TRAFFIC REPORTS ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL
Radio_Realist said:
OK, you all don't care about traffic reports. I get it. Apparently, neither does AAR.
Wrong. When we're driving in our own cars during rush hour, we do care a great deal about getting a traffic report. We just don't much care what the source of that report is. That's the point you keep missing. There are something where the brand name matters. There are some things where the brand name doesn't. Traffic information is a generic commodity. Listeners don't much care what brand of traffic report they get, so long as they get a report.
Since the concept of "brand name" versus generic is so important regarding other aspects of news/talk radio, maybe you should learn more about the concept.
Now we are getting someplace.
Traffic reports on most stations are "store brands." Most stations put their own name on traffic reports ("In the W*** traffic center..."). You are correct, listeners don't care much about the source of the reports. They do care whether the reports they hear are timely and accurate. Since the station is putting it's own name on the traffic reports, they SHOULD care about whom they select as traffic provider.
Traffic reports are NOT generic in that they are not all created equal. Traffic reports are a product, not a commodity.
This board includes radio insiders (as well as fans). Insiders also have an interest in who provides what programming service to whom - and what their track records are.
AAR has an LMA in one market. They had planned to have more. The cellar-dweller traffic provider reportedly offered them a better deal with piece of the commercial revenue action from traffic reports. To keep costs down, this traffic provider arranged to have one announcer, working from the company website, pre-record traffic reports for (originally four) different markets, in which stations would be automated. The Traffic.com (then called "Mobility Technologies") computer set-up and the AAR automation systems required reports to be in the can at least eight minutes before air time (since multiple stations would be running reports at the same time, as a practical matter reports would be in the can even earlier). Fortunately for the quality of traffic reporting on WLIB (and now WWRL), Clear Channel decided to operate KPOJ as a radio station - not a repeater - using their own service and LMA's in Chicago and LA were terminated during the first month. That left Traffic.com's Philadelphia announcers feeding reports for New York only, still pre-recorded from out of town.
AAR could have had Shadow Traffic - with experienced local traffic reporters (who can pronounce street names correctly and know alternate routes), aircraft, mobile units and banks of live traffic cams enabling them to describe what is happening - but they opted for a tiny piece of additional revenue over quality. And Shadow could have provided live reports, as they do for other automated stations.
But, instead, AAR's one remaining "operated but not owned" station has traffic reports from a company that has been losing money, borrowing money and cutting corners in various ways but will share traffic spot revenue. This company which apparently believes, rightly or wrongly, that "the deal" is more important to broadcasters than the quality of the report listeners hear.
This is typical of AAR. One minute they throw money away on high-priced "names" and fancy facilities. Then they turn around and make "screw the listener" deals with XM Radio or Traffic.com - or fire a host ostensibly to save a few bucks.
AAR listeners in New York mostly don't know and don't care about any of this. They just know what they hear.
