Elvis Duran Says Radio Isn’t What It Used To Be...

[SCMcKinney]

I am a mere listener, not a professional. I do listen to OTA every day, Saturday and Sundays included. My listening as a boomer is heavily skewed to spoken word, although there is some music here and there. So, knowing those facts, you'll understand some of my posts are going to be biased. Listening after morning drive, I just don't hear much that is going to cause me to keep my dial glued. If the program is OK I'll stick, but I am just as likely to go to talk radio. But at least I am still listening to OTA. I think the younger set is off to the web or their personal music collections and that's the problem that needs to get addressed. I don't think you can fix it with more or better researched music. Maybe it is because I am outside looking in, but am I seeing something professionals don't want to contemplate? Especially when musicradio has worked so well for such a long time.

Big A suggests new programming is being done - but I don't hear it anywhere. Latest new format I have heard is 'Podcast Radio,' but I just don't think that long form programming is paced well for radio. Would it be better to do the Podcast is smaller chunks, same time every day over the course of a week?

David Eduardo points out that new programming needs to evolve, not just 'appear,' but most of the rest of the comment centers on music evolution. If the kids are not listening to music OTA, doesn't that mean that something other than music is needed to get them to stay with OTA? I am focused on OTA because I think that is where advertisers pay the most money. If I am wrong on this, you can ascribe that to amateur ignorance. If I had a decent powered FM, I would think a talk program following the morning show might keep the dial where it is at, maybe using the sidekicks of the morning show to be the hosts, the topic being whatever was the main idea of the morning show. For the noon time show, maybe some kind of remote based electric lunch spinning in-person requests? Early afternoon, maybe some kind of sponsored comedy show(s)? Later afternoon, maybe some kind of 'are you smarter than a tenth grader' quiz competition? Jeopardy is, I think, one of the highest rated syndicated TV shows - would they be interested in working with radio to find TV worthy contestants? Afternoon Drive, Music, News and Traffic. Evenings and overnight, music with an involved DJ - maybe remotes at interested clubs on Friday and Saturday. For those who say this scenario is not possible - they'll tune out once the music stops - the numbers are showing, I think, that they ARE tuning out now even with a solid music presentation. Comments I saw in these forums are that ratings points hold fewer listeners, and as has been acknowledged, they are listening less. If what I am suggesting is too much, maybe the evolution will need to be slower. I recall a program director's reported instruction on one of these forums some time back - "Be entertaining. If necessary, play a record."

Signal Geek commented that 610 KFRC tried a quiz show format 'many decades ago.' That could have been a fading AM trying anything to stay afloat. And was it a 'format' - quiz shows all day long? Too much of anything (all-stand-up 'comedy radio') is not going to succeed. In any event, just because something failed a long time ago, doesn't mean it shouldn't/couldn't be considered again. One post above was from a guy who did Pub Trivia and how it didn't get the younger set. He would know what kind of quiz doesn't work, but maybe he would know what could be adjusted to make it get the demographic needed.

 

[TheBigA]

Big A suggests new programming is being done - but I don't hear it anywhere.

Because, as you said, you mainly listen to spoken word.

Latest new format I have heard is 'Podcast Radio,' but I just don't think that long form programming is paced well for radio. Would it be better to do the Podcast is smaller chunks, same time every day over the course of a week?

If you want smaller chunks, then download the podcast and listen to it that way. Your statement points out an inherent problem in broadcast radio, which is that it is a one-to-many system. They pick the songs, and you listen. If you don't like the songs, then it's not for you. If you don't like the subject being discussed, or the way the talk is presented, then it's not for you. That kind of radio is the way it was always done. You are saying you want radio to do new things, and that requires you to move off the 100 year old platform to a place where you have more options and choices.

If the kids are not listening to music OTA, doesn't that mean that something other than music is needed to get them to stay with OTA?

It's not just OTA radio. It's any form of linear real time media. They want on-demand, and that's different from linear real time media. Broadcast can't be retooled for on-demand. It is what it is. So the future is about diversification of platforms, so that all eggs are not in one basket, and that all revenue is not based on one single platform. Because the FCC says a company can only own a certain number of radio stations. But there's no limit to the number of internet streams. So you make up the money from five radio stations with advertising from hundreds of streams.

If you REALLY want radio to change and do new things, that means using new platforms and new methods of presentation. The music industry was build on the sales of physical product in brick & mortar stores. That business model is mostly dead. They needed to adapt to a new marketplace, and that marketplace is streaming. The revenues from streaming are less than what they made under the old model. That means they need to diversify their offerings and make more music available than is airable on traditional radio. For radio to adapt to the new music reality, they need more outlets on non-regulated platforms where they can charge users rather than charge advertisers. Understand what I mean? If people aren't using the old platform, you don't waste time trying to bring them back, because they're not going back. You instead create new content on the new platform and then build a new business model and level of staffing for that new platform. We're not putting new wine in the same old bottles. We're finding new ways to get wine to consumers that doesn't involve bottles.

 

[MassMusicMan]

Jeopardy is, I think, one of the highest rated syndicated TV shows - would they be interested in working with radio to find TV worthy contestants?

Jeopardy is working with a big-name pub quiz company right now for contestant recruitment.

Commercial radio listeners would get their asses handed to them on Jeopardy! Those contestants listen to NPR and triple A.

 

[SCMcKinney]

So you make up the money from five radio stations with advertising from hundreds of streams.

Is that currently the case or can that be done? Or is that only a hoped-for goal?

If people aren't using the old platform, you don't waste time trying to bring them back, because they're not going back. You instead create new content on the new platform and then build a new business model and level of staffing for that new platform. We're not putting new wine in the same old bottles. We're finding new ways to get wine to consumers that doesn't involve bottles.

Does that mean that advertiser supported OTA has a finite life left? In 20 years, will the only people still listening to FM music and commercials be older Millenials who won't adopt those new platforms? FCC licenses are, within 20 years, going to be worth a lot less?

 

[TheBigA]

Is that currently the case or can that be done? Or is that only a hoped-for goal?

iHeart and Audacy own their own streaming platforms. They are constantly adding streams and services to those platforms to improve profitability. They are charging other radio companies for access to their platforms, and also using them to make deals with content owners such as sports teams and other media companies. So it's an ongoing process, and part of how radio companies are changing in ways that you don't see.

Does that mean that advertiser supported OTA has a finite life left? In 20 years, will the only people still listening to FM music and commercials be older Millenials who won't adopt those new platforms? FCC licenses are, within 20 years, going to be worth a lot less?

That's up to advertisers and radio listeners. If listeners go away, so will advertisers. If money goes away, so will the current owners. We're seeing a change in radio ownership towards more religious or agenda-driven owners, rather than mainly music or entertainment owners. There are no real programming changes that radio owners can make that will cause streamers to throw away their devices and search for transistor radios. People have made their choice.

 

[davideduardo]

Commercial radio listeners would get their asses handed to them on Jeopardy! Those contestants listen to NPR and triple A.

That is an unfounded statement.

I only listen to NPR a few times a year, and never, ever to AAA. Yet I can play along with Jeopardy and would usually win. In particular, the celebrity Jeopardy editions are very easy for me to beat, so much so that they are boring (as are many of the daily editions, too)

Yes, I am a sample of one. But I use this lone example to show that taste in music or talk radio stations has notihng to do with the ability to store information.

 

[radiofan2023]

I rarely listen to NPR or AAA, usually I listen to commercial radio/podcasts of commercial radio shows, and I usually know most of the Jeopardy questions.

A friend of mine is the same way. He actually got picked to go on Jeopardy when God’s gift to game shows Alex Trebek was still hosting, but he told some people he was in the running to go on when he wasn’t supposed to say anything, and the producers somehow found out and told him he wasn’t in the running any more.

 

[vchimpanzee]

I rarely listen to NPR or AAA, usually I listen to commercial radio/podcasts of commercial radio shows, and I usually know most of the Jeopardy questions.

I only listen to "Wait! Wait!" which is sort of a quiz show. Only the very end has questions at the pace of a "Jeopardy" episode.

 

[TheBigA]

I'm sure with Seacrest as the host, WOF has access to iHeart if it wants a broadcast radio partner.

 

[SCMcKinney]

Jeopardy is working with a big-name pub quiz company right now for contestant recruitment.

Commercial radio listeners would get their asses handed to them on Jeopardy! Those contestants listen to NPR and triple A.

The actual great unwashed audience wouldn't necessarily be the contestants. If I understand correctly, Jeopardy does game show trial runs with contestant candidates that contact the show directly. But none of those contestant auditions are not currently broadcast. Maybe later rounds of auditions could be for radio? Show and radio get to sell advertising. Show gets promotion (not that it necessarily needs it). Radio gets something new to present beyond current offerings - creates buzz.

 

[TheBigA]

Show gets promotion (not that it necessarily needs it). Radio gets something new to present beyond current offerings - creates buzz.

You would think "promotion" alone had value. But in deals done for intellectual property, there needs to be a quantifiable amount. iHeart's deal for the use of the NBC News Radio name involves a payment of a fee plus a percentage of ad revenues. Everybody connected would have to get paid. An appearance fee for contestants, host, the music used in the show, production fees. The list goes on. So while someone like you would think this could be a free content deal, where radio has an opportunity to make money from a known brand, the truth is there are a lot of costs involved. Then you research the potential audience for such a show, and find it's mostly over-55. These are people advertisers are already reaching in other ways.

 

[MassMusicMan]

The actual great unwashed audience wouldn't necessarily be the contestants. If I understand correctly, Jeopardy does game show trial runs with contestant candidates that contact the show directly. But none of those contestant auditions are not currently broadcast. Maybe later rounds of auditions could be for radio? Show and radio get to sell advertising. Show gets promotion (not that it necessarily needs it). Radio gets something new to present beyond current offerings - creates buzz.

I mean, modern Jeopardy! has been on television for 40 years, to say nothing of its 1960's incarnation. If that brand were a viable audio property, you don't think that somebody would have thought of that, and researched its viability, over the course of four decades?

And if it was found to be an interesting option to people who affirmed that they would use radio for such a thing in the first place, why would the team behind Jeopardy! serve the worst of their content to radio, instead of their best? Would you turn on a radio to hear a bunch of basketball teams fail to qualify for the Olympics?

 

[TheBigA]

I mean, modern Jeopardy! has been on television for 40 years, to say nothing of its 1960's incarnation. If that brand were a viable audio property, you don't think that somebody would have thought of that, and researched its viability, over the course of four decades?

Keep in mind that Jeopardy is owned and distributed by Sony. They also own American Idol. They have an IP division built on marketing their brands. That's why I say anyone who wanted to do Jeopardy on radio would have to pay for it. Right now, the rights fees would exceed potential revenues.

 

[SCMcKinney]

If that brand were a viable audio property, you don't think that somebody would have thought of that, and researched its viability, over the course of four decades?

When it comes to FM, I am beginning to think that there really hasn't been too much research or consideration of any programming other than music. Up until about 15 years ago, a solid argument could be made that there was no need. Music worked well, was cheap to program, and had sort of a stable audience. But the internet and streaming have stolen the younger music audience. Much as radio was faced with the loss of their audience when TV came in, and AM lost its audience when FM became the norm, radio is back to being in the same boat. In 1954, radio started dropping the dramas and started spinning rockola, and found a new audience. In 1980 AM started dropping music and doing talk, and found a new lease on life. In 2025, OTA radio has to drop music (or at least broaden its offerings) to stay relevant. I've just been tossing out ideas, and as an armchair quarterback that's easy to do. I have asked on other forums for professional's ideas, but don't hear too much, other than 'plans are afoot.' Big A has suggested that new stuff is underway with Music FM, which I just haven't picked up on. But it is still music with the necessary commercials, and that is something Gen Z won't tolerate. Radio as a big business is apparently going to where the kids are with streams and podcasts. But I question whether the revenue they can get on those platforms will equal what a mass appeal (but youth leaning) variety of programming could get on an OTA FM. The big money I think is still on terrestrial broadcasting. It will take different thinking from advertisers and radio companies alike. But continuing the music intensive program on OTA doesn't seem to be getting new listeners. (Ratings points are worth fewer people, and they listen less). It is time to try new ideas. I would be interested in hearing what professionals would do other than music.

 

[TheBigA]

When it comes to FM, I am beginning to think that there really hasn't been too much research or consideration of any programming other than music.

What do you base that opinion on? Have you ever spoken with an executive at a radio company? Have you ever attended a radio conference? Have you recently visited a radio station and had an appointment with the PD or someone in charge? Those are a few simple questions.

Do you read the various free radio trades that detail the kinds of research being done for radio from places such as Edison Research or the multiple consultant blogs that we often link here?

In just the last few years, several radio companies have developed sports gambling formats that have attracted a lot of sponsorship dollars. In addition, iHeart launched it's BIN service. Both of them were new in formats other than music. The format you seem to like is game shows on the radio. The research I've seen is that would appeal to 55 plus, and would cost more than it would make.

I would say the main area of growth for radio in terms of new products is in programming other than music. But most of that investment has been done in podcasting or streaming, not broadcast. The reason radio companies prefer non-music programming is that it is content THEY own, as opposed to music, which they don't own.

Big A has suggested that new stuff is underway with Music FM, which I just haven't picked up on. But it is still music with the necessary commercials, and that is something Gen Z won't tolerate.

There are two ways for radio to make money: Commercials or listener sponsorship. Or you freeload by listening to non commercial radio and don't pay. If you have another suggestion, I'm ready to hear it. The main thing Gen Z wants is the ability to make their own playlists and restrict the music to songs they like, rather than those chosen for them by a PD. By definition, that's something other than broadcast radio. Radio is not in the music distribution business. For that, they should subscribe to a music service.

 

[b-turner]

One thing that seems to impede taking a big chance in broadcast radio is you're playing with other's money. Stockholders and investors want a sure thing where they know they can see a profit. That means you do something that is currently successful. That's not to say it can't happen but it might take a bunch more research and talking to get a mere chance and I suspect most will say no.

 

[michael hagerty]

Signal Geek commented that 610 KFRC tried a quiz show format 'many decades ago.' That could have been a fading AM trying anything to stay afloat. And was it a 'format' - quiz shows all day long?

It was a six-hour block---9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.

https://www.worldradiohistory.com/hd2/IDX-Business/Music/Archive-RandR-IDX/IDX/80s/85/RR-1985-04-26-OCR-Page-0043.pdf#search=%22kfrc%20game%20zone%22

It lasted seven months, during which time KFRC went from eighth place with a 3.0 (then considered a horrible book for KFRC) to 20th place with a 1.9.

I've harbored a suspicion that RKO's consultant, Walt Sabo, who had pitched his Adult Standards format first, sold them on the game show specifically to crash the ratings and force them to Standards. Which, nine months after dumping the Game Zone, they did.

 

[MassMusicMan]

When it comes to FM, I am beginning to think that there really hasn't been too much research or consideration of any programming other than music.

You ever heard of 98.5 the Sports Hub? #10 billing station in the country.

And that's to say nothing of every NPR affiliate. If they ever bothered with AM, it didn't happen in my lifetime, at least not in markets I've lived and worked in.

I have asked on other forums for professional's ideas, but don't hear too much, other than 'plans are afoot.'

We call those "trade secrets."

Big A has suggested that new stuff is underway with Music FM, which I just haven't picked up on. But it is still music with the necessary commercials, and that is something Gen Z won't tolerate. Radio as a big business is apparently going to where the kids are with streams and podcasts. But I question whether the revenue they can get on those platforms will equal what a mass appeal (but youth leaning) variety of programming could get on an OTA FM. The big money I think is still on terrestrial broadcasting. It will take different thinking from advertisers and radio companies alike. But continuing the music intensive program on OTA doesn't seem to be getting new listeners. (Ratings points are worth fewer people, and they listen less). It is time to try new ideas. I would be interested in hearing what professionals would do other than music.

 

[davideduardo]

When it comes to FM, I am beginning to think that there really hasn't been too much research or consideration of any programming other than music.

You know this how? Or is it just a personal suspicion? m

Up until about 15 years ago, a solid argument could be made that there was no need. Music worked well, was cheap to program, and had sort of a stable audience. But the internet and streaming have stolen the younger music audience.

Generalizing again. Even in the younger demos, there is a huge percentage of people listening regularly to radio. While in 25-54 the weekly usage approaches 80% of all people, in 18-34 it is still in the 70% range.

Again, the change is in the amount of time, not usage itself.

Much as radio was faced with the loss of their audience when TV came in, and AM lost its audience when FM became the norm, radio is back to being in the same boat.

Yet today over a third of all adults use AM at least once a week. You are generalizing all the data and presenting it to favor your opinion.

FM took about 35 years to achieve parity with AM, by the way. The change was very gradual.

In 1954, radio started dropping the dramas and started spinning rockola, and found a new audience.

Actually, the network radio shows faded in the period between about 1948 and the mid to even late 50's. It took about a decade for most of the "old" network radio model to die, yet some lasted even another decade!

And music radio happened not by accident but due to the fall in influence of Petrillo, the head of the Musician Union. No longer required to have live bands in-house, stations could play recorded music. That started in the later 40's after The War. And then, nearly half a decade before "Rock Around the Clock", Todd Storz figured out that playing just the hits over and over would be successful.

Again, you are generalizing as well as forgetting many actual facts.

In 1980 AM started dropping music and doing talk, and found a new lease on life.

Oh, and tell me about the stations like WOR and KABC and WGN decades before that, where music, if played at all, was just fill in between talk segments. "1980" is not a benchmark year for talk on AM. The main restriction on more talk was the Fairness Doctrine which required balance, making many stations reluctant to do all talk. Once that went away, we got Rush Limbaugh. But that was at the end of the 80's. In the meantime, we had lots of stations like WNWS and WINZ in Miami and KGO in San Francisco and WERE in Cleveland just to name a couple that had all or extensive talk shows.

In 2025, OTA radio has to drop music (or at least broaden its offerings) to stay relevant. I've just been tossing out ideas, and as an armchair quarterback that's easy to do. I have asked on other forums for professional's ideas, but don't hear too much, other than 'plans are afoot.'

Yes, the plans involve considering that "radio" is really "audio" and the future lies in streams, not radio frequency waves.

Big A has suggested that new stuff is underway with Music FM, which I just haven't picked up on. But it is still music with the necessary commercials, and that is something Gen Z won't tolerate.

One-to-Many only works with advertising. Radio has a transition period that is likely a decade or more; as long as it reaches huge percentages of consumers in a cost-efficient manner in the meantime, it will continue to do what works.

Everything that has been suggested here as options, like all game shows, has been tried or experimented with many times and failed. Those who don't learn from history....

(Ratings points are worth fewer people, and they listen less).

A rating point is always worth the same number of listeners, unless the market population changes. You don't know the difference between "rating" and "share" which is not surprising, considering the lack of factual knowledge you have shown in just one post!

It is time to try new ideas. I would be interested in hearing what professionals would do other than music.

Those of us who have ideas on future strategies and may be in a position to affect a station or two certainly won't show our hand here...

 

[Theater of My Mind]

Generalizing again. Even in the younger demos, there is a huge percentage of people listening regularly to radio. While in 25-54 the weekly usage approaches 80% of all people, in 18-34 it is still in the 70% range.

That's not what you said before:

If we look at the average time spent listening of 18-24 year olds, only abut 60% use terrestrial at all, and then it is only a couple of hours a week. I suspect a lot of that is "hearing" but not intentional "listening" of stations put on by family members or co-workers.

When you get over age 25, we start seeing longer average weekly radio usage. But still, it is less than 1/3 of the levels we saw back in Y2K.

https://radiodiscussions.com/threads/what-happened-to-rock-on-the-charts.757040/page-6#post-6589552