YES! I had replied to Big A's earlier post b4 I saw yours!
-
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
Classic Rock: Evolve or Die!
- Thread starter semoochie
- Start date
YES! I had replied to Big A's earlier post b4 I saw yours!
My post was in response to something very specific. I know who the customers are.
I'm glad to see the situation addressed. I'd hate to see radio professionals like Mr. Eduardo, KM, TheBigA, and others feel compelled to leave because of situations like what happened in this thread.
Obviously, there are people who are dissatisfied with radio. But the reasons may be more complex than what they appear at the outset.
One thing that doesn't get mentioned much is that the boomer generation was raised to believe that everything must be inclusive. Multicultural, embrace the differences, etc. Then you have the fact that for years they were the prime marketing demo. They got used to it. But now they turn on the radio and see a limited number of stations playing music they want to hear.
Then they read sincere but reality-based comments from professionals explaining that very few want to market radio to them, because of their age group, along with explanations why. I can see where some of the dissatisfieds are probably saying "well, where's the inclusiveness?"
I think some of the progressive talk aficionados feel the same way. It's not just that they're not hearing what they want to hear on the radio -- it's that the business model of radio seems to go against what they were taught about society and media. The business model of radio isn't necessarily inclusive of all ages, opinions, and cultures. The airwaves belong to everybody... but then that doesn't necessarily translate into them serving everybody.
I don't agree with the anger or the negative attitudes about it, but I can see where for some people that might be a hard pill to swallow.
And, of course, it's no excuse whatsoever for insults.
I think that the professionals and programmers here have generally done a good job explaining -- in this thread and others -- why they do what they do (concerning research, etc.), and how it's done. Although I myself may sometimes have questions about it, I'm always glad to read their input about the nature of the radio business. I've learned a lot from them.
Obviously, there are people who are dissatisfied with radio. But the reasons may be more complex than what they appear at the outset.
One thing that doesn't get mentioned much is that the boomer generation was raised to believe that everything must be inclusive. Multicultural, embrace the differences, etc. Then you have the fact that for years they were the prime marketing demo. They got used to it. But now they turn on the radio and see a limited number of stations playing music they want to hear.
Then they read sincere but reality-based comments from professionals explaining that very few want to market radio to them, because of their age group, along with explanations why. I can see where some of the dissatisfieds are probably saying "well, where's the inclusiveness?"
I think some of the progressive talk aficionados feel the same way. It's not just that they're not hearing what they want to hear on the radio -- it's that the business model of radio seems to go against what they were taught about society and media. The business model of radio isn't necessarily inclusive of all ages, opinions, and cultures. The airwaves belong to everybody... but then that doesn't necessarily translate into them serving everybody.
I don't agree with the anger or the negative attitudes about it, but I can see where for some people that might be a hard pill to swallow.
And, of course, it's no excuse whatsoever for insults.
I think that the professionals and programmers here have generally done a good job explaining -- in this thread and others -- why they do what they do (concerning research, etc.), and how it's done. Although I myself may sometimes have questions about it, I'm always glad to read their input about the nature of the radio business. I've learned a lot from them.
K
K.M. Richards
Guest
That's a very well thought out reasoning, boombox, of the "why" there is so much dissatisfaction. Being a Boomer myself (born 1956) I am often struck with the incongruity of being in the business of consulting radio stations on programming designed to attract an audience that Madison Ave. doesn't want me as a part of.
What I wish we knew the answer to is why, even when it is explained that the decisions are not made by the programming people to program for specific demographics, people still seem to believe that arguing with the programmers on a discussion board is going to change anything. Perhaps it is because the advertising and marketing people don't have boards where people can go to argue the case for older demo inclusiveness, but these circular arguments do strike me as a waste of the proponents' time, just as it was a waste for Don Quixote to tilt at the windmill.
I hope that -- if nothing else -- this experience has taught people the pointlessness of continuing an argument once the answer has been proved to be "no" by facts outside of the control of either side. The problem here was not so much an "us vs. them" mentality as the inability to stop attempting to win by brute force and repetition, and the longer things went on in that vein, the more frazzled nerves got and the more frayed the ability to tolerate the duplication.
An argument presented once is accepted as your position. The second time, it is a "but you said that already" statement. By the time you have repeated yourself five or six times, it becomes "don't you have anything else but that as your defense?" And by the 20th time, it becomes "okay, you're a nut." Now, no one wants to be called a nut -- not you, not me, not even Avid -- but a third party who was uninvolved in the original discussion could read a transcript of it and come to precisely that conclusion.
And in the long run, did anything really change?
(The question was purely rhetorical, Bernard.)
What I wish we knew the answer to is why, even when it is explained that the decisions are not made by the programming people to program for specific demographics, people still seem to believe that arguing with the programmers on a discussion board is going to change anything. Perhaps it is because the advertising and marketing people don't have boards where people can go to argue the case for older demo inclusiveness, but these circular arguments do strike me as a waste of the proponents' time, just as it was a waste for Don Quixote to tilt at the windmill.
I hope that -- if nothing else -- this experience has taught people the pointlessness of continuing an argument once the answer has been proved to be "no" by facts outside of the control of either side. The problem here was not so much an "us vs. them" mentality as the inability to stop attempting to win by brute force and repetition, and the longer things went on in that vein, the more frazzled nerves got and the more frayed the ability to tolerate the duplication.
An argument presented once is accepted as your position. The second time, it is a "but you said that already" statement. By the time you have repeated yourself five or six times, it becomes "don't you have anything else but that as your defense?" And by the 20th time, it becomes "okay, you're a nut." Now, no one wants to be called a nut -- not you, not me, not even Avid -- but a third party who was uninvolved in the original discussion could read a transcript of it and come to precisely that conclusion.
And in the long run, did anything really change?
(The question was purely rhetorical, Bernard.)
I think that is the exact point we tried to get across many times: we program stations per the orders of those higher up and we take extreme care to take our best shot at winning the listener because our job security relies on it. I related we were much like the interior designer that always does what their client wants and their own ideas about what that design should be is not even considered because you have to do what the client wants.
Yes, I'm the one that felt Mr. Avid might benefit from a session with a professional that might help him.
As for me, December 1955 was when I came in to this world.
Many times I've been in discussion with others in the business talking about how we could break out of the box but never could see a path for doing that. In my own experience as a listener I was rather passive about songs I didn't like, figuring I'd like the next one. In a few short years I was able to find a station or two where I loved every song and a song I didn't love meant punching the button to the competitor. I have said we sort of got spoiled as listeners by demanding we love everything on a station.
Now I am outside the prime demographics and find little of interest on major market radio. Either it skews too young for me or the songs are those I played so many times over the years. Then again, I recognize I place great importance on music and represent a minority among music listeners who generally don't listen to music as I do. I accept that not only in my job but my life. I also don't wear the radio station on my sleeve. The way I see it, it is not about me but reaching the right people with just what they want even if I don't particularly like it. I think in programming you have to learn to separate yourself from the details you use in building the on air sound. My first boss in radio sort of said that on my first shift. He said he was paying me to do what the community wanted, not what I wanted and added he had been there much longer and knew the audience well.
I realize that with the investments made in radio there is not a chance to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, but to do what brings the desired results. Just like other businesses, it is always best to use impartial third party results from companies that make their living doing such things to help validate or invalidate our plans.
Yes, I'm the one that felt Mr. Avid might benefit from a session with a professional that might help him.
As for me, December 1955 was when I came in to this world.
Many times I've been in discussion with others in the business talking about how we could break out of the box but never could see a path for doing that. In my own experience as a listener I was rather passive about songs I didn't like, figuring I'd like the next one. In a few short years I was able to find a station or two where I loved every song and a song I didn't love meant punching the button to the competitor. I have said we sort of got spoiled as listeners by demanding we love everything on a station.
Now I am outside the prime demographics and find little of interest on major market radio. Either it skews too young for me or the songs are those I played so many times over the years. Then again, I recognize I place great importance on music and represent a minority among music listeners who generally don't listen to music as I do. I accept that not only in my job but my life. I also don't wear the radio station on my sleeve. The way I see it, it is not about me but reaching the right people with just what they want even if I don't particularly like it. I think in programming you have to learn to separate yourself from the details you use in building the on air sound. My first boss in radio sort of said that on my first shift. He said he was paying me to do what the community wanted, not what I wanted and added he had been there much longer and knew the audience well.
I realize that with the investments made in radio there is not a chance to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, but to do what brings the desired results. Just like other businesses, it is always best to use impartial third party results from companies that make their living doing such things to help validate or invalidate our plans.
B
BOZ Profit
Guest
Having been a General Manager of a radio station myself, I have long held the view that I actually have 2 sets of customers I have to please. Those that listen and those that advertise. I have both to please and I want more of both and do not want to lose any in either group.
If you don't think listeners are radio's customers... try selling advertising for a station with no listeners. This whole argument has been about pleasing the listeners, so the audience will grow... so you can sell advertising. You can argue semantics if you'd like.. that "no listeners means you have no product". That's fine. But from the listeners perspective, they are your customer (albeit a free one) and if you don't produce the content they desire, they will go elsewhere.
About offering a free product: Consider when McDonald's gives away free coffee in the morning (don't know if they do that where you are but occasionally they do it here), is that person coming in for free coffee not a customer? Just because the product is free does not mean someone who gets the product free is not a customer. Radio listeners actually pay with their time and attention.. to the commercials. There is value in that. They are a customer.
But, yes, the listeners are the product for the most advertisers. As a radio station you deliver the listener's ears to the advertiser. BUT there are some advertisers that simply want to support the content of the radio station. Yes, these types are generally found in smaller markets... how many smaller markets are there, compared to large markets? My point being it happens more often than you might care to appreciate. Think about that advertiser that won't advertise on the Country station because he doesn't listen to Country.. despite the demo might be exactly what the advertiser is looking for (it's up to a good marketing consultant to show that..but that's a different conversation). So for them, they are not really concerned about radio's product. They just want to have the content. In the end, they may end up being one of those that say radio doesn't work...but again, that is a different conversation.
If you don't think listeners are radio's customers... try selling advertising for a station with no listeners. This whole argument has been about pleasing the listeners, so the audience will grow... so you can sell advertising. You can argue semantics if you'd like.. that "no listeners means you have no product". That's fine. But from the listeners perspective, they are your customer (albeit a free one) and if you don't produce the content they desire, they will go elsewhere.
About offering a free product: Consider when McDonald's gives away free coffee in the morning (don't know if they do that where you are but occasionally they do it here), is that person coming in for free coffee not a customer? Just because the product is free does not mean someone who gets the product free is not a customer. Radio listeners actually pay with their time and attention.. to the commercials. There is value in that. They are a customer.
But, yes, the listeners are the product for the most advertisers. As a radio station you deliver the listener's ears to the advertiser. BUT there are some advertisers that simply want to support the content of the radio station. Yes, these types are generally found in smaller markets... how many smaller markets are there, compared to large markets? My point being it happens more often than you might care to appreciate. Think about that advertiser that won't advertise on the Country station because he doesn't listen to Country.. despite the demo might be exactly what the advertiser is looking for (it's up to a good marketing consultant to show that..but that's a different conversation). So for them, they are not really concerned about radio's product. They just want to have the content. In the end, they may end up being one of those that say radio doesn't work...but again, that is a different conversation.
Last edited:
I've experienced exactly what you speak of.
I had clients that would not buy from me because we played contemporary music and the client didn't like it. He simply could not jump that barrier. He never used radio because there was not an easy listening choice on the dial. His competitor advertised everywhere. I mentioned that and his response to that was that I was trying to milk the community's business of every dollar I could get. I realized I'd never sell him because he didn't like our programming and in his mind/experiences salespeople had no integrity.
I wound up in a top 10 market trying to sell an AM daytimer without full market coverage. It was a year old when I got there. Research showed we could do well with more of an educational styled format I'll call 'Christian Education'. The researched showed great interest in programs like an investigation of Jesus life, etc. Naturally, we couldn't find the product and rather became the 5th station on the dial selling time to ministries. The top 40 ministries already were on more powerful stations that had been long established and few of those national ministries were interested. We tried targeting local Churches and had a little luck but not a whole lot.
We began to supplement our programming with secular programs of general interest to the suburban communities we served. For example, Chamber of Commerce Reports and such. That brought in some cash but the advertisers were revolving doors. Our problem was we have so few listeners in any single location business trade area it was almost impossible to get any recognizable results for the single location Mom and Pop business that spent about what it cost us to cultivate a new customer. For every 20 clients we got, we were lucky if one or two would renew. I knew many at the ad agencies but not a single dollar came from those relationships carried over from another station or two.
As you might suspect, we realized this wasn't going to work. We began reaching out to the various ethnic communities about buying blocks of time to reach their community. That became our bread and butter.
You are very correct: the listener is the customer just as the advertiser is. You must have both and in significant quantity to make the station work. I can say it is much easier running a station in a smaller market. For one sales are based much more on relationship and listeners tend to be a bit more forgiving when it comes to programming where there are fewer choices on the radio dial.
I had clients that would not buy from me because we played contemporary music and the client didn't like it. He simply could not jump that barrier. He never used radio because there was not an easy listening choice on the dial. His competitor advertised everywhere. I mentioned that and his response to that was that I was trying to milk the community's business of every dollar I could get. I realized I'd never sell him because he didn't like our programming and in his mind/experiences salespeople had no integrity.
I wound up in a top 10 market trying to sell an AM daytimer without full market coverage. It was a year old when I got there. Research showed we could do well with more of an educational styled format I'll call 'Christian Education'. The researched showed great interest in programs like an investigation of Jesus life, etc. Naturally, we couldn't find the product and rather became the 5th station on the dial selling time to ministries. The top 40 ministries already were on more powerful stations that had been long established and few of those national ministries were interested. We tried targeting local Churches and had a little luck but not a whole lot.
We began to supplement our programming with secular programs of general interest to the suburban communities we served. For example, Chamber of Commerce Reports and such. That brought in some cash but the advertisers were revolving doors. Our problem was we have so few listeners in any single location business trade area it was almost impossible to get any recognizable results for the single location Mom and Pop business that spent about what it cost us to cultivate a new customer. For every 20 clients we got, we were lucky if one or two would renew. I knew many at the ad agencies but not a single dollar came from those relationships carried over from another station or two.
As you might suspect, we realized this wasn't going to work. We began reaching out to the various ethnic communities about buying blocks of time to reach their community. That became our bread and butter.
You are very correct: the listener is the customer just as the advertiser is. You must have both and in significant quantity to make the station work. I can say it is much easier running a station in a smaller market. For one sales are based much more on relationship and listeners tend to be a bit more forgiving when it comes to programming where there are fewer choices on the radio dial.
Wow, this has been a very entertaining thread. Hate to admit it but the "what to do with Avid" portion kept me up way past my bedtime. Boz, you probably made the correct decision but I believe it was more diificult than the rest of us can truly appreciate. Sometimes I think the professionals on this board become insulted too easily and you pointed that out. On the other hand, there are some true "music" fans who are not "radio" fans because they cannot find their favorite music on the radio anymore. They are probably too easily insulted, as well. Both have a place on these boards though...so long as they behave. The one thing they have in common, it seems, is that they are both Baby Boomers. Their music and their radio have changed. They are no longer in charge. The consumers, the advertisers, the radio programmers, and the listeners are Gen X, Gen Y, Millenials, etc. Those generations are now in charge.
B
BOZ Profit
Guest
Thanks for commenting AM FM. It was not easy. It is disappointing that personalities clash, but such is life. I cannot fix that.
Being a Gen Xer myself, I often find it difficult to find music on the radio that I enjoy as well. There are a few bands that my kids like that I enjoy, but I find today's pickins to be slim. I just think about how the target demos do change... as a teen, my parents were losing the music on the radio of their generation to my generation, now it's my turn to lose the music on the radio of my generation to my kids.. and so it goes. The circle of life. The difference being we do have the Internet now, and mp3 players or smart phones that can hold tens of thousands of songs... these toys my parents did not have and were relegated to the turn table in the living room. We can at least take our favorite music with us where ever we go. And our purpose (generationally speaking) for listening to the radio has changed from wanting to hear the newest music and artist news to wanting to be informed of local news, information, and opinions...
I'm in the same boat. I find little of interest in radio since I'm out of the prime demos. Most of my years in programming I was programming for those older than me. I had a few years of being in the demographic I was programming for. Now I am beyond that and programming music I really do not find of interest.
While I'm passionate about my career, it is a job and my satisfaction comes from actually working to create that audio that attracts the target demographic. Seeing that happen is what makes my job fun whereas the music was what made it fun in prior years. Still you never get to do what you really want because the format and song selection is not about you. I think that is something I tried to get across in my posts. Simply put, you are given an assignment in your job and you do it, backed up by all the third party sources you can get and research that you need to be able to verify as accurate to your bosses, if asked. It's a job and you do the very best you can because there's always someone ready to take your job. Needless to say, if it doesn't turn out successful, chances are you're polishing up that resume and hoping to find a new gig.
As for me personally, I've always been a music fan. Working in a record store before getting in to radio was a money losing situation since I spent so much on various types of music. After playing the songs so many years, I personally look for stations, the few that there are, that expand my musical knowledge. So, personally, I am nowhere near the masses in musical wants.
I agree, as a person working in radio, we can be a little sensitive but we are in this business because there is something inside us that outweighs the paycheck and other factors that keeps us in this business. You get jobs because of your abilities. You fight yourself and your preferences to create what the listener wants. While disagreements are fine (we hear those and calmly react), when it goes beyond that, it becomes personal. Teachers and Police tend to be passionate about what they do. In other words, they have known much of their life this was their destiny. I think most people would not call a cop stupid when they stop you because things can go badly if you do. I'm just trying to say the average person in a job they love and with a successful track record tends to get a bit bent out of shape when they feel their credibility and intelligence is attacked.
While I'm passionate about my career, it is a job and my satisfaction comes from actually working to create that audio that attracts the target demographic. Seeing that happen is what makes my job fun whereas the music was what made it fun in prior years. Still you never get to do what you really want because the format and song selection is not about you. I think that is something I tried to get across in my posts. Simply put, you are given an assignment in your job and you do it, backed up by all the third party sources you can get and research that you need to be able to verify as accurate to your bosses, if asked. It's a job and you do the very best you can because there's always someone ready to take your job. Needless to say, if it doesn't turn out successful, chances are you're polishing up that resume and hoping to find a new gig.
As for me personally, I've always been a music fan. Working in a record store before getting in to radio was a money losing situation since I spent so much on various types of music. After playing the songs so many years, I personally look for stations, the few that there are, that expand my musical knowledge. So, personally, I am nowhere near the masses in musical wants.
I agree, as a person working in radio, we can be a little sensitive but we are in this business because there is something inside us that outweighs the paycheck and other factors that keeps us in this business. You get jobs because of your abilities. You fight yourself and your preferences to create what the listener wants. While disagreements are fine (we hear those and calmly react), when it goes beyond that, it becomes personal. Teachers and Police tend to be passionate about what they do. In other words, they have known much of their life this was their destiny. I think most people would not call a cop stupid when they stop you because things can go badly if you do. I'm just trying to say the average person in a job they love and with a successful track record tends to get a bit bent out of shape when they feel their credibility and intelligence is attacked.
At least I still have two of my favorite styles of music on the radio. For one, I need to be in the car and farther north. But I still qualify as a radio fan because I enjoy reading about the format changes and even hearing what happens when they do. I think the term is "Sound check", although I need to go to the library to hear anything online.
Plus there is a lot going on that I enjoy on NPR, and we can credit the "Car Talk" guys for that.
B
BOZ Profit
Guest
That can of worms has officially been opened.. LOL : )
I liked the smooth jazz format but I always felt the format limited itself a bit too much. I felt here was too much emphasis on playing songs that crossed from Adult Urban to AC. I felt widening the format a bit more might have helped. I felt KBCT in Waco, Texas had the right idea. I heard Quiet Village by Martin Denny, songs like Summer Breeze by Seals and Crofts and the usual Anita Baker, etc. mixed in to flavor the smooth jazz. I could see the attempt was made to take a select group from several formats as ultimately all smooth jazz listeners came from other formats that existed prior to the format.
Another thing I liked was they had a few weekday working hours clients who sponsored an hour of music. They got a 10 second at :00,:20, :35 and :50. No weather, PSAs or promos aired in the sponsored hours.
Somewhat of a beef of mine is a station that constantly tells you the style of music you're hearing on the station. I really didn't need to be told I was hearing smooth jazz. KBCT was not doing liners between each song, instead IDing in breaks. I thought that was nice and since Waco is not a big city, it likely didn't need to ID itself as frequently.
Another factor about smooth jazz was that the format had a sameness to it musically. While the selections were constantly changing, newer songs had so much of a 'sounds very similar' feel. I like smooth jazz but I can see how the thrill could fizzle over time.
Smooth Jazz suffered on the advertising side but stations like The Oasis in Dallas/Fort Worth had active advertisers after the high income users not unlike Classical stations had. That gave the station an illusion that the up and coming (financially) felt they, by listening, were making positive steps in climbing the career ladder. It was the station the successful listened to, or so you thought.
Another thing I liked was they had a few weekday working hours clients who sponsored an hour of music. They got a 10 second at :00,:20, :35 and :50. No weather, PSAs or promos aired in the sponsored hours.
Somewhat of a beef of mine is a station that constantly tells you the style of music you're hearing on the station. I really didn't need to be told I was hearing smooth jazz. KBCT was not doing liners between each song, instead IDing in breaks. I thought that was nice and since Waco is not a big city, it likely didn't need to ID itself as frequently.
Another factor about smooth jazz was that the format had a sameness to it musically. While the selections were constantly changing, newer songs had so much of a 'sounds very similar' feel. I like smooth jazz but I can see how the thrill could fizzle over time.
Smooth Jazz suffered on the advertising side but stations like The Oasis in Dallas/Fort Worth had active advertisers after the high income users not unlike Classical stations had. That gave the station an illusion that the up and coming (financially) felt they, by listening, were making positive steps in climbing the career ladder. It was the station the successful listened to, or so you thought.
Another poster has made the observation that the owner's other two stations are more compatible as a sales package with classic rock than with smooth jazz, and that for sales this may be a very good way of selling the three stations together.
The Desert has become so overpopulated with stations, including translators, that it is hard to have a low rated format that is not packagable with co-owned stations.
That said, during the first 6 or 7 years that I was a part-time resident of the Coachella Valley, I used to hear the smooth jazz station with considerable frequency in stores and restaurants. In the last few years, I never heard it. I don't know what that means, but it is likely part of the same problem that made them switch formats.
K
K.M. Richards
Guest
Since I posted that comment in the thread about that station on the Smooth Jazz format board (as opposed to in this thread), here is the link to the thread for cross-reference:
http://www.radiodiscussions.com/showthread.php?685027-KJJZ-Palm-Springs
So stations could just save all that research money and plug in Avid's iPod and be top 5. O.....k
If I haven't mentioned Rock 92 in Greensboro NC on this thread, it was once a station which wouldn't play new songs, even when it was the only rock station. These days it will include Nickelback and other "modern" acts, and last night there was "Man in the Box" by Alice in Chains.
"Gypsy" by Fleetwood Mac. The same station.
Now I remember that song being an example of the new music on a former beautiful music station in Charlotte. A TV station reported on this. This was once big enough news for TV stations to report! The reporter was in an elevator where the song was supposedly playing and the look on his face and the messed up newspaper he was trying to read indicated he wasn't happy.
- Status