inches of facing to give and at
what
level and the resultant sales.

have you even been in the natural, or organic stores in your area? or
smaller chains, you would be amazed. in my metro area, there are 3
smaller grocery store chains, one has a whole aisle of soda pop, made
with pure cane sugar, in glass bottles mostly, but also pony kegs, and
many brands get wiped out over the weekend, and the pony kegs go even
faster. you really need to get out more. you are locked in a
corporatist mentality.

There will always be niche markets, where people who are looking for
specialized products will drive farther and spend more money. But that kind
of store is the equivalent of narrowcasting... and for that, we have today
iPods and the web and all kinds of other distribution models.

Not so. Playlists existed back to the time of live bands at local radio
staitons... someone determined the songs the bands would play. And since
recorded music has been a staple of American radio, going back to the
rejection of the AFM rules and Petrillo's policies, stations have
pre-programmed music in almost every instance. In fact, the format
concept
that "saved radio" in the early and mid-50's, Top 40, was based entirely
on
the concept of a playlist and zero deviation from it.

yes there has been in the past, except, they were flexible. today,
see if a jockey was to sneak in something not on the playlist, see
what would happen to such jockey. its why independents can no longer
get airtime, but when i was a kid, they did.
you are simply a hard wired free market apologist.

There is no difference in whether an independent can get a song played today
than in the past. In fact, with so many more formats than there were in the
50's and 60's, the number of new songs played per week in a market is many
times more than it was when you had multiple top 40, multiple MOR and a
couple of r&b or countrry stations.

And if the guy at the Mercedes plant near Tuscaloosa puts a green fender on
a gray car, he gets a warning, and then fired. Why would we not exepect our
product to be as finely crafted as any other? Like I said, the stations you
mentioned in the Twin Cities would not allow deviation from the playlist...
and a jock that did so would be warned, and then fired.

Hmm... in the mid 60's, the first person I fired as a PD was a guy who
played one song that was not approved.

at your station. back then, there were 1000's of independently owned
stations. are you telling me that they all operated the same?

Yeah, the ones that were successful did.

And if you worked for Storz or McLendon or Burden or Crowell-Collier or
any
of the big operators of music stations in the 50's and broke format, you
were gone.

but, was there 10 companies or less that own just about all radio
stations in america? not!

No, and that is not true today, either. The largest owns about 800 stations,
with a significnt number in a trust pending their sale. The next largest has
about half that, and by the time you get to the 6th largest, they have
around 75 stations. And, to put things in perspective, the average McDonalds
grosses about twice what the average US radio station did 2 years ago. Now,
it's probably 3 to 1 in favor of the Mickey D place.

Probably the stations have adjusted to contemporary taste of the target
audience, which is generally 18-49 or 25-54, and you are either out of
the
demographic or have not kept up with current taste.

snicker, infomercials are entertainment, that is how far we have
sunk. you are part of the problem, that is why corporate media is
failing.

Infomericals are what stations that can't compete do... or they sell
brokered hours... or run religious shows that are paid based on donations...
or they rent the station to someone who does a format in Hindi or Russian or
Farsi.

Those stations, mainly AM, can't compete because 90% of major market AM
stations do not cover the market fully day and night, so they can't
challenge the bigger stations, and they do whatever it takes to bring in
revenue. Of about 1800 AMs in the top 100 markets, about 210 are viable. The
rest can run the stuff that pays the bills and leaves a little on the side.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

wrote in message
...
Hey Nickname, My alter ego nickname is Alice.
cuhulin


Lay off the sauce, feed Blueberry dog and chill.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

It is True, my alter ego, pretend gal's name is Alice.I named ''her''
myself.Maybe that married Irish woman wayyyyyy over yonder across the
big pond is right, maybe I am getting old and penile.y'all should have
seen what I was wearing under my Dickies work pants and my shirt last
Tuesday when I stopped off at the Goodwill store on my way to the Lowe's
store.I am going to the Lowe's store again in the morning for some more
2'' by 4''s for my old trailer.Of course I will stop off at the Goodwill
store first. www.shopgoodwill.com From the Lowe's store, I will go
across Highway 18 to the GNC store.I want to see if GNC sells some
testosterone blocker stuff.
I haven't had any booze since last February.
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

wrote in message
...

I haven't had any booze since last February.
cuhulin


Congratulations. That's a significant achievement. How's the dog?

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

Doggy is sleepin with her head on my right leg.Night of the Hunter movie
just now finished up on the TCM channel.Next up, The First Auto.

U.S.prezes Murdered By the Rothschild Banking Cartel.
www.rense.com/general86/pres.htm

www.devilfinder.com
Lyndon Baines Johnson's involvement in the murder of John F.Kennedy

www.devilfinder.com
George H.W.Bush's involvement in the murder of John F.Kennedy

Heh, politicians Murdering politicians.

The More the Better, I always say.
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep the
research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep the
research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

Radio audience is a group. To form a group, you have to attract listeners
with common likes and dislikes, and satisfy each of them.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On 07/13/09 08:51, David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep
the research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

Radio audience is a group. To form a group, you have to attract
listeners with common likes and dislikes, and satisfy each of them.

No, Radio listening is done by individuals. It's done by
individuals, mostly in separate locations, under separate
conditions, with individual intent, tastes and needs of the moment.
Radio listening is an individual experience. Not a group marketing
construct.

As R. L. Larkin liked to say..."The Map is not the Territory."
There are vast differences between the individuals needs and
individual experience, and the constructs used to measure, evaluate,
and attempt to grasp these experiences, and then direct mass
listening.


"Radio audience" is an artificial construct to group individuals
into a single manageable entity, by averaging, rounding off, and
statistically creating a model from carefully chosen sample. To
create the 'average' listener to whom the product is marketed, and
for whom the advertising is targeted. But it is not the actual
individual listener. Who often selects a radio station because it's
the lesser of multiple dislikes.

Radio audience is not like a theatre audience. A theatre audience
is a group of individuals gathered at a common time, into a single
place, with a single intent, and a single environment, with common
expectations on product that are driven by the common environment
the common experience. An audience shares contained commonality.
Even to changing dress for the experience.

Radio is individual. It's been a long time since people grouped
around their radios for the common experience. Radio listening,
today, is 'at will.' Seeking psychographic satisfaction at the
moment as an individual. Usually singly, usually personally. With
expectations of the product that are driven by the
needs/wants/tastes/satisfactions of the moment.

But Radio is presented by a carefully constructed formula based
on a carefully constructed model of the listeners that comprise the
construct called audience. And listeners choose what's available.
Even if it may not be to their precise tastes/needs/wants of the
moment. Radio works to convince listeners that what Radio presents
is precisely what the listener wants.

So Radio doesn't attract bodies of listeners by satisfying each
of them. They attract individual listeners by doing what's easy,
convenient and graspable for RADIO, and satisfying the needs of the
artificial construct, not the individual. And then selling the
individual on the idea that he/she/it is actually being satisfied as
an individual.

And it's all nonsense.

If Radio was so successful at satisfying the needs of each of
it's listeners, there would be many fewer alternative choices to
Radio. Because there would be no viable market for them.

Radio does what's good for Radio.

The fact that Radio is successful at meeting Radio's goal is not
an indication that Radio has satisfied each listener's needs. It's
only an indication that Radio has met the goals of its marketing
construct. And satisfied the construct of the 'average' listener,
with average content, presented in an average way, until the numbers
match the target.

Actual listeners are only tools to Radio's commercial end.

Listeners are not served by Radio. Radio lures listeners so that
listeners may serve Radio's needs.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 07/13/09 08:51, David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep
the research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

Radio audience is a group. To form a group, you have to attract
listeners with common likes and dislikes, and satisfy each of them.

No, Radio listening is done by individuals. It's done by individuals,
mostly in separate locations, under separate conditions, with individual
intent, tastes and needs of the moment. Radio listening is an individual
experience. Not a group marketing construct.

No disagreement. But from the persective of a radio staiton, one can only
form an audience, which is a group, by finding common appeal among many,
many individuals. The process consists in finding the common thread among
large groups of listeners, and providing it. The listener wo thinks, "I like
this music" or "I like this show" must be joined by thousands if not tens of
thousands of other people all at once for a station to be successful.

The first step has to be that identification of broad likes. Then, the
content is delivered as if it were directed at each listener individually.
That is where one on one comes in... in the delivery, not the design.

In airchecking, I often suggest that jocks put a picture of a loved one or
family menber over the mike so they talk to a person, not a crowd. But,
again, this only works if the program content is selected to appeal to a
bunch of listeners, a group.

Reread my statement... "Radio Audience is a Group." Each listener is an
individual, but the audience is a group.

A good resstaurant may have a few customers who like beets. But maybe 80% of
the customers hate them. So they would never serve beets as a standard side.
That's because they know most of the clients would not enjoy their dining
experience as much as were they to serve potatoes and mixed veggies. The
restaurant knows the base offerings must have broad appeal to a group of
clients. Otherwise, they fail.

The rest of your post was clipped, as you are harping on the idea that we as
an industry don't get that listening happens person by person. We get that,
but a station has to appeal to each person who belongs to a group with
common music likes and dislikes and which is large enough to make the
station successful (by whatever metric that is measured). And that is where
the concept of a group, a collection, an assembly enters in. The key part of
"broadcasting" today is "broad."

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On 07/13/09 10:31, David Eduardo wrote:

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 07/13/09 08:51, David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep
the research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

Radio audience is a group. To form a group, you have to attract
listeners with common likes and dislikes, and satisfy each of them.

No, Radio listening is done by individuals. It's done by individuals,
mostly in separate locations, under separate conditions, with
individual intent, tastes and needs of the moment. Radio listening is
an individual experience. Not a group marketing construct.

No disagreement. But from the persective of a radio staiton, one can
only form an audience, which is a group, by finding common appeal among
many, many individuals. The process consists in finding the common
thread among large groups of listeners, and providing it. The listener
wo thinks, "I like this music" or "I like this show" must be joined by
thousands if not tens of thousands of other people all at once for a
station to be successful.

The first step has to be that identification of broad likes. Then, the
content is delivered as if it were directed at each listener
individually. That is where one on one comes in... in the delivery, not
the design.

In airchecking, I often suggest that jocks put a picture of a loved one
or family menber over the mike so they talk to a person, not a crowd.
But, again, this only works if the program content is selected to appeal
to a bunch of listeners, a group.

Reread my statement... "Radio Audience is a Group." Each listener is an
individual, but the audience is a group.


I read it the first time, David. Or I wouldn't have had a response.

The 'audience' doesn't exist. It's an artificial construct to
gather together the numbers into a manageable device. But it's an
artificial construct, nothing more.



A good resstaurant may have a few customers who like beets. But maybe
80% of the customers hate them. So they would never serve beets as a
standard side. That's because they know most of the clients would not
enjoy their dining experience as much as were they to serve potatoes and
mixed veggies. The restaurant knows the base offerings must have broad
appeal to a group of clients. Otherwise, they fail.


Every restaurant I frequent will serve an alternate, if I ask.
They understand that general offerings don't get it, even for
patrons who seek out their restaurant based on genre.

Interesting you should mention beets. I get beets frequently.



The rest of your post was clipped, as you are harping on the idea that
we as an industry don't get that listening happens person by person. We
get that, but a station has to appeal to each person who belongs to a
group with common music likes and dislikes and which is large enough to
make the station successful (by whatever metric that is measured). And
that is where the concept of a group, a collection, an assembly enters
in. The key part of "broadcasting" today is "broad."


I"m sure that you get that listening happens person by person.
The fact you clipped the rest and reduced it to 'harping'
underscores my point that Radio isn't about the listeners. It's
about Radio. And for the bigger groups, the stock price.

The listeners are only a tool to a commercial end. Your job is to
sell us on the idea that we want what you offer.

Radio does what's good for Radio.

The listeners serve that end.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep
the research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

Radio audience is a group. To form a group, you have to attract
listeners with common likes and dislikes, and satisfy each of them.

You cannot interview them in groups. People express their likes and
dislikes more honestly when they are not with other people.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

The listeners are only a tool to a commercial end. Your job is to sell
us on the idea that we want what you offer.


No, our job is to identify what individual listeners want, and then find the
commonality that has a base in a large group of people with similar likes.
Then we serve each individual. Unlike the internet, or the restaurant
example, we can't customize content for each listener, but we can find
common elements many listeners have... which ends up being the same thing.

Audience is the only thing radio sells. Audience is created by putting
together, one by one, listeners who like a station and come to it with a
certain frequency.

"Selling what we want you to offer..." is an old concept. It's, from the
radio point of view, about "us." It's the "50,000 watt voice of the Great
Southwest." Who cares? Good radio today is about "you," the individual
listener. It's the difference between "La Nueva, the concert station, where
you can win tickets to the Vicente Fernandez concert..." and "Imagine
yourself in the front row at the Vicente Fernandez concert... it may not be
a dream...."

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

"dave" wrote in message
. ..
David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:
The reason there are no more is that
listeners as a group don't like any more songs, no matter how deep the
research goes.

People don't listen in groups. Your research is flawed.

Radio audience is a group. To form a group, you have to attract listeners
with common likes and dislikes, and satisfy each of them.

You cannot interview them in groups. People express their likes and
dislikes more honestly when they are not with other people.

That's why most radio research today is done individually. And a music test
is not a discussion, so whether there is one person or one hundred present,
each person scores each song individually, and many stations have moved to
on-line testing (one person) or "by invitation" individual testing in an
office or even mall meeting room. Perceptuals are most often done by one on
one phone interviews or one on one personal interviews. Callout music
research is done via one on one phone interviews.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

The Pioneer radio in my 1983 Dodge van picks up local Jackson 103.7 FM
radio station www.WLEZ.com (Nostalgia Radio) real good.I hopes at
least one of my other radios can pick up that radio station.I haven't
tried them all out yet.
I reckon I can hook up one of my old car radios and see if it will pick
up WLEZ and use it in my house and or out in my back yard.
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"Selling what we want you to offer..." is an old concept. It's, from the
radio point of view, about "us." It's the "50,000 watt voice of the
Great Southwest." Who cares? Good radio today is about "you," the
individual listener. It's the difference between "La Nueva, the concert
station, where you can win tickets to the Vicente Fernandez concert..."
and "Imagine yourself in the front row at the Vicente Fernandez
concert... it may not be a dream...."

If the programming is so good, why do you have to give away prizes?

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 12:55*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...
On Jul 12, 1:52 am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
KSWB).

2) To quote a certain shill person "nobody listens to radio outside the
64dBu city contours" and "stations don't care about anyone outside their
own
city contours... they do not count in the ratings." I know there was other
BS in there somewhere..

when i was a kid, there was a radio station in of all place, little
rock arkansas, i am in minneapolis/st.paul, that rock station would
come in late at night, and really good if it was a clear night, and
they would play all sorts of rock music that was obscure, and that was
back in the 60's and 70's. i really miss them.

The reason why folks listened to out of town stations 50 years ago is that
there were still no Top 40 (or other "hip" formats) in many markets. So kids
in Ruidoso, NM listend to KOMA from Oklahoma City and those in Northport,
Michigan, listened to WLS and so on.


we had 2 top 40 stations back then, including the one where i got to
pick my own top 40. we listened to other stations because there was a
wide selection and variety available to people back then. properly
interpreted, it means we had options. but even our top 40 stations
played a wide variety. today you get a selection some corporate toady
picks for you.


Now, there are many more stations. For example, in the case of Northport,
they had two AMs giving day, but not night service, in 1960. Today, it has
over a dozen usable signals day and night. They have 8 or 9 distinct formats
to chose from, and have no need to listen to static and fading on distant
AMs.


we know music went to f.m. that does not mean they are locked into a
playlist some corporate toady has chosen for us to hear.


*they used to play a song about hemp rope, and the hippe that craved
the rope, it was hilarious. today if you dare criticize a
conservative, you are banned from air time, censored like the nazi's
used to do. conservatism, just say no, its the healthy thing to do.

Yes, I am sure that not-so-subtle references to drugs amuse you... uh,
pardon me, befuddle you.

it was funny. just like itsibisty yellow polka dot bikini, monster
mash, or purple people eater, nether of those could make it with
today's corporate feverish grip on the media.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

Nickname unavailable wrote:

On Jul 12, 12:55 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...
On Jul 12, 1:52 am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
KSWB).

2) To quote a certain shill person "nobody listens to radio outside the
64dBu city contours" and "stations don't care about anyone outside their
own
city contours... they do not count in the ratings." I know there was other
BS in there somewhere..

when i was a kid, there was a radio station in of all place, little
rock arkansas, i am in minneapolis/st.paul, that rock station would
come in late at night, and really good if it was a clear night, and
they would play all sorts of rock music that was obscure, and that was
back in the 60's and 70's. i really miss them.

The reason why folks listened to out of town stations 50 years ago is that
there were still no Top 40 (or other "hip" formats) in many markets. So kids
in Ruidoso, NM listend to KOMA from Oklahoma City and those in Northport,
Michigan, listened to WLS and so on.


we had 2 top 40 stations back then, including the one where i got to
pick my own top 40. we listened to other stations because there was a
wide selection and variety available to people back then. properly
interpreted, it means we had options. but even our top 40 stations
played a wide variety. today you get a selection some corporate toady
picks for you.

Psssssst... 'Eduardo' is a corporate toady.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 1:02*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...

then it shows you that concentration had to start somewhere. last
time i checked, oslo norway, pop. a little over 3 mil. still has 3
dailys.

As I mentioned before, what sustains European papers, and will for a while
longer, is the immense use of public transit systems. What percentage of
newspaper users buy the paper to read on the train or bus?

No US city, save New York, has anywhere near the use of public transit, and
most of the use is by those who can't afford cars. What drives public
transit in Europe is far denser population, resulting in an ease in creating
transit routes very near each person's residence.

Without public transit, the reading time for papers would be reduced
enormously and many papers would fail.

In Buenos Aires, the southernmost city in Europe, one major daily, Clarín
observed that nearly half its daily circulation was bought at Subte (subway)
stations and bus and train stops. And that is why in Europe and Latin
America, Sunday circulation falls way off, while in the US it is much higher
than the Monday-Firday press run.

The US depends on home delivery for most circulation... in other parts of
the world, there is often no home delivery... all copies are sold on the
street.

you go where your customers are. but in my case, i love the door to
door service. but why buy a bland corporate paper that is a
conservative doormat. in europe, papers still break stories faster
than the internet. which menas people value them.
letting madison avenue that is populated with conservatives and
libertarians choose what we see, hear and read, has been a disaster.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 1:12*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...

Must have been a bad station in a small market or a really bad on in a
bigger one. In any case, nobody who knows radio would call the person on
the
air a "jockey." Jockeys ride horses. Disk Jockeys may be called DJ's or
Jocks, but they ain't called jockeys.

minneapolis/st.paul. hardly small. it was am radio then. today they
are talk, but back then, they were the rock power house.

I presume you mean "rock and roll" powerhouse. "rock" stations were an FM
phenomenon, starting in the very late 60's.


hmmmm, rock and roll was a 50's terminology as far as i know. i must
have coined the phrase back in the early 60's then?


Nit picking on terminology aside, the two Top 40 powerhouses in the Twin
Cities were KDWB and KDGY (630 and 1130 AM)


yes.

KDWB was a Crowell Collier station, and like KEWB and KFWB, it had a very
limited Top 40 playlist and never deviated from it. WDGY was owned by Storz,
where format violations were subject to immediate dismissal.



then i must have gotten wdgys jockeys all fired.


Of course, KDWB is no more... the allocation moved once as far as Wisconsin,
and is now a small station doing Regional Mexican programming..



they moved to f.m., where it is today, i could care less.

today, corporate america has ruined not only radio, but t.v. and the
papers. they have loaded them up with debt, and severe restrictions
that make them bland, conservative in nature, safe.

There are 14,000 radio stations in the US, and perhaps 1000 are burdened
with seemingly irresolvable debt issues. None would have had any trouble
were it not for the recession, so you are doing the equivalent of blaming
debt for the failure of Chrysler and GM, when it was the perfect storm of
labor commitments, bad designs and horrible quality that came about due to
the recession.

and most are owned by a few companies, that loaded them up on debt
because of the purchase price, and gave us a bad product, a product
that was costing them customers before the recession. and as we always
see with conservative economics, they cannot pay their bills. who
would have ever thought.

Untrue. If you go down in size to groups that own 50 stations or less, which
excludes only about 10 or 11 companies, you will see that about 12,200
stations are not owned by big companies.


we have few independents here. but we do have clear channel, and more
than one of them.


There are, among them, only a couple that are severely burdened by debt,
representing maybe 1000 stations. On the other hand, every station,
newspaper, corner story and working person is burdened by the economy. Any
bankruptcies are due to the economy, not the business model.



we shall see.

Yes, a few companies are in trouble in radio due to debt. Most are not.

we shall see.

We can already see. There are as many endangered single station Ma and Pa
operations that can't pay the bills today as there are big "corporate"
stations.



no doubt.


And among the biggest, there are those like Cox and CBS that have no debt
issues and use the very same programming models because they work and please
listeners.

there is a place for ridged playlists, but, that model si shrinking
fast

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 1:42*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...
On Jul 12, 2:22 am, "David Eduardo" wrote:

you are citing a different problem than what we are discussing. then
you say they went under not because of the programming, but because
f.m. became popular right? you cannot have this both ways.

Brenda Ann made two NUMBERED points... one about programming, the other
about the facility. In this case, the cause of the demise of the station had
to do with it being AM when AM began dying as well as loose, uncontrolled
programming in the face of more structured and focused FMs.


you have insinuated that f.m. caused the demise of these stations,
but in my area, many moved to f.m. once they were bought out, then
came the ridged playlists. that is what we are really discussing.


And analysis of millions of listener weeks of recorded listening over
nearly
a decade shows that there is very little listening outside the 64 dbu of
FMs
at work or at home, and much of that is because the radios of the last few
decades can't pick up much of anything less than that with acceptable
quality. When I see nearly no exceptions that would validate your
contention, I must conclude that you are imagining things.

hmmmm, are you telling me that the f.m. band, cannot play a large
wide selection of music, is there something wrong with the spectrum,
it can only broadcast corporate chosen bland conservative playlists?

FMs have essentially all the music audience, so there is no issue between AM
and FM here. It is just a radio issue, with no band distinction.



nope, its a corporate mentality that limits choice.

Radio uses techniques to determine the appeal of each individual song in a
specific genre (or "format") and they play, as a rule, all the songs that
have wide appeal and don't play the ones that a significant numbers of
listeners don't want to hear. In each format, there are different numbers of
songs that tend to define these formats, in every market, often even in
different countries.



that's why people are loading up ipods with music they cannot hear on
the radio, plugging them into their radio jacks, and ignoring
corporate owned bland radio.

Country stations average in the 600 to 700 songs, Tallahassee or Spokane.
Soft ACs go from 300 to 350 songs. CHR's (today's term for Top 40) around
120. And so on. The reason there are no more is that listeners as a group
don't like any more songs, no matter how deep the research goes.


corporate research is so good. or, is it that corporate research only
chooses what the corporation makes money on.


And every so often there is a station that plays 1500 songs in a 700 song
format, and dies, proving the rule. The reason playlists are the size they
are is that the listeners who selected the songs indicated that that was all
they liked enough to play.

you ignore what is going on, on the internet.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

On Jul 12, 2:00*pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Nickname unavailable" wrote in message

...
On Jul 12, 9:10 am, dave wrote:



David Eduardo wrote:

The idea that there are musicologist-type DJs rummaging through
thousands of records is a myth, and in the few cases such exists or has
existed, most have failed.

Myth? How so? Community stations have such programmers to this day.
When I was in Top 40 (50 actually) radio in the '60s we were told where
to choose the next record from, e.g. top 10 current out of the top of
the hour ID; power oldie out of news headlines, etc. We were never
told to play a specific song at a specific time.

We had music meetings where we auditioned new records and informally
voted on them. We discovered and broke new acts. Our musical knowledge
and opinion was valued.

I blame Lee Abrams more than Ron Jacobs.

thank you for your statement. its what i saw as a kid also.

Of course the statement is untrue. Playlists, based on consumer feedback,
were shortened going back nearly 20 years before Abrams developed his
successful format at WQDR in Raleigh.


wal-marts come and go im american history, once the citizens of this
country find out how bland they are. this is not natural to limit
choices in america.


As for proof, Abram's SuperStars(c) format was contracted all over the US,
where it rapidly decimated the remaining free form stations that ran under
the label of "progressive rock."


wal-mart wipes out main street, that does not mean that wal-mart will
stay in favor forever.


the
truth, its refreshing. back in the 60's, in my area, garage bands were
the thing. my local radio exposed them, and many went national,
remember the trashmen and surfer bird, the gentrys "keep on dancing"
the castaways 'liar liar", today, they would never get heard.

The eqivalent songs would get played today... adding music is a pure
emotional call, verified only weeks later by research. Most program
directors are blind to label... we look at the aritst, obviously giving
prefernce to the new song by the biggest acts and the newer acts with a few
consistent hits under their belts. Then, just as in the 50's and 60's we
look for good songs by unknowns.



ROTFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! night is day, and day is night.


No PD in the 60's would have postponed adding a new Beatles or Stones or
Supremes cut to play the Castaways chanting "Liar, Liar, you're pants are on
fire..." But enough of the new songs get played that we have a nice crop of
newcomers in country, CHR, Urban, and every other format that plays an
amount of current music.

its not that the castaways pushed off the beatles and stones music
off the air, its that we had a choice, and that choice enriched the
music listening, and also the health of the music industry. the music
industry uses your research, and we see how well they are doing.

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

Have you ever watched Top Gear on the BBC America tv channel? It is easy
to see/hear they hate America/Americans.
Especially that damn MORON Jefrey Clarkson.
Look them up at www.devilfinder.com
You will see what I mean.
cuhulin

The "Progressive" Promised Land
 

About time for me to take another Estrogen tablet now.
This morning at the Goodwill store, I mentioned to Pam (she shops at
Goodwill, she is almost always over there every day) I need to find out
where I can buy some Testosterone blocker.She told me to check with the
Sesame Seed store in Clinton.Clinton is a suburb City five miles West of
doggy's couch.
cuhulin