Better for whom? If you don't like the replays, simply stream KBRE. The choice is in yours to make. The options exist. A radio station doesn't have to change what it does to serve you individually.
-
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
Did I Outgrow Seattle Radio or did Seattle Radio Outgrow Me?
- Thread starter DMK
- Start date
Better for whom? If you don't like the replays, simply stream KBRE. The choice is in yours to make. The options exist. A radio station doesn't have to change what it does to serve you individually.
Absolutely correct. If KISW does well as a talk station, then so be it.
That said, the good music is out there. The fact that KISW can get ratings without playing it is a credit to their programmers, but their motto is 'Seattle's Best ROCK', not 'Seattle's Best Talk'. Still, it's a bit ironic that they keep the motto, but decide to replay a lame talk show rather than music at night.
They do. That's why they do it.
The music has become very individual. There's very little consensus new rock. The legendary WMMS in Cleveland has made the same decision.
If people want to hear new rock, they know where to get it.
I wish this message was emblazoned in bold text on the main page
Has a supposedly new rock station always been the defacto male-oriented talk station? This is another odd thing I've never understood about programming decisions. KVRQ didn't gain as much traction as I would have thought, despite positioning itself between two well-established rock stations, and was pulled off the air for country as soon as KMPS went away.
These "everything that rocks" stations tend to be losers because rock fans don't want everything that rocks. They want specific songs and bands.
Take a look at WCHI in Chicago. They use the "everything that rocks" brand. One of the lowest rated FMs.
On the other hand, rock can get good ratings if you build a strong guy-talk morning show.
With regard to Seattle, I'd love to know what the highly regarded K-JET was billing back in the day... on AM.
Someone at IHR should have studied the history of the former 94.7 WZZN, and all of the adjustments that were attempted to make "The Zone" successful. I really enjoyed the harder versions of 94.7 The Zone, but just like 95.5 now, it was one of the lowest rated FM's, despite all of PD Bill Gamble's hard work.
The music itself was always individual. There were always genres and divisions in rock music. People were griping about KISW's playlists back in the late 70s and through the 80s. Too much of this, too little of that.... blah blah blah. But there were consensus acts because they were promoted, by both records, and radio. The fact there is no 'consensus' isn't the fault of the audience, it's that the record companies and the radio format isn't trying to build any consensus. There are quality acts out there that could be more popular but records and radio are content to let them be.
Consequently, online is the only place to go for music, as you've stated, and Seattle's Best Rock is transformed into Seattle's Best (?) Talk.
But back then the only choice they had was either buy the records or listen to the radio. Once streaming became easy and cheap, then people became far less patient and less tolerant.
The record companies are no longer motivated to work with radio. The schism began in 1988, but became more pronounced thanks to the DMCA that paid money to record labels from digital airplay. Once that happened, record labels changed their business model to streaming and stopped promoting rock and alternative music to radio. Instead, they have built a model more aimed at direct marketing to fans. Radio isn't part of the equation.
I think you mentioned, in the past, that the fact that the big record companies are foreign corporations factors in somewhere, too. Less concern about marketing of rock in the US. The drop in overall revenues (when accounting for inflation) since the 2000's also is a factor. Less money available for promotion, so they stick with the biggest music formats, like country and pop/AC.
Still, it sort of sucks to be both a rock and a radio fan these days. But it is what it is.
That was 1988. The two biggest American record labels: Columbia and RCA, were sold to foreign conglomerates. A few years later, MCA was sold to a French conglomerate. The European labels don't do radio promotion the way it was done here. Also the foreign labels get a royalty from radio. They don't here. So no motivation anymore. We allowed our culture to be bought by foreign countries who now benefit from all our creativity.
I’m a fan of The Men’s Room. I feel like we hear all too often these days that listeners hate listening to talk, and every on-air personality should be let go. Or at least, that’s what you might think if you read some of the comments that pop up online.
The Men’s Room’s success proves that this opinion is false. For the right type of program, people will absolutely tune in. I would be willing to bet that a major chunk of their audience doesn’t listen to KISW outside of 2-6pm. Get the right talent in the room, and great things can happen.
Someone could compete with KISW if they really wanted to. Heck, it seems like KZOK already tries to do that (successfully). But talent still appears to be a major factor here. KISW has some of the best talent in the market, and KZOK keeps up (and while most of their talent is tracked, listeners who want classic rock still will tune in).
I don’t think adding another station to the battle for rock would be a particularly good idea. We’ve seen a few examples of that over the years. In all cases, it seems like listeners overwhelming chose the live and local station. Nobody really seemed interested in a rock jukebox.
The Men’s Room’s success proves that this opinion is false. For the right type of program, people will absolutely tune in. I would be willing to bet that a major chunk of their audience doesn’t listen to KISW outside of 2-6pm. Get the right talent in the room, and great things can happen.
Someone could compete with KISW if they really wanted to. Heck, it seems like KZOK already tries to do that (successfully). But talent still appears to be a major factor here. KISW has some of the best talent in the market, and KZOK keeps up (and while most of their talent is tracked, listeners who want classic rock still will tune in).
I don’t think adding another station to the battle for rock would be a particularly good idea. We’ve seen a few examples of that over the years. In all cases, it seems like listeners overwhelming chose the live and local station. Nobody really seemed interested in a rock jukebox.
KJAQ has a half million cume, which puts it near KZOK. That's not too bad for what it is.
Correct, but it's programming does overlap into KZOK's. Probably not a surprise given both are IHEART stations and they are leaning into the harder 90s songs more and more.
I think there’s a big difference between Jack and someone trying to create a budget KISW though. We’ve seen an example of a budget KISW before (on 104.9), and I don’t think it stood a chance. To be fair, 104.9 is not anywhere close to being a full market signal, but it didn’t have much of an audience.
Ironically, 104.9 did have success under its most famous rock era in the early 2000’s. But there seemed to be no appetite for a canned rock station that was not much more than a jukebox.
I agree if we're talking about 104.9, but 98.9 under the rock format had a shot, and I still can't get over how abruptly that was pulled off the air.
I agree that content and talent is king, which is why I have such a problem with the way some stations, particularly iHeart stations in markets below about 50, are run. That being said though, I can't see why there isn't room for a station that plays newer rock music that follows a similar model to KZOK. I'm not sure what the most recent KZOK morning show was like, but last time I listened, it was little to no music in the morning, but a fairly standard amount of music the rest of the day.
I agree that content and talent is king, which is why I have such a problem with the way some stations, particularly iHeart stations in markets below about 50, are run. That being said though, I can't see why there isn't room for a station that plays newer rock music that follows a similar model to KZOK. I'm not sure what the most recent KZOK morning show was like, but last time I listened, it was little to no music in the morning, but a fairly standard amount of music the rest of the day.
- Status