-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
WHYL
- Thread starter Seltzer
- Start date
Have you seen that research? Who did it? When was it done. What methodology was used? Survey research is generally crap - and the worst of it is done in broadcasting and politics. This has long been a convenient lie for management to use as an excuse to fire on air talent. The appeal of radio has always been personalities. Take a station's popular personalities and you get the station's listeners.
WHYL carried Westwood One's "Good Time Oldies" format, which ceased to exist as of April 20th, 2025.
radioinsight.com
Westwood One Eliminates Seven 24/7 Formats
RadioInsight Exclusive: Additional cutbacks have hit Cumulus Media's Westwood One syndication division as the company has eliminated seven of its
radioinsight.com
All the research I have seen from various sources indicates a negative when the DJ cracks the microphone. There are others on this board that might be able to go into greater depth on this. I'm in the business. What used to work no longer does. Can you prove research is wrong? Do you really believe stock owned companies are going to shell out huge amounts of cash for bogus research. If you can you have unearthed a fault affecting billions of dollars misdirected based on a falsehood. Your statement tells me you have no clue about the operations of radio stations. Radio is better researched now than at any other point in it's history.
Companies shell out money for research that tells them what they want to hear. It's easy to word questions to get the answers the client wants. Radio got rid of personalities. And in the process, radio got rid of a lot of listeners. The idiots in management say it's because of "competition." Competition is only a problem when they are better than you. Your statement tells me you have no clue about research methods.
Unless you work at a station in a management position, you will not see this research. It is confidential and we usually sign agreements to see and present this data.
Qualified broadcast research companies, like Edison for example.
This is not true., The kinds of research projects are varied, but use professional samples and very carefully designed questions.
In general, research on programming practices is done in focus groups or one on one projects. There are also large perceptual projects that include many structured questions with open ended responses for many.
The reason a lot of talent is let go is that it is cheaper to voice track in shifts that do not involve personality approaches. Radio revenue is off over 70% in the last two decades, so many things we used to do are not viable now.
Not true. The appeal of most stations is the music.
Again, not true. Heck, go back 50 years to the 70's when the #1 format was Beautiful Music. Almost all stations were automated, and the few that were live had zero personality.
Today, AC stations do not need personality after about 9 AM, and too much talk will drive away listeners. Other formats each have a level of need for announcing talent, and some do best with a minimalist approach.
Radio is losing audience to streams. Zero talent, zero personalities. Just music. Pay a bit, and no ads, either.
When research is done, the objective is to find out how to improve and existing station or how to create a new one. I've never seen research that worded questions to get a desired response.
I ran a house research company that did over 100 ATMs a year, dozens of perceptuals, and hundreds of thousands of call-center phone interviews. We spent hours making sure all questions did not introduce bias or create desired responses. In fact, the final questionnaires were not designed or coordinated with station staff to prevent this.
Because in most dayparts, listeners do not want them now.
That is an unsubstantiated response. Nearly as many adults use radio as they did 20 years ago. They listen less because there are more oppositions.... particularly Alexa and commercial free streams. Those don't offer personalities.
Nor do you. Quite obviously, in fact.
David: "Push polling" is a fact. Pollsters do get paid to come up with results their clients desire, especially in issue-oriented politics. Maybe all the companies hired by broadcasters to do their surveys are pure as the driven snow, but I wouldn't be shocked if some are taking the low road to keep clients on board in the future.
I'm not talking about political polling. I am focused on radio research, which is almost entirely done by companies like Harker, Edison and Coleman... ones that have been around for decades and have very specialized systems for evaluating audio content.
In radio, you don't keep a research company "on board" by delivering data that will cause ratings to drop.
Keep in mind that political polling is more comparable to Nielsen radio ratings. It is a measure of behaviour in one specific time period. It is, as such, historical data, not actionable information to improve a or create a product.
Radio programming research is intended to find out what a station can do to retain existing listeners and/or attract more of them. As such, it is predictive, not passive.
No, no, many of them don't do that.. IE: do it to be told what they wanna hear. Youd have to be insane if you think they're going to spend gobs of money for that.
Alot of us do informal research and we get HONEST opinions.
Is this research polling text-only? Or do they play audio clips of the station's DJs and ask participants to rate them?
About 10-15 years ago I was part of a station's "listener club" and was periodically sent music surveys (including audio clips of songs), but I was never asked anything about their DJs.
About 10-15 years ago I was part of a station's "listener club" and was periodically sent music surveys (including audio clips of songs), but I was never asked anything about their DJs.
Research is confidential? How convenient! The validity and reliability of any study can not be determined without peer review. So basically, you pay your money and you take their word for it.
What are the qualifications of the people behind these research companies you mention? Do they have advanced degrees in any social research disciplines?
Most of these companies doing "research" are actually consultants. They do so called "research" to support and sell their consulting services, which is where the money is.
Funny how these "research studies" claim people complain jocks talk too much but nobody complains about 10 minute (more or less) commercial breaks. Is that a question they don't ask? Is that a question they don't want to ask?
Look at all the money Howard Stern gets/has gotten for talking too much - and all the money people now pay to hear him talk. Video didn't kill the radio star. Managers who didn't want to pay air-talent did.
I bet "research" also gave us the name Audacy, which to this day they still have to spell out so people won't confuse it with Odyssey.
If the research is so good and the people so smart, why has radio been circling the bowl for the last 20 plus years? Don't say competition. Any endeavor has competition. Failure is the result of not competing effectively. And that is the result of incompetent management and bad information. As long as radio management refuses to admit that the decline and fall of radio continues to an inevitable conclusion.
Not all of radio:
Why Are We Successful When Radio Industry Stats are Down?
Radio industry stats don't paint the whole picture. Though stats may be dropping, Leighton Broadcasting has only experienced growth and expansion.
blog.leighton.media
Leighton Media said:
Just because you dont agree with the research, doesnt make it wrong... it just means you likely arent the audience for that particular station.
I see people from time to time complain about this that or the other on some stations and they are out of the geographic target or age demo of the station, so it doesnt really matter
People not in the target are not likely to be the ones saying "just play the music." Some people may feel that way. Many do not. But it is convenient justification for not paying air talent. Personalities, especially good local personalities give radio something the "competition" can't match. "Just play the music" gives the "competition" a district" advantage. It plays the music and it can customize the music to your own taste. No PD, consultant or service acting as a musical gatekeeper. Plus an unlimited music library available.
Funny, surveys force respondents into a specified context and possible responses. When I have heard people saying "just play the music," upon some inquiry what they meant was stop talking over the music.
Playing untested, unresearched music from an "unlimited library" is an even surer way to kill off all but a sliver of your audience than telling your DJs to flap their lips more is.
- Status