Is This The Future of Radio?

[rbrucecarter5]

I don't really know how to answer that. I can just guess.

The average listener probably isn't going to seek out DJ shows from other areas of the country. Music streams, yes. Nationally well-known talk and music shows, probably, if the show is in their field of interest. But I don't think the majority of listeners online are much different from those who listen over the air in this regard.

A truly unique DJ like we had in the 60's - probably not going to happen. Although I do tune in KIIS specifically for Ryan Seacrest, one of the few recognizable DJ's left. Talent like that costs money, stations don't want to pay for real talent in DJ's. DJ as a personality to be sought out on radio is almost dead.

I will stream for musical format. Oldies are considered uncool in Houston, OK, HD-2's on two station, then streaming. If there is an good DJ on the stream, it enhances the experience. But these clowns that talk nasty on morning shows - STFU and get back to music. That's what I think, but I usually tune out at the first vulgarity. That has NO PLACE on radio and does not serve the public in my opinion. Play music, lots of it, pick good songs, don't talk over the beginning and end. That's a good DJ.

 

[davideduardo]

The current ratings model is outmoded.

No, it's not. Local market measurement includes any listening of significance to any encoded radio station from anywhere.

Advertisers use local markets and geographic areas to analyze sales results and marketing effectiveness. Local media is used in national campaigns to supplement network TV and other national media.

So as long as a station meets the minimum reporting standard, which is about 0.1% of listening, it will show up in the local market reports.

When I listen to radio, more than half the commercials are national brands and services. They would be just as effective at selling product 1000 miles from where the station broadcasts. You can buy Geico in Houston, and you can buy it in Great Falls, etc.

But, unless an out of market station or stream has significant local audience or aggregates a total significant amount of listening out of their home market, it's not useful or effective for the advertiser.

So the Houston station streamed there should get credit for the sale and the ratings. How they accomplish that - I don't know. Maybe a quick point of sale survey - "where did you hear about us?".

National campaigns have so many components that there is no way of "giving credit" to one medium or a single station in a single medium.

They should do the same in the new reality of streaming - not sit there with spreadsheets looking at ratings numbers, 60 dBu countours, and "scientific" studies showing details in polished powerpoint presentations. That isn't marketing. Selling commercials is marketing. You do it any way you can, making your station look as attractive as possible. What makes people buy a product or service is not scientific study - it is behavioral study. Understand motivations, needs, wants, and desires - sell to those. Those know no boundaries or markets, they apply across the country. Have a unique format, advertise it effectively on social media, get a substantial streaming audience - then sell commercials to that audience. Get off of powerpoint and into the field and knock on doors, make calls.

Selling single station out of market listening is impossible unless the numbers are so big that they compete with local station in multiple other markets. This is why broadcasters aggregate stream sales to offer an advertiser many stations in many markets in a package which has significant size.

Keep in mind, also, that commercials inserted in streams is only part of the digital revenue spectrum that radio stations can participate in; streaming is just one component of new media and stations are using lots of other options to develop revenue.

 

[TheBigA]

A truly unique DJ like we had in the 60's - probably not going to happen. Although I do tune in KIIS specifically for Ryan Seacrest, one of the few recognizable DJ's left. Talent like that costs money, stations don't want to pay for real talent in DJ's. DJ as a personality to be sought out on radio is almost dead.

And yet right now in the city of Houston, just about every radio station spends money hiring live and local talent. Some of them have been there for 30 years! They can't be cheap after that much time. I just wonder why these stations spend the money when listeners just want to hear the music.

 

[rbrucecarter5]

And yet right now in the city of Houston, just about every radio station spends money hiring live and local talent. Some of them have been there for 30 years! They can't be cheap after that much time. I just wonder why these stations spend the money when listeners just want to hear the music.

I'm not sure what stations you are listening to. I hear a lot of so-so hosts in the morning talking about sexual subjects and celebrities and other things that disgust me. Nobody here has the knowledge or love of the music that the DJ's from the 60's had. If stations are playing big bucks for these local clowns, I pity them. Heck I could get on the air and cuss a lot, make jokes about bodily fluids, humans mating, and what the Kardashians did yesterday and make a fortune. It doesn't take any intelligence at all. It doesn't even take somebody that knows about radio or the music they play. It just takes somebody that can spout endless streams of disgusting, boring content that appeals only to people with IQ's under 70. They ought to go out to a middle school, grab some 14 year old hood rat, and put him on the air if that is all they want in a morning show host. No doubt he would achieve celebrity status in short order.