calguy said:
I am an air talent, so what you're saying is I should just quit the business because as an air talent I'm on the extinction list.
Air talents today are most secure if they are voicetracking multiple markets or have a cost-effective deal that delivers sales and ratings. They are most insecure if they are chatty and in PPM markets, or on stations targeting under-35 audiences.
Like so many people I know, if current employment is lost, there is either no replacement job or one that pays much much less.
And when we're gone, what will radio sound like with no human touch?
As I said previously, many younger listeners "feel" the human touch when they hear a great mixer; some can identify a mixer just by the style of the mixes.
What they don't want is to be talked to by some person on a radio station. They can chat with real friends any time, so why would they buy into the old jingle line of "your friends on the radio?"
When I know it's automated, I don't bother to listen and my point here is that we're going in the wrong direction, again, just my opinion.
And there are still plenty of people, mostly 45+, who like DJs in general. And more who look for the Seacreast type of thing in the morning. But remember that even in the 70's the top station or several stations in most markets were automated... and nobody cared.
Degrees don't make you any smarter than anybody else, I know plenty of people with degrees who are dumb as a post.
My bad. I was using "degree" much like many use "suit" to describe the management of a station.
The gentleman I worked with for over 20 years flatly refused to interview anyone who had "communications degree" on their résumé. He said that they all came in thinking they knew more than he did and thought they could replace him, too. Of course, he was just an engineer who worked hard and now owns about 12 stations in a Top 15 market...
But we need suits to run stations. Someone has to balance the insanity with reality.
A business degree doesn't make you a broadcaster, but I suppose using your model David, anyone who owns or runs a station is a broadcaster.
Yes, anyone who works in radio is a broadcaster. Like anything in life, there are good and bad in every barrel.
Talent now are considered providers of content, sadly that means regurgitating all the crud that AOL, Yahoo and MSN spew, Kardashian's and American Idol every day. Everyone uses the same info, but do listeners really want that?
Yes, they want things that touch their lives. Again, some do it well, others don't. One reason Seacrest makes the millions he does is that he sounds nice and he has cred; people know he is talking about people he knows and rubs elbows (does anyone use that expression any more?) with. That's why using Seacrest on a station in Lexington or Knoxville works better than some local person with copies of US and People.
The ad dollars aren't' there anymore, so radio has to reinvent itself, the question is, are companies making the right decisions? Or are they just following the big boys right over a cliff?
Save for a few major AMs, that show is over. FMs will continue to be a viable business as long as the costs are contained. The station groups that are making the right decisions are the ones that have developed iHeart Radio and such... because if there is any chance of preserving part of the revenue stream, that is where it will be.
Everyone is going over the cliff. Some will crash. Others will have brought hang gliders and will land on the other side with a very different view.
By the way BigA, I don't hate owners, I dislike ones that ruin lives, and industries through stupidity and greed. At the end of the day someone has to pay, and for you, that's airstaff,or just staff in general.
Here's a scenario that goes back many years and in a different department. I was GM of an AM which had a DA-1 at 10 kw, and required transmitter "engineers" 24/7. The costs of that and other things, like board ops, bad programming and such, had caused the station to lose money every one of the 6 years before I got there. I had the directional redesigned and it came out rock stable. The baby sitters at the transmitter went away... along with the board ops. We put the market's first computer traffic system in and the production guy did the logs, too. Traffic disappeared, as did two accounting people. But the station went from dead no-show last to #1 18-49, and the rest of the staff was paid as well as or better than anyone in the market... and we made money.
I give this example to show that there is truly a "greater good" situation that can occur where making dramatic changes ends up preserving the business and much, although not always all, of the jobs.
...or the street teamer who has to try and set up all the equipment by themselves because the station says they can't afford more than one person at an event. Ever watch a 5 ft 5 inch girl try to lug around equipment? It's pretty sad., and remember, the client paid for that.
In most cases, the client got that appearance as part of "moochindising" that had to be given to the agency to sweeten the buy or to make up for an uncompetitive CPP in the target demo. Like bonus spots, promotions and appearances are so often given away that management's statement that they can't afford to spend on more staff actually rings quite true today.
