In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

I was surveyed once by a local rock FM station that had a top 40 format.
The wanted to know what music format I listened too.

There is lots of bad research in all fields. the fact that the station
identified itself is a good clue... introducing the name of the client
creates respondent bias that is capable of ruining the responses.

Classical music was
not one of the choices. Talk radio was not one of the choices either.
They wanted to know what mix of rock music I favored of older music from
the 80s and 90s and current hits. I told them I was tired of hearing the
old hits and dont ever want to hear them again. The new music was more
interesting but not my preference.

It sounds like they were, very badly, trying to qualify respondents for a
phone call out music test. In such cases, only certain combinations of
stations are of interest, and screening does occur. This sounds like they
did not know how to do this right.

She wanted to argue with me about
what I did listened too. The question moved on to if I was to listen to
KXXX what mix would I prefer. Good example of outcome based marketing
dont you think. I didnt fit into their listening survey so they would
make me fit. I just hang up the phone went they call now.

Generally, this only works if they play you mix samples, as there has to be
a common ground to evaluate all responses against. Usually, a variety of
"pods" representing a mix will be played, and the respondent scores them on
a scale.

Thanks for responding to this I'm learning a lot about broadcast
marketing. This radio station that called was one of these 40 or so
rotating hits FM stations and they wanted people at work to listen to
them all day long in the background. That's the idea anyway.

Even if it was music I wanted to listen to that is not a long enough
list of songs for me. Rotating 40 tunes of a few minutes of each means
you go through the list something like every couple of hours so during
the workday you would hearing the whole list several times a day. Since
this list changes slowly over time it would be way to repetitive for me.
I can't fathom why people would want to listen to such a short list day
after day. This would be torture for me to listen to after a few days
even if I liked all the tunes to begin with.

Are broadcasting stations going to longer lists of tunes now that people
have appliances like IPOD's that can store many albums of music?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Are broadcasting stations going to longer lists of tunes now that people
have appliances like IPOD's that can store many albums of music?

Good question. This is not a simple issue.

An iPod has "my favorite songs" on it. A radio station tries to have
"everyone's favorite songs" on it. So, to get consensus songs, the list is
shorter because I may love what you hate!

The younger the listener, the shorter the list. I do see stations appealing
to adults trying to add variety, but nothing like 1000 song iPod
collections.

I got my HD radio this evening. A few thoughts:

- I can't tell the difference between HD and regular FM. They both sound
good but I can't tell one from the other.

- There are four HD stations in Nashville:

WLAC-AM 1510:
WPLN-FM 90.3:
WVNS-FM 102.5:
WNRQ 105.9:

- Couldn't test AM, as UPS didn't deliver the radio until 6:15. "FCC
sunset" for Nashville in March is 6:00 so WLAC-HD was off the air.

- WVNS' analog audio sounds *better* than the HD -- the HD was "hissing
its F's" which the analog doesn't do. No other station has this
problem, so I suspect it's a processing issue at the station. WVNS has
a translator on 102.1 which is *not* relaying the HD. (not that I
expected it would)

- At my location (18 miles from the nearest HD station and about 27
miles from two of the three) the provided 18" wire antenna is not
adequate for any HD reception. I hooked the set to my TV antenna. I
suspect the built-in AM antenna wouldn't provide any reception either
but the set comes with an external loop which probably will. I'll find
out tomorrow!

- WNRQ-HD drops out for about 5 seconds about every 30-60 seconds.
Neither WPLN nor WVNS does this. WVNS is a lot closer, but WPLN is on
the same tower as WNRQ - and runs about 20% *less* power. Tested only
on HD2 though I'd be surprised if this problem doesn't affect both channels.

- At least in theory, the HD exciter is supposed to contain a delay line
that delays the analog audio to match the delay through the digital
coding process. It appears that no station around here has got it
completely right. (but they're all pretty close) It is possible this is
due to varying delays in *receivers* though; the Receptor HD appears to
delay the audio of *analog* stations. (might it have DSP for analog
signals??)

- It takes roughly 5 seconds for the radio to lock in to a HD signal. If
you've tuned to a HD simulcast of an analog signal, you'll hear the
analog audio during the lockin period.

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

"David Eduardo" wrote:



Interstates are elevated,

....if you mean "by 15 feet above the original grade," then maybe.
That's as stupid a generalization as I've *ever* heard. But I've come
to expect that out of this thread.

and mostly clear of obstructions by nature. The
fact is, there is not a listenable signal to any Denver station much south
of Monument, except for sporadic places where height gives a path into
distant locations. The chances of any significant listening occurring when
the signal comes and goes and is unlistenable on average radios is nil.

No Denver FM has a city grade signal (70 dbu) that gets south of
Larkspur.

70dBu is a pretty serious signal. While that might be the ideal, you
might find that even today's receivers can do well with less.

Nearly all reported listening to FMs occurs inside the 64 dbu contour.
Research by third parties as well as Arbitron itself where diaries are
compared to coverage maps confirms this is a pattern that has held true for
decades.

You may put up with DX-quality signals, but the average listener does not.
This is why AM skywave is not much listened to any mo the quality is
ratty and the reception is inconsistent.

This. Is. Not. DX.

50 miles is not DX.

100 miles is not DX.

Get out of your box and breathe some fresh air, fergawdsakes. You
have an overly simplified model of the world and it doesn't fit
reality. From what you say in this thread I would suggest you do
substantial harm to those stations unlucky enough to hire you.

But then, consultants are known for doing that in my field, too.


You are DXing, and putting up with come-and-go signals. Listeners are not
DXers. If the signal is not perfect, they don't listen.

These are steady, strong, clean signals.

If you were really concerned about clean signals, you'd be screaming
at receiver manufacturers to clean up capture ratios so that the
multipath doesn't garble them to hell and gone.

Oh, you work with running AM into the ground... never mind...


In other words, what they do doesn't reflect reality. Your "listener
or tow [sic]" is probably more like 10 here, 20 here, 5 there, adding
up to the hundreds to thousands.

First, there are only a few stations that even get, consistently, outside
their own markets.

By your filtered numbers. Which I simply do not accept as an accurate
reflection of reality. Use them all you want for your narrow view,
but I believe your methodology is *fundamentally* flawed.

My numbers, again are not filtered. They are not even "mine." They are
Arbitron numbers. Arbitron diaries instruct each participant to write down
everything they listen to, day by day, for a week. They do not say, "only
local staitons" or anything else. Just, "hat did you hear on the radio." If
anyone listened to distant stations in any measured market, it gets picked
up. As I mentioned, 2 people out of 3000 sampled in Phoenix had listened to
KFI in the last 12-week survey period. Since that is not enough listening to
project into the usinverse, it is not in the published printed reportes, but
is in the electroinc reports that stations and ad agencies get.

Everything is measured. But if there is no behaviour of the kind you want to
see, it is not the fault of Arbitron. It is the fact that people just do not
listen to out of market stations any more.

In another response, I mentioned that Casper has, now, 11 stations. There is
no need to put up with bad signals or to wait until after sunset to listen
to the radio. Nearly everything you could want is on the air there. No need
to be a DXer to get the music or talk you want.

My whole point is that there are several factors that have changed since the
days when families gatered 'round the radio at night to hear The Lone Ranger
on a staion sometimes hundreds of miles away. First, there are vastly more
stations. Second, evenings are no longer prime time; 6 AM to 7 M 9 is. And,
third, most listening is to FM which seldom gets any usable signal out of
each station's home market, unless it is in the fringes of an adjacent
market not far removed.

CKLW was not "Detroit / Windsor" It was a Windsor station always, and
used
"The Motor City" as a euphemistic ID point.

It was a Windsor station, but it always announced as Detroit /
Windsor. You may want to visit some of the many historical pages on
CKLW before you make any claims as to what it did when.

since I am mentioned on the CKLW tribute site as a contributor, I think I
know a bit about the staiton. It's glory years were from the time it became
a "Drake" station in the mid-60's until the early 70's. By then, the FMs in
detroit, like WDRQ in 1972, had nocked it off and it was on a decline. As
CHR FMs came on in Toledo, Cleveland, etc, it died a quick death in those
places, too.

As for WHK and WIXY, they had their listeners. WHK targeted a
different market -- country --

WHK was THE Top 40 well into the 60's,a nd then was in a battle with WIXY
until the FMs camy. WGRC (the General Cinema staitons) and WNCR killed both.
CKLW was an afterthought in the 70's in Cleveland.

I'm talking about the 70s. WHK was country in the senventies. I
can't remember a time when it wasn't -- not that there wasn't such a
time, but it was before my time.


There is no adjustment. Arbitron must, to keep its accreditation, use
accepted statistical practices.

Accepted and accredited by whom? If you are measuring listener
density by zip code, of *course* you aren't going to see an impact
outside of the local area.

But you cover an enormous amount of territory broadly. All those ones
and twos add up. ...and you throw them out by setting the initial
conditions so poorly.

You want to know the listener density by zip code, and so you get
numbers that are utterly misleading about the overall listener
community.


In statistics and polling, data which is not
projectable onto a universe is not usable. So there has to be a minimum
level of listening for a station to show up in the printed Arbitrron list.
still, all subscribers (radio and agencies) get the data that shows that KFI
got a share of 0.0 in Phoenix on a cume of 2,300 persons.

Who cares? You aren't selling to Phoenix. You're selling to your
listening community. LA first and foremost, everyone second. If you
can sell to someone who can use LA companies for something -- by mail
order, by phone order, by web page, by whatever -- you still *sell*.

The fact is, that
is so little that no advertiser or station would ever care... when the #1
station in Phoenix has 100 or 200 times that listening reach.

But you. Shouldn't. Target. Phoenix. I don't give a crap what
Phoenix thinks. I *do* give a crap about what my listening
demographic thinks, be they in Phoenix or at some desert intersection.
If they buy what you advertise, then you are making money.


You know, I trust, that advertisers only buy the very top stations in their
target demographics?

But you are measuring geographics, not demographics. By that
standard, the dense high-rises are better targets than suburbia.


You already stated you are inside the Denver metro. You have dozens and
dozens of local stations. Including KFI.

No, I'm not, and I didn't state that. I'm outside of Denver Metro.
I'm in Ft. Collins -- Greeley by your numbers. Yet anything beyond
grocery shopping I do in Denver and Boulder because the selection and
quality is better. I think I've stopped in Greeley maybe twice. I
made my first purchase of substance in Ft. Collins two weeks ago.

But... whatever. I'm sitting herre arguing with a calculator, for
gawdssake. You just keep pretending the world fits your model -- you
can't even get it out of your head long enough to *think* for a
second.

You will be the doom of over the air broadcasting. Check back in 10
years; we'll see how the health of the industry has changed in the
last decade.

--
Eric F. Richards

"This book reads like a headache on paper."
http://www.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/readi...one/index.html

In article ,
Doug Smith W9WI wrote:

I got my HD radio this evening. A few thoughts:

- I can't tell the difference between HD and regular FM. They both sound
good but I can't tell one from the other.

- There are four HD stations in Nashville:

WLAC-AM 1510:
WPLN-FM 90.3:
WVNS-FM 102.5:
WNRQ 105.9:

- Couldn't test AM, as UPS didn't deliver the radio until 6:15. "FCC
sunset" for Nashville in March is 6:00 so WLAC-HD was off the air.

- WVNS' analog audio sounds *better* than the HD -- the HD was "hissing
its F's" which the analog doesn't do. No other station has this
problem, so I suspect it's a processing issue at the station. WVNS has
a translator on 102.1 which is *not* relaying the HD. (not that I
expected it would)

- At my location (18 miles from the nearest HD station and about 27
miles from two of the three) the provided 18" wire antenna is not
adequate for any HD reception. I hooked the set to my TV antenna. I
suspect the built-in AM antenna wouldn't provide any reception either
but the set comes with an external loop which probably will. I'll find
out tomorrow!

- WNRQ-HD drops out for about 5 seconds about every 30-60 seconds.
Neither WPLN nor WVNS does this. WVNS is a lot closer, but WPLN is on
the same tower as WNRQ - and runs about 20% *less* power. Tested only
on HD2 though I'd be surprised if this problem doesn't affect both channels.

- At least in theory, the HD exciter is supposed to contain a delay line
that delays the analog audio to match the delay through the digital
coding process. It appears that no station around here has got it
completely right. (but they're all pretty close) It is possible this is
due to varying delays in *receivers* though; the Receptor HD appears to
delay the audio of *analog* stations. (might it have DSP for analog
signals??)

- It takes roughly 5 seconds for the radio to lock in to a HD signal. If
you've tuned to a HD simulcast of an analog signal, you'll hear the
analog audio during the lockin period.

Sounds like a long lock time. Maybe it is a 5 second buffer time?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote:



Interstates are elevated,

...if you mean "by 15 feet above the original grade," then maybe.
That's as stupid a generalization as I've *ever* heard. But I've come
to expect that out of this thread.

Interstates are elevated, and that is why the FCC will not allow field
strength to be measured there. In fact, reception on perfectly tuned FM
antennas in cars on interstates is totally atypical. Ask any broadcast
engineer.

Nearly all reported listening to FMs occurs inside the 64 dbu contour.
Research by third parties as well as Arbitron itself where diaries are
compared to coverage maps confirms this is a pattern that has held true
for
decades.

You may put up with DX-quality signals, but the average listener does
not.
This is why AM skywave is not much listened to any mo the quality is
ratty and the reception is inconsistent.

This. Is. Not. DX.

50 miles is not DX.

For many FMs, it is. For a Class IV AM it is.

100 miles is not DX.

For an FM,, it is. For most AMs it is.

Get out of your box and breathe some fresh air, fergawdsakes. You
have an overly simplified model of the world and it doesn't fit
reality. From what you say in this thread I would suggest you do
substantial harm to those stations unlucky enough to hire you.

Yeah, I make them tops in ratings and billing.

But then, consultants are known for doing that in my field, too.

Last station I consulted went #1 in less than a month in a market of 17
million, where there are over 100 other radio staitons. It is #1 today,
after 6 years. Another, in US market 13, was #1 for the entire 20 years I
advised it, an Arbitron record for a Top 50 market FM.

You are DXing, and putting up with come-and-go signals. Listeners are not
DXers. If the signal is not perfect, they don't listen.

These are steady, strong, clean signals.

I have run Langley Rice maps on the main Denver FMs, like KBCO, and there is
no reliable signal capable of being heard on all kinds of radios south of
Monument. Period. there may be small places where reflections occur, but
that is not listenable for the average person. For this reason, the Denver
staitons do not show up in the ratings at that distance, and the FCC can
duplicate the main channel or the adjacents in such areas.

If you were really concerned about clean signals, you'd be screaming
at receiver manufacturers to clean up capture ratios so that the
multipath doesn't garble them to hell and gone.

If this was possible, it would be done. HD solves this, anyway.

Oh, you work with running AM into the ground... never mind...

Yeah, right. the AM I did in that same market 13 went form a 1.8 share to #2
in the market in a little under 2 years.

WHK was THE Top 40 well into the 60's,a nd then was in a battle with WIXY
until the FMs camy. WGRC (the General Cinema staitons) and WNCR killed
both.
CKLW was an afterthought in the 70's in Cleveland.

I'm talking about the 70s. WHK was country in the senventies. I
can't remember a time when it wasn't -- not that there wasn't such a
time, but it was before my time.

WHK, after being sold by the Vails (Plain Dealer) to John Kluge, ws one of
the more famous Top 40's in the USA. "Color Channel 14" was #1 in Cleveland
until the mid-60's when WIXY captured the crown. WHK did not go country
until FM had killed AM for Top 40... it was driven out by FMs.


There is no adjustment. Arbitron must, to keep its accreditation, use
accepted statistical practices.

Accepted and accredited by whom?

Media Ratings Council, set up as an aftermath of a congressional
investigation in the 60's into media ratings. It consists of noted
statisticians and representatives of national advertisers and agencies with
credentials in media research. The audit, done by a team, takes over a month
every year.

If you are measuring listener
density by zip code, of *course* you aren't going to see an impact
outside of the local area.

Each person counts once, whereever they live. This is a proportional sample
at the population and discreet demographic level.

But you cover an enormous amount of territory broadly. All those ones
and twos add up. ...and you throw them out by setting the initial
conditions so poorly.

In the entire Southwest, the skywave listeners of KFI do not reach 10% of
the local, LA and Orange County listening at night, and are less than 2% of
total listening. Since a poll like Arbitron has greater margin of error than
2%, that data is meaningless and no advertiser cares.

Please try to get it: advertisers dictate. They have zero interest in out of
market Am night signals as they do not advertise at night and do not buy
markets from afar anyway.

You want to know the listener density by zip code, and so you get
numbers that are utterly misleading about the overall listener
community.

No, we look at listeners by MSA. Metro LA. Metro Las Vegas, Metro Phoenix,
etc.

In statistics and polling, data which is not
projectable onto a universe is not usable. So there has to be a minimum
level of listening for a station to show up in the printed Arbitrron
list.
still, all subscribers (radio and agencies) get the data that shows that
KFI
got a share of 0.0 in Phoenix on a cume of 2,300 persons.

Who cares? You aren't selling to Phoenix. You're selling to your
listening community. LA first and foremost, everyone second. If you
can sell to someone who can use LA companies for something -- by mail
order, by phone order, by web page, by whatever -- you still *sell*.

But if the advertiser does not care, it is valueless. It can not be
monetized, so it is ignored.

The fact is, that
is so little that no advertiser or station would ever care... when the #1
station in Phoenix has 100 or 200 times that listening reach.

But you. Shouldn't. Target. Phoenix. I don't give a crap what
Phoenix thinks. I *do* give a crap about what my listening
demographic thinks, be they in Phoenix or at some desert intersection.
If they buy what you advertise, then you are making money.

No, we make money from selling ads to advertisers. Advertisers do not
advertise for out of LA on LA staitons, or out of Phoenix on Phoenix
stations. They buy each market locally, andonly the high rated stations.


You know, I trust, that advertisers only buy the very top stations in
their
target demographics?

But you are measuring geographics, not demographics. By that
standard, the dense high-rises are better targets than suburbia.

No, markets are measured by a proportional sample inside the counties that
make up the market. An effort is made to sample within the market in
proportion to population by zone, too, in many markets.


You already stated you are inside the Denver metro. You have dozens and
dozens of local stations. Including KFI.

No, I'm not, and I didn't state that. I'm outside of Denver Metro.
I'm in Ft. Collins -- Greeley by your numbers. Yet anything beyond
grocery shopping I do in Denver and Boulder because the selection and
quality is better. I think I've stopped in Greeley maybe twice. I
made my first purchase of substance in Ft. Collins two weeks ago.

You are so unique no advertiser will care about you as you do not behave in
a predictable way. Advertising on mass media is bought against masses of
listeners or viewers or readers. All advertisers know that reach is never
100% and they don't care as buys become inefficient when a reach of over
about 70% to 75% is attempted.

But... whatever. I'm sitting herre arguing with a calculator, for
gawdssake. You just keep pretending the world fits your model -- you
can't even get it out of your head long enough to *think* for a
second.

I KNOW how advertisers buy, and know how to keep buyers happy, which is by
providing large, local audiences all over the USA.

You will be the doom of over the air broadcasting. Check back in 10
years; we'll see how the health of the industry has changed in the
last decade.

Well, I doubt it. In fact, last year I was given an award for putting the
first FM in northern South America on the air when no stations were on the
band for 1000 miles in any direction. The award calls me a "pioneer" and
"visionary." What have you done except snipe?

"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Eric F. Richards" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote:



Interstates are elevated,

...if you mean "by 15 feet above the original grade," then maybe.
That's as stupid a generalization as I've *ever* heard. But I've come
to expect that out of this thread.

Interstates are elevated, and that is why the FCC will not allow field
strength to be measured there. In fact, reception on perfectly tuned FM
antennas in cars on interstates is totally atypical. Ask any broadcast
engineer.

Elevated above grade. Drive I-70 from Denver to Grand Junction and
tell me how "elevated" it is. Or drive I-25 from Wyoming to New
Mexico and tell me how "elevated" it is. 15 feet above grade, fine.
But down in valleys wherever possible to avoid climbing mountains.

Those "atypical" receivers are your biggest market, because that's
where people would be listening.



I have run Langley Rice maps on the main Denver FMs, like KBCO, and there is
no reliable signal capable of being heard on all kinds of radios south of
Monument. Period.

My radio says differently. When push comes to shove, I'll believe the
car radio over a coverage map.


If you were really concerned about clean signals, you'd be screaming
at receiver manufacturers to clean up capture ratios so that the
multipath doesn't garble them to hell and gone.

If this was possible, it would be done. HD solves this, anyway.

HD solves nothing. HD will make signals unlistenable while analog
will continue to be listenable.

And fixing the capture ratio is not only possible, it was done. My 30
year old low-end Rotel has a capture ratio of 1.0 dB. But receiver
manufacturerers would rather save $0.15 per unit because they listen
to people like you who say that such things don't matter in a local
market... and on and on and on it goes.

This is why DXers -- real DXers, not someone driving the interstate --
like 60's vintage car radios. The problems were solved, but some
consultant told them they didn't have to worry about quality because
the radios would be used only for local market.


In the entire Southwest, the skywave listeners of KFI do not reach 10% of
the local, LA and Orange County listening at night,

Did I not suggest that they might make between 5 and 10% of the total
at night somewhere up there? I'm sure I did.

and are less than 2% of
total listening. Since a poll like Arbitron has greater margin of error than
2%, that data is meaningless and no advertiser cares.

That's true.

Please try to get it: advertisers dictate.

Yes. They dictate based on a loaded methodology. If I was locked in
a windowless box my whole life and everyone told me the sky was green,
I would believe the sky was green, too. But whatever I believe,
whatever assumptions I operate under, doen't change the fact that the
sky is blue.


No, we look at listeners by MSA. Metro LA. Metro Las Vegas, Metro Phoenix,
etc.

"Consider the true picture. Think of myriads of tiny bubbles, very
sparsely scattered, rising through a vast black sea. We [sell to] some
of the bubbles. Of the waters we know nothing. . ." (butchered from
the prologue to "The Mote In God's Eye." and very fitting here...)



You already stated you are inside the Denver metro. You have dozens and
dozens of local stations. Including KFI.

No, I'm not, and I didn't state that. I'm outside of Denver Metro.
I'm in Ft. Collins -- Greeley by your numbers. Yet anything beyond
grocery shopping I do in Denver and Boulder because the selection and
quality is better. I think I've stopped in Greeley maybe twice. I
made my first purchase of substance in Ft. Collins two weeks ago.

You are so unique no advertiser will care about you as you do not behave in
a predictable way.

Not really. I'm pretty typical of my community in that way. There is
very little selection and/or quality in any of the nearby "cities," so
people go to real cities like Denver and Boulder to get what they
need.

If they buy groceries, it isn't a big deal, generally, although our
selection is poor. Washing machines can be bought.

Audio equipment, a good meal, quality furniture, auto repair and
service, entertainment -- music, sports, stage performances -- all
require you to go to Denver to get it.

So we go. All of us.

There is no "Ft. Collins Avalance" hocky team, or "Ft. Collins
Rockies" baseball team. Nor should there be. They draw plenty of
people from this nowhere place in your world, and they are smart
enough to know it.


I KNOW how advertisers buy, and know how to keep buyers happy, which is by
providing large, local audiences all over the USA.

They buy based on the best information they can get.

I am suggesting that your information is fundamentally flawed, and you
are insisting it is not only good enough, it is perfect. It is not.


You will be the doom of over the air broadcasting. Check back in 10
years; we'll see how the health of the industry has changed in the
last decade.

Well, I doubt it. In fact, last year I was given an award for putting the
first FM in northern South America on the air when no stations were on the
band for 1000 miles in any direction. The award calls me a "pioneer" and
"visionary." What have you done except snipe?


Congratulations. What you did in South America had nothing to do with
your advertising models in the U.S.

--
Eric F. Richards

"The weird part is that I can feel productive even when I'm doomed."
- Dilbert

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:


I am however noticing compression artifacts. I'm generally fairly
immune to artifacts. (I have no problems with MP3 files; on digital TV,
people can point out artifacts and I still can't see them!) So I
suspect those who *are* sensitive to these are going to find HD AM
rather difficult to listen to.


That would drive me nuts. I am very aware of artifacts, especially
from aliasing. The digital NPR feed sometimes drives me nuts with all
the aliasing artifacts in some of the programs.

--
Eric F. Richards

"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- Myron Glass,
often attributed to J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940

....so I spent some time here arguing with a rock, er, an, um, "radio
consultant," who is convinced that by the flawed methodology used by
his clients and the ratings service that all radio listening is local,
and he uses those same flawed methodologies to show that his stations
are now number 1.

The phrase that is important here is "flawed methodology."

I was listing to American Public Media's "Marketplace" last Friday and
they had a piece on AmEx's new "clear" AmEx, that they tested in
Boston (and are advertising in Boston only, but is available anywhere)
using a "survey," with questions like:

o Would you like more clarity in your finances?

o What is a bigger source of stress in your life?
a) personal relationships b) money and finance

They found the survey laughable. So they went out and asked the exact
same survey questions with one mo "Would you want to get a credit
card that would help clear up your finances?" People, of course,
said, no, the last thing they need is another credit card.

AmEx, of course, said that was the wrong question to ask.


....and so it goes with radio. As long as the methodology is skewed to
deliver the wanted results, it is as meaningless as AmEx's absurd
"market research."

So they will go on, with IBOC and so-called "HD" radio with all its
artifacts and dropouts, to the detriment of people who actually
listen.


--
Eric F. Richards

"This book reads like a headache on paper."
http://www.cnn.com/2001/CAREER/readi...one/index.html

Eric F. Richards wrote:
...so I spent some time here arguing with a rock, er, an, um, "radio
consultant," who is convinced that by the flawed methodology used by
his clients and the ratings service that all radio listening is local,
and he uses those same flawed methodologies to show that his stations
are now number 1.

The phrase that is important here is "flawed methodology."

I was listing to American Public Media's "Marketplace" last Friday and
they had a piece on AmEx's new "clear" AmEx, that they tested in
Boston (and are advertising in Boston only, but is available anywhere)
using a "survey," with questions like:

o Would you like more clarity in your finances?

o What is a bigger source of stress in your life?
a) personal relationships b) money and finance

They found the survey laughable. So they went out and asked the exact
same survey questions with one mo "Would you want to get a credit
card that would help clear up your finances?" People, of course,
said, no, the last thing they need is another credit card.

AmEx, of course, said that was the wrong question to ask.


...and so it goes with radio. As long as the methodology is skewed to
deliver the wanted results, it is as meaningless as AmEx's absurd
"market research."

So they will go on, with IBOC and so-called "HD" radio with all its
artifacts and dropouts, to the detriment of people who actually
listen.



Yes, they will. Why? Two reasons....one is that Powell's FCC
mandated that any future modulation schemes for broadcast must be
digital. But the other is that there's believed to be money in it.

And, again, in the US Radio is ALWAYS about the money.

It may surprise you to know that I agree with you about a lot of
research. Most political polls are constructed to produce a desired
result in precisely the same way as the survey you describe. And I've
been involved with stations that conducted surveys that asked highly
constructed questions that gave the GM precisely the answer he wanted.
While some rather extensive naive listening, produced dramatically
different results. Care to guess how long those GM's last?

But the issue, and this is true of most marketing, but especially
Broadcast, is a matter of cost effectiveness. Why do more work when less
will produce the same profit?

Simple example. When Wapner was on The People's Court, and the
program popularity was at it's zenith, the syndicator announced that
production of new programs would cease, and that all future programs
distributed would be reruns. You should have heard the screaming in my
neighborhood when THAT one went public. It got picked up by the local
broadcasting columnists in the papers and some questions got asked. The
matter was explained by the syndicators: They had enough shows in the
can to keep the program running for several more years. Why spend the
money to produce more shows, when the shows already on the shelf would
produce the same revenue/profit? Of course there were those like you
and me who said things like "To serve the fans?"

Truth is that the syndicator didn't care. He wasn't in the caring
business. He was in the business to make money for himself, his company
and his stockholders. Cutting expenses to maximize profits is only smart
business. And the show, like any show on TV would eventually burn out,
anyway. Any run of more than 4 years is profitable. Anything more than
that is gravy, but gravy with diminishing returns over time, as
distribution costs begin to become a significant fraction of revenue
when the program goes into decline.

Cost/Benefits, Eric. It's all about cost/benefits. And when there can
be revenue generated, without costly methodology, the simpler
methodology will win every time.

It's not about monster signals, anymore. And beyond the 40's it never
really was. There was a certain cache in having a monster signal, but
that was more to dispirit the competition's staff, and do a little chest
puffing. But as far as a practical business strategy...monster signals
beyond the local contours were a waste of energy. No matter who was
listening. Because there was no cost effective (and the key phrase is
"Cost Effective") way of measuring them and making them meaningful to
the sales department. In fact, I've worked for stations that voluntarily
reduced power and reshaped their directional array because the extra
reach was a waste of power. The pennies saved on electricity were more
important and more visible on the books than the extra listeners beyond
the fringe.

The truth is, that the image of public service, huge reach and super
service to the wider area presented by stations in the 60's and 70's
like WLS, WABC, CKLW, KAAY, KNX, WLW and others were more show biz than
substance. In fact, in the late 70's and early 80's when WLS was
snapping up teenagers in ST Louis, it could barely crack the top 10 in
Chicago where it's revenue base was located. Changes in staff, format
and target resulted. Monster signal, and perceived monster reach, but
revenue producing listenership was off. King Kong was finally revealed
to be 3' 6". But the truth is, he always was. WLS, in Chicago, was
just another big signal. And it enjoyed a huge local share for a time.
Huge. But it was still a local station. That you could hear it from the
Rockies to Bermuda was only show biz. King Kong was still only 3' 6".


The public service commitment for Radio has been mostly lip service
for years, anyway. There simply is no profit in it. Hell, I worked for
one GM who SOLD PSA's. Nobody buys, none air. He had lawyers on speed
dial to protect his license. But he never actually did meet his
commitments. He was certainly not alone.

In the late 70's Jesus was kicked off the air at many stations.
Church services broadcast for decades disappeared in a stroke, to make
room for profit producing syndicated programming. Good for business,
but it orphaned smalls groups of loyal listeners for stations
nationwide. Ultimately a large population of listeners if taken as a
class, but a trivial number on the local stations Sales pitch. No
station failed because of them. It's always about the money. And it's
always about Sales. And all stations are bought for their local reach.

David and I have gotten into some pretty tense disagreements over the
state and nature of Radio. But his business is not in creating King Kong
stations of catholic interest and reach, his business is in turning
stations into more of a Mighty Joe Young. Still a lot of strength, but
strength where the money is. And that's locally. Without the wasted
effort into so called national reach. Why? Because he can make more
money for his stations by keeping the effort local. Where the
advertisers buy.

David touched on this but there wasn't a lot of amplification on it.
This is the crux of the matter: Advertisers call the shots. They always
have. Everywhere. Since the first broadcast station hit the air in the
US. The Advertiser calls the shots. Because without the advertiser,
stations do not survive. And if you think Public Radio is devoid of
advertiser pressures, guess again. Corporate underwriting is the
backbone of Public Radio, and corporate underwriters provide more
funding than public donations. Make no mistake, when a corporate sponsor
doesn't like a program....public or commercial radio...it is made clear
that revenue is threatened. And this has been the case since the birth
of the business.

Murrow wept openly in the hallowed halls of CBS when Chairman Paley
killed a story Murrow had been working on for months, bowing to
advertiser pressures. W.C. Fields sponsored by Lucky Strike make
frequent on-air references to his nephew 'Chester' to the horror and
eventual withdrawal of Lucky Strike. Fields often enraged sponsors.
Don't think there weren't heated conversations about his content.

Advertisers were responsible for the abrupt cancellation of a
consumer advocacy program on KRMD some years ago. In the middle of the
broadcast, Gene Dickerson walked into the control room and pulled the
talent out of the chair by his shirt collar under direct pressure from
an offended advertiser.

NPR, locally, has also killed or modified stories to protect funding.

And there are tens of thousands of such stories every year.

Should it happen? No. I don't think so. And there's a lot of evidence
to suggest that in many cases, the impact to advertisers' sales by the
offending content are, at best, minimal. But most GM's, most Chairmen,
most Sales ducks don't have the backbone to stand up to advertisers
writing checks that keep them in their lifestyles. So advertisers rule.
And they always have. In fact, the purpose of programming in the US has
always been to hold the attention of listeners between commercials. An
old joke, but it's always been true.

Radio in the US has always been about the money. Early stations in
rural areas began as ham stations owned by grain elevator operators. The
owners used to report grain prices to the farmers, a commercial
interest. When the grain elevator up the road also became radio
equipped, they began simple programming to fill the gaps between price
reports. This is how WDZ, Tuscola (later Decatur) began. It's how WLS
began. Live programming to fill time between commercial messages.

The commerical content ALWAYS being the more important issue.

And over time, the commercial content evolved, and rules regarding it
evolved, but it's importance and it's position in the scheme of things
has not diminished, but only gotten stronger.

So the methodology, whether it's flawed or not (and that can be
debated until the Second Coming), is the reality by which advertisers
live and die in broadcast media. They like the methodology. It's simple,
it's easily digested, and it produces hundreds of millions of dollars a
year in Sales. It's not going to change, until the revenue stream is
threatened by the external forces on the market. Advertisers call the
shots. They always have, and they always will. This is the way they
like it. It is what it is. And despite what you hear, have heard, or
will hear on the radio, King Kong is still only 3' 6". And so he will
remain, because the people with the money don't care to spend a dime to
see him larger.

David is in the business of keeping radio profitable for his clients.
He does this by showing his clients how to meet the needs of
advertisers. Advertisers who call all the shots. Sometimes you can get
control of an advertiser to do something that's more service oriented.
And for me, that's what keeps me even allied with Broadcast. It's worth
the effort and the heartache for that payoff. But, in the main....it's
just about doing what advertisers want. And the bulk of them do NOT care
about anything but what they see in the books. And the books were
created to meet their needs.

I don't like it. Anymore than you do. But it is what it is.

Unless you can get the advertisers to see a need for change, either
by convincing them, or through a market induced threat to revenue, it's
not going to change. Certainly not revert to the kind of Radio that you
and I enjoyed so many years ago.

Radio was in its adolescence, then. Still learning its way. It's not
now. Today, Radio is a mature product and to survive, it must
concentrate its efforts on to keep it's revenue stream intact. That's
the one thing that's never changed, over the years.

It is, and always has been about the money.