Beating Clear Channel / CBS Radio in PGH

[Radio_Realist]

"What the dickens do you want, my boy?"

I want the people who work in local radio to get off their high horses and admit that the real reason that they favor "live and local" DJ's is simple job security -- nothing more. I want to hear the people who whine and moan about losing their jobs to voice-tracking (or who worry that they'll be the next one to go) admit that if they were offered the chance to take away a job from someone in Topeka or some other city by voice tracking a program for that market, they'd take such a gig in a New York minute.

"Live orchestras playing dance music from the roof of a High Street hotel?"

No, that would be silly. Only an organization like the BBC would program something like that. But a live concert program once a week featuring a local band every Friday night would be a refreshing change of pace. The 'DVE Morning Show team already does something like that every know and then in the morning, or does it at night to tape for morning broadcast. A live rock and comedy program once a week could be a real winning bit of programming. But that would mean someone in local radio would need to use some imagination and creativity, so that will never happen.

"You've already established that having a Pittsburgh resident talk about Pittsburgh events while playing records in Pittsburgh is not "local" enough for you."

Aside from the 'DVE Morning Show, I am not aware of any DJ's on the air in Pittsburgh who talk all that much about Pittsburgh events. But more importantly, my question was what Pittsburgh events get talked about live that couldn't be pre-recorded, and what Pittsburgh events get talked about by DJ's sitting in the Greentree flashcube that couldn't be talked about just as effectively by someone sitting in front of a microphone in Ashtabula.

In short, what is so magical about hearing words spoken in real time instead of hearing them pre-recorded? What is so magical about someone talking about something they're reading from a page in Pittsburgh as compared to someone reading them from a page in Oshkosh?

"My question, sir, is this: Are you barmy, or do you merely enjoy talking bollocks to wind others up?"

I'll respond to your question with another. Do you find that posing as a Brit amuses you? Do you think it amuses anyone else to read it half as much as it amuses you to do it?

Pip Pip, and all that.

Cheerio.

 

[frothingslosh]

Tsk! Such temper, mate. It's unbecoming.

By the way, this was also unbecoming:

Normally, I do not like 50's vintage oldies. But I made a point to tune in a live and local Am station that plays 50's vintage oldies today for my ride home from work. There was a guy/girl DJ team. From 5:15 PM when I left the office until I pulled into my driveway at 5:45 PM, I didn't hear a single word that couldn't have been recorded on tape, or that couldn't have been spoken in another city, or both. Breaking into a song to say "This is dedicated to the Duquesne class of '61" didn't have to be done live, and it didn't have to be done local.

Since --- unless I miss my guess, old chap --- there is only one MW (that is, "AM") station in Pittsburgh playing 1950s music, I presume you mean 770 kHz.

And I believe it's no secret that one of the people on this thread is working there.

Thus, I think I correctly interpret your "analysis" as a shot at Mr. Ingram.

Mr. Ingram can take care of himself, so he needs no defense from the likes of me.

But you, dear boy, are as subtle as someone "breaking wind" in church, and almost as clever.

 

[cingram]

"If the listening audience doesn't care where the DJ is sitting, or even if there is a DJ, then the DJs are failing at their job as entertainers."

"If that is correct, then Pittsburgh radio is sure full of lots and lots of failures."

With only a few exceptions, I find Pittsburgh radio to be average. I find most radio to be average. Maybe I'm just out of the demo, and they're not talking to me any more, but I am less entertained by radio every day.

"Normally, I do not like 50's vintage oldies. But I made a point to tune in a live and local AM station that plays 50's vintage oldies today for my ride home from work. There was a guy/girl DJ team. From 5:15 PM when I left the office until I pulled into my driveway at 5:45 PM, I didn't hear a single word that couldn't have been recorded on tape, or that couldn't have been spoken in another city, or both. Breaking into a song to say 'This is dedicated to the Duquesne class of '61' didn't have to be done live, and it didn't have to be done local."

Well, we all know what and whom is being discussed here. That's brokered time, and that makes it a different situation - but I'd argue that a dedication or request for the "Duquesne class of '61" is a minor reason to be live if it was phoned in and announced on the spot. I do not police the content of jocks who are brokering time, except to keep them legal.

"I'm not being argumentative here. I genuinely want to know. What can a live DJ say on the air that couldn't be pre-recorded?"

How about, "the second tower of the World Trade Center has just fallen"?

"If 'live and local' is so great, there must be something about it that taped 'someplace else' cannot provide. I just want someone to tell me what that mysterious 'something' is."

The same thing that live television had fifty years ago before they killed it.

I wonder if you can tell me what that is.

"I'd also like to know how many 'live and local' DJ's in Pittsburgh would turn down a gig making extra money doing voice tracking for someplace else, purely on principle."

I would, and did, and in fact caught hell for it. But that just wasn't for me.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"How about, "the second tower of the World Trade Center has just fallen"?"

That's is the kind of statement that the stations Newscaster should break into regular programming to announce, not the disc jockey. Of course, there are no newscasters anymore either, but that's another argument. Then again, all stations should have cut away from their voice-tracked and entertainment programming the minute that the first tower was hit and switched to their news feeds, but that's also another argument.

I don't see how keeping live and local disc jockeys on the air just in case there's a major news story of the kind that comes along maybe once or twice a years is a compelling argument.

"Well, we all know what and whom is being discussed here."

And we all know I didn't say anything negative or derogatory about that station.

"I wonder if you can tell me what that is."

Better blooper reels.

 

[kenhawk1160]

I want the people who work in local radio to get off their high horses and admit that the real reason that they favor "live and local" DJ's is simple job security -- nothing more. I want to hear the people who whine and moan about losing their jobs to voice-tracking (or who worry that they'll be the next one to go) admit that if they were offered the chance to take away a job from someone in Topeka or some other city by voice tracking a program for that market, they'd take such a gig in a New York minute.

I agree wholeheartedly, Realist. I catered to that mentality back when I was a jock. After I found six hours a day in a studio bored to tears, I figured out another aspect which I felt was useful...news. Those who want to sit in a studio and put in four hours playing music and little if anything more, need to find something else to do with their lives. In my present capacity, every day is different and offers a new challenge. Plus, I offer input in other areas where I feel the station can benefit financially...when you talk money to the top execs, that's a universal language.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"I figured out another aspect which I felt was useful...news."

So far, I've heard a compelling argument for keeping at least one newscaster on standby at the stations' studios, and when a big news story breaks, that one individual can do the "We interrupt this program" thing on all the cluster's stations at once to report the breaking news. That is not a compelling argument to having all stations using all live DJ's all the time.

I also gave some more thought to what television was like in 1956. I don't see how television in 1956 was "dead" compared to the years before then.

 

[Johnny Morgan]

How about because it keeps people in Pittsburgh employed using marketable skills (their voices, conversational speaking, etc.) at Pittsburgh radio stations?

In that case, there's absolutely no difference between a disk jockey and a lawyer.

Why do we need Pittsburgh lawyers? The technology is available to teleconference (in fact, one case we're working on now routinely has hearings by phone). Couldn't we record lawyer's opening and closing arguments--especially in a civil trial, the evidence is known well in advance of trial through discovery, etc., so we know what our case will be. Hell, even witness questions could be recorded--we know what they're going to say (or should say).

I'd like you to offer a compelling argument why your lawyer needs to be live in Pittsburgh and not recorded from New York City.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"How about because it keeps people in Pittsburgh employed using marketable skills (their voices, conversational speaking, etc.) at Pittsburgh radio stations?"

Isn't that what I said? To quote myself, "I want the people who work in local radio to get off their high horses and admit that the real reason that they favor "live and local" DJ's is simple job security -- nothing more."

"Why do we need Pittsburgh lawyers?"

You could remove the word "Pittsburgh", and it would still be a very valid question. However, not appropriate for this forum. I have a tendency to agree with William Shakespeare in that regard.

"I'd like you to offer a compelling argument why your lawyer needs to be live in Pittsburgh and not recorded from New York City."

Are you talking a trial lawyer, or a contract lawyer? I see no compelling reason why a lawyer who is drawing up a will for me or checking out a contract needs to be "live and local". On the other hand, if I was in court I'd want my lawyer to be physically present for the trial.

 

[Johnny Morgan]

On the other hand, if I was in court I'd want my lawyer to be physically present for the trial.

Why? Both sides know what the other is going to say. Hearings are often done by phone--arguments over the 3kHz landline (and by crappy speakerphone), evidence submitted in written briefs and addenda beforehand.

Again, any compelling reason why a trial lawyer actually has to be in trial will do.

And as for job security, I'm not in Pittsburgh radio and I want live and local radio guys to have jobs. I like everyone who wants one to have a job. As I'm sure you do too. What if someone came along and said, "Realist, your sales job can be done by Bob in Atlanta cheaper. Thanks, bye."? Any compelling reason why that shouldn't be permitted will do.

 

[kenhawk1160]

So far, I've heard a compelling argument for keeping at least one newscaster on standby at the stations' studios, and when a big news story breaks, that one individual can do the "We interrupt this program" thing on all the cluster's stations at once to report the breaking news.

This is the advantage of local radio, particularly where small market is concerned. Here at my own station, we were able to beat the Pittsburgh TV stations on a fatal vehicle-pedestrian accident that happened yesterday afternoon. KDKA even credited our website as the source when they announced it about 45 minutes later. The DJ is we know it is fast becoming extinct. Broadcasters today want staff announcers. People who can jock, deliver a newscast, write copy, board-op, production, and a myriad of programming-related functions other than doing a real-time airshift. Not many people are willing to do that anymore.

 

[Radio_Realist]

"Again, any compelling reason why a trial lawyer actually has to be in trial will do."

Being a lawyer and being a disc jockey are such totally different things that any comparison between the two breaks down really, really quickly. Having never been in court for a criminal trial, I don't know how such things work. Maybe some Perry Mason will notice some body language thing during a witness's testimony that gives something away. Whatever reason might exist, it's so far afield from what disc jockeys do as to be totally meaningless.

"I like everyone who wants one to have a job. As I'm sure you do too."

To a point. I'm not willing to pay higher prices for products just to featherbed payrolls.

"What if someone came along and said, "Realist, your sales job can be done by Bob in Atlanta cheaper. Thanks, bye."? Any compelling reason why that shouldn't be permitted will do."

There is no compelling reason why that shouldn't be permitted. There is no justification for any sort of law to keep people employed just for the sale of keeping them employed. But, in the example you listed, there's no way Bob in Atlanta could possibly have the personal connections I have accumulated over time. And, if that situation were to happen, I'd be happy to take my clients with me over to a competitor.

I've been through downsizings, industry shake-ups, and almost every kind of economic upheaval you can think of. It all boils down to "[EDIT] happens". In fact, I was replaced in a sales job once because someone thought they could hire someone cheaper to produce the same results. They were wrong. The manager who fired me got the axe six months later. [EDIT] happens.

I worked for a company that thought that quality control inspectors were a waste of resources so they laid off all but a handful who had really high seniority (it was a union shop). Within two years they were on the verge of bankruptcy, because they lost half of their customers when their quality went downhill.

Many, many years ago, movies and radio put large numbers of vaudeville performers out of work. Sh!t happens. Sound movies put large numbers of silent movie actors out of work. Sh!t happens. Tastes changing from Big Bands with 20 players to rock and roll bands with three to five members put lots of musicians out of work. Sh!t happens. Club DJ's and karaoke put lots of bar band musicians out of work. [EDIT] happens. Voice tracking technology is putting large numbers of radio DJ's out of work. [EDIT] happens.

In every one of those scenarios where many performers where thrown out of work, it was the best of the bunch who managed to survive. It was the ones who were able to deal with change, to change their act, to keep up with the times who kept going.

Like Ingram said, most radio in town is "average". The way to survive in radio is not to wail and moan and gnash your teeth about voice-tracking. The way to survive is to make sure you're well above average.

"Not many people are willing to do that anymore."

But those that do will be the survivors.

[EDIT-profanity]

 

[kenhawk1160]

"Not many people are willing to do that anymore."

But those that do will be the survivors.

Hence my existence in this business for almost 20 years now. Those who hang on to the past can't move into the future. I voice-tracked my shifts as far back as 1994, when the technology was still pretty new. Once people sit in the decision-maker's chair and have to do things like build revenue in order to meet payroll and other expenses, then they gain a new perspective as to why and how things are done.