I have heard 'the new stuff's been tried' statement several times. The problem is, since the 1986-7 inception of Sports Radio, something that I would classify as something new - bringing new listeners significantly to radio - I am hard pressed to come up with additional examples.
One of the big problems with new and creative is how we define creativity. If you just define it as creating something brand new from nothing, you might be right. Creative and new, however, are more than that. Remember when 80’s stations were tried around 25 years ago? Those weren’t successful, but, by 2007, 80’s based classic hits had replaced 60’s centric oldies. The brain trust behind radio figured out how to update a format it had almost given up on. Jack FM was something new, too. Alternative rock stations took off in the mid-90’s, too. Modification and enhancement are also forms of innovation and creativity. Most people are far more creative than they ever thought they were or have ever been given credit for. We spend our early lives in bureaucracy and are routinely told creativity only comes from a blank slate. The result stifles creativity and fails to acknowledge real progress.
As I suggested in a post above, anything tried on 560 would not have been the end in itself, but a decently powered laboratory to figure out what would work for radio's future. What could get younger demos listening?
If I had some grand new idea, I wouldn’t be doing it on AM radio. Again, it’s 100 year old technology. It had a good run and outlasted the concept of television that was expected to replace it in the 1950’s, but every mode of technology eventually needs to sunset. If AM is in a death spiral (and some broadcasters clearly seem to think it is), the time to get out is now, before throwing away more good money on something that will never have a return.
About a week ago, I tuned around my shortwave just to see what was there, and there wasn't anything. This is the future of radio?!?
The future of radio is not likely over the air. It’s going to be more like Pandora, Spotify, and Apple Music. Again, every technology has a finite lifespan. I wouldn’t say FM is in a death spiral yet, but it will happen at some point. The last person to hold the licenses will be the one to turn out the lights.
Are we sure that something like that (with a little bit of promotion) would not have got people figuring out how to tune 560 in? A modern day Dr Ruth would have had no attractive demos following it?
The time to try that on AM was 30-40 years ago. Remember, the FCC tried to find a way to revitalize AM. It couldn’t find one. Don’t think companies like iHeart, Cumulus, and Audacy haven’t done research of their own to make their AM properties more appealing. They haven’t found a way because it doesn’t exist. Put the whip away. That horse is dead!
Sports Betting had to have been one of the narrowest of narrowcasting there was, especially in a place where betting was illegal.
Agreed, but it paid the bills.
And I'll still say that why, whatever that unmentionable station in Orlando is doing, isn't being tried in every market where there's a vacant or poorly performing broadcast channel, amazes me.
That has been tried multiple times, and it is still being tried. Audacy, for example, runs talk radio focused more on entertainment and local issues on most of its FM talkers while mostly keeping national politics out. It works well. It’s not an exact clone of WTKS, but it’s based on a similar concept. Notice, also, that Audacy does it on its FM’s. You won’t find that programming on many AM’s unless it’s a simulcast. It’s expensive, and Audacy isn’t making an investment like that on a technology that can’t draw the intended audience.
radioinsight.com
