• 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

FCC Proposes Increase in HD Signal Power

see..your gatekeeping and gaslighting.

all these stats your throwing out are nothing but guessing games, show real numbers of those listening to terrestrial stations right now in real time!
I just did, based on the averaging of Nielsen radio market data.
go blow smoke up someone else's ass with your stats and misinformation.
OK, that is a lie and I'm suspending you till you learn a few things. Example: Stations have payed writers and composers for the last nearly 90 years.
at the end of the day, i'm still right and you refuse to admit it.
No, your statements are full of misinformation.
Radio stations need to pay the artists, not the record companies...pay up or shut down.
We do, and until the labels became foreign owned conglomerates, they paid us to play their records, legally and illegally because it was that valuable to them.
 
About the fact that this industry is filled with technological gatekeepers and gas-lighters.
You seem to like to use terms like 'gas lighting' for just about everything you believe differently. From Merriam Webster:
"Gas Lighting: psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one's emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator."
It seems like by definition, you are guilty of using this tactic more than anyone here.
the blinders are on, you can see where the industry should go, but you really don't want it to, so you pretend not to notice until you're so far behind the curve that you are left begging people to stay.
Seems like you expect humans, let alone media execs to be able to predict the future, or be able to determine consumer habits years in advance. If you're so good at knowing what listeners/viewers will do in the future with certainty, chances are good you wouldn't be making cranky posts on some radio discussion board.
back in 1994-ish, a young entrepreneur named Mark Cuban bought the domain broadcast.com for nearly a steal...everyone called him crazy and said no one will every listen to sports or music on the internet, they all laughed.
I worked in the same building in the infancy as Broadcast.com, and knew Mark personally through business. Nobody was laughing that I saw. Most traditional radio management was paying attention to the idea of streaming, but there wasn't a business model around it at that time, mainly because Internet access was much more expensive.
from the success of that website, sparked the beginnings of what would lead to innovations such as Pandora, spottily, apple music, podcasting and internet radio as we know it today.
That's a pretty simplistic description of streaming evolution, but yes, Mark was one of the first.
knowing what was to come, terrestrial radio continued to sit back and play the long game with many saying there will always be a need for terrestrial radio, no matter AM or FM.
You do know that iHeart is one of the largest, most popular streaming and podcast platforms? Groups like Townsquare have seen significant increases in business from the digital side. In fact, I believe their digital assets have surpassed traditional radio in percentage of revenue.
Had Ford and GM not publicly announce the initial plan to phase out AM radio from vehicles, that little story would have gone completely unnoticed by everyone.
As I recall, most of the publicity that was aroused mainly through Republican politicians was due to right-wing talk networks that mainly rely on AM stations for distribution, were concerned that automakers would hurt their business by eliminating AM tuners in vehicles.
you can spit ball all the stats of who has 2% over here and 30% over here, but at the end of the day, the listeners don't care.
You were the one who (paraphrased) claimed SXM was so popular, and that somehow radio got caught flat-footed. That couldn't be further from the truth.
and to be honest, no one here really cares about the listeners.
Nice that you can speak for everyone. Not really.
Of course broadcasters care about listeners. The key term is broad. Popular radio has always benefited as a business by providing programming to many, not just a few.
if anyone reading this post ever gave a damn about the listeners over the last 40+ years, there'd be a lot of more stations fully staffed 24/7, no corporate overwatch, no voicetracking... actually listening to that voice on the other end of your voxpro line, asking you play their request.
Really? You believe that having yakky jocks doing time checks and talking up vocals, Les Nessman doing news at the top of every hour, is something that modern listeners want? Again, you couldn't be further from reality in that thinking. And there's a lot of research to back that up.
and if the radio indsutry ever gave a damn about it's roots, it would collectively lobby the FCC to require stations to pay the artists and songwriters every penny they have been due and put an end to the free publicity and exploitation just to get the local dollar general to run a 30 ad on your station.
So with more competition from streaming, radio should go back in time, pay more by hiring more employees, and pay more to songwriters, while ad spending is at an all time low? If that's what you think. you're thinking everything backwards, and are simply out of step with modern media consumption.
 
About the fact that this industry is filled with technological gatekeepers and gas-lighters.

the blinders are on, you can see where the industry should go, but you really don't want it to, so you pretend not to notice until you're so far behind the curve that you are left begging people to stay.

back in 1994-ish, a young entrepreneur named Mark Cuban bought the domain broadcast.com for nearly a steal...everyone called him crazy and said no one will every listen to sports or music on the internet, they all laughed.

from the success of that website, sparked the beginnings of what would lead to innovations such as Pandora, spottily, apple music, podcasting and internet radio as we know it today.

knowing what was to come, terrestrial radio continued to sit back and play the long game with many saying there will always be a need for terrestrial radio, no matter AM or FM.

Had Ford and GM not publicly announce the initial plan to phase out AM radio from vehicles, that little story would have gone completely unnoticed by everyone.

you can spit ball all the stats of who has 2% over here and 30% over here, but at the end of the day, the listeners don't care.

and to be honest, no one here really cares about the listeners.

if anyone reading this post ever gave a damn about the listeners over the last 40+ years, there'd be a lot of more stations fully staffed 24/7, no corporate overwatch, no voicetracking... actually listening to that voice on the other end of your voxpro line, asking you play their request.

and if the radio indsutry ever gave a damn about it's roots, it would collectively lobby the FCC to require stations to pay the artists and songwriters every penny they have been due and put an end to the free publicity and exploitation just to get the local dollar general to run a 30 ad on your station.
Over the Air radio will be with us probably for a couple more decades, because it's FREE. People like the cost of FREE.

RE: Radio and streaming: In the 2000's, when streaming first became a thing, there was generally little way to monetize it. You mention Pandora and Spotify. Even 15+ years after they became prominent streaming platforms, they still don't make much profit. Apple streams music, and (reportedly) around 50% of their music streaming revenues go to royalties... 50% of revenue to royalties. That's a big chunk of your income -- before all the other costs.

People at radio may sometimes appear to be a little slow in adapting some new tech, because it can cost a lot of money, but they aren't stupid. In the 2000s streaming was a toy, basically. It didn't start becoming a dominant platform for music consumption until the late 2010s. Go look at the RIAA music consumption charts on the RIAA website. People were still downloading MP3s to their phones and IPod devices in 2012. MP3 downloads were still a chief music revenue model as late as 2014, and streaming was still growing in importance. Radio knew this. Radio knew streaming was a big deal, but streaming still presented a difficult business model because of digital royalties, which are (and were) high.

Streaming still doesn't make the platforms much of a profit.

So why would Joe's radio station in Podunk, Missouri concentrate on streaming? They may do it now, to a certain extent, because it's become the dominant platform for music consumption. But up until the late 2010's it just wasn't so.

And even now some stations -- especially smaller radio operations -- have to limit the geographic area their stream reaches because of royalty costs. One station in California that had maybe 400K online listeners nationwide had to restrict access to its stream to just the local area because the digital royalty payments were so high.

Add in the after effects of the 2008 recession, which slammed the radio industry hard, and the economic effects of the pandemic, it makes smaller radio companies a bit more hesitant to make major changes to their operations unless they are certain that those changes will provide a return on investment.

Finally, radio does pay artists -- through BMI, ASCAP, and other services, and they also pay digital royalties for every song streamed. The amounts paid vary. But they do pay. If you want to see the big picture of how much money is involved on the digital royalty side, the RIAA website is a good place to start. It doesn't address radio, but the music industry side of the streaming revenue situation is pretty well covered there.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom