Is News-Talk radio prepared for the future?

[bigtalkradiofan]

News-Talk Board,

Main Question: What are the implications both for News-Talk stations and content providers - if we'll soon see a portable and affordable device that can play: satellite radio, HD radio, terrestrial radio, internet radio, podcasts and mp3's (see my prior post on this subject below)?

My initial thoughts are:

N/T Stations - Hurts N/T stations because listeners can get same shows via satellite, or internet or podcast - so they aren't tied to the station as much. Stations are the "middle-man" - and getting squeezed out by these other delivery mechanisms.

N/T Content Providers - Strengthens hand of N/T content providers - because there are several different mechanisms to reach listener now.

Moderators: Please leave this post in the News-Talk Board. Initially, I posted this topic in News-Talk - but it was moved to a different board - which I didn't desire or approve of. Because I think this is an important topic for the News-Talk board - hence why I put it there in the first place. Thanks!

bigtalkradiofan

http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,59333.0.html
Posted on: January 03, 2007, 02:09:37 pm

Is radio prepared for the future?

It is just a matter of time...

Within the next 5 years, we will likely be seeing a device (likely a cell phone or mp3 player) that is:
A.) Affordable,
B.) Portable (personal, car, home, work, etc), that
C.) Can play simultaneously:
1.) Terrestrial Analog & HD Digital Radio (free over-the-air radio),
2.) Satellite Radio (pay to listen radio),
3.) Internet Radio & Podcasting (free or paid, access via internet),
4.) Personal mp3 Library (free or paid mp3 library).

In addition, within the next 10 years, we will likely be seeing these affordable and portable devices will eventually also be able to simultaneously play:
5.) Terrestrial Analog & Digital TV (free over-the-air TV),
6.) Cable TV & Pay-Per View TV (pay per view TV),
7.) Internet TV Broadcasting & TV Blogs (free or paid, access via internet),
8.) Personal mp3 TV Library (free or paid TV mp3 library).

In this context, there will be a ton of audio/video content available for listeners/viewers. There will also be a lot of competition to reach these audiences, with some content focused on reaching:
* Mass audiences,
* Niche audiences,
* Both Mass & Niche audiences.

Is radio prepared for the future?


http://www.hear2.com/2007/01/the_first_inter.html

"The First Internet Service Provider Specifically Designed for Cars"

I told you so.

It's Autonet.

TURN YOUR CAR INTO A WI-FI HOTSPOT.

Fasten your seatbelt. Because the driving experience will never be the same again. With Autonet Mobile, the first ever, always-on mobile broadband network, you and your passengers can now enjoy internet services and Wi-Fi connectivity whenever you want to by turning your car into a Wi-Fi hotspot on wheels. IM, chat, stream media, email, games, on-line listen to music and more.

It ain't cheap ($49 per month) - YET.

But already these guys have a deal with Avis for later in 2007. You'll be able to rent your mobile Internet connection for about the same price as it costs for you to link up in an airport or at a hotel. ...

[Click link above for the complete internet article.]

A portable device that can play: satellite radio, HD radio, terrestrial radio, internet radio and mp3's - who would have thought of that (see quote above).

Now the government is getting involved, ensuring that the merged Sirius satellite radio company doesn't try to block manufacturers from making devices capable of HD & internet radio as well as satellite radio.

http://textpattern.kurthanson.com/articles/367/rain-0505-reps-want-hd-net-radio-on-xm-sirius-devices

RAIN 5/5: REPS WANT HD, NET RADIO ON XM-SIRIUS DEVICES
·May 5, 11:31 AM
Posted by: Paul Maloney

U.S. REPS WANT SATELLITE RECEIVERS TO HANDLE OTHER TECHS LIKE HD AND NET RADIO: Two powerful Congressmen insist that if XM and Sirius are allowed to merge, satellite radio devices must accommodate other technologies like HD Radio and Internet access in receivers. ...

[Click link above for the complete article.]

 

[DaleGriffin]

Short answer... no, we are not ready.

Long answer... we could be, if we provide local content... local talk, news, weather, traffic. We are now branding our online brands and even though you may be able to go to Hannity.com, if my station is your local home for Hannity, you will go to mystation to get to him.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

0It is hard to evaluate whether radio is ready for the future, always has been hard to do, and probably will continue to be a mystery. There are always a few deep thinkers and visionaries toiling away somewhere, but what we see and hear is what they are doing to operate today and generate programming and revenue TODAY. If I am one of those "thinkers" I am not going to tell the world what the secret up my sleeve is until it is time to put it to work. If I show my cards, you may play them before I do.

I personally am bit pessimistic that in the immediate future I will have available to me at a price the masses can afford one device that does ALL the things you are envisioning in one package. The one technology that I think offers the biggest threat to traditional/terrestrial radio is what the cell-phone industry may be able to offer in enhanced streaming capabilities. The can utilize the same technology used by e-mail, the web, business data, etc. The same chips and circuits in the portable device, the cell-phone tower, and the back-bone network are agnostic about the content. They don't care whether they are carrying buckets of programming, e-mail, pornography, business data or gaming. It's just more bits. The cell phone industry can deliver more and more for the dollar because of the economic concept of "Economy of Scale".

So, if I own and operate a traditional FCC licensed broadcast property, what is in my future? I propose it had better be localness. I have always been a big believer in localness but as I read these discussion groups and I talk to broadcasters via e-mail and in person, we haven't begun to fathom what localness really means. Much of the conversation about localness is so, so shallow. WE DON'T HAVE A VISION of what is localness. And once you figure out what localness is, and you learn to germinate it and plant it and grow it to maturity, then you can not only monetize it on your transmitter, but you will eventually figure out how to make it a part of the mix on that giant cell-phone/internet monster and monetize it there also.

HINT: Just because you have a cubicle called a studio or announce booth that is located in your city of license and you have a human being there who can access the lever-key to open his/her mic does not mean you have germinated, planted and harvested localness. My vision is that true localness is some kind of descendant of news/talk radio.

 

[cm454]

Pretty simple, really:

Have good LOCAL talent.

Yeah, you have to invest in it and watch it grow audience. All good things take time.

You want no leverage? Keep cranking out the programming-off-the-bird.

Localness SHOULD NOT mean just focusing on local issues because they're local issues. If something on a national level is more interesting, talk about it. If a local subject is equally or more interesting, then do that.

The advantage to a local personlity is that they are living life along with your listeners and are relating to them on many levels about many subjects. Notice I said MANY subjects---not just politics.

The decisionmakers in this business have mortgaged this industry's future to turn a tidy profit over the past 10+ years.

They will leave this business in shambles and unprepared for the onslaught of a communications technology revolution. There is very little talent in the pipeline. If you have any in your stable, you'd best hold onto it as if it is your whole future---because in talkradio, it is.

 

[justareporter]

And don't forget the "news" in "news-talk." It is the most expensive part of the equation, but it is the one that listeners care about.

 

[jimwalsh2001]

Not unless we start getting some fresh and creative content. A thousand Rush-clones ain't gonna make it...

 

[WTUX]

We have lost the radio "farm teams" by replacing local dj's and talkers with syndicated programs. The small and medium market used to provide the voices of the future; those voices are now in short supply.

That said, radio needs to learn from pro football. Baseball gets the players of tomorrow from their farm system. Since radio has killed their own farm system, follow the lead of pro football and look to the colleges. Sean Hannity first came to the attention of professional radio from his time at a college station. The talk stations (and music stations) need to be spending more time listening to college radio, seeking the next generation of radio hosts. If this is not done, I am really unsure that radio as we know it HAS a future, in any format.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

WTUX- there is much wisdom in what you say. Big broadcast operations could afford to put some of their promotional budget into prizes and competition venues for college broadcasters... and just plain subsidize news and interview projects for campus radio.

However, let me play contrarian and suggest that campus radio is not the TOTAL answer or the ONLY answer. Take a page from the church world. They have a "farms system" for developing church professionals. (a.k.a. "ministers", "pastors", etc.) Church groups have universities. They have seminaries. They have internships. But guess where some of the most dynamic church talent is coming from today. Second career ministers. Folks who were lawyers, accountants, bankers, sales people decide they want in and walk away from career number one and bring with them talents and experiences you can't get on campus. Among the most pitiful "church professionals" are some who have never held down a "real world" job.

Radio ALSO, to go along side your excellent campus/farm team concept, needs a structured input system that takes people who are 35, 45 and 55 years old who have been living out where the listeners are brings them into the radio world. Those of us who were sitting before broadcast mics in our teens don't always have a fully developed view of the world outside of broadcasting. We tend to focus on impressing our fellow professionals. Among the most pitiful "radio professionals" are some who have never held down a "real world" job.

 

[smedge2006]

Radio ALSO, to go along side your excellent campus/farm team concept, needs a structured input system that takes people who are 35, 45 and 55 years old who have been living out where the listeners are brings them into the radio world.

It does... it's called "brokered radio"... and it brings not only the people but their money into the radio world... unfortunately one is soon gone, and then so is the other.

 

[cm454]

Since radio has killed their own farm system, follow the lead of pro football and look to the colleges. Sean Hannity first came to the attention of professional radio from his time at a college station. The talk stations (and music stations) need to be spending more time listening to college radio, seeking the next generation of radio hosts.

That is a really bad example.

First, Hannity started on a college station, as many have, and then got on a SMALL market talk station---which again, is the way the farm system often worked. You make it seem as though he fine-tuned his chops in college and then was ready for the big time. Not at all. He was a product of the farm system.

Second, college radio guys were always notorious for bad habits that needed to be un-learned for commercial radio. I worked for a guy who would have rather pulled someone off the street than use a college guy. Why? Clean slate.

Now we may in fact have to rely on "talent" that may very well have been shunned in the past for lack of ability and/or experience because those big voices of the future will perhaps not even consider radio as a viable career choice...and for good reason.

But alas, the broadcast medium's woes are nothing some Wall Street abandonment and wholesale bankruptcies won't cure.

And I'm looking forward to it.

 

[jaymarvin]

Talk radio will die if it doesn't provide live, local talent and better content than right vs left all day. Look at NPR's numbers. What does that say? NPR is great and is the wave of the future? No, what it says is talk radio is not doing it right, and people who want a spoken word format are going elsewhere.

 

[jimwalsh2001]

Talk radio will die if it doesn't provide live, local talent and better content than right vs left all day. Look at NPR's numbers. What does that say? NPR is great and is the wave of the future? No, what it says is talk radio is not doing it right, and people who want a spoken word format are going elsewhere.

Mega-dittos to everything Jay says... ;D

 

[DKB]

I am trying to locate a local am radio broadcast aired early 2005. Voice or transcript would work. Any ideas on where I might find it?
Thanks,
Dave

 

[DaleGriffin]

I am trying to locate a local am radio broadcast aired early 2005. Voice or transcript would work. Any ideas on where I might find it?
Thanks,
Dave

That really narrows it down.

 

[david9396]

check out the new LOCAL talk show on helloradio whlo640 afternoons 5 to 7--matt patrick.

matt is a 30 yr radio veteran who grew into his conservative views as he matured as a parent.

 

[dustintv]

Talk radio will die if it doesn't provide live, local talent and better content than right vs left all day. Look at NPR's numbers. What does that say? NPR is great and is the wave of the future? No, what it says is talk radio is not doing it right, and people who want a spoken word format are going elsewhere.

Brillant point. Mr. Marvin I love how your station in Denver has you and another local host in both AM and PM drivetimes, something more progressive stations should learn from. Same goes for all stations. It's sad to see heritage stations like WGY, WABC, KFMB etc. become locked in syndication all day long. This Phil Boyce post has left me very discouraged.

 

[jimwalsh2001]

In fairness to Mr. Boyce, his boss is an idiot.

 

[jimwalsh2001]

In fairness to Mr. Boyce, his boss is an idiot.

My apologies, that's a bit strong. Let's just say I believe the company has its priorities out of wack... ;D

 

[cm454]

I guess the sad notion that many people (myself included) have trouble reconciling, is that the only people who are interested in the spoken word format are conservatives and sports fans.

Isn't it really that niche programming has been given the *premiere* opportunity to succeed over all else due to the explosion of success for Rush Limbaugh in the early '90s?

There are plenty of listeners who aren't devoutly conservative or liberal who enjoy conversation on a wide variety of issues. Is any DOMINANT signal trying to cultivate talent that appeals to that MASSIVE and super-underserved crowd?

And no, the answer is not and has never been, nonsensical T&A talk, which unfortunately, was the usual go-to alternative to the Rush clone stations, particularly on FM.

Lib-talk was a disaster, not because only conservatives can entertain, but because a shallowly rooted agenda driven format, staffed by mostly no-names and isolated on second and third tier signals WITHOUT a real breakthrough entertainer, never had a chance. Conservative talk would have also failed under all those same conditions.

PEOPLE have much more in common than not. You want the future of talk to be interesting and inspiring? Hire entertaining talent that isn't a shill to a political agenda. You might someday find that your potential listening audience is almost EVERYBODY.

Easier said than done of course, especially in today's incredibly short-sighted and dividend-driven broadcasting climate.

Sadly, if you listen to most talkradio, you would think we are a country that is 90% right-wing and 10% everything else.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Sadly, if you listen to most talkradio, you would think we are a country that is 90% right-wing and 10% everything else.

Presidential elections where the vote is so close we have to get out magnifying glasses to inspect the chad to see who won would seem to support your claim.

We may indeed be a nation that is divided 50/50, or 55/45 or whatever.

However, one of the problems we have in understanding "audience" is that the question and answer are not quite that simple. People do come in MORE than TWO varieties. We are not simply left and right, Democrat and Republican, Conservative and liberal. There a sub-groups and sub-sub-groups of thinking and belief.

Winner-take-all ratings-driven-media do not seem to have the luxury of programming/writing to this sub-group and then switching gears to meet the interest of that sub-group over there. I think we have come to realize that making a child born to be left-handed fit our dreams and forcing that child to be right-handed sometimes bottles up a lot of emotion and talent.

What does it do to community when media says: You have to be either liberal or conservative, when a major portion of the population is neither PURE liberal or PURE conservative?