A Gig In Today's Radio

[TheBigA]

So, in other words, PPM is proving that the liners and promo content don't work, and add to clutter.

No...that you don't need to aurally remind people what station they're listening to because the PPM device automatically picks it up.

Maybe it's time to look at those people who successfully relate to audiences, and encourage them

I think that's what they're doing. I read somewhere that they kept the talent who were among the Top 3 in their market, and got rid of the rest. Then they'll offer those people as part of the premium choice. And the talent gets more money. Isn't more audience and more money encouraging them? Or is it more encouraging to leave them in the same market doing the same job for 40 years? That would be death for me. I may be the only one, but I didn't get into radio to do the same job in the same place my entire career. If that's what I wanted, I would have done something that paid more money.

 

[davideduardo]

So, in other words, PPM is proving that the liners and promo content don't work, and add to clutter.

Liners that had the purpose of creating top of mind awareness that produced ease of recall at the moment of diary entries have no purpose in the PPM world.

Liners that encourage association of the station (principally its dial position today; the URL tomorrow) with a positive experience and which invite return listening incidents are needed, constantly and regularly. That's why individual containers of Coke have labels, too.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Identifying the station is one thing. C'mon, admit it, there's a LOT of banal promo crap on the air. How many stations are "The NEW blah-blah-blah" for years at a time? It's simply bad, lazy programming, and too often it's encouraged by either corporate programmers or consultants.

Labelling is one thing. Bad marketing is something else.

 

[davideduardo]

Identifying the station is one thing. C'mon, admit it, there's a LOT of banal promo crap on the air. How many stations are "The NEW blah-blah-blah" for years at a time? It's simply bad, lazy programming, and too often it's encouraged by either corporate programmers or consultants.

Labelling is one thing. Bad marketing is something else.

" New" is one of the invariable and constant terms in marketing that triggers consumer response. "New Tide with bleach" may be on a product label for years at a time, particularly with brands that are otherwise not very new at all.

In the Southwest, there are several radio stations, in Spanish, that are called "New" (as in, loosely, "The New One") and which have no other identifier, and which don't even mention their call letters in Spanish, ever. "New" is their name. One has been called "New 106.5 for 13 years." It's very successful.

In PPM markets, the average length of a listening incident is 11 to 13 minutes. You don't have much time to make an impression. So you had better do it often, or listeners won't remember to return to your station for the next incident, or they may tune around looking for something that branded itself as "the best choice" when they return.

In (smaller) diary markets like yours, outside the top 50, the repetition of phrases and names will continue just as it has for 30+ years to try to get diarykeepers to write down actual listening in their diary.

 

[SirRoxalot]

So, you think that diary keepers really write down actual listening? If that's true, why has PPM had such a profound effect in most markets? Then again, diary keepers may be more accurate at listening, and less accurate at hearing.

It doesn't resolve the issue that what many people perceive as "clutter" is really repetitive promo filler, which they blame on a jock who has no control over it.

 

[davideduardo]

So, you think that diary keepers really write down actual listening?

Diary keepers write down what they think they listened to, part of which is based on reality, part on perception and part on mental "rounding" of time.

If that's true, why has PPM had such a profound effect in most markets?

The "profound effect" of PPM is mostly grounded in the overall reduction of about 30% in total time spent listening: from around 18 hours per person per week in the diary, to around 12 hours in the PPM.

This deeply affects radio´s CPP in sales, as overall the listening levels are less than reported in the diary.

The main causes of the reduction in TSL per person is made of two things.

First, in the diary, listeners rounded listening. Instead of a real 9:12 to 9:49, they wrote 9 AM to 10 AM. In the PPM that's two quarter hours, in the diary it's 4.

Second, listeners did not discount interruptions. 10 AM to 3 PM at work listening is 20 quarter hours in diary markets, but may be a third or 50% less in the PPM. Bathroom breaks, turning the radio down for the phone, coffee breaks, lunch, a brief meeting, retrieving something from the car in the parking lot, etc., all reduce PPM listening but seldom got reported in the diary.

Then again, diary keepers may be more accurate at listening, and less accurate at hearing.

The diary seldom picked up "hearing" but since much "hearing" is the sort of thing that won't affect rating/share/AQH (hearing the radio while at a store for a while) it inflates cume, but does not do anything except lower the average for TSL.

It doesn't resolve the issue that what many people perceive as "clutter" is really repetitive promo filler, which they blame on a jock who has no control over it.

I don't think listeners blame anyone. Listeners like or dislike a station. If the station, in it's totality, pleases them, they listen. To single out something that you may disagree with is disingenuous.

I agree with you... many stations have long failed to refresh their promos and imaging often enough. Most don't write them very well. Most don't understand that there is no such thing as a 60" promo... and that short is better always. But I've heard that for four or five decades, and have tried to capitalize on that shortcoming when done by a competitor, in the process made lots of work for myself and the rest of the staff.

But liners don't make... and usually don't break... a station. Today, failure to realize that AM and FM will not be the preferred delivery method in the future is. And failure to be a lot less one-way and more interactive will determine the winners tomorrow.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Good radio's always been interactive. In the old days, jocks used phones. Now, good jocks use social networking. The difference is that there are far fewer jocks to interact with listeners. Clear Channel is leading the charge to reduce interaction with local audiences.

 

[TheBigA]

The difference is that there are far fewer jocks to interact with listeners. Clear Channel is leading the charge to reduce interaction with local audiences.

You really don't get it. The idea isn't for jocks to interact with the public. The goal is to get the public to interact among themselves using YOUR platform. You get a whole lot more people that way. Just get the conversation started, and get out of the way.

 

[SirRoxalot]

You don't get it. Broadcast isn't interactive. It's primarily a one-way medium - one-to-many distribution model. If you want a completely interactive medium, sink your money into the Internet. Radio stations that have tried letting the public program them have been a dismal failure so far. That doesn't mean that you ignore listeners. You need to provide programming that they want, and react positively to, which requires a degree of interactivity. That doesn't make it an interactive medium.

 

[TheBigA]

You don't get it. Broadcast isn't interactive. It's primarily a one-way medium - one-to-many distribution model.

And that's why radio is dying. People grew up wanting to have it their way, not your way.

 

[SirRoxalot]

And yet, cume hasn't really shrunk, and TSL is still significant, although hard to compare to the past because the method of measurement has changed.

 

[John FL]

There have been lots of interesting comments. One of the main reasons I raised this topic in the first place was to acknowledge those broadcasters who apparently do work very hard.

I never liked broad-brushing and I hope I’m not doing so here. But from where I sit, it would appear that there are many in the radio industry who appear to take on the role of the victim. I hate to break the news but radio isn’t the only business that has gotten lean and mean. It’s also not the only business that requires a lot more of the fewer employees who remain.

It would also seem radio mirrors other businesses in those who get that new gig are probably actively or very recently employed. I’ve noticed in both R.I. and sites like All Access that the story is usually along the lines Joe Blow from station XXXX in market YYY has accepted the position of “Fill In The Blank.” Most employers don’t like hiring members of the 99 Week Unemployment Club, but there are exceptions. Opportunity, where I live, came to someone who was not on the air for many years. But he heads both a very successful internet 80s based music site and has received rave testimonials from many local “celebrities” for his party DJ business. Seems to me getting back on the air was a natural event.

I’m not going to change the opinion of those who like to demonize the big corporations such as Clear Channel. But let me try to make a point this way. I believe there are those at the local level who may have the same goals as everyone else in the franchise but it’s HOW they achieve their goals and how they treat people really defines them. It’s important to separate the corporation from local management and the local team. Where I live, I’m actually very impressed with CC. Being this board is not local-based, I won’t get into specifics why I feel as I do.

Social media was brought up several times. IMO, talent can make that impression on the listener where time doesn’t always permit on the air. I’ve seen YouTube videos for both promotions and even celebrity interviews. People tend to listen to the radio for limited amounts of time. But with social media, it’s 24/7.

Anyway, maybe I just try to see the positive in very tough times. It’s easy to get negative and really there is something that probably pisses each of us off every day. I still see some good things about radio and those who are fortunate enough to have a livelihood in it. It’s not always easy to find but I celebrate the times I do!

 

[davideduardo]

And yet, cume hasn't really shrunk, and TSL is still significant, although hard to compare to the past because the method of measurement has changed.

In over 200 markets, including yours, measurement has not changed.

Only 48 of the top 50 markets have gone to PPM, and an understanding on the differences in recall and passive measurement allows equating the two.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Strictly speaking, that's not quite true, David. In my market, the method hasn't changed in quite some time. It's obviously changed in the PPM markets. And, the methodology has changed in markets that have abandoned Arbitron. Cumulus is the largest corporation to dump Arbitron in smaller markets, but they're not the only ones.

Another thing to remember is that metric selling is not as prominent in smaller markets as it is in the top 30. Relationship selling gets stronger as market size gets smaller. That's the primary reason that many stations in smaller markets have dumped their Arbitron subscriptions in favor of results-based selling.

 

[bossbill]

Another thing to remember is that metric selling is not as prominent in smaller markets as it is in the top 30. Relationship selling gets stronger as market size gets smaller. That's the primary reason that many stations in smaller markets have dumped their Arbitron subscriptions in favor of results-based selling.

True. We build trusted relationships, and create ways for their marketing to be more effective. We did a radio-only campaign for a fireplace distributor, he sold twice as many as he had expected, and gave us a testimonial. It's all about results.