Nash 947

[dcowboy7]

At the time, New York didn't have a country station. Carrie was well known outside of country because she won Idol. So that song got airplay on some pop and AC stations, but only reached #8 on the Billboard Hot 100. This was her only cross-format hit.

Yes & Z100 played it....groove posted they wouldnt.

& as i mentioned my point was Z100 played everything which again he posted they didnt.

 

[TheBigA]

NASH just did their nash bash concert featuring cole swindell whos 1st single hit #2, 2nd hit #1 & now his 3rd just hit #1 too.

He's a new artist who has only been around for one year. He's doing it for exposure, not airplay, like all other new artists.

He got those #1 hits BEFORE the Nash Bash, not as a result of them. And as I said, it's all very legal. Everyone has signed disclosures.

 

[dcowboy7]

He's a new artist who has only been around for one year. He's doing it for exposure, not airplay, like all other new artists.

He got those #1 hits BEFORE the Nash Bash, not as a result of them. And as I said, it's all very legal. Everyone has signed disclosures.

What ?

You said the artists that do these concerts ARENT getting airplay.

But he is.

 

[TheBigA]

You said the artists that do these concerts ARENT getting airplay.

But he is.

I said a lot of things, but you're focused on that one line. At the time Cole already had 3 #1s, so there was no airplay in exchange for doing that show. If you have factual evidence to the contrary, report it to the Attorney General. But I promise you that this was all very legal, and everyone signed the appropriate forms.

 

[dcowboy7]

I said a lot of things

Some obviously wrong.

 

[TheBigA]

Some obviously wrong.

Not really. We're talking about the law here, and they haven't broken the law. He didn't get airplay in exchange for the concert. Right? And you've ignored the other artists on the bill. How many #1s do they have?

 

[dcowboy7]

Not really. We're talking about the law here, and they haven't broken the law. He didn't get airplay in exchange for the concert. Right? And you've ignored the other artists on the bill. How many #1s do they have?

Gloriana & jana kramer who have had top 10 hits = they got airplay.

But how can that be ?? im so confused ?? since you said these artists dont get airplay ??

You didnt say airplay for bill - you just said no airplay.

 

[TheBigA]

You didnt say airplay for bill - you just said no airplay.

Are we discussing the law, or do you just want to be right?

 

[mikerock]

Not with the audience. This was a genre driven by the people, not by corporations. I promise you that corporations are still very afraid of hip hop and rap because of language, violence, and everything else. But that's actually what drove its popularity, especially among young white males. They are what made it mainstream. A lot of what they like, even now, can't get airplay because of the language and violence. FCC rules prevent radio from playing it. So they listen on their own devices.

The majority of people listen to whatever corporate radio puts in front of them. At that time rock was removed from top 40 and replaced with urban. That was all that was available to them at the time. You are perpetuating the myth that the masses - listeners drive these formats and they don't.

That statement doesn't fit the timeline. As I said, the format became more female in the 80s, driven by cute male artists like Randy Travis. Viacom didn't get CMT until 1997. And the changes they made in 1997 were more about aiming at younger audiences, so they could sell it to the same sponsors as MTV, than women. And country radio NEVER followed CMT into this drive for younger audiences. Country radio has always been 25 to 54. CMT is 18 to 34.

Actually CBS acquired TNN/CMT from Gaylord Entertainment in 1996 which became part of the CBS Cable division until the Viacom acquisition in 2000.

As I said, this isn't a recent development. It sounds like you don't know the format. Bluegrass was always a separate genre, invented by Bill Monroe to be more instrumental than vocal. So it's always been a niche genre.

I never said it wasn't. I know the format since I have been listening to both for as long as I can remember. The newer Bluegrass sounds more Country from years past than Bluegrass these days and County more feminized-popish compared to years ago.

Country artists sample rap and emulate the artist moves because the audience knows that music. That's why Nash is playing some pop. Once again, it's being driven by what the audience wants, and that's why artists who incorporate rap, like Luke Bryan and Jason Aldean, are the most popular stars. If you go to a country concert, you'll see this is all being driven by the audience. Radio is simply following them.

One more thing: Media companies are not in the music business. We have no interest in promoting certain kinds of music other than it attracts an audience that we can sell to advertisers. That's our only motivation. If bluegrass attracted a mass audience, we'd love to play it. But it doesn't, so we don't.

Why not just make all genres emulate rap and hip hop artists because that is what the listener wants is ridiculous. More like it is agenda driven since it is perceived as safe for advertisers to muddy the genres so one does not get labeled too white male. If it is perceived that if it is too white male it will turn away a percentage of females and minorities.

 

[TheBigA]

You are perpetuating the myth that the masses - listeners drive these formats and they don't.

You're perpetuating the myth that the "masses" listen to whatever corporate radio puts in front of them, and it's very obvious that's not true.

Actually CBS acquired TNN/CMT from Gaylord Entertainment in 1996 which became part of the CBS Cable division until the Viacom acquisition in 2000.

None of that is in the 1980s, which is when country started to aim at women. So you're still wrong about that.

Why not just make all genres emulate rap and hip hop artists because that is what the listener wants is ridiculous.

You're asking a music question, which should be aimed at the music industry. They're the ones behind trying to make all genres the same, not radio. No one in radio has anything to do with making the music. But if the audience responds to country with rap, then radio has to go in that direction.

 

[chrocket87]

What, exactly, is wrong with trying to make radio more mass appeal by becoming more friendly to females and minorities? If you want to see what happens with stations that only cater to one group of people, look at the many times modern rock failed in NYC.

Repeat after me: Radio is a business, not a hobby.

 

[DOB]

"It's not about that. It's about a girl being jealous of a girl, and the "controversy" was largely manufactured. "

Might be but perception is reality. I'd listen to check it out but my head will explode if I listen to hick-pop lol

 

[mikerock]

What, exactly, is wrong with trying to make radio more mass appeal by becoming more friendly to females and minorities? If you want to see what happens with stations that only cater to one group of people, look at the many times modern rock failed in NYC.

Repeat after me: Radio is a business, not a hobby.

Do you believe every frequency should mass-appeal to everyone? If that is the case Taylor Swift should be playing in heavy rotation on Power 105, BLS and Hot 97, mass appeal right? With a limited number frequencies available a variety of diverse cultural programming for each would be ideal. Is that so much to ask rather than everyone seeking the same set of listeners. But I suppose I should just shut up because having such an opinion is some how insulting to radio execs.

 

[mikerock]

You're perpetuating the myth that the "masses" listen to whatever corporate radio puts in front of them, and it's very obvious that's not true.

We have no interest in promoting certain kinds of music

We disagree and I can objectively prove otherwise. I also did not call you out as having to take the defensive position for the entire industry.

None of that is in the 1980s, which is when country started to aim at women. So you're still wrong about that.

I never said the problem with the format today started in the 80s and do not have a problem with them aiming at women back then or now. It is when catering to one demographic dominates the entire playlist and station like it does today. There is nothing wrong with equaling catering to both men and women.

You're asking a music question, which should be aimed at the music industry. They're the ones behind trying to make all genres the same, not radio. No one in radio has anything to do with making the music. But if the audience responds to country with rap, then radio has to go in that direction.

Of course radio has nothing to do with making music, no one here is saying that. Radio provides a great deal of exposure. If the music industry has no outlet they do not make money. They ultimately decide what gets put on their airwaves and chose to include or exclude what the industry provides. If advertisers want more females or minority listening on a country station you bet they will chose what is available accordingly just like NASH doing.

I am sure someone will respond it is about money, it's not a hobby and the art form should disregarded. It is also not unheard of for corporations to sacrifice a little to preserve whatever art form is part of their business.

 

[TheBigA]

We disagree and I can objectively prove otherwise.

If so, then explain the popularity of Pandora, Spotify, and other personal services that allow music listeners to bypass OTA radio. People today aren't forced to listen to anything they don't like. Which is why it's so important for radio programmers to know what the masses want.

I never said the problem with the format today started in the 80s and do not have a problem with them aiming at women back then or now.

That's right. You didn't. I said it started in the 80s, and it's a documented fact. Radio was playing Kenny Rogers and Randy Travis because they appealed to women. That predates the CBS role with CMT. By the time they got involved, the music was already aimed at women, with about 60% of the audience being female. That percentage varies from station to station.

With a limited number frequencies available a variety of diverse cultural programming for each would be ideal. Is that so much to ask rather than everyone seeking the same set of listeners.

I think that was part of the thinking behind the creation of non-commercial public broadcasting in 1967. To take the private enterprise out of the equation. I think it's worked. That's how you have WFMU and WFUV.

 

[semoochie]

The ratings demographics have nothing to do with the music we hear. You can target all you like and you don't get what you want as far as ratings. So they go over the top appealing to females or minority groups. Notice I particularly called out music and not talk or sports radio.
If corporations wanted to push Chinese music, they would promote it as being popular, put it on the airwaves and then receive the same ratings since that is all that is available for people to hear. They will ram it down peoples throats even if there are no ratings until it becomes mainstream.
You want to talk about 50 or over 55, well look at the CBS-FM's old man imaging. What generation do you think they are trying to appeal to with those DJ's and imaging. I like the 80s music and I am old guy but even I get turned off when I hear the old man imaging. That is for the 55-60+ year olds that remember and relate to that kind of sound. (I would however give Scott Shannon somewhat of pass since many may remember him from Z100 in the 80s and PLJ there after.).

Somehow, David skipped over your statement, "I also doubt a station like WPLJ, WWFS or WNSH has only 15% female audience.", so I will respond: What he actually said was, "Music radio is definitely not overly targeted at females, as in the PPM system we see that women listen to the radio about 15% or so less than men in the key 18-54 demographics so there is simply more male listening available." 15% less is a lot different from a total of 15%!

 

[TheBigA]

Might be but perception is reality.

That seems to be true for people outside the format.

 

[Bob Eubanks]

Do you believe every frequency should mass-appeal to everyone? If that is the case Taylor Swift should be playing in heavy rotation on Power 105, BLS and Hot 97, mass appeal right? With a limited number frequencies available a variety of diverse cultural programming for each would be ideal. Is that so much to ask rather than everyone seeking the same set of listeners. But I suppose I should just shut up because having such an opinion is some how insulting to radio execs.

That's a bogus argument, however. "Mass" appeal is not "exclusive" appeal. Many masses of various demographics can co-exist. No, Taylor Swift, if one insists on that example, doesn't fit all of them. But that doesn't mean that they don't all have a degree of "mass" appeal.

And how would it work to have "diverse cultural appeal" for all of the limited frequencies? Let's set aside the issue of ownership rights and First Amendment protections for simplicity. How would it work? X hours per day you must do for men, X for women, X for this, X for that...and what do you have as a result? A mishmash that ultimately serves no one.

Certainly limited frequencies are true, but irrelevant. There have always been limited frequencies, and always been audiences without "their" desired tastes reflected. If anything, it's less relevant or important today, in an era of iTunes, XM, Pandora et al. There is no inherent right to a specific format that appeals to you or me (setting aside that groups of people who share similar demographic and other criteria might have entirely divergent desires when it comes to content), and that's not a corporate conspiracy. It's just life. If anything, the heightened competition and increased financial pressures make it all the more likely that if there were "gold in them thar hills" when it came to untapped formats, that someone would be rushing to stake their claim. Anything to gain a competitive edge. So when it doesn't happen, that might be saying more about the actual business potential than any ulterior motive.

 

[Groove1670]

Youre wrong.

In 2006 carrie had a country hit "before he cheats" that Z100 played too cause it was a pop hit as well & again as i said Z100 plays all the billboard top 10 hits just like they do today so im not sure why you are saying nobody played all the hits.

Also the fact you say you dont know what Z100 is playing now means you really dont know what youre talking about anyway.

I never said anything about Z100 not playing the top 10 hits?, or playing all the hits at the time? (back then, and now).

All I said was. The current CHR (Mainstream, Adult) charts are more musically diverse.

 

[dcowboy7]

I never said anything about Z100 not playing the top 10 hits?, or playing all the hits at the time? (back then, and now).

All I said was. The current CHR (Mainstream, Adult) charts are more musically diverse.

You said:

"I doubt that Carrie Underwood or John Legend (for example) would of made the Z100 chart back then."

So i posted that carrie did have a top 10 pop hit back then & Z100 did play it.