Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

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

Maybe they _wanted_ to continue to work for the company. If they didn't,
they could have resigned and been hired elsewhere. There are no slaves in US
radio.

Of course. Because everyone knows how easy it is to start a new
career in mid-life.

Idiot.


Actually, I highly recommend it.

I did it. So have most of my colleagues.



...because life as a DJ/"on air talent" had become miserable, right?



Actually, no.




Your new career is very very closely related to the old one.
Voice-over talent for ads, club remotes, etc., all involve the same
skills you used in your old career: audio mixing, proper mic
technique, "The Voice," and so on. You simply aren't doing it
directly for broadcasting -- you tape a spot, or do your show to a
live audience instead.


It's not like you became an actuary and had to acquire an entirely new
set of skills.



Oh...Then I must have picked up the aerial photography by osmosis.
Thanks. I was wondering about that.

D Peter Maus wrote:



Oh...Then I must have picked up the aerial photography by osmosis.
Thanks. I was wondering about that.


That's one I didn't know about.

Beats the living hell out of taking the actuarial exam... I speak from
experience -- my undergrad final was a subset of that exam and even
straight out of school it was utter murder.

--
Eric F. Richards

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

D Peter Maus wrote:

Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

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

Maybe they _wanted_ to continue to work for the company. If they didn't,
they could have resigned and been hired elsewhere. There are no slaves in US
radio.

Of course. Because everyone knows how easy it is to start a new
career in mid-life.

Idiot.


Actually, I highly recommend it.

I did it. So have most of my colleagues.



...because life as a DJ/"on air talent" had become miserable, right?



Actually, no.


Care to rephrase that?

You have quite a bit of writing on usenet about leaving CBS and
Chicago radio, about boards designed by you and personal equipmentleft
behind that you don't even want to go back to retrieve.

So, please explain Peter: What, exactly, drove you out of radio,
consistent with your past writings?

--
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:
D Peter Maus wrote:

Eric F. Richards wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:

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

Maybe they _wanted_ to continue to work for the company. If they didn't,
they could have resigned and been hired elsewhere. There are no slaves in US
radio.

Of course. Because everyone knows how easy it is to start a new
career in mid-life.

Idiot.

Actually, I highly recommend it.

I did it. So have most of my colleagues.


...because life as a DJ/"on air talent" had become miserable, right?


Actually, no.


Care to rephrase that?

You have quite a bit of writing on usenet about leaving CBS and
Chicago radio, about boards designed by you and personal equipmentleft
behind that you don't even want to go back to retrieve.

So, please explain Peter: What, exactly, drove you out of radio,
consistent with your past writings?



Being on air wasn't my primary responsibility. In fact, I had
voluntarily hung up my headphones a few years before I left the company.

What drove me out what Radio had become. As I have explained, both
here an elsewhere, I had grown embarrassed by what Radio had become. I
could no longer endorse what I could not support. I had been a quite
vocal opponent to Telecom '96, and had some pretty intense discussions
with manglement about why I would not sign and send in the form letter
distributed through the company to my Congressmen. I refused to endorse
a product that was carrying such a big part of the station's budget,
that it actually got a spot in the station's booth at public events. And
there were other things involving some high level persons that good
taste suggests I not reveal publicly (and as you've probably figured
out, good taste is NOT my strong suit...so that should give you some
ideas of how distasteful these matters are). So rather than live a
double life, I left Radio to be what it has chosen to be, left the
station to be what it has chosen to be and went off to do other things.
Many other things.

It had nothing to do with being miserable. I enjoyed my life in
Radio. Even the abusive program directors and sales ducks didn't
diminish my eagerness to get up in the morning and face the day. But as
time went on, there was less of my life and more Radio than there should
have been for balance. If work exists to fund one's life, then
surrendering one's life to fit in more work is lunacy. But even that
could have been tolerable if it weren't for the internal conflicts.
Having to face myself everyday as a member of a class that I couldn't
endorse.

One day the warning light went on. And I laid down my key and walked
away.

I"ve entertained opportunities since. Some at stations I've enjoyed
listening to in small doses. Actually had a great offer from another
company in town.

I'm just not interested enough to devote what it would take.

It has nothing to do with being miserable. Hell, if I'd been
miserable, it wouldn't have taken so long.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

What drove me out what Radio had become. As I have explained, both here
an elsewhere, I had grown embarrassed by what Radio had become. I could no
longer endorse what I could not support. I had been a quite vocal opponent
to Telecom '96, and had some pretty intense discussions with manglement
about why I would not sign and send in the form letter distributed through
the company to my Congressmen. I refused to endorse a product that was
carrying such a big part of the station's budget, that it actually got a
spot in the station's booth at public events. And there were other things
involving some high level persons that good taste suggests I not reveal
publicly (and as you've probably figured out, good taste is NOT my strong
suit...so that should give you some ideas of how distasteful these matters
are). So rather than live a double life, I left Radio to be what it has
chosen to be, left the station to be what it has chosen to be and went off
to do other things. Many other things.

I think you may have missed what many companies became by not staying in
radio.

I would not like to be at CBS, Clear or a couple of the huge companies. But
I love being at one of the smallest of the Top 10 radio companies.

The ability for radio to be big, after 96, allowed radio access to capital
markets. It allowed companies to be big enough to get good benefits.
Clusters allow internal promotion without moving. And there are fewer of the
scary "mom and pop" managers and owners who drove me to leave US radio in
'63.

I have "owner" mentality as I have been an owner and a pretty autonomous
manager for other companies. I find I can be "agent of change" as our CFO
called me without fearing being fired. I can suggest dramatic projects, such
as changing the format of nearly a quarter of our stations in a 90 day
period, and get listened to and even have the project approved.

I am having a lot of fun right now, in radio.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
What drove me out what Radio had become. As I have explained, both here
an elsewhere, I had grown embarrassed by what Radio had become. I could no
longer endorse what I could not support. I had been a quite vocal opponent
to Telecom '96, and had some pretty intense discussions with manglement
about why I would not sign and send in the form letter distributed through
the company to my Congressmen. I refused to endorse a product that was
carrying such a big part of the station's budget, that it actually got a
spot in the station's booth at public events. And there were other things
involving some high level persons that good taste suggests I not reveal
publicly (and as you've probably figured out, good taste is NOT my strong
suit...so that should give you some ideas of how distasteful these matters
are). So rather than live a double life, I left Radio to be what it has
chosen to be, left the station to be what it has chosen to be and went off
to do other things. Many other things.

I think you may have missed what many companies became by not staying in
radio.



You may be right. And I've thought about that in the last couple of
years. I do know that I had way more fun in smaller companies than I
did in the larger. But then with the larger companies absorbing the
smaller ones, how far can I really get from the CBS's and the CCU's?


Hell, when I came back to Chicago, I was working for a smaller
company. In 11 1/2 years, I worked for 4 different companies. My desk
was in the same spot the whole time.



I would not like to be at CBS, Clear or a couple of the huge companies. But
I love being at one of the smallest of the Top 10 radio companies.


Dan Mason, when I started at Cook Inlet, said to me that getting to
the top was fun. BEING there is not as much fun as you think, so enjoy
the climb, because that's the most fun you'll ever have. I like much
smaller companies. And if I ever did get back into it, it would be for
a smaller shop with big aspirations.

Was it Leader in an editorial in R & R about 15 years ago, or was it
the AOR editor...anyway, he said that his dream gig would be working a
weekend shift at the #2 station in LA. That would be sheer Heaven in Radio.

I gotta agree with him. Well, maybe not LA....but Chicago....




The ability for radio to be big, after 96, allowed radio access to capital
markets. It allowed companies to be big enough to get good benefits.
Clusters allow internal promotion without moving. And there are fewer of the
scary "mom and pop" managers and owners who drove me to leave US radio in
'63.


Oh, I know the benefits, the economics. But as you and I have bashed
each other in the face about over the years, I find the homogenization
boring. I like the smaller local outlets, with locally generated
playlists that don't follow the national trends point for point. I like
surprises when I listen to the radio. But then I also like new
experiences in other things, too. When I travel for business, I don't
care for Holiday Inn's or Airline travel. I take my motorcycle through
the back roads, or down the Great River Road. And stay in some mom and
pop motels. Some of which can be pretty...um...exciting...Even at the
destination, I take an off the beaten path room. Take my meeting, record
my audio, and ride back an entirely different route.

I like lumps in my gravy, too.

And along the way, I get to hear some small, privately owned, often
GOD AWFUL radio stations, that are, if nothing else, amusing. But
they're always representative of their home town. And I like that. I
don't go the back way to find the same experiences I get at home in
Chicago.

And, from time to time, I experience some real treats. There was a
station in Central Illinois...had a signal that reached across Missouri
and into Arkansas, that played nothing but bluegrass. It was wonderful.
Picked it up north of Decatur, and rode it all the way to Searcy, Ark.


I don't hear that kind of thing since 96. So, I burn up an iPod,
instead.




I have "owner" mentality as I have been an owner and a pretty autonomous
manager for other companies. I find I can be "agent of change" as our CFO
called me without fearing being fired. I can suggest dramatic projects, such
as changing the format of nearly a quarter of our stations in a 90 day
period, and get listened to and even have the project approved.

I am having a lot of fun right now, in radio.


I have no doubt. And I find it heartening to know that it can still
be done.

Who knows....maybe........

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Dan Mason, when I started at Cook Inlet, said to me that getting to the
top was fun. BEING there is not as much fun as you think, so enjoy the
climb, because that's the most fun you'll ever have. I like much smaller
companies. And if I ever did get back into it, it would be for a smaller
shop with big aspirations.

I never met dan, but always heard good things about him. that statement
confirms them.

I have always liked building new stations, or creating "new" formats. That
is why I tend to move around. I build, from ground up, over a dozen in
Ecuador, and dozens more since them. It is staying at the top once you get
there that is toughest, but it requires a different personality than mine...
which is why I now like to work in teams of two or three in programming so
that we have builders, craftsmen and strategists all together so stations
stafy fresh and fun, but are always trying new things within the confines
of the format.

I do not think companies where the PDs never talk to the CEO or COO can
create this type of culture... which makes me think that a limit of maybe 80
to 100 stations would be the limit for a company to create really good radio
on a local level.

Was it Leader in an editorial in R & R about 15 years ago, or was it the
AOR editor...anyway, he said that his dream gig would be working a weekend
shift at the #2 station in LA. That would be sheer Heaven in Radio.

Maybe, because I am at the #1 and #2 stations in LA, that does not have
appeal! (tounge inserted in cheek here). I can see what he meant, though. e
on a good station, in a shift that has less pressure but makes you feel part
of that same sucess... would be pretty neat.

I gotta agree with him. Well, maybe not LA....but Chicago....

I can still remember hanging around the door of WLS to get a jock card
signed by all the talent... from Holman and Roberts to Biondi... I still
have it. Chicago had fun radio. Our traffic person in LA did traffic years
ago for Spuer CFL, and has lots of fun stories. That was a classic Top 40
battle, and I owuld have enjoyed being closer to it.

Oh, I know the benefits, the economics. But as you and I have bashed
each other in the face about over the years, I find the homogenization
boring. I like the smaller local outlets, with locally generated playlists
that don't follow the national trends point for point.

We are 70 stations, and every playlist is based on 100% local market
research. None are the same, except for our newest project which is an Adult
Hits network, out of LA, that is very personality based. In its case, we
dound the same songs research the same way in every one of the 12 markets...
so no reason to reinvent the wheel. the determining factor was, "were these
songs you liked as you grew up?" and ther eis 100% consensus. So there is
no single answer for local vs. national, and in this case, we have some
incredible talent no single station could afford and we bring it to places
like McAllen and Albuquerque! We even have an in house travel coordinator,
as all the talent goes to the different markets all the time, originating
from the local station and doing appearances.

I am having a lot of fun right now, in radio.


I have no doubt. And I find it heartening to know that it can still be
done.

Just stay away from the bigger players and it is still a hoot. Of course,
many other companies still exist.

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Dan Mason, when I started at Cook Inlet, said to me that getting to the
top was fun. BEING there is not as much fun as you think, so enjoy the
climb, because that's the most fun you'll ever have. I like much smaller
companies. And if I ever did get back into it, it would be for a smaller
shop with big aspirations.

I never met dan, but always heard good things about him. that statement
confirms them.

I have always liked building new stations, or creating "new" formats. That
is why I tend to move around. I build, from ground up, over a dozen in
Ecuador, and dozens more since them. It is staying at the top once you get
there that is toughest, but it requires a different personality than mine...
which is why I now like to work in teams of two or three in programming so
that we have builders, craftsmen and strategists all together so stations
stafy fresh and fun, but are always trying new things within the confines
of the format.

I do not think companies where the PDs never talk to the CEO or COO can
create this type of culture... which makes me think that a limit of maybe 80
to 100 stations would be the limit for a company to create really good radio
on a local level.

Was it Leader in an editorial in R & R about 15 years ago, or was it the
AOR editor...anyway, he said that his dream gig would be working a weekend
shift at the #2 station in LA. That would be sheer Heaven in Radio.

Maybe, because I am at the #1 and #2 stations in LA, that does not have
appeal! (tounge inserted in cheek here). I can see what he meant, though. e
on a good station, in a shift that has less pressure but makes you feel part
of that same sucess... would be pretty neat.

I gotta agree with him. Well, maybe not LA....but Chicago....

I can still remember hanging around the door of WLS to get a jock card
signed by all the talent... from Holman and Roberts to Biondi... I still
have it. Chicago had fun radio. Our traffic person in LA did traffic years
ago for Spuer CFL, and has lots of fun stories. That was a classic Top 40
battle, and I owuld have enjoyed being closer to it.

Oh, I know the benefits, the economics. But as you and I have bashed
each other in the face about over the years, I find the homogenization
boring. I like the smaller local outlets, with locally generated playlists
that don't follow the national trends point for point.

We are 70 stations, and every playlist is based on 100% local market
research. None are the same, except for our newest project which is an Adult
Hits network, out of LA, that is very personality based. In its case, we
dound the same songs research the same way in every one of the 12 markets...
so no reason to reinvent the wheel. the determining factor was, "were these
songs you liked as you grew up?" and ther eis 100% consensus. So there is
no single answer for local vs. national, and in this case, we have some
incredible talent no single station could afford and we bring it to places
like McAllen and Albuquerque! We even have an in house travel coordinator,
as all the talent goes to the different markets all the time, originating
from the local station and doing appearances.

I am having a lot of fun right now, in radio.


I have no doubt. And I find it heartening to know that it can still be
done.

Just stay away from the bigger players and it is still a hoot. Of course,
many other companies still exist.

How many of your stations were involved in getting the illegals out to march?

dxAce
Michigan
USA

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Dan Mason, when I started at Cook Inlet, said to me that getting to the
top was fun. BEING there is not as much fun as you think, so enjoy the
climb, because that's the most fun you'll ever have. I like much smaller
companies. And if I ever did get back into it, it would be for a smaller
shop with big aspirations.

I never met dan, but always heard good things about him. that statement
confirms them.

I have always liked building new stations, or creating "new" formats. That
is why I tend to move around. I build, from ground up, over a dozen in
Ecuador, and dozens more since them. It is staying at the top once you get
there that is toughest, but it requires a different personality than mine...
which is why I now like to work in teams of two or three in programming so
that we have builders, craftsmen and strategists all together so stations
stafy fresh and fun, but are always trying new things within the confines
of the format.

I do not think companies where the PDs never talk to the CEO or COO can
create this type of culture... which makes me think that a limit of maybe 80
to 100 stations would be the limit for a company to create really good radio
on a local level.


That's an interesting number. Karmazin said something similar in
a staff breakfast when we were learning to do things the "Infinity way."

That got my attention.



Was it Leader in an editorial in R & R about 15 years ago, or was it the
AOR editor...anyway, he said that his dream gig would be working a weekend
shift at the #2 station in LA. That would be sheer Heaven in Radio.

Maybe, because I am at the #1 and #2 stations in LA, that does not have
appeal! (tounge inserted in cheek here). I can see what he meant, though. e
on a good station, in a shift that has less pressure but makes you feel part
of that same sucess... would be pretty neat.


I gotta agree with him. Well, maybe not LA....but Chicago....

I can still remember hanging around the door of WLS to get a jock card
signed by all the talent... from Holman and Roberts to Biondi... I still
have it. Chicago had fun radio. Our traffic person in LA did traffic years
ago for Spuer CFL, and has lots of fun stories. That was a classic Top 40
battle, and I owuld have enjoyed being closer to it.



It was compelling listening, to be sure. I remember riding in the
back seat of my cousin Barry's Impala driving around River Forest....one
hand on the wheel one hand on the radio, arguing with his friend about
whether Frijid Pink was heavy enough.

Those were some scary rides.



Oh, I know the benefits, the economics. But as you and I have bashed
each other in the face about over the years, I find the homogenization
boring. I like the smaller local outlets, with locally generated playlists
that don't follow the national trends point for point.

We are 70 stations, and every playlist is based on 100% local market
research. None are the same, except for our newest project which is an Adult
Hits network, out of LA, that is very personality based. In its case, we
dound the same songs research the same way in every one of the 12 markets...
so no reason to reinvent the wheel. the determining factor was, "were these
songs you liked as you grew up?" and ther eis 100% consensus. So there is
no single answer for local vs. national, and in this case, we have some
incredible talent no single station could afford and we bring it to places
like McAllen and Albuquerque! We even have an in house travel coordinator,
as all the talent goes to the different markets all the time, originating
from the local station and doing appearances.


Well, at least you have some local presence. Too often that's not
even on the radar. And the station sounds kind of generic, and detached.
Q102 in Iowa City sounded like that. Automated and automated well, but
still detached. Dry almost.



I am having a lot of fun right now, in radio.

I have no doubt. And I find it heartening to know that it can still be
done.

Just stay away from the bigger players and it is still a hoot. Of course,
many other companies still exist.



Thanks for the advice. I'm still having my own fun, today. And
Radio is largely, at least for me, lost it's place at the center of my
media wheel. As I said, I don't even listen that much anymore. But it's
good to know that there was some evolution after Telecom 96.

Radio adapts.