1-2 year old study: Playlists narrowing due to competition.

[tall_guy1]

Radio stations have been narrowing their playlists, because they fear listeners might "switch" unfamiliar songs. This is their answer to Spotify, and because about 3 main corporations own the media across the country, nobody can really stop it. The article states that in 2013, "Blurred Lines" was played twice as much as the 3 Doors Down "When I'm Gone" when they both respectively hit number one a decade apart; and though the article is somewhat dated, I am sure "Shake it Off" was more than that. What do you think of this though? Since about 95% of people listen to radio on a somewhat regular basis, I think this is foolish. You are only alienating the audience by having such narrow playlists, so that longtime avid radio fans have switched to CDs in their car to avoid the "torture" of having to hear the same songs over and over again. Stations need variety, in the age of digital media, moreso than they did, not less. What are your thoughts?

Here is the article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303754404579313150485141672 Jan. 16, 2014 (article date).

 

[TheBigA]

You are only alienating the audience by having such narrow playlists, so that longtime avid radio fans have switched to CDs in their car to avoid the "torture" of having to hear the same songs over and over again.

Not exactly true. If the facts showed that larger playlists would increase broadcast listenership, stations would do it. The larger the list, the lower the ratings.

As for the Capital Cities example given in the article, record labels control how many singles they send to radio from an artist. They prefer to use radio as a "free sample" so that fans will buy the album, or use music devices that pay them money, like iTunes, Pandora, or Spotify. What I'm saying is this isn't just radio acting alone here.

 

[JeffM]

It's only "torture" if you don't like the song being played.

 

[Groove1670]

The difference is "Blurred Lines" still tests well. 3 Doors Down - When I'm Gone ...well not so much. The majority of listeners scan the radio for the hits, not for "oh I think i remember that", or that song "yes it was okay". As I said in the past, if you don't listen to terrestrial radio, you probably never did. You probably don't watch TV also because they show the same shows over and over.

The only argument I would have is that radio has lost touch with the listener on the local level. I think this is critical in medium and smaller markets. I think smaller owners and groups have realized this, and even those who don't have a budget have localized their voicetracking.

Those who take the PPM as ultimate rule will probably disagree somewhat.

To quote a post on another board: "Commercial stations don’t program to geeks and collectors".

 

[tall_guy1]

The difference is "Blurred Lines" still tests well. 3 Doors Down - When I'm Gone ...well not so much. The majority of listeners scan the radio for the hits, not for "oh I think i remember that", or that song "yes it was okay". As I said in the past, if you don't listen to terrestrial radio, you probably never did. You probably don't watch TV also because they show the same shows over and over.

The only argument I would have is that radio has lost touch with the listener on the local level. I think this is critical in medium and smaller markets. I think smaller owners and groups have realized this, and even those who don't have a budget have localized their voicetracking.

Those who take the PPM as ultimate rule will probably disagree somewhat.

To quote a post on another board: "Commercial stations don’t program to geeks and collectors".

I have listened to terrestrial radio for a long time, and liked "tuning in" to see if they would play a certain song I liked. I would even check their playlists to see the "odd" gold song they'd occasionally play, as well as the flow of the playlists, and it just interests me. I still do, for a large part, and like listening to specialty shows, as well. However, it seems like with radio in my market, there just seems to be too many things playing the same thing, and over and over ("Shake it Off," "Ain't it Fun," ect.), and there isn't as much fun listening as they stations have become so repetitive it's like "Groundhog's Day." So, for example, I bought a Sting CD to escape from that and have been listening more online. I stilll listen to terrestrial radio, but I have narrowed down how much and what I listen to on it.

 

[davideduardo]

Radio stations have been narrowing their playlists, because they fear listeners might "switch" unfamiliar songs.

This is a very disingenuous argument or position.

When radio figured out how to save itself from TV over 60 years ago, the solution, nay, salvation, came in the form of playing just 40 songs over and over and over all day long.

Skip ahead about 20 years. When FM stations discovered they could knock off AM music stations, they first depended on quality of sound and greater focus or niche formatting to capture big audience slices. But as soon as the competition became between FMs and other FMs, the guy with the shortest, most focused playlist won: Abrams "Superstars" vs. progressive free-form rock being the most dramatic example.

This is their answer to Spotify, and because about 3 main corporations own the media across the country, nobody can really stop it.

No, this is, in present time, radio's answer to the PPM. The PPM allows moment to moment viewing via Media Base of how audiences react to each song. Over time, the thus-derived MScores show which songs, no matter where we play them, cause audience attrition. So we know with even more precision which songs are detrimental to audience retention.

Of course, we have had music test results going back over three decades. We have had callout current song scores going back to around 1975. And before that, we had singles sales and jukebox play data back to when Top 40 was created by the observation of how the same songs were played over and over on a jukebox somewhere in Omaha.

The methods of finding out which songs are harmful have changed somewhat, but truthfully and factually we can see that stations were playing music based on listener preferences since all-music stations were "invented".

The only problem was that ratings, until the PPM came on the scene, were significantly based on recall. So the station you liked the most tended to get the best recall and thus the most reporting of listening time. And generally those "I went to another station because I hate that stupid "Calcutta" song" temporary changes in station were not reported.

The article states that in 2013, "Blurred Lines" was played twice as much as the 3 Doors Down "When I'm Gone" when they both respectively hit number one a decade apart; and though the article is somewhat dated, I am sure "Shake it Off" was more than that.

I think that "When I'm Gone" was played less on fewer stations. I heard Blurred Lines incessantly. I am not sure I have ever heard "When I'm Gone"... ever.** While that is a personal anecdotal observation, I'd contend that we might want to look at the number of reporting stations and see if we are getting a "same stations, different year" comparison or one that has a different base of stations and listeners. Also, in 2002, the top markets were measured by diary and in 2013 they were measured by PPM, affecting radically the number of people who were reported as having heard a song.

Also, consider that CHR was in a slump in the early 2000's and is in a boom period now. More stations, greater audience. And the Hot AC phenomenon was barely known 12 years ago, and now Hot AC's are in the top ranks in nearly every market... making the basis for comparison full of deficiencies.

** I listened to "When I'm Gone" and checked its airplay base vs. "Blurred Lines". "Blurred" was played on CHR, CHurban, Urban, Urban AC, Hot AC, some AC's and even Spanish language CHRs. It was a much broader based hit in multiple formats than the very "white" sounding "When I'm Gone". So of course it got more spins on more stations because it is so much more universal a song. I'd welcome an occasional play of "Blurred" while one listen to "When I'm Gone" will last me all my life... but of course I'm a product of a rhythmic and Latin musical background and "When I'm Gone" has absolutely no appeal whatsoever to me.

What do you think of this though? Since about 95% of people listen to radio on a somewhat regular basis, I think this is foolish. You are only alienating the audience by having such narrow playlists,

You alienate your audience by playing songs they don't like. Music research tells you what songs have a consensus of likability and which will hurt you. Playlists are almost 100% based on consensus appeal or consensus rejection.

.. longtime avid radio fans have switched to CDs in their car to avoid the "torture" of having to hear the same songs over and over again.

CD's? You're kidding, right? Many cars now come without CD players. Talk to me about Pandora and MP·'s and I will agree many people pick those options in the car and elsewhere** but the reason is to escape commercials, not repetition.

** Most listening is not done in the car. At home and at work listening is about two thirds of all listening.

Stations need variety, in the age of digital media, moreso than they did, not less. What are your thoughts?

"Variety" is not understood by armchair Program Directors.

The stations that get the best attributions for variety are CHR stations that play 70 or 80 songs in regular rotation. They get that attribution because they only play mass appeal, consensus hits. Every song is a favorite for most people who like contemporary pop music.

"Variety" is "playing only songs I like". Lack of variety is "they play a lot of songs I don't like".

Thus maximum variety is achieved by only playing the top scoring songs that are only neutral or slightly negative to a small portion of a station's listeners.

 

[TheBigA]

The only argument I would have is that radio has lost touch with the listener on the local level. I think this is critical in medium and smaller markets.

You need to be specific when you make a statement like this, because most of the smaller markets are locally owned.

I stilll listen to terrestrial radio, but I have narrowed down how much and what I listen to on it.

That's great. That's what we program for.

 

[Groove1670]

You need to be specific when you make a statement like this, because most of the smaller markets are locally owned.

Yes, I am one of the local owners. We have worked hard to be the voice of our community, and still provide a focused product.

Sorry, I have not figured how to make the quote marker work on the board.

 

[TheBigA]

Yes, I am one of the local owners. We have worked hard to be the voice of our community, and still provide a focused product.

But from what I see, there are thousands of small and medium market stations doing that.

Use a bracket and forward slash before the close quote.