Is Bad HD-1 Programming a valid objection to HD radio?

[clouseau]

The assertion that "Lack of digital is not what's wrong with radio." is pretty weak when you look at it. In response to the latter, I would propose that programming and digital are two totally different and unrelated topics. Many of us (Yep that's right I'm in there too) would assert that radio is a little too safe. Too formulatic and too sanitized. Way too much "Don't play something bad" That has nothing to do with better sound and more choices. Or digital or HD. The dissatisfaction with ANALOG radio is being transposed onto DIGITAL radio. That's just wrong. Hate the right thing.

HD is not the enemy. Corporate radio MIGHT be. But I'm not so sure.

We in radio METHODICALLY do what produces the biggest audience. I swear this as the truth. There MIGHT be others with an agenda, I SERIOUSLY doubt it. I have had a job for MANY moons at the same ownership by getting the largest audience in my target group on a "Book by Book" basis. I've fed my employees because of it. I'm not the best at it, but I don't suck at it, either. And I'M NOT ALONE. In the world of radio,
I survive and prosper. DO YOU? Or did you find a more lucrative work field by franchising a Domino's Pizza ???

Not an attack, just a question. If more people listen to the tightly playlisted station as opposed to the freeform station, is THAT corporate radio's fault? Should the alledged, "Corporates" program "Better" and have fewer listeners? Or do we owe a "Best Book this time" to our owners? If not, should we stand under a bridge with a cardboard sign? Or should we get the bigger audience? Look in YOUR individual market. How may times have you heard... "Why do the really good stations always change format?..." It's "AUDIENCE REALITY". More variety does NOT equal higher listenership. Or better ratings. The audience or the measurement methodology is truly the problem. .

It's because People. (Not to be confused with YOU) don't really listen to more variety. They want their favorite song, "Coming up next". And we as radio, try to do that. There is a formula that get's better ratings. "IT" flies in the face of the "DB's" . The "Hippos", the "Racketteers" and the whole bunch. -You can trumpet your office listeners, your ears or your preference. I'll cite the official measurement of the universe.... ARBITRON. And according to them.... Radio can outperform you programming wannabee 's.... every time.

Here's the reality. You (And I) are NOT typical listeners. You insist you have a better idea. Ratings show elsewise.

Show me a better format and we'll run it. Ever hear of "JACK" and "Jammin' Oldies"?

It could happen. Your assertions about how you know better are really lame. PM me if youi think you have a programming answer. I'm alway looking...
But's if it's all about how HD radio sucks, well Good Luck.

Clouseau

 

[grantchester]

Nah, it's not the lack of digital, it's the lack of a connection to the listener. Radio ownership groups do not have the luxury of time. It takes time to build a station based on a connection between the broadcasters and the listeners. That's why we get these quick-flip format du jour stations like Jammin Oldies, Jack/Bob/Bruce/Ralph or whatever.
Radio as juke-box is in decline. People can program their own background music. Besides, a station that has only passive listening isn't a very good advertising value.
Active radio can succeed, on AM, on FM, in HD or on the internet. It's based on making a connection with the listener. If the listener is on the same wavelength as the personality, the personality can introduce a variety of tunes, beyond the same old same old so many of us criticise.
Examples of active radio:
Rush Limbaugh. His psychegraphic knows what to expect, and follows his line of thinking. They adopt his points because they feel the connection.
Wolfman Jack: He played tunes his listeners had never heard before, but he made them exciting. He gave the listener 'Entrance' into the tunes, by setting the context for their presentation.
Rege Kordic: He and his crew shared the point of view of his geographical audience. As network block programming migrated to TV, he created a new radio world, that his listeners understood and enjoyed.
Prairie Home Companion: A throwback to a previous era of radio variety show. It works because you know who the host is, where he is coming from, and where he is taking you.
Bottom line: it takes a lot of work, some time, some money and most of all persistence to make enough connections to make a personality show economically viable. Use these tools and any station from the high power a-1 or c-1 to the lamest LPFM, HD-3 channel or class D FM can find a viable audience and carry it's weight financially.
Unfortunately, it's a risk. It might not work. A financial expert has no idea what talent is,and won't approve the spending needed to make it happen. An account executive needs billing NOW and can't afford to wait around for things to grow. And there are very few BROADCASTERS around who understand how to make it work...
So, lets all go oldies/classic country/hot hits/ or urban hip hop, cause we know what that will do.
g

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

How ironic......At a time when hundreds of potentially viable FM multicast channels are becoming available around the country, ...creativity and originality in the industry seems to be at an all-time low.

It's no secret that the vast majority of these new FM mulicast channels are in the hands of 'big radio'. Makes sense, since these were the folks with the money to get invested in making the transition to digital.

But...these are many of the same people for whom originality and creativity seem to be dirty words.

Then, these same people have the task of trying to figure out how to program all these multicast channels while they ease thier own fears of 'cannibalization' of the rest of thier clusters...God forbid they actually compete with themselves! I might suggest that a bit of intramural rivalry inside a cluster isn't such a bad thing, but...

Simply put, I don't have a whole lot of confidence that many of the multicast channels will get the TLC that they'll need to become viable choices in the marketplace.

 

[kyscott]

It's not an objection, it's an expectation. These major radio companies cannot program one analog channel, what makes you think they are going to do any different to any other channel regardless of the delivery method?

 

[R.F. Burns]

It's not an objection, it's an expectation. These major radio companies cannot program one analog channel, what makes you think they are going to do any different to any other channel regardless of the delivery method?

I wouldn have to say that the vast majority of the public disagrees with this statement. Radio still has well over 100 million listeners who are more than satisfied. What broadcast facility, internet only or satellite comes close to the weekly cume of radio stations in a major market?

 

[clouseau]

...These major radio companies cannot program one analog channel, what makes you think they are going to do any different to any other channel regardless of the delivery method?

Radio still has well over 100 million listeners who are more than satisfied.

I agree with you RF, but I'm not sure I can say they are satisfied. Neither you or I have decisive data on that, I suspect. But either way, they ARE users of the product. Therefore I would assume SOME degree of satisfaction.

What's actually surprising is how much of it's audience, radio has retained considering it's position in, say the 70's. Let's use Philadelphia as an example. I'll have to do this from memory, so indulge me.

Major Radio Players - Early 70's

AM
WFIL - Top 40
WIP - MOR
WFLN - Classical
WPEN - MOR
WIBG - Top 40
KYW - News
WCAU - Talk
WHAT - Urban
WDAS - Urban
WRCP - Country/Daytime

FM (Not really major players, but...)

WIFI - Top 40
WMMR - Album
WYSP - Trying MOR Badly
WFLNFM - Classical
WWDB - Jazz
WCAU-FM Oldies/Disco
WPBS - Beautiful Music
WDVR - Beautiful Music
WIOQ - Trying to be MOR but lost
WPEN FM - MOR
WRCP - Country
WDASFM - Urban
WWSH - Beautiful Music

With FM just starting to get traction, if we include it, there are arguably 9 choices for Listeners up to 35. How about now? Can someone find me a station NOT tartgeting a 35 year old beside radio Disney? (And if you listen, they really are too). There's a LOT more choice. And a lot less competition. There's about 10 different formats above in the 70's. How many are there now? 25?-30? And how many more stations.

The radio industry didn't create this demand, it's the audience.

All things considered, It's pretty surprising radio has survived at all.

Clouseau

 

[R.F. Burns]

Clouseau, I made the statement I did because in today's world there are so many alternatives to terrestrial radio and yet the vast majority of people still choose radio. That might change somewhat in the future but as of this time, that is where we stand.

 

[clouseau]

Clouseau, I made the statement I did because in today's world there are so many alternatives to terrestrial radio and yet the vast majority of people still choose radio. That might change somewhat in the future but as of this time, that is where we stand.

Agreed. While individual stations tend to not have the gigantic shares many radio lovers remember, AS AN INDUSTRY, radio holds pretty steady. This in the face of Satellite and Internet, as well as significatly better quality reproductions such as CD's and Audio files. Rememeber when fidelity improvement was defined by changing from 8 tracks to cassettes?

One of the ways radio owners have retained listener share was the migration from AM to FM. Clearly they are attempting to do that again by adding HD. Notable along with the increased choices available has been the decreased revenue per "Choice". As listeners continue to demand more and more choice, there will be less and less revenue "PER CHOICE" than before. Some here have tried to use this a a twisted justification of why radio should not expand into HD. However
this "Head in the sand" approach can not work because alternative will continue to appear. The key is to be involved in the alternatives.

Radio "is" working in that direction. Be interesting to see how it plays out.

Clouseau

 

[dbdigital]

With all due respect, Inspector, (and, yes, as an industry professional I do respect you), your philosophy of programming to "what produces the biggest audience" which, put another way, means programming to the lowest common denominator and a slavish adherence to "the book" is what's wrong with much of radio today.

You can label me a 'programming wannabe' but you might as well put much of the media press in that same category as they have long complained about the state of radio programming.

How about this title from Wired Magazine's online magazine, "Why Things Suck: Radio" by Brendan I. Koerner. Mr. Koener than starts out his article with this statement; " Unless you enjoy hearing the same insipid Fergie song a dozen times a day, chances are you loathe mainstream radio. And for good reason: The FM band between 92.1 and 107.9, where commercial stations reign, is mostly a desert of robo-DJs and pop pabulum." And he's not alone in his assessment of commercial radio.

I had a very nice conversation by e-mail a few weeks ago with Bill Norman, owner of WNMB and we talked about his philosophy on how he programs his station.

He said this:

"We chose to do WNMB because we felt we could offersomething unique. Perhaps one could call it under the radar. We don't try to compete with any of the groups, we just do our own thing. We don't partcipate in the ratings game, instead we rely on our satisfied customers to be great testimonials for us when we are recruiting someone new" (referring to advertisers).

Granted, Oldies on AM is nothing new. But it's the way he presents the format and connects with the community that makes WNMB work. How successful is WNMB? Here we have an AM station with a 500 watt DA signal serving a very small market, North Myrtle Beach, and yet the station is able to pay all of its bills, support a staff of 8 and make a profit...enough for Bill to be able to purchase another station in the area.

You say, "show me a better format", without defining what you mean by 'better'. Do you mean better in the sense of gaining more audience? If that's the case then stay with the format you have as it appears to be working for you. If you mean 'better' in serving the community and offering something unique and worth listening to, then look at what NPR and the LPFM's are doing. Or talk to Bill Norman.

But as someone else here observed, first get it right on your primary channel before moving on to your HD2 and 3 channels.

db

 

[rbrucecarter5]

HD is not the enemy. Corporate radio MIGHT be. But I'm not so sure.

I'd be the first to say that bad programming decisions shouldn't have a bearing on the HD radio debate.

I wouldn't call it corporate radio so much as the lawyers and micro-management by corporate radio. Little politically incorrect gaffs, off the wall songs brought in by DJs that didn't exactly fit the preconceived format, contests that go a bit wrong, occasional technical goofs - they made radio FUN! Fun to work in, and fun to listen to. It isn't fun any more. It is BOR-RING.

Play a new artist that is really good, but not in the station's collection, the lawyers will panic about copyright, the manager about liability, the program director about integrity of the station image - and the DJ gets hauled in for an unpleasant meeting. It doesn't matter that the listeners love the song. By the way, I am talking about a real incident. It happened to a friend of mine in 1963, with an obscure new musical act called "The Beatles".

Will HD fix the problem with radio? I don't think so. The problem has nothing to do with analog or digital, codecs or bitrates, what is on HD-1 or HD-2 through X. The problem is dogmatically minded middle managers. Always has been, always will be. Only difference between 1963 and now - the small minded middle managers have seized control as giant radio corporations, stifling any semblance of creativity on their stations. Is it any wonder listeners have deserted radio in droves for anything fresh and unusual?

 

[dumber than a box of hair]

Remove the "HD-1" and the "HD" from your question, and ask it again. It's a fair question for any type of radio, analog or digital.

No one is going to stick around, HD or analog, if the programming sucks. However, if the exclusively-HD programming (the HD secondaries) sucks, no one will be motivated to buy a new radio either.

 

[clouseau]

(the) philosophy of programming to "what produces the biggest audience" which, put another way, means programming to the lowest common denominator and a slavish adherence to "the book" is what's wrong with much of radio today.

Or put another way, "The hell with playing what people vote to listen to with their tuning knobs", I, You, or some pompously annointed dunce knows best.

To buy into the view you espoused above is to say "SCREW YOU" to the people who like listening to the radio. They vote WITH THEIR TUNERS which station they like the best. You would deprive them of that - in favor of your (Or someone else's) idea of aledgedly "quality programming."

You can label me a 'programming wannabe' but you might as well put much of the media press in that same category as they have long complained about the state of radio programming.

How about this title from Wired Magazine's online magazine, "Why Things Suck: Radio" by Brendan I. Koerner. Mr. Koener than starts out his article with this statement; " Unless you enjoy hearing the same insipid Fergie song a dozen times a day, chances are you loathe mainstream radio.

This is absolutely correct. With his predetermined rancor for the business aside, what he states is correct. However it's only half the story. what he SHOULD have written is...

Unless you enjoy hearing the same insipid Fergie song a dozen times a day, which extensive research from listening measurement giant Arbitron shows the majority of you do, chances are you loathe mainstream radio.

In order to buy into this whole idea you're touting, you have to agree with one of the following principles.

1) The primary offenders in this alledged programming debacle do not want more listeners.

or

2) The measurement system is consistantly wrong and has been wrong since before 1996.

or

3) Listeners should NOT be able to chose what they want to listen to. I, You, Someone else or maybe The Government knows what is "Better" programming and they should impose it on the listener.

"We chose to do WNMB because we felt we could offersomething unique. Perhaps one could call it under the radar. We don't try to compete with any of the groups, we just do our own thing. We don't partcipate in the ratings game, instead we rely on our satisfied customers to be great testimonials for us when we are recruiting someone new" (referring to advertisers).



Granted, Oldies on AM is nothing new. But it's the way he presents the format and connects with the community that makes WNMB work. How successful is WNMB? Here we have an AM station with a 500 watt DA signal serving a very small market, North Myrtle Beach, and yet the station is able to pay all of its bills, support a staff of 8 and make a profit...enough for Bill to be able to purchase another station in the area.

And in a very small market, it may just work. Good for him. Seriously. Other stations in larger markets operating under this plan seem to have no chance whatsoever. Do you honestly think if this idea really worked in any type of bigger market, Clear Channel and the Big Boys wouldn't be all over it? And are the programming elitists actually going to permit him to play "OLDIES"? This would be the same "up to 1000 songs" we've all heard for 30 years right? He's doing what he needs to do. There's actaully a few of us out here doing that. We approach it from different angles.

You say, "show me a better format", without defining what you mean by 'better'. Do you mean better in the sense of gaining more audience? If that's the case then stay with the format you have as it appears to be working for you. If you mean 'better' in serving the community and offering something unique and worth listening to, then look at what NPR and the LPFM's are doing.

What a lot of the people who write this stuff don't seem to be able to grasp is that THEY are not the average listener. They casually toss around terms like "something unique and worth listening to" and they don't realize this is code for "something THEY say is unique and worth listening to.

But as someone else here observed, first get it right on your primary channel before moving on to your HD2 and 3 channels.

And I guess it's up to "those folks" to decide when it's been "Gotten Right". Is there a memebership fee to join the determining body? Do I have to be an NPR supporter? How about a family? If I like traditional jazz and my wife is into classical, but our Kid likes Hannah Montana does that still qualify?

With over 9 of 10 American's utilizing radio every week, do we really need these "Radio Programming Police" signing off on programming formats? What is this, Canada? England?

WHat is being prescribed here is the slipperiest of slopes.

Clouseau

 

[LinoNYC]

I had a very nice conversation by e-mail a few weeks ago with Bill Norman, owner of WNMB and we talked about his philosophy on how he programs his station.

He said this:

"We chose to do WNMB because we felt we could offer something unique. Perhaps one could call it under the radar. We don't try to compete with any of the groups, we just do our own thing. We don't partcipate in the ratings game, instead we rely on our satisfied customers to be great testimonials for us when we are recruiting someone new" (referring to advertisers).

Granted, Oldies on AM is nothing new. But it's the way he presents the format and connects with the community that makes WNMB work. How successful is WNMB? Here we have an AM station with a 500 watt DA signal serving a very small market, North Myrtle Beach, and yet the station is able to pay all of its bills, support a staff of 8 and make a profit...enough for Bill to be able to purchase another station in the area.

What Mr Norman is doing may be great programming but let's look a the service area demo's:

http://www.bestplaces.net/zip-code/North_Myrtle_Beach_SC-72958200011.aspx

Note that the area is 89.94% white as opposed to the National median of 77.53%

Next, look at the age median:
http://www.bestplaces.net/zip-code/Zip_Code_29582_North_Myrtle_Beach_SC-PEOPLE-DATA-72958200011.aspx

Ten point 4 percent higher than the national median.

Home price:
http://www.bestplaces.net/zip-code/North_Myrtle_Beach_SC-72958200031.aspx

$483,000 vs. $217,200 National.

WNMB is lucky enough to find itself serving a small, homogeneous, older and fairly affluent community.


It's also worth noting that the area in question is beginning to see an influx of younger people, what will that mean in say, ten years?

In my opinion, the best long-term scenario for a station such as this is to upgrade it's facility particularly ERP as much as possible, add both an iboc and 'net stream, promote these and begin working toward an eventual switch to all-digital AM (if such is ever approved).

Even in areas such as this, you cannot long ignore that the next generation of potential listeners is not AM-analog friendly.

Lino

 

[Tom Wells]

Dear Lino and Inspector,

I'm happy that you are still being served by radio. With so few stations having the courage to provide "gourmet" listening,
What other areas of preference and taste do you feel should be dictated by lowest-common denominator?

Are you wearing cheap, flashy shoes today because you can't find a high-quality pair?

Do you eat at Mc Donald's because they are everywhere?

Do you choose your vehicle based on what's selling the best, or do you wait until you find exactly what you want?
Do you excercise your free will in anything, or do you always wait until someone else's analysis tells you what you should choose?
Do you invest in businesses you support, or only those with a good return?
Is money THE only thing that matters? Check carefully before you trade away your last shred of integrity.

Tell us again why casual, barely attentive listeners are to be served rather than the active, engaged, increasingly disenfranchised listeners who find their favorite choices or variety ( remember variety?) discontinued?

I quote a wonderful tagline from an ad in MAD magazine from the 1960s.

"The man who thinks for himself, smokes VICEJOY, because everybody else does."


Businesses who care more about "business matters" ( $ ) than "content" will always fall into this trap, which is why creative issues should
never be left to MBA people.

If you are looking down at your feet and placing every next step by 'business-style" metrics, you are looking down, not watching
where you're headed, and will run into walls repeatedly, and wonder why.

Please tell us which other areas in life are best served by a herd mentality or over-analysis.

Only dead dish go with the current.

 

[clouseau]

Dear Lino and Inspector,

I'm happy that you are still being served by radio. With so few stations having the courage to provide "gourmet" listening, What other areas of preference and taste do you feel should be dictated by lowest-common denominator?

Again with the "Eliteist" stuff. You do understand that "Gourmet" becomes "Everyday fare" when it becomes very popular, right?

Are you wearing cheap, flashy shoes today because you can't find a high-quality pair?

I wear what I choose. Non of your business. However, if I want to wear rattlesnake moccasins and no one else does, they're going to be rare and expensive. Why? Because that's what it takes to make a living if you make them. Pure reality.

Do you eat at Mc Donald's because they are everywhere?

No, I eat at McDonalds because I like the taste of a Big Mac. Apparently so do a few other people. Do you have a problem with that?

Do you choose your vehicle based on what's selling the best, or do you wait until you find exactly what you want?

I buy the car that solves my problem. I do NOT care how wel it sells, concerns about continued service availability aside.

Do you excercise your free will in anything, or do you always wait until someone else's analysis tells you what you should choose?

What an absolutely arrogant and ignorant comment. I do what I chose. I also use tools to decide what to choose. Is Consumer Reports a bad idea? Do you personally interview candidates in the presidential race, utilize someone else's reports of what they stand for, or do you write the names on slips of paper and pull them out of a hat. Your take here is just crazy.

Do you invest in businesses you support, or only those with a good return?

If I am INVESTING, I look for those with a good return. If I am looking to do something to better a particular situation then I support that. Almost without exception these two tend to overlap only tangentially. It's my experience that a good financial base allows more effective philanthopy and more effective positive actions.

Is money THE only thing that matters? Check carefully before you trade away your last shred of integrity.

Well thanks for that. Obviously you are a much better judge of integrity than any of us. I stand in awe of your moral superiority. I'm sure you have a much better grasp of the public as a whole than those of us who

Tell us again why casual, barely attentive listeners are to be served rather than the active, engaged, increasingly disenfranchised listeners who find their favorite choices or variety ( remember variety?) discontinued?

Because, despite your self centered, "college campus activist" like screeching, griping, moaning and complaining, there's lots more of them than you. And the airwaves belong to THEM as much as you. And just because YOU think you're more important than them, you're not. The arrogance of "why casual listeners are served" rather than people like you is just flabbergasting. I will invite you to head on down to your local Wal-mart and meet the audience.

Businesses who care more about "business matters" ( $ ) than "content" will always fall into this trap, which is why creative issues should never be left to MBA people.

Well it's nice to see that you not only feel your ears are more important than you fellow man's, but that your opinions about creative matters are also superior. Let me get my shades here so I'm not blinded by the brightness.

Please tell us which other areas in life are best served by a herd mentality.

Got it. Your idea of "Best Served" is obviously far superior to the "Herd's" desires to be entertained..

You might want to keep in mind that without the support of the ignorant herd, you wouldn't have much of what many of enjoy everyday.

I've been a little caustic here, but it is a MASS medium. For a few to try and HIJACK IT for their own personal agenda because "They Know BEST" is just wrong.

Clouseau

 

[Tom Wells]

Whew, hit a few nerves there, did I?

Thank goodness I'm not "mass market" or a "consumer". I'm also very un-elitist, despite your paint-splashing of labels.

Everyone should have a choice to wear rattlesnake moccasins, not forced to wear puffy silver-striped athletic shoes the market
is flooded with.

Once the gourmet choice becomes popular, it always becomes cheapened and almost impossible to sell at the quality level
once expected, and the cheap version is never the same.

Would you invest in businesses that make lots of money if they are diametrically opposed to your values?
Again, see integrity.

I am not happy about where my company has invested ny 401K, for these reasons.
I must deliberately ignore the "fund portfolio" as I would object to many of the things I find in there, but I have no choice in
this matter anymore.

Please keep in mind while the words are mine, I am echoing opinions ( regarding radio ) from many different people over many years.
Just because some people are more engaged and attentive is not elitist.

I'd rather not meet you at Wal-Mart or Mc Donalds.
I have one thermal undershirt bought at a Wal-Mart in an emergency when sent to Minnesota after Florida in January 1993.
I am still ashamed that I bought it at a Wal-Mart instead of a small business that contributes to the greater economy.


What if NO vehicle sold solves your problems? What then? Do you keep the old one, or just decide to have the problem?

We need to have this discussion over beer, not keyboards.
I suspect we both have had strong coffee this morning.
We're both OK people, and I'm really not trying to be antagonistic.
Maybe it's the fact I've been dealing with a customer from hell this week.
See Engineering board, "to be or not to be digital".

 

[clouseau]

Whew, hit a few nerves there, did I?
Thank goodness I'm not "mass market" or a "consumer". I'm also very un-elitist, despite your paint-splashing of labels.
Everyone should have a choice to wear rattlesnake moccasins, not forced to wear puffy silver-striped athletic shoes the market is flooded with.

Tom, your view is VERY elitist. I know you don't like to hear that, but it is. You talk about your CHOICE to "Not be forced" to wear a certain kind of shoes. No one does force you. But you are well off and can make those choices independently. You don't shop at Wal Mart because you choose not to. Many MANY folks in this country can not afford the luxury of that option. That's why Wal Mart is doing well and odds are the department store where your family shopped when you grew up is gone. REALITY.

Once the gourmet choice becomes popular, it always becomes cheapened and almost impossible to sell at the quality level once expected, and the cheap version is never the same..

Your life is so tough. Sorry all those soiled masses ruin your existance. The nerve of them wanting large quantites of cheap wine in a box.

Would you invest in businesses that make lots of money if they are diametrically opposed to your values?

No, but I'll be damned if playing Fergie too much is diametrically opposed to my values. If your business is selling 12 year old girls into slavery, I have a serious problem with that. Too much Alecia Keys? Please.

Again, see integrity.

How about common sense? Do we ever get any of that?

I am not happy about where my company has invested ny 401K, for these reasons.
I must deliberately ignore the "fund portfolio" as I would object to many of the things I find in there, but I have no choice in
this matter anymore.

Yeah you're really on there. That damn 401K and where it's invested. The hell with the family who has two kids, both parents work, and the transmission is slipping in the Tempo. Come back to reality, Tom. These people are far more numerous then those of use who do a good bit better. And they all get one vote, just like you and me. Again i remind you GO TO WAL-MART AND ACTUALLY MEET THE AUDIENCE. Or pay for satellite.

Just because some people are more engaged and attentive is not elitist.

It is if you think we should change radio away from what the majority seem to want to what YOU want. You might not like the sound of it, but that's what it is. I'm a realist. Are you?

I'd rather not meet you at Wal-Mart or Mc Donalds.

I'm sure. Frankly, me too. However however when the Huggies are on sale, the MASSES go there. If you're not Mass Market or a Consumer, but you want to dictate, then you must just think you better than others. Maybe you are. But the masses don't seem to want your culture. They want "Fitty Cent".

I have one thermal undershirt bought at a Wal-Mart in an emergency when sent to Minnesota after Florida in January 1993. I am still ashamed that I bought it at a Wal-Mart instead of a small business that contributes to the greater economy.

Don't put me in the position of defending Wal Mart, but they actually contribute to the economy also. Again, I will state. If you think there is a problem with radio (or Wal Mart) then vote with the Knob (or shop somewhere else.)

What if NO vehicle sold solves your problems? What then? Do you keep the old one, or just decide to have the problem?

Yes. You do one of the other.

We need to have this discussion over beer, not keyboards.
I suspect we both have had strong coffee this morning.
We're both OK people, and I'm really not trying to be antagonistic.
Maybe it's the fact I've been dealing with a customer from hell this week.
See Engineering board, "to be or not to be digital".

De nada. And I agree. I just get testy when people start telling other people how they "Should" be.

I've been following your engineering board saga. Good luck with that

Clouseau

 

[dbdigital]

(the) philosophy of programming to "what produces the biggest audience" which, put another way, means programming to the lowest common denominator and a slavish adherence to "the book" is what's wrong with much of radio today.

Or put another way, "The hell with playing what people vote to listen to with their tuning knobs", I, You, or some pompously annointed dunce knows best.

To buy into the view you espoused above is to say "SCREW YOU" to the people who like listening to the radio. They vote WITH THEIR TUNERS which station they like the best. You would deprive them of that - in favor of your (Or someone else's) idea of aledgedly "quality programming."

You can label me a 'programming wannabe' but you might as well put much of the media press in that same category as they have long complained about the state of radio programming.

How about this title from Wired Magazine's online magazine, "Why Things Suck: Radio" by Brendan I. Koerner. Mr. Koener than starts out his article with this statement; " Unless you enjoy hearing the same insipid Fergie song a dozen times a day, chances are you loathe mainstream radio.

This is absolutely correct. With his predetermined rancor for the business aside, what he states is correct. However it's only half the story. what he SHOULD have written is...

Unless you enjoy hearing the same insipid Fergie song a dozen times a day, which extensive research from listening measurement giant Arbitron shows the majority of you do, chances are you loathe mainstream radio.

In order to buy into this whole idea you're touting, you have to agree with one of the following principles.

1) The primary offenders in this alledged programming debacle do not want more listeners.

or

2) The measurement system is consistantly wrong and has been wrong since before 1996.

or

3) Listeners should NOT be able to chose what they want to listen to. I, You, Someone else or maybe The Government knows what is "Better" programming and they should impose it on the listener.

"We chose to do WNMB because we felt we could offersomething unique. Perhaps one could call it under the radar. We don't try to compete with any of the groups, we just do our own thing. We don't partcipate in the ratings game, instead we rely on our satisfied customers to be great testimonials for us when we are recruiting someone new" (referring to advertisers).



Granted, Oldies on AM is nothing new. But it's the way he presents the format and connects with the community that makes WNMB work. How successful is WNMB? Here we have an AM station with a 500 watt DA signal serving a very small market, North Myrtle Beach, and yet the station is able to pay all of its bills, support a staff of 8 and make a profit...enough for Bill to be able to purchase another station in the area.

And in a very small market, it may just work. Good for him. Seriously. Other stations in larger markets operating under this plan seem to have no chance whatsoever. Do you honestly think if this idea really worked in any type of bigger market, Clear Channel and the Big Boys wouldn't be all over it? And are the programming elitists actually going to permit him to play "OLDIES"? This would be the same "up to 1000 songs" we've all heard for 30 years right? He's doing what he needs to do. There's actaully a few of us out here doing that. We approach it from different angles.

You say, "show me a better format", without defining what you mean by 'better'. Do you mean better in the sense of gaining more audience? If that's the case then stay with the format you have as it appears to be working for you. If you mean 'better' in serving the community and offering something unique and worth listening to, then look at what NPR and the LPFM's are doing.

What a lot of the people who write this stuff don't seem to be able to grasp is that THEY are not the average listener. They casually toss around terms like "something unique and worth listening to" and they don't realize this is code for "something THEY say is unique and worth listening to.

But as someone else here observed, first get it right on your primary channel before moving on to your HD2 and 3 channels.

And I guess it's up to "those folks" to decide when it's been "Gotten Right". Is there a memebership fee to join the determining body? Do I have to be an NPR supporter? How about a family? If I like traditional jazz and my wife is into classical, but our Kid likes Hannah Montana does that still qualify?

With over 9 of 10 American's utilizing radio every week, do we really need these "Radio Programming Police" signing off on programming formats? What is this, Canada? England?

WHat is being prescribed here is the slipperiest of slopes.

Clouseau

So which is worse, "screw you" or "me too" programming?

For example in Los Angeles, the market I'm in, Radio-locator identifies 4 stations as Urban Contemporary (if you don't count a translator for one of the stations). Now, do we really need four stations with the same format and all working off basically the same playlist? I don't think so and many listeners here agree.

The top rated station for Urban C, KHHT, comes in at #15 with a 2.4 share. The bottom ranking Urban C stations tie for an 0.8 share.

By contrast, up the coast in Central California (another area with a high Hispanic population) KKJL, an Adult Standards AM, is ranked at #13 with a 2.7 share. We have nothing like a KKJL in L.A. Would Adult Standards on, say FM, do well here? I have no idea but I have to think it would do better than an 0.8 share.

Of course, we'll never know because most of the people who program the stations in L.A. are gutless lemmings whose tails are tied to "the book" and will only program what their competitors are doing or what a consultant or marketing research study says they should program. No passion or instincts needed or wanted.

I agree with you on one thing, Inspector: people are voting with their tuners. They're turning them off and turning on something else.

db

 

[clouseau]

So which is worse, "screw you" or "me too" programming?

For example in Los Angeles, the market I'm in, Radio-locator identifies 4 stations as Urban Contemporary (if you don't count a translator for one of the stations). Now, do we really need four stations with the same format and all working off basically the same playlist? I don't think so and many listeners here agree.

The top rated station for Urban C, KHHT, comes in at #15 with a 2.4 share. The bottom ranking Urban C stations tie for an 0.8 share.

By contrast, up the coast in Central California (another area with a high Hispanic population) KKJL, an Adult Standards AM, is ranked at #13 with a 2.7 share. We have nothing like a KKJL in L.A. Would Adult Standards on, say FM, do well here? I have no idea but I have to think it would do better than an 0.8 share.

Don't take this wrong, but you are right. You have no idea. NEITHER DO I. I don't know the market. But we clearly have MUCH more chioce than we did just a few years ago. As a rule, there is very little duplication any more. Most stations are fairly different from each other. Not market to market, but the Hot rockin' flame Throwing head on head competition between 2 stations you can't tell apart is fairly rare anymore. Many MANY station share similar tracks, but are very different.

Of course, we'll never know because most of the people who program the stations in L.A. are gutless lemmings whose tails are tied to "the book" and will only program what their competitors are doing or what a consultant or marketing research study says they should program. No passion or instincts needed or wanted.

Gutless lemmings? My GOD, could you folks try for a millisecond to try and understand the average radio listener. It's NOT YOU.

I agree with you on one thing, Inspector: people are voting with their tuners. They're turning them off and turning on something else.

Some are no doubt. It has to do with number of choices. If there are a limited number of stations and now a MULTITUDE of other choices, people will slowly adapt the other technology if radio can not provide them with what they want.
This is inevitable. To turn around and give the industry to people who don't understand anything about how pand why people listen is not the answer.

Clouseau

db
[/quote]

 

[dbdigital]

OK, Inspector, just to prove to you that I'm not such a bad guy, here's a little announcement posted on the LA Radio site on some new HD-2 programming from our friends at Clear Channel:

"Hot HD. HOT 92.3 announces the world’s first 24 hour all-Slow Jams radio station to 92.3FM HD-2. “Slow Jams Radio” features the greatest R&B love songs from today and yesterday and will be one of the few HD Format channels to feature personalities."

The HOT HD lineup includes: Al B. Sure! – mornings, Lisa St. Regis – middays, Kevin “Slow Jammin” James – afternoons, Victor Zaragoza – nights and R Dub! – Late Nights.

The announcement continues:

"In addition to the Los Angeles Market, this month Clear Channel signed a deal with R Dub to program a national version of Slow Jams Radio as part of the company’s “Format Lab” – 40 formats designed for Clear Channel stations to run on their HD-2 side channels."

I'm not even going to comment on any of this.

http://www.laradio.com/newsite/index3.htm

And if you want to hear this format:

www.slowjamsradio.com

db