Sporque said:
I saw a topic on another board that brings up a nagging question for me considering most insiders and, in fact, listeners with whom I speak prefer a wide variety of artists and deeper cuts along with the same old overpolished turds. I'm pretty wet behind the ears in commercial radio, having spent a LOT of time announcing for nonprofits and working in other media so this is all new to me.
None of our airstaff likes the slimming down of playlists and eyes always roll in meetings when the topic of consultancy comes up. Management's argument is always that, despite the limited range of artists, our numbers go up book after book. Books I've read on the topic say pretty much the same thing: if it doesn't test, it doesn't get played.
What's your experience with consultants and narrowed playlists and how it all impacts your ratings, a wide sampling of listeners (not just the usual phone and prize pigs) and airstaff morale?
Thanks
This was a great thread of discussion, thanks Sporque! Now my 2 cents:
Consultants. Like everything else in life, some are better than others. MANY are preaching to the choir, while some can actually enhance your products. I've worked with some good & bad consultants: from Randy Michaels to Rick Sklar, Jacobs Media to McVay. Wanna guess what they all have in common...the foundations of their strategies are built around programming to arbitron's methodology and the strengthening of a listeners recall.
Some great postings on this matter, and yet not ONE mention of what I believe to be the biggest factor in the denegration of rock radio programming: you guessed it, programming to win the book NOT the hearts and minds of their audience. Creating in quarter-hours segments, hoping to lure new cume instead of developing a texture that is
without boundaries.
With that said, some of the "blame" has to fall on to the shoulders of the listener, or should I say, their listening habits. The research compiled on their habits push the programmers into a corner:
"Why program for a 24 hour day, when they only listen for less than an hour maybe once or twice a day?"
"How can I get them to come back if they only listened for five minutes?"
Unfortunately for most of us here, the listeners are not musicologists like we are. We also know that most will tune out(and turn off) almost anything that's deemed too unfamiliar by the listener. That's why when it comes to deepening the classic rock library, I go deep into
established heritage artists only. An "unfamiliar" deep track from Rush, Zeppelin or The Stones is more likely to be "accepted" than say, an unfamiliar deep track from Alice Cooper or Molly Hatchet.
As the PPM continues to evolve, I hope that this will help many programmers get out of the rut. But that won't change the way listeners use our product. Until then, we have to keep building new ways to win the respect of the listeners, while keeping true to the basic programming foundations needed to keep "the train on the track". Check your ego by listening to the audience, let them help guide you in the direction THEY want. You might be surprised what can happen when you empower your listeners!
And finally...it's cliche, but it's true: "you can't get hurt by what you don't play". You don't have to play something just because you can...or because you think it shows off your stations' diversity. These are times that a good consultant can be a great help by helping you focus
objectively on your music.
Which brings us back to the beginning, consultants...uh, what was the question? ;D
