WHUD Westchester County Reduces Staff

[luperm]

How is this nonsense? It's the fact of life. If Coke and Pepsi are going broke and can't afford to put sugar in their soda, no one will buy it. Same thing with radio.

It's a bit more nuanced that this. Why are "Coke and Pepsi" going broke? Is it because consumers have found something different or better to drink?

If so, then "Coke and Pepsi" can either continue to do the same thing and hope that someday people want their products again just pissing money away while they wait. Or, they can try and adapt their products and cost structure while they try to find something that resonates with consumers and/or structure their businesses in a way that acknowledges the reality of the situation.

You suggest the former. Radio is trying to do the latter.

 

[Kelly A]

You can't. That's why radio will continue its decline until and unless they come up with something new to draw in new listeners and excite them enough to respond to advertising.

Radio is still the most frequently consumed form of media, full stop. Just because it isn't like the old days when it was the only game in town, doesn't mean it's inferior or not appealing.
Advertising is down on all forms of media, not just radio. You're placing blame on the radio for declining revenue is misplaced. Blame the evolution of Amazon, Home Depot, and Walmart.

At present they don't and although a lot of people cry and whine about "the poor station can't afford to pay for a decent product".

I've never heard any broadcaster make that claim, you did. And somehow I don't think you're involved in broadcasting because you wouldn't make that claim if you were.

That doesn't change the fact that people are leaving, revenue is down. and to continue to do what the stations are doing, the decline will continue until the power company sends the final notice for payment the station can't afford, and turns off the electricity.

Advertisers buying less media in general has nothing to do with what is on the radio. It's down everywhere.

 

[72167-3530]

It's the same old argument made over and over on this forum and others.

One of the few members of the public who still care about radio points out that they'd like the product they consume (radio) to be better.

In response, all the self-proclaimed experts tell them that they don't know what they're talking about. The very people who claim to work in radio, and claim to know everything there is about radio, yet somehow are completely incapable of doing anything about the current state of radio.

As someone who's been on both sides of the microphone, and in radio management, it's all been said before.

"TV is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"Cable TV is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"Cable radio is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"CDs are going to kill FM. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"The internet is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"Satellite radio is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"Social media is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"
"Streaming is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"

Coming soon: "Virtual reality is going to kill radio. There's nothing we can do about it!"

OK, all you people who allegedly work at a real radio station and struggle with this every day. Let's go back to day one of broadcasting school. What's your P.O.D.? What is it that your radio station can give the listeners that they can't get anywhere else, including the internet? If you can't answer that question, then you're not going your job.

 

[72167-3530]

You seem to insist that because radio is having financial problems they must cut back on programming. True to an extent, but if they do they will continue to see the decline until there is nothing left.

You can only amputate so many body parts before there's no patient left. And with radio, there's not much left.

 

[Kelly A]

You are right, it's not the 1960's anymore. But you can't just use ageism to waive away the problems with radio. "Ohh, everything is different now. Woe is me!" Get over it. Whether it's 1960 or 2060, it's still just radio. Same formula as before listeners + advertisers = money. It's time to stop making excuses

Really? So cars are the same as they were thirty years ago because they have four wheels? How about retail? How's the local traditional hardware store across town doing? Are there only three TV stations and a handful of radio in major markets all competing with each other?
Just because reminding you this isn't 1966 anymore, doesn't make it ageism. It's called current reality.

I know you think you're being clever by pointing out that iPods aren't current. Neither is the word "telephone" or the floppy disk icon that Microsoft used to indicate "save." All nitpicking language does it ignore the facts in front of you.

The fact you don't seem to be up to speed with modern technology and consumer media use is abundantly clear and would account for your lack of understanding of how people consume media in the 21st Century.

And for everyone who says, "Then go start your own radio station," that's not addressing the problem; it's attacking the messenger.

Not an attack at all. If you claim to know better than people who already own, or are management at modern radio stations/groups, then there are ample opportunities to put your money where your mouth is and show us all how it's done. As I mentioned; by comparison with twenty years ago, you can become a radio station operator for less than the purchase of a small house. Just being a keyboard warrior with no business or radio experience doesn't make you an expert on current or future media consumption trends.

The problem isn't the people who want better radio, the problem is that there are too many people in radio who don't have the answers.

Okay, so what is "better radio"? Hosts like Arthur Godfrey, or radio shows like George Burns?
Rather than typing what's wrong with radio, tell us all what will bring advertisers back to the days of when radio was the only game in town.
This should be interesting, but I get the impression you'd rather type the same mantra.

Who sit around and make the same old budget cuts we did last century. Who do the same consolidation and automation we did last century. Who know that things have changed, but refuse to change.

So sorry if I offended you for thinking that there is something better than populating the nation with 50,000-watt iPods. Sorry if I offended all the people in radio who think they're such experts at radio, yet do little more than rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic while it sinks. I don't have to be the ship's captain to point out where it all leads. I already have my lifeboat.

Fine, then crank up the Victrola and enjoy those 78's!

 

[TheBigA]

The very people who claim to work in radio, and claim to know everything there is about radio, yet somehow are completely incapable of doing anything about the current state of radio.

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Maybe you can be more specific. Radio is not one thing like Sirius or Apple. It's 16,000 stations each with different programming and staff. So each station is different. In this case, we're talking about the #1 station in Hudson Valley.

You can only amputate so many body parts before there's no patient left. And with radio, there's not much left.

Once again, radio is not just the physical device. Radio companies are broadening the reach of their content using apps, podcasts, and social media. They're not amputating things, they're ADDING new outlets and content. You should broaden your view beyond what you listened to 50 years ago.

 

[Kelly A]

It's the same old argument made over and over on this forum and others.

One of the few members of the public who still care about radio points out that they'd like the product they consume (radio) to be better.

Better according to whom? You?
Do you speak for all age demographics male and female 12-65?

In response, all the self-proclaimed experts tell them that they don't know what they're talking about. The very people who claim to work in radio, and claim to know everything there is about radio, yet somehow are completely incapable of doing anything about the current state of radio.

Other than not being like the days when you grew up, what is the current state of radio? So far all we've read is a lot of vague accusations with no meat on the bone. Give us examples of your expert opinion on how radio could be 'fixed'.

 

[TheBigA]

Radio is little different from any other consumer product. Reduce the value, cut enough corners, cheapen the product enough, and eventually people stop buying it.

How much do you pay for the ''product?''

Radio is not a ''consumer product,'' unless you're talking about the device. Radio is a free service. That's a very different thing.

Listeners don't pay for the service. They don't ''buy'' the service. They either use it or they don't. It's up to them. There's no contract, there's no payment, no username or password, no direct relationship between the service & user. So what you're saying is a complete mischaracterization of what radio is and how it works. On the other hand, SriusXM is a product that people pay for. They have also laid off staff. In that case, it's up to the users to decide if it's still worth the subscription fee.

 

[Hyrum]

What is it that your radio station can give the listeners that they can't get anywhere else, including the internet? If you can't answer that question, then you're not going your job.

So about 99 percent of the programmers seem to not be doing their jobs?? We all agree that there are a million alternatives to radio. The audience is spread out over a million choices it didn't have in the stone age. It doesn't matter the reason, it only matters that the broadcast stations are not healthy and something needs to change because they are not generating the revenue needed to be healthy. And we know the reasons for that too. So you're right, we need to find something wonderful that internet can't offer. I don't know what that is. You don't either. But the next great idea is out there somewhere. Or if it's not then things will continue until more and more fail and the remaining few will have a better shot at financial health. I'm wondering what will happen.

 

[TheBigA]

Or if it's not then things will continue until more and more fail and the remaining few will have a better shot at financial health. I'm wondering what will happen.

What do you mean by ''fail?'' WHUD is the #1 station in Hudson Valley. They are not failing.

All media companies, including Spotify, SiriusXM, Disney, Facebook, and Paramount+ have been laying off staff. This isn't a radio problem.

 

[Hyrum]

How much do you pay for the ''product?''

Plenty. How much is YOUR time worth? Time listening to the commercials is what you pay them.

 

[TheBigA]

Plenty. How much is YOUR time worth? Time listening to the commercials is what you pay them.

Not the same thing. No one forces you to listen to commercials. But you must pay for SiriusXM.

There is no contract with radio. You either listen or you don't.

 

[Hyrum]

What do you mean by ''fail?'' WHUD is the #1 station in Hudson Valley. They are not failing.

And they are not what they once were either. I said as more and more fail, and many are, the survivors would have a better shot at financial health. I didn't say that station was failing. I will say many around it are.

All media companies, including Spotify, SiriusXM, Disney, Facebook, and Paramount+ have been laying off staff. This isn't a radio problem.

As a consumer, I don't care who lays off whom. I only care that my Raisin Bran has two scoops of raisins in every bowl and taste good. Applying that to radio, I don't care who works there or doesn't work there. I only care about an entertaining product. It's not as entertaining as it should be.

 

[CTListener]

Radio is still the most frequently consumed form of media, full stop. Just because it isn't like the old days when it was the only game in town, doesn't mean it's inferior or not appealing.
Advertising is down on all forms of media, not just radio. You're placing blame on the radio for declining revenue is misplaced. Blame the evolution of Amazon, Home Depot, and Walmart.

Home Depot still advertises on radio, doesn't it? Amazon never has, and the only times I remember hearing Walmart ads on the radio were when new locations were opening -- usually a few weeks of ads just to let listeners know that Walmart is in town, then nothing.

 

[Hyrum]

Not the same thing. No one forces you to listen to commercials. But you must pay for SiriusXM.

There is no contract with radio. You either listen or you don't.

So you're saying that you get what you pay for? With radio you may be correct.

 

[CTListener]

As a consumer, I don't care who lays off whom. I only care that my Raisin Bran has two scoops of raisins in every bowl and taste good. Applying that to radio, I don't care who works there or doesn't work there. I only care about an entertaining product. It's not as entertaining as it should be.

As long as it's playing songs I like, it's every bit as entertaining as it should be to me. I'm almost 70, have plenty of fond memories of favorite DJs, but I find I actually like long sets of music I enjoy without the gab just as much, if not more.

 

[TheBigA]

And they are not what they once were either.

That could be said about a lot of things, right?

As a consumer, I don't care who lays off whom.

You don't pay for radio, so you're not a consumer, but a user. You pay for Raisin Bran. You don't pay for radio.

If you don't find it entertaining, just go somewhere else. We don't know who you are. There is no obligation on our part to be ''entertaining.'' The only requirement is that we stay on the air.

 

[Kelly A]

Home Depot still advertises on radio, doesn't it?

Not on local stations, only national ads purchased on groups. Your average stand-alone or mom-and-pop wouldn't be elligible to get any ad revenue because Home Depot uses a national ad rep.

 

[Kelly A]

As a consumer, I don't care who lays off whom. I only care that my Raisin Bran has two scoops of raisins in every bowl and taste good. Applying that to radio, I don't care who works there or doesn't work there. I only care about an entertaining product.

Entertaining for just you? That's the problem here; broadcasting is intended for a broad audience. If someone wants targeted music or entertainment, that's what streaming does best.

Oh, and might I suggest another 'I only care about'-item for you: Keep kids and their balls off the lawn.

 

[Hyrum]

Entertaining for just you? That's the problem here; broadcasting is intended for a broad audience. If someone wants targeted music or entertainment, that's what streaming does best.

Oh, and might I suggest another 'I only care about'-item for you: Keep kids and their balls off the lawn.

I get that. Do you get that radio must build a responsive audience to generate income for those who advertise on it? If people are leaving it in volume whether its for other services or singing to themselves, it only matters that for the business it has something to offer the advertisers. Presently it doesn't because the cookie cutter 9 in a row followed by long and unentertaining stop sets isn't cutting it. I'm not a huge consumer of it, but unless it does something to stand out the fragmented audience will not support the business. That's all I'm saying. And did you stay up late to write the clever "kids and their balls line"? Very creative. You should be on the radio and entertain what's left of that broad audience.