Pretty concise column from the folks at Wired:
http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-02/su_radio
http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/16-02/su_radio
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Article: Why Radio Sucks
- Thread starter jimwalsh2001
- Start date
D
dave388
Guest
there is alot of truth to that piece.
i remember listing to the Fm radio alot back in the early mid 90s
today i mabe listen to 30mins of AM/FM (and its DX chasing)
for example jan.2007 WWFT 93.9 put on a talk format i stumbled on it. heard savage and the radio ended up locked on 93.9 i quite enjoyed it (mancow,dave ramsey,savage)i would listen most of the day.
but in nov.2007 they dropped the formatt. now i have no intrest in radio cept to chase DX.
untill these station owners realize people want alot more then the same 40songs every hour, radio will continue to lose
i remember listing to the Fm radio alot back in the early mid 90s
today i mabe listen to 30mins of AM/FM (and its DX chasing)
for example jan.2007 WWFT 93.9 put on a talk format i stumbled on it. heard savage and the radio ended up locked on 93.9 i quite enjoyed it (mancow,dave ramsey,savage)i would listen most of the day.
but in nov.2007 they dropped the formatt. now i have no intrest in radio cept to chase DX.
untill these station owners realize people want alot more then the same 40songs every hour, radio will continue to lose
I can compare radio to vaudeville in a lot of ways. In vaudeville, the show got stale, and it became medeocre. Along came other choices that gave people a choice, and a fresh approach to their entertainment. The public switched, and where do you see vaudeville today?
I look no further than myself and my family. I'm a 40+ year radio guy, (now in other media), who listened to one of the last remaining stations that provided me what I wanted. When that station was blown up by its owner, I had no other station to listen to. Consequently, I purchased XM.
My wife was a rabid listener to another format, till it became stale and played the same 300 songs, automated, with no news, weather, or live announcers. Last year she switched to XM.
My son (14 years old) has never listened to radio, even though I got him one for his 8th birthday, and there are plenty around the house. In his words, "there is nothing I like. It's 20 stations all playing the same thing." So he is a kid of MP3 file sharing.
Radio has, born largely from the giant corps have no interest in public service and need, shot its self in the head and is dying. Unless CPR is performed soon, I fear the medium will be just transmitters talking to nobody.
It's interesting that someone in our shop today pointed out the good ratings of the crosstown station. "Radio has to be good, they got a 12.4!!" he gleefully cried. As our GSM said, "what is more important, 10,000 listeners or 12.4 of 50 people." Sometime numbers can be deceiving.
Just my 2-cents, (1.9992376 Canadian)
I look no further than myself and my family. I'm a 40+ year radio guy, (now in other media), who listened to one of the last remaining stations that provided me what I wanted. When that station was blown up by its owner, I had no other station to listen to. Consequently, I purchased XM.
My wife was a rabid listener to another format, till it became stale and played the same 300 songs, automated, with no news, weather, or live announcers. Last year she switched to XM.
My son (14 years old) has never listened to radio, even though I got him one for his 8th birthday, and there are plenty around the house. In his words, "there is nothing I like. It's 20 stations all playing the same thing." So he is a kid of MP3 file sharing.
Radio has, born largely from the giant corps have no interest in public service and need, shot its self in the head and is dying. Unless CPR is performed soon, I fear the medium will be just transmitters talking to nobody.
It's interesting that someone in our shop today pointed out the good ratings of the crosstown station. "Radio has to be good, they got a 12.4!!" he gleefully cried. As our GSM said, "what is more important, 10,000 listeners or 12.4 of 50 people." Sometime numbers can be deceiving.
Just my 2-cents, (1.9992376 Canadian)
Simple Answer
There's a simple answer to the problem that radio has today.
Someone please tell Corporate that successful radio programming incorporates more than just music.
In the past, kids swapped records, made cassettes, burned CDs, and generally shared music the same way that they share MP3s. Radio prospered because it was the source of new music, and because it offered information and entertainment in addition to the music. Jocks were "cool" because they told you about what shows were coming to town, what places were "happening", what events were going on, what different artists were up to, who the new talent was, what was "in", what was "out", and news that might be important to me.
What do we have now? Radio stations "on shuffle", trying to emulate MP3 player - but with a much smaller selection of music. Jocks are canned - both in the "fired" sense, and in the "pre-recorded" sense. News is mostly non-existent, or a rehash of the morning paper with a dash of the latest from the Internet thrown in - and that's on the news/talk stations!
Upper management concluded that people would be thrilled to hear out-of-market voice trackers who spouted generic infotainment that has little local connection. Even people in the market VT shows hours or even days in advance, which hardly helps them to be timely or relatable.
Programmers end up becoming Selector wizards who are asked create clocks, run music tests, manage playlists, oversee promotions, interface with sales, battle over budgets, and schedule programming for multiple stations. Do you see "developing talent" on that list?
When was the last time you heard a "killer segue"? How often to do you hear two songs back-to-back that a musically incompatible? How many times an hour do you hear a canned "John Goodvoice" promo or liner instead of a live jock? How "special" does that promo sound the 37th time that you heard it this week? When a live jock gets to talk, how often is he/she reading a liner, promoing the latest contest, or selling something instead of relating to the audience?
Corporate has "saved" itself into declining audiences, declining revenues, and declining profits. Maybe they'll "save" themselves to the point where they'll get out of the broadcasting business, and go back to going bust with dot-coms and mega-mergers. Then, maybe radio can reinvent itself again, and become something that listeners can relate to again.
There's a simple answer to the problem that radio has today.
Someone please tell Corporate that successful radio programming incorporates more than just music.
In the past, kids swapped records, made cassettes, burned CDs, and generally shared music the same way that they share MP3s. Radio prospered because it was the source of new music, and because it offered information and entertainment in addition to the music. Jocks were "cool" because they told you about what shows were coming to town, what places were "happening", what events were going on, what different artists were up to, who the new talent was, what was "in", what was "out", and news that might be important to me.
What do we have now? Radio stations "on shuffle", trying to emulate MP3 player - but with a much smaller selection of music. Jocks are canned - both in the "fired" sense, and in the "pre-recorded" sense. News is mostly non-existent, or a rehash of the morning paper with a dash of the latest from the Internet thrown in - and that's on the news/talk stations!
Upper management concluded that people would be thrilled to hear out-of-market voice trackers who spouted generic infotainment that has little local connection. Even people in the market VT shows hours or even days in advance, which hardly helps them to be timely or relatable.
Programmers end up becoming Selector wizards who are asked create clocks, run music tests, manage playlists, oversee promotions, interface with sales, battle over budgets, and schedule programming for multiple stations. Do you see "developing talent" on that list?
When was the last time you heard a "killer segue"? How often to do you hear two songs back-to-back that a musically incompatible? How many times an hour do you hear a canned "John Goodvoice" promo or liner instead of a live jock? How "special" does that promo sound the 37th time that you heard it this week? When a live jock gets to talk, how often is he/she reading a liner, promoing the latest contest, or selling something instead of relating to the audience?
Corporate has "saved" itself into declining audiences, declining revenues, and declining profits. Maybe they'll "save" themselves to the point where they'll get out of the broadcasting business, and go back to going bust with dot-coms and mega-mergers. Then, maybe radio can reinvent itself again, and become something that listeners can relate to again.
I have to agree with you SirRoxalot.
One of the guys in our sales office summed it up pretty good. He speculated that in the interest of trying to maximize profits they have forgotten about the customer, and the perception the public gets. He went on to say that the typical (corporate) station is like a hamburger restaurant where they only thing you can get is meal 1, 2, or 3, the staff doesn't care about customer satisfaction, and none of the tables are clean.
While I realize that profit is the goal of any business, at some point you have to invest in your future by taking a portion of profit and fixing up the place. Using my friend's analogy above, radio has to start putting more on the menu, instructing staff to cater to the customer, and clean its appearance up.
Honest to God, it pains me to think that 20+ years ago we all had choices of good radio, and many times it was competing formats. But now, I find that XM is better, yet I would really rather listen to LOCAL radio.
One of the guys in our sales office summed it up pretty good. He speculated that in the interest of trying to maximize profits they have forgotten about the customer, and the perception the public gets. He went on to say that the typical (corporate) station is like a hamburger restaurant where they only thing you can get is meal 1, 2, or 3, the staff doesn't care about customer satisfaction, and none of the tables are clean.
While I realize that profit is the goal of any business, at some point you have to invest in your future by taking a portion of profit and fixing up the place. Using my friend's analogy above, radio has to start putting more on the menu, instructing staff to cater to the customer, and clean its appearance up.
Honest to God, it pains me to think that 20+ years ago we all had choices of good radio, and many times it was competing formats. But now, I find that XM is better, yet I would really rather listen to LOCAL radio.
Good article ... until it got to the last sentence about hope springing eternal with the advent of the inevitability of radio going "digital" (HD) ... and there being more choices.
In the current climate, that doesn't appear to work on the HD main channel, let alone on the "new" HD2 or HD3 channels of "diversity."
In the current climate, that doesn't appear to work on the HD main channel, let alone on the "new" HD2 or HD3 channels of "diversity."
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.