"7 Days of Seth - Chapter 5: Why HD Radio is NOT the Answer"

[PocketRadio]

"7 Days of Seth - Chapter 5: Why HD Radio is NOT the Answer"

http://www.hear2.com/2007/06/7_days_of_seth__4.html#comments

 

[Mike Walker]

Oh that's useful. Another "here2.com...." link. Because nine thousand just aren't enough. Of course the answer to everything is a link to someone else's thoughts. Much easier for a fella' than having his own!

 

[dbdigital]

What Seth Godin is talking about is not just localized media but personalized media, something which is impossible for radio to accomplish because it's MASS media. This is why there's so much interest in Pandora and Last.FM because they offer a form of personalized media.

I suppose the ideal combination (judging from what he said) would be a personalized, ever-expanding playlist with very local traffic, news and information (reflecting the person's neighborhood or worksite). The HD-Radio signal, of course, can't be split up fine enough to accomplish that nor does it offer two-way communication the way the internet does.

From what I've read the software engineering behind Last.FM is very complex and so I'm not sure how a radio station, even one that streams from a website, can impliment an approximation of it without spending huge amounts of money to web and software developers.

For that matter, as interesting as Seth is, I'm not sure how a radio station can use any of what he's been saying these past few days. Maybe Friday's installment will pull it all together. Of course, in his estimation an FCC broadcast license will be worthless in a few years as Wi-Fi takes over.

db

 

[dbdigital]

In Seth's 6th podcast he suggests ways terrestrial radio can engage the listener more thereby making the listening experience more personal to the individual, creating a stronger listener loyalty as well as providing stations with the audience feedback they need.

These suggestions are: a blog, a regionalized podcast which can be e-mailed (as a link) to the listener and, of course, a web stream. The podcasts need not be long and would contain information specific to areas within the station's service.

To do all of this, a radio station would have to invest in a good webmaster. But this might be a better investment than converting HD-Radio (at least for now).

db

 

[PocketRadio]

In Seth's 6th podcast he suggests ways terrestrial radio can engage the listener more thereby making the listening experience more personal to the individual, creating a stronger listener loyalty as well as providing stations with the audience feedback they need.

These suggestions are: a blog, a regionalized podcast which can be e-mailed (as a link) to the listener and, of course, a web stream. The podcasts need not be long and would contain information specific to areas within the station's service.

To do all of this, a radio station would have to invest in a good webmaster. But this might be a better investment than converting HD-Radio (at least for now).

db

"Saturday Night Oldies"

http://www.wabcradio.com/showdj.asp?DJID=30049

I keep saying this, but WABC has it figured out (except for running IBOC) !

 

[clouseau]

"Saturday Night Oldies"

http://www.wabcradio.com/showdj.asp?DJID=30049

I keep saying this, but WABC has it figured out (except for running IBOC) !

Hey Pocket. You and I have gone at it for a while and I get where you're coming from, but here is the big money question. Why did the music die??? Why "IS" WABC a talk station???

I'm NOT trying to start a sniping incident here, just provoke thought.

The American Broadcasting Company "Turned Off" the most recognizable radio brand in history. WHY DID THEY DO THAT???

They did it because "Musicradio 77" no longer made business sense. It's not a plot. It's not a fad. It just DID NOT WORK. I grew up with WABC as an option. But it just does not sell. You have GOT to realize this.

Fact is, if WABC has figured out that Saturday Night Oldies really works, they'd be running Tuesday Morning oldies.

It's an out of format splinter show that probably garners a rating share that starts with a "0.". If it was the success you claim it is, it would be on in a better daypart, would have some of the original talent and would be full time or widespread. Remember RUSH is not owned by ABC. They run it for the cash it makes. And George Michael does a weekend TV show. It's not like he's not available.

I feel your pain, but one of the things I deal with every day is that "I AM AGING OUT OF THE DEMO". That is, my "personal" taste is not all that valid because numbers show differently. And they pay me to get numbers and deliver demographics. AM music does not do that. Clear Channel tried it in the X band on AM within the last 2 years in Chicago. IIRC featuring Lujack and Biondi. It "Ain't" for lack of trying. It just "DOES NOT SEEM TO WORK"

Now we can either accept that overall the ratings methodology is sound, or we can drop it in the trash, as people like Radiopilot would have us do. I can speak from a fairly decent radio career that you can "get" numbers to respond based on certain constants and methods. And all of these make sense if you look at it analytically. We as radio "Geeks" have one basic flaw. We don't listen as today's "LISTENERS". We listen as Radio Geeks.

Sadly, Saturday Night Oldies on AM is not the answer. If it were, I'd have it on the air and making gobs of cash in a heartbeat. Frankly, I might put it on if it were enough to even get by. But it's just not. Sorry. (And I really "AM" sorry. I'd love to be able to do it.)

Clouseau

 

[Tom Wells]

The clear channel AM 1690 experiment in Chicago was a weak effort, then they added IBOC.

Same tested hits, listen 2 days, and you know the list, or exactly what categories the music would be.

The big names did as good a job as you can phoning it in.
The station's not gonna ever click and stick if there's no studio per se, and the magic that happens when a great team actually
works together can't develop in this modern mode.
The total control of music playlists is why the 'oldies' cannot be a viable format.

 

[clouseau]

The clear channel AM 1690 experiment in Chicago was a weak effort, then they added IBOC.

Same tested hits, listen 2 days, and you know the list, or exactly what categories the music would be.

The big names did as good a job as you can phoning it in.
The station's not gonna ever click and stick if there's no studio per se, and the magic that happens when a great team actually
works together can't develop in this modern mode.
The total control of music playlists is why the 'oldies' cannot be a viable format.

So the "Heavy Hitters" can't perform in today's environment and they live in Arizona???

Then why are we having this discussion? There's not even anyone to DO the format. Or maybe Kidd Kraddick, Mancow or Stern can pull it off???

What's the problem? We don't all live together? We can't work together unless we can High Five each other at shift change, or we need to play "Whatever the heck" we want? Remember 'Back in the day" we counted on our Heroes to break the new hot tunes. These dudes aren't exactly poster children for hipness anymore. Times change. I think I basically said this already.

We can't have it both ways.

Clouseau