Branding & calls disconnect: when did it happen?

[upstate29651]

Not all that long ago, if you were a rock or CHR, and you had a "X" or "Z" or "Q" in your calls, the branding was very straightforward. Now I've noticed more of a disconnect between calls & brand.

Examples: Charleston, SC

WYBB (98X...uh, there's no "X" in WYBB)
WALC (The Drive @ 100.5...now "drive" tends to be synonymous with classic hits or AAA...but not jockless alternative)

Of course, we can add many of CC's "Kiss" properties to the list as well. So when did stations/ownership groups decide that branding could have zero connection to calls?

G

 

[Roger That]

Uh...when someone figured out that the only people that care about stuff like that are radio nerds. We're the only ones that even notice. In fact, most radio stations are so bad at branding, that you're lucky if your listener remembers anything other than your frequency, much less your station's name or call letters.

Be happy they remember you at all.

 

[RDO]

Uh...when someone figured out that the only people that care about stuff like that are radio nerds. We're the only ones that even notice. In fact, most radio stations are so bad at branding, that you're lucky if your listener remembers anything other than your frequency, much less your station's name or call letters.

Be happy they remember you at all.

True.

 

[davideduardo]

So when did stations/ownership groups decide that branding could have zero connection to calls?

They decided it did not matter what the calls were at the point when the majority of radio dials became digital. Today, over 80% of diary mentions are by frequency, and very few (mostly AMs with over 55 listeners) are by call. With the People Meter, it does not matter how you identify... or even if you identify... to get ratings credit.

 

[MojoInKansas]

Sorry in advance for hijacking the thread, but Mr. Eduardo reminds me of a point I've been wondering about. In TV, cable & satellite are, I would imagine, much more common than the old antennas. This means that quite a bit of the time, "Channel 9" is on some channel on the cable lineup OTHER than 9. On my cable it may be channel 16, on Dish Network it may be 74 or whatever.It seems to me that TV is shooting itself in the foot branding/imaging wise by relying so much on the (analog, soon to be gone) channel number. I would think that TV would be much better off by avoiding the channel number like the plague. Am I wrong?

 

[Roger That]

According to:

http://www.ncta.com/Statistic/Statistic/Statistics.aspx

...only 58% of households are served by cable TV. Sure, 42% isn't the majority, but it's still a LOT of TVs. And I would guess that the average age of a TV news viewer is an even higher percentage of antenna-only. Considering the heritage of most TV stations, and the aforementioned demo, I'm not surprised they haven't changed channel branding.

Also, keep in mind that TV actually has a ratings system that works. Theirs isn't based on recall, but actual viewership, so branding, while important, isn't what signs their paychecks every two weeks.

 

[MojoInKansas]

True, but also keep in mind that the (analog) channels are GOING AWAY in 7 months. Then would there be ANY correlation between "channel number" and where you actually find the station?

 

[davideduardo]

According to:

http://www.ncta.com/Statistic/Statistic/Statistics.aspx

I'd trust a cable source about as much as I would the detainees at Guantanamo.

...only 58% of households are served by cable TV. Sure, 42% isn't the majority, but it's still a LOT of TVs.

Add in another 22% or so for satellite, which also moves channels around a bit, and you have 80% of TV delivered by alternative methods.

Also, keep in mind that TV actually has a ratings system that works. Theirs isn't based on recall, but actual viewership, so branding, while important, isn't what signs their paychecks every two weeks.

Radio also has electronic measurement; in TV it took lawsuits and lots of politicing in DC to get the TV meter working semi-right. And remember, only small portion of all TV markets are metered, while the rest are diary measured.

 

[Roger That]

LOL...I was just riffing in an effort to offer a solution to his question. I'm not in TV, nor do I care to be. And I made it very clear that it was my guess and opinion.

I understand the satisfaction of picking apart people's posts, but perhaps you could just ignore me and answer his question.

 

[davideduardo]

I understand the satisfaction of picking apart people's posts, but perhaps you could just ignore me and answer his question.

I have difficulty ignoring inaccurate data. You posted such.

 

[davideduardo]

Sorry in advance for hijacking the thread, but Mr. Eduardo reminds me of a point I've been wondering about. In TV, cable & satellite are, I would imagine, much more common than the old antennas. This means that quite a bit of the time, "Channel 9" is on some channel on the cable lineup OTHER than 9. On my cable it may be channel 16, on Dish Network it may be 74 or whatever.It seems to me that TV is shooting itself in the foot branding/imaging wise by relying so much on the (analog, soon to be gone) channel number. I would think that TV would be much better off by avoiding the channel number like the plague. Am I wrong?

No, you are right. And most stations are moving to "FOX LA" or putting the brand ahead of the channel... in radio, it took quite a while for stations to transition from call usage to name usage and then to rounded frequencies and then to exact frequency / name usage. This is why we have older-demo station, like Heritage AMs still using calls, but most younger demo stations using name and frequency or frequency and name.

A big problem is that DMA's (the "metro" for a TV station) may have several to many cable systems, all with different channel layouts. And then Dish and DTV are both using different maps, too. The quandry for Broadcast TV is how to tell people where to find you.

 

[Roger That]

I understand the satisfaction of picking apart people's posts, but perhaps you could just ignore me and answer his question.

I have difficulty ignoring inaccurate data. You posted such.

I get that there's no possible way we could all be as smart as you, but for those of us with an IQ under 70, do you plan to actually post a source for your information? Or are we to assume that your word is good enough?

 

[davideduardo]

I get that there's no possible way we could all be as smart as you, but for those of us with an IQ under 70, do you plan to actually post a source for your information? Or are we to assume that your word is good enough?

The fact that you posted a cable percentage and ignored satellite providers (Dish and DirecTv... heard of 'em?) needs no verification. However, you can find accurate subscriber data for each of the satellite providers in the 14k / 10k filings for each on a number of free access investment sites.

Per the Census update for 2006, there were 111 million households in the US. 15 million have Directv (source: Broadcasting & Cable) and Dish has 12 million, for 27 million or just short of 25% of all households. Add that to the cable data of around 57% this year, and you have around 82% of the US with no need for over the air reception, digital or otherwise.

As to metered audience measurement, I guss you are trying to insinuate that there is no electronic measurement for radio, per your quote; "Also, keep in mind that TV actually has a ratings system that works. Theirs isn't based on recall, but actual viewership, so branding, while important, isn't what signs their paychecks every two weeks."

Go to www.arbitron.com and click on PPM (Portable People Meter) to see the new "Nielsen like" device being rolled out in the Top 10 markets this year. The diary metod, however, remains in most US TV DMAs. Only 56 out of 210 DMA's (Nielsen's abbreviation for TV markets) are metered (source, Nielsen website) so for markets outside of the top 50 plus or minus, the recall based diary will continue to be the system for some time due to costs.

If one expects listeners to return to a channel or station, branding and promotion are still required... maybe more than before.

Then Google on "lpm" +lawsuit +nielsen and see quite a bit of data on the problems the local people meter had when rolled out.

 

[GeneSavage]

I feel it's worth mentioning that on DirecTV, the local channels are on the correct numbers.

Also, on my brand new digital TV tuner (converter box for analog TVs) shows Channel 2 as 2.1, 2.2 & 2.3, 6 is 6.1 & 6.2, 8 is 8.1, 8.2, & 8.3, etc. The channels may be at different locations, but the tuner is branding them at their old locations.

Also, a local UHF station has branded themselves since their launch at both their broadcast & cable locations: formerly they were the WB 12/19, now they're CW 12/19.

Nobody else in town does that; 2 is on cable 9, 23 is on cable 10, etc. but they call themselves "2 Works For You" & Fox 23.

Makes me glad I'm in radio! (Although, is it Z104, Z104 & 1/2, or Z104.3?) ;D

 

[The Beave]

[back on topic for a sec...]

I did a bit of research on this... It appears (unless David ego proceeds me) that in 1988 the stations started wandering off the branding atleast on my radar. And this was in small market USA.

Anybody have any info if it was earlier?

 

[davideduardo]

[back on topic for a sec...]

I did a bit of research on this... It appears (unless David ego proceeds me) that in 1988 the stations started wandering off the branding atleast on my radar. And this was in small market USA.

Anybody have any info if it was earlier?

That was about the time that digital dials became prevalent in new devices.... so stations that realized that the dial position was the main way listeners wrote down station listening in diaries started incrporating exact dial positions in their postioning and reducing the use of calls, which, except for older listeners, were not much used by listeners.

It wasn't as much a reduction in branding as a change in what was branded, with ever increasing use of dial position. To Arbitron, dial position is as sure an identifier as calls, and to the listener it is the way 80% of all diary mentions are made.

 

[davideduardo]

Makes me glad I'm in radio! (Although, is it Z104, Z104 & 1/2, or Z104.3?) ;D

Only Z 104.3 will avoid ascription in diary markets. In the PPM markets, it probably doesn't matter as much, but with digital dials it probably make sense to be precise so listeners can return.

 

[Tom Wells]

Branding is obnoxious and has annoyed me ever since it began, and mid-late 80's is when I remember starting to complain
about it.

It seemed to me like stations would do anything to avoid using proper IDs.
A lot of them didn't like their calls, I guess. Then too, many changed calls to become something new.
With each new callsign change, the disconnect becomes greater, and listeners become less loyal to stations.
This is all part of the fracturing of formats, and we all know stations view "heritage" as a two headed monster.

As someone who travels, the idea of unique calls makes more sense to me than a generic tag, which means nothing to me.
As years go by it seems even more dated to me than big-bell bottom levis from the seventies.

When WWWE became WTAM, I felt a similar annoyance. I mentally still keep track of Chicago AMs by original calls,
regardless of how many years the signal has been something else.

Branding seems especially silly to me on AMs. I've heard a few.

 

[davideduardo]

Branding is obnoxious and has annoyed me ever since it began, and mid-late 80's is when I remember starting to complain
about it.

Branding is what made Crest, Kleenex, Kellog's and thousands of other brands successful. How many national brands are made up of sets of four letters? I can think of a gas additive... oh, that is three letters... an oil... no, that is two letters and two numerals...

A brand as opposed to call letters gives feel and dimension to a station... even a personality.

It seemed to me like stations would do anything to avoid using proper IDs.

Call letters are vestiges of the 20's and 30's when stations interferred with each other. They are useless today. It's no wonder that abobut 95% of the world's nations do not use them.

A lot of them didn't like their calls, I guess.

A lot of us found out names and the dial position were much more effective than calls. And much more memorable.

Then too, many changed calls to become something new.

Today, many of us don't even change calls. We just ignore them except when we have to say them, really fast, for the legal ID:

With each new callsign change, the disconnect becomes greater, and listeners become less loyal to stations.

Loyalty is not preserved by calls. An old station with heritage calls, whatever that means, but with programming that sucks, derives no benefit from the calls. You are only as loyal to a station as today's programming deserves. If the station is good, you come back. Otherwise, loyalty is done, gone, erased.

This is all part of the fracturing of formats, and we all know stations view "heritage" as a two headed monster.

Heritage usually just means the station is old. I fear when an old station celebrates a 25th anniversary. Hey, root for us, we are almost as old as the 8-Track. Wow.

As someone who travels, the idea of unique calls makes more sense to me than a generic tag, which means nothing to me.

Since travelers are only rated in their home market, this point is irrelevant.

When WWWE became WTAM, I felt a similar annoyance.

Why? WTAM is the heritage call for that station. Before it was KYW and WKYC.

Branding seems especially silly to me on AMs. I've heard a few.

Very few AMs have any audience left. Maybe we just figured out why... they are irrelevant to younger listeners.

 

[nhradiochild]

David,

Why is it you fear when a station celebrates a long-time anniversary? I think it is admirable that a station can last that long, SO LONG AS what they are celebrating is format consistency. Simply to be on-air and stay on-air, that anniversary is best celebrated amongst radio geeks exclusively, and perhaps only mentioned in a wikipedia article or the likes.

Main reason to me why AM radio is out the window, unless your radio is installed in a particularly well-grounded car, attempting to fine-tune a station is cumbersome and an activity not well-received to the "plug-n-play" mentality of today. (Notice how I did not mention anything about "youth".) So unless you have some REALLY compelling program on AM... I'd just as soon see AM die, making the transition to FM exclusively.