• 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

Bill Drake

T

The Batman

Guest
Do you think Bill Drake was the forerunner of corporate, consultant-driven, short-playlist, less-personality radio?

Or none of the above?

It seems much of the genesis of what airs today began in Fresno, CA and later at KHJ in LA.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Lyndell Williams
 
What Bill Drake recognized and applied was based on his understanding that the typical listener at the time was growing tired of hearing air talents play one record, stop and talk and talk and talk, play commercials, talk some more and play a song and then do the same thing over again and again. There were a few talented individuals who actually could pull that off and entertain and make themselves the star.
What Drake did was make music the star, and contrary to what many believe, did not intend to shut up jocks but make them self edit themselves and briefly perform and entertain. Those at KHJ were masters at it. Many of the wannabe's who never fully understood the concept were not able to duplicate the success elsewhere. Drake also streamlined the top 40 format by playing only the bonafide hits and keeping the forward momentum paramount and fast-paced. No longer did one have to wait through the crappy songs to get to something good. By playing only true hits, his stations were always playing a very recognizable hit song, while others might be still playing stiffs or songs that weren't hits yet.

Something else to remember too is the fact that Drake's format wasn't necessarily designed to transform all of top 40 radio, it was simply another version of it. In the 80's Mike Joseph introduced "Hot Hits" which was kind of a 80's version of Drake Radio and it was successful in many places...again as an alternative to what was typically being presented elsewhere at the time.

There will always be cycles to the innovation. What is the current "Drake" or "Hot Hits"? I don't know, I don't hear much of anything different in presentation than its been for at least a decade or more. That's the challenge though. Find a new way to do essentially the same thing but make it innovative, fresh, and exciting. Programmers and consultants are on the lookout for the next breakout idea, but it doesn't seem to be materializing at this time. What is it? Where will it come from? Who will be the one to discover the next great idea as far as this goes? I sure don't know, but it will be interesting to hear it when it happens because top 40, or CHR if you prefer, hasn't seemed to offer anything new in a long time. Programmers better hurry too, because listeners are growing fond of their ipods by the day.
 
But if it's all about making the music the star, the ipod is going to win ... everytime.

You have to give Drake credit for "cleaning up" top-40, but if he had left it a little less neat, maybe radio would be better today.

When my dad attended graduate school in CA, I preferred KRLA and KFWB over KHJ. Obviously, in retrospect, by 1965 I was in the minority. Guess I wasn't "boss" enough -- although I never heard anyone really use that term by then.

KHJ always seemed a little too perfect ... sort of like Mitt Romney's hair, but with better results in the end.
 
My point is that today's generation of young people are growing up on non-radio sources for music, information, and entertainment much more so than before. If radio is to retain those listeners, it must find some innovative way of appealing to them so radio isn't a medium they aren't used to using.

Think of the first generation of listeners who grew up listening to FM radio. To many of them, they were completely unaware that AM was or could ever be a source for a music station. To them, AM was were news and sports stations were.

In many ways, today's young listeners are growing up giving radio (AM OR FM) the same (or less) importance as their ipods, laptops with I-tunes, and perhaps satellite radio.

The record industry missed the boat by almost a decade until they realized the new generation simply wasn't buying music in the same old fashioned way as those before. Radio is in much the same situation. It's almost as if they are in denial that the marketplace has changed, yet radio hasn't changed very much to anticipate or adapt to those changes. It is an interesting challenge.
 
I agree, Steve. Growing up, all I had was an AM radio and the TV in the livingroom was VHF only, when it worked.
 
Maybe the question should be: Who will be the next Bill Drake ... or will there be one?

With even local stations enamored of syndicated, satellite and automated programming, where will all the young programming talent come from?

You are so correct that radio is in denial. Just ask anyone with an ipod ... if you can pry he or she away from the music for a moment.

Radio faces some of the same problems as the Drake-era -- heavy spot load clutter, among other distractions.

Could it be that the age of music on radio is disappearing as it did on the AM band? Maybe information designed to specific age groups is the key to radio's future.
 
Bill Drake provided the template, it was the local Program Directors and talent who provided interpretation. For example, Ron Jacobs worked within the template as a KHJ PD and produced incredible radio. From a talent point of view Robert W. Morgan, The Real Don Steele and Charlie Van Dyke all worked within the Drake framework and performed but utilized something called economy of words; you convey the thought but use the fewest words possible. Van Dyke did well as a KHJ PD when Paul Drew ran RKO programming when the concept was similar. Those who saw "Drake radio" as nothing more than jocks giving the equivalent of "name, rank, and serial number" and acapella jingles created boring radio.

As mentioned radio today really needs a Bill Drake/Ron Jacobs combination to clean up the never ending image liners. But the amateur investment bankers running radio will not change a thing so not to risk an end of year bonus. But what radio really needs is a new millennium Gordon McLendon, Todd Storz or Bill Stewart to revolutionize the presentation , that as well is likely not to happen in the current environment.
 
RadioRob hit the nail on the head. It's a sad day when missing Wall Street projections by a penny means company-wide disaster, but that's where we are (as an industry). I fear that stations will have to become worth almost nothing before they are sold to private investors (read: radio operators) who will try to revive them. I was stunned by this past week of additional cutbacks. I noted that not one SALES job WAS cut, only the programming jobs that create the product. The "execs" have mortgaged the future of the industry for another day of the appearance of profits. And to whose benefit is this for? Only those who are today scrambling to close the deals to sell their chains (to the private equity firms) so that they ("execs") get hundreds of millions in golden parachutes and proceeds from sales of their stock. Yes, the top guys are firing the programming guys making $50,000 a year so that they (top guys) can bail from the industry, with HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS. They have raped, pillaged and plundered the industry for their own personal ends. The past 10 years should be a lesson in not letting the bankers run ANYTHING.
 
I mentioned Gordon McLendon in the above post. Assuming this doesn't infringe on any copyrights here is a speech he gave at early seventies NAB convention. These are the words of a broadcaster:

I was, am, and always be essentially a program man. When I was a boy, there was no greater thrill than to climb in an armchair on a Saturday afternoon and listen to Ted Husing's great football broadcasts. I guess that's where I fell in love with radio, and nothing has ever changed with me. It is almost a physical anguish for me to talk to an operator who has lost the romance of radio And to me, the bewitchment of radio is its programming.

In the end, given a good signal over the population in your market, the wise owner and/or manager will spend every possible moment on programming, because programming is his product. I have always had a personal philosophy on sales as they relate to programming or, if you will, programming as it relates to sales. At each of my radio stations, programming has always been almost totally accentuated over sales, because I have always believed that if the programming is there, the dollars will follow. The few times I have allowed sales to dictate programming have invariably been among the times I have been beaten decisively in the ratings. Be sure that your station's signal strength over its major population centers is at optimum. The finest programming effort is generally nonproductive unless the radio station's signal is conveniently hearable. It is recorded that Washington's troops at Yorktown missed hearing General Cornwallis' words of surrender because the wind was blowing from the wrong direction.

Let's add the following questions to the Federal Communication Commission's renewal forms: What innovative programming has your station originated during the present license period? How many hours during the average week does the licensee's president, owner, manager, and/or chief operating officer spend in station programming? And, what has your station contributed toward improvement of the radio industry within the present license period? I certainly do not object to whopping profits, but rather to the tendency of some radio operators, both conglomerate and otherwise, to let their great signals, rather than their programming carry them in the community sales-wise. Almost invariably, these stations originate programming only half as good as it should be, and it is almost never innovative. People listen to radio not only for various services, but for entertainment as well. It is not ignoble to entertain. The FCC should award high renewal marks to stations which in the FCC's judgement have produced creative and/or innovative programming in the entertainment sector. I see radio owners everywhere who are losing sight of their cost advantage over television. Oddly enough, no businessman was most cost- conscious than J. Paul Getty. To Getty is was more important to the man with the "millionaire mentality" to be able to think small than to think big - in the same sense that he gives meticulous attention to the smallest details and misses no opportunity to reduce costs in his own or his employer's business. Today, many a station is letting its God-given radio supremacy in cost per thousand slip away. I see station after station raise base salaries and other fundamental operating expenses on the strength of momentarily higher ratings or a few good sales months. This increase in base pay, and other items, can be an unnecessary error. Increases in compensation should, like a cost-of-living index, be dictated by a station's current audience position as determined by audience survey.

In the days when most were predicting television would crush radio to death, those were some difficult days for those of us who stood on radio's embattled ramparts and yet somehow believed. Today, radio is still gaining, not losing, in sets in use. One might now raise a facetious question: Will radio destroy television? I am bullish on radio. The word radio evokes many sharp memories from the old years - Pick 'n Pat, Sam & Henry, the Eskimos, the Atwater Kent hour, Major Bowes, Myrt & Marge, Stoopnagle & Budd, Frank Munn, the Golden voice of radio, the A&P Gypsies, the Happiness Boyus, Graham McNamee, Husing, Bill Stern, Winchell, Boake Carter, Murrow, Jolson, Will Rogers, Benny, Allen & Woolcott - great names fraught with the memory of entertainment giants. The last of a magnificent school that with them died forever. They are all gone now, with their long forgotten audiences, but behind them they left the legend of a radio era as dazzling as the morning sun. To those of us who stand on the threshold of radio's tomorrow, these years have been but the closing of a brilliant chapter. The pages of radio's next chapter will prove once again that there are still sounds worth a thousand pictures. Radio is beautiful.
 
That has for many years been my favorite speech on broadcasting I've ever heard (or read).
Print it out, hand it to a friend in the industry, and have them read it ... TWICE.
 
WWGD? What Would Gordon Do now? He's the one guy I'd want to have dinner with if I could bring anybody back. Would he have sold off his AM stations by now? Gone all brokered time with many of them (selling time to doctors, lawyers, preachers and snakeoil salesmen; remember the ill-fated K-Ads in L.A.)? Or would he have embraced Steve Jobs and Apple (maybe even formed a partnership) and re-revolutionized the radio industry before it was too late?
 
Yes, great speech. You can "hear" his passion just by reading it.

Is it possible to listen to it somewhere?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom