-
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
Butts on the Beach
- Thread starter onair
- Start date
Ok.... now that I stopped laughing I think I can write something. My simple point is really being over complicated by some.
#1. I'm not interested in being a public servant. I would be a horrible employee for a radio station looking for a "community good guy". How much more honest can I be?
#2. What I stated was pretty much fact. People generally don't tune in a show just because the host is Mr. Public Service. If you want to believe that they do, than go have your debate with someone more qualified to talk about this. I know plenty of them hang out here. Let's see what they have to say.
#3. I may have missed your whole point. I'm to tired to figure it out right now.
I don't know what else to tell you. At this point I'm not even sure what all this back and forth is about. I've voiced how I feel and I've heard how you guys feel. I'm bored with this topic at the moment. Maybe I'll feel different tomorrow.
#1. I'm not interested in being a public servant. I would be a horrible employee for a radio station looking for a "community good guy". How much more honest can I be?
#2. What I stated was pretty much fact. People generally don't tune in a show just because the host is Mr. Public Service. If you want to believe that they do, than go have your debate with someone more qualified to talk about this. I know plenty of them hang out here. Let's see what they have to say.
#3. I may have missed your whole point. I'm to tired to figure it out right now.
I don't know what else to tell you. At this point I'm not even sure what all this back and forth is about. I've voiced how I feel and I've heard how you guys feel. I'm bored with this topic at the moment. Maybe I'll feel different tomorrow.
O
Oxford_Street_Shuffle
Guest
Skynet, I'm afraid that as usual, you're wrong.
People absolutely listen to a radio personality more because of their involvement in the community. It's certainly isn't the only reason, but it can play a major role.
One thing that PPM has taught many markets is that it's all about the radio station being top-of-mind with the audience and having a "brand". People are loyal to the radio station that they like. And they like a station for a variety of reasons: music, presentation, jocks etc. A jock being more visble only enhances the brand. Every charity walk, fundraiser, telethon that the jocks attend is a chance for them to interact with someone who might have a diary or might be wearing a meter. It's about being out in front of your audience as many different ways as you can as often as you can.
Someone who goes the extra mile to get involved is a "personality". Someone who comes in and does 5 hours on the air and goes home because they can't be bothered is a waste of space and his shift will eventually be voicetracked from out of market.
I don't love going to every single charity event I attend, but it's part of the job.
Anyone can just show up to their paid remotes on the weekends. But it takes someone who's truly committed to the craft of radio to attend all of the events that don't have a talent fee tied to them. That might explain why you don't work in radio my friend.
People absolutely listen to a radio personality more because of their involvement in the community. It's certainly isn't the only reason, but it can play a major role.
One thing that PPM has taught many markets is that it's all about the radio station being top-of-mind with the audience and having a "brand". People are loyal to the radio station that they like. And they like a station for a variety of reasons: music, presentation, jocks etc. A jock being more visble only enhances the brand. Every charity walk, fundraiser, telethon that the jocks attend is a chance for them to interact with someone who might have a diary or might be wearing a meter. It's about being out in front of your audience as many different ways as you can as often as you can.
Someone who goes the extra mile to get involved is a "personality". Someone who comes in and does 5 hours on the air and goes home because they can't be bothered is a waste of space and his shift will eventually be voicetracked from out of market.
I don't love going to every single charity event I attend, but it's part of the job.
Anyone can just show up to their paid remotes on the weekends. But it takes someone who's truly committed to the craft of radio to attend all of the events that don't have a talent fee tied to them. That might explain why you don't work in radio my friend.
Oxford_Street_Shuffle said:
The very first time people hear their favorite host on the radio, they aren't listening because of community involvement. They are listening because they like what they hear coming out of the speakers. We are talking RADIO. This isn't the RED CROSS. The whole medium is based on providing compelling programming. It's all about keeping the listener tuned in. What comes out of those speakers is what matters. Not Mr. Host running a race for a cure. Not Ms. Host raising money for Diabetes. People who already listen to a particular personality will appreciate this effort. So will many others. However if a particular personality sucks on the radio, people are going to tune away to another station no matter how much Community Service this person does.
So let's just agree to disagree. I can give you a long list of successful personalities who come in, do their show, get major ratings and then go home. A radio station is in business to make money. So it scares me that you see no value in a host who does his 5 hours on air and goes home. What if that host is actually pulling in Big Ratings? I bet you would change your tune fast about firing them. If not, than you suck at programming. You would be the one that should be fired.
iyiyi said:
I understand what others are sayiing, however I think some of you are really overemphasizing the importance of community involvement when it comes to successful radio. But I guess I'm the fool. OK.... so if management knows so much about radio than I guess they'll be able to figure out how to get back all those listeners they are losing. I also assume that we won't be hearing about any more radio stations filing for bankruptcy. No more employees fired either. Whew... thank God for the wisdom of all the intelligent programmers. It appears to be working out really well for them these days. Luckily I'm the foolish one and not them.
I don't want to get in the middle of anything. Growing up I listened to PRO-FM. I had my favorite jocks. Mostly Jimmy Gray,Chris Camp & David Simpson. Whatever mall Jimmy Gray was appearing at on Labor Day for MDA. I always went & made a contribuition. Jocks who do get involved, HELP their stations!
I'm not saying jocks who contribute don't help. I know they help. They help in some incredible ways. Both through use of their time, energy and helping to raise funds. But they are helping various charities. That still doesnt help ratings. Geeez... am I the only one who understands the point I am trying to make? Yeah.... nobody has to answer that. I think I alreaady know the answer.
Nobody seems to be getting my point. Let's try it this way. Think about one word "RATINGS". That is all I am talking about here. I am not discussing all the do gooders of the world. I am simply talking about "RATINGS". If I somehow made a confusing reference along the way in this thread, than it's my fault. I'm not going to go read through all this crap to see what it was. Of course people who involve themselves in charity are helping. But it's not what counts when it comes to Ratings. They are helping people and the community. But all this helping the community is not helping ratings. It just isn't.
In the end I admire anyone who does it. Maybe I'm not as charitable, but I already admitted that on the first page.
Nobody seems to be getting my point. Let's try it this way. Think about one word "RATINGS". That is all I am talking about here. I am not discussing all the do gooders of the world. I am simply talking about "RATINGS". If I somehow made a confusing reference along the way in this thread, than it's my fault. I'm not going to go read through all this crap to see what it was. Of course people who involve themselves in charity are helping. But it's not what counts when it comes to Ratings. They are helping people and the community. But all this helping the community is not helping ratings. It just isn't.
In the end I admire anyone who does it. Maybe I'm not as charitable, but I already admitted that on the first page.
O
Oxford_Street_Shuffle
Guest
Skynet, being visible out in the market absolutely does have a correlation with ratings. And being involved in community events is one way to be out and about for a jock. It's a big piece of the puzzle.
Like I said before, it's about being visble and touching the audience as many different ways and as many different times as you can. I realize most of the concepts are probably over your head, considering you don't actually work in radio.
There's no formula that says that a station that's out "x" amount of times per month will be succesful, but it works. That's why every station tries to do it as much as they can.
Like I said before, it's about being visble and touching the audience as many different ways and as many different times as you can. I realize most of the concepts are probably over your head, considering you don't actually work in radio.
There's no formula that says that a station that's out "x" amount of times per month will be succesful, but it works. That's why every station tries to do it as much as they can.
I understand being visable and promoting your brand. That much I can understand. The more ways the better. It certainly doesn't hurt. But like I said, the number one most important goal for any radio host should be to just put on a great show. I am clearly looking at this purely from a ratings standpoint. Everyone else seems to be looking at it from a promotional standpoint.
You guys want to promote the "brand". I understand that. But the best promotion of your brand would be to put out a kick ass on air product. Make things come out of those speakers that people can't stop talking about. Word of mouth is the best promotion of your brand.
If you want to help in the community that is fine. But I'm not buying that it does a damn thing for ratings though. Nobody can even prove that it does. I believe the ratings would be exactly the same either way. People can come here and tell me that I'm wrong, however nobody can really prove that I am. So ths topic is going to be left up in the air for now.
You guys want to promote the "brand". I understand that. But the best promotion of your brand would be to put out a kick ass on air product. Make things come out of those speakers that people can't stop talking about. Word of mouth is the best promotion of your brand.
If you want to help in the community that is fine. But I'm not buying that it does a damn thing for ratings though. Nobody can even prove that it does. I believe the ratings would be exactly the same either way. People can come here and tell me that I'm wrong, however nobody can really prove that I am. So ths topic is going to be left up in the air for now.
Skynet74 said:
And how are your ratings?
I don't mean to offend anyone here because if you're looking for a creative outlet, then fine. My take on all of this is that if you're in radio it's probably because you prepared yourself, educated yourself, paid some dues, convinced someone you had something to contribute, etc. If you're running your own online station, it's because you want to. I'm not implying anyone doing it is any kind of a radio reject. We all know how difficult the business can be even for those with lots of talent, but it isn't the same thing. It's me writing a novel online because no one will publish it and I'm hoping someone will stumble across it and read it. It's the direction society is going but it isn't the same thing.
Runrigger said:
Having an online station may not be the same thing as working at a terrestrial radio station. You are absolutely corrrect. But in my opinion it can be even better! Definitely the potential for a larger audience. I don't think I need to lay out numbers again. You also get to be your own boss. No Program Director telling you what music to play or how to program your show. No General Manager around to stress you out. Nobody is going to lay you off or fire you. It's 100 percent yours! The creative freedom can't be beat. Make money with it and you are home free. Don't underestimate new technology. Cable TV was new once too.
A February 21, 2007 "survey of 3,000 Americans released by consultancy Bridge Ratings & Research" found that "[a]s much as 19% of U.S. consumers 12 and older listen to Web-based radio stations." In other words, there were "some 57 million weekly listeners of Internet radio programs. More people listen to online radio than to satellite radio, high-definition [sic] radio, podcasts, or cell-phone-based radio combined
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_radio
Skynet74 said:
That good, impressive.
O
Oxford_Street_Shuffle
Guest
Wow... in 2007 19% of consumers listen to radio every week?? You're kidding... and that data is almost 4 years old??? Great point!
You should note that it's 19% of CONSUMERS... not 19% of the population. It's two different things. The same page you cited actually states 13% of the population listened to internet radio durring the week in 2008.
But 94 percent of the population of this country listens to broadcast radio every week. Yeah, you're right, internet radio sounds like it's a huge success.
And we wouldn't want one of those pesky program directors telling you what to do. You're far too creative to let some corporate suit push you around. The lame-ass world of corporate radio doesn't deserve your creative genius.
You should note that it's 19% of CONSUMERS... not 19% of the population. It's two different things. The same page you cited actually states 13% of the population listened to internet radio durring the week in 2008.
But 94 percent of the population of this country listens to broadcast radio every week. Yeah, you're right, internet radio sounds like it's a huge success.
And we wouldn't want one of those pesky program directors telling you what to do. You're far too creative to let some corporate suit push you around. The lame-ass world of corporate radio doesn't deserve your creative genius.
- Status