Is Radio Truly Being Properly Presented?

[KFodor]

You look at various news accounts and networks and all you read is:

Radio is dead....

Radio is dying...

Internet and satellite is king...

And yet, when Arbitron measures radio's audience, it's very good, and solid. (In fact, gaining audience in the last article
I read.)

And usually, I see that the mis-information always seems to come from press agents hired by companies representing the new media interests.

Why won't radio fire back? Unless you read it in forums such as this (and, sorry R-I...as a percentage of the population, this is a niche news forum).

When does radio get mad and get an advocate to go to the networks and correct some of the blatant crap I hear on TV and on the net? We don't seem to be able to rely on the NAB anymore....

When do we get a voice? Ideas?

 

[local oscillator]

Jason, you are on the money. Radio is so incredibly powerful, yet nobody wants to admit it because it's not digital, and most of the consultants out there can't turn a buck without jumping onto the digital bandwagon. For the record, Richard Harker, Tim Moore, Roy Williams, and Lee Abrams get kudos for not flying into the digital flame. Most of the others, ugh! They're not in the business of promoting or improving Radio, they're in the business of telling Radio that it's doing everything wrong, and they and their digital expertise are going to save the industry. Riiiiiggght! In addition, media tech reporters are only interested in the newest, sexiest, digital piece of crap du jour to discuss, not a decades-old technology that has stood the test of time and works well. Radio is kind of like water and electricity -- been around a long time, used by everyone, taken for granted.

 

[Roger That]

Radio is kind of like water and electricity -- been around a long time, used by everyone, taken for granted.

This is your answer. Radio is a utility. You can't lump the 1% of Radio that may be amazing, powerful, radio-touches-the-audience examples in with the 99% of it that's barely serviceable, compelling insofar as the next hit record (in other words...you play a song I don't love and I'm gone). Just because people listen to Radio in general doesn't mean that the radio STATIONS that they're listening to are anything more than throwaway to them.

It's old, and perceived as so. Anyone think that Newspaper will be around forever? If anything, Radio should be taking a cue from them. If you don't want to be like Newspaper, EVOLVE. It's easy to see Newspaper and think it will never happen to Radio. But if you weren't in, or obsessed with Radio, would you think that? That doesn't mean shut off the transmitters and only stream. It means stop pretending like iPods and Pandora are the enemy. They are, but they're the underdog. David, to Radio's Goliath. But ignore them long enough...pretend like they're only a fad...feel untouchable...How long until David finds a slingshot? We should be stealing the things they're doing right and stay on top, while also creating our own new things that they only wish they thought of. Innovate. Radio doesn't have it all figured out anymore. There are still things to learn, and with more and more audiences becoming more and more sophisticated, the time to do that is now. As smartphone percentages in the general population increase, how many of those have FM capabilities? Thought so. And when streaming becomes regularly available in cars in 5-10 years, are you going to bet on Radio? Or the field?

Picture any heritage station battle like FLZ vs Q105 in '89. You think Q105 was scared of FLZ when they signed on? See what happened when they took it for granted? That their "brand" would carry them through? If Radio waits until they don't have the audience they do now to evolve, they'll never get it back. Do you ever see Newspaper subscriptions going UP? Radio has to get its head out of the sand and stop thinking that everything's ok.

SIDE NOTE: Personally, I think Arbitron is the biggest problem, and one that, if fixed, would raise the bar of all radio. But that's a whole different topic.

There is an OPPORTUNITY here. Surely I can't be the only one that sees it.

 

[TheBigA]

We should be stealing the things they're doing right and stay on top, while also creating our own new things that they only wish they thought of.

I think "we" are. That's why we still have lots of audience. That's why the people, for the most part, feel that pay radio, whether it's satellite or internet, isn't worth the money.

But yes, there's a huge perception problem. The programming isn't the problem. Radio needs a cool new device that people will want to own. Remember how cool that iPhone was when you bought it? You showed it to everyone. It's just a phone. You don't show everyone that 5-button black thing on your desk. But an iPhone is cool. There are no really cool radios that have features I'd want to show someone. That's what leads to the perception that radio isn't cool.

 

[TheBigA]

I was just reading a great article about pizza restaurants, and how Sbarro's is having financial trouble, even though it's one of the biggest pizzarias in the country. I saw one quote that could just as easily apply to radio:

"This is not based on the specific product, pizza, but instead on how Sbarro ran their business, executed leases, created profitable items and managed their labor model," he said. "Sbarro is a stale and old brand that has not taken any steps to reignite their audiences and have not competed on the same level as their competitors."

So there you have it. A big part of how Sbarro's competitors have reinvented themselves is through advertising and regular specials. Papa John's is one of the most dynamic. Personalizing their store, with the founder, is from the Wendy's and KFC playbook. But it works. And it doesn't hurt to deliver a good product.

 

[KeithE4]

I was just reading a great article about pizza restaurants, and how Sbarro's is having financial trouble, even though it's one of the biggest pizzarias in the country. I saw one quote that could just as easily apply to radio:

"This is not based on the specific product, pizza, but instead on how Sbarro ran their business, executed leases, created profitable items and managed their labor model," he said. "Sbarro is a stale and old brand that has not taken any steps to reignite their audiences and have not competed on the same level as their competitors."

So there you have it. A big part of how Sbarro's competitors have reinvented themselves is through advertising and regular specials. Papa John's is one of the most dynamic. Personalizing their store, with the founder, is from the Wendy's and KFC playbook. But it works. And it doesn't hurt to deliver a good product.

Mall pizza (and not very good mall pizza at that). 'Nuff said. ;D

But Papa John's and Pizza Hut are just as mediocre as Sbarros as far as food quality goes, but they at least attempt to compete and innovate. Doesn't help their pizza any (IMHO) but it apparently keeps the customers coming in.

 

[TheBigA]

Doesn't help their pizza any (IMHO) but it apparently keeps the customers coming in.

Once again a great analogy for radio, and proof that it's not always the product that's the problem.

 

[local oscillator]

Radio is kind of like water and electricity -- been around a long time, used by everyone, taken for granted.

This is your answer. Radio is a utility. You can't lump the 1% of Radio that may be amazing, powerful, radio-touches-the-audience examples in with the 99% of it that's barely serviceable, compelling insofar as the next hit record (in other words...you play a song I don't love and I'm gone). Just because people listen to Radio in general doesn't mean that the radio STATIONS that they're listening to are anything more than throwaway to them.

If you think that these attributes - been around a long time, used by everyone, and taken for granted - are negative, then we're not speaking the same language. I would hope that all serious station owners aspire to those attributes. My station has been around a long time, is used by (almost) everyone in our market, our listeners and advertisers take us for granted, and I love it. It's called success, and I can tell you that success takes a lot of hard work and clear thinking. It has very little to do with the next hit record or a twitter account.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

This is a conversation that rises to the surface in some form or another with regularity.

Being OUT of the business, I have to think really long and hard to evaluate my opinions and my observations. I, like so many people, have fond memories of some time in the past and of course I think we did radio right back then. And the next post is written by someone who still lives in some other time period. And the next post is written by someone who is in the business today and is making it work, TODAY!

Pulling yourself out of your own cocoon, and trying to see the whole world, the up close world as well as the one out on the horizon, it very, very tough to do.

My world was small market radio and by turning over rock after rock in these conversations, I find there are still local stations in small markets who really accomplish what ROGER THAT is describing. But then again, my radar antenna is well tuned to spot that kind of operation, and maybe forgive it for having a few little warts and wrinkles.

But in the big picture, I stick to my somewhat negative view of how the industry is dealing with "being radio". I know. The audience studies show that the audience is as big as ever. It's in black and white. See it for yourself!

War Story: Later in life I was the computer guru for one of America's phenomenal car dealers. And when sales people began making more money than he thought they should, he would change the commission arrangement. The group that kept me laughing were the "F&I" guys. (You know, after you and the salesman agree on a price and a car, they turn you over to "Finance and Insurance" to so the paperwork. Their place in life is to sell you financing even when you are ready to write a check for the car; sell you extended warranty. sell you rust proofing. And the one I should have bought on my most recent purchase: Protection for rock-chips in the paint on the front end of the car! I didn't know these new designs handle the air flow in such a way that the front end of the car is a magnet for such damage!. Back to my story. This deal kept fiddling with the pay arrangement for these guys because they always made too much money. I got involved because the pay program was so complex I had to write a computer algorithm to calculate the commissions. And no matter how he changed the program, within 10 days these guys always figured out how to make even MORE money under the new draconian program.

Prove me wrong, but I think those F&I guys now own and run the audience survey companies. No matter how much the real radio audience shrinks, they figure out some new method of selecting the participants who keep diaries or wear those little PPM receivers so that only hard-core listeners are surveyed. Just like call-screeners make sure the audience killing callers never get on talk radio, somebody has figured out a legal way to screen the audience survey participants. I know. FTC or somebody has written rules to make sure the surveys are authentic, but I don't believe it. And as long a gung-ho broadcasters really believe those surveys and can convince advertising buyers they are authentic, they are not going to fine-tune or repair radio.

As long as Sbarro's was making profit, no one could convince their management their product and image needed fine-tuning or repair.

If radio is hot-stuff today with bigger audience than ever, how come I have trouble finding radios for sale at retail? Everywhere I turn I can buy a Cuisinart Coffee-maker, or a bathroom scale or a little battery powered vacuum to keep the carpets clean in my rock-scarred new car. But a radio... at retail? It's like trying to buy a flat-bed scanner without a built-in printer.

My other argument is this: I serve on some committees. I operate and maintain a church sound system. My people that I work with ask how I learned the technical skills of sound reinforcement. When I tell them I learned when I learned the technical end of broadcasting, I hear some interesting stories to that tell me that today's radio audience may be showing some anemia. Same story with the group where I maintain a website for them.

 

[TheBigA]

If radio is hot-stuff today with bigger audience than ever, how come I have trouble finding radios for sale at retail?

Answer: Everyone already owns at least three. But I don't own a Cuisinart Coffee-maker, nor do I plan to. I own a Braun.

But you can't sell a product to a glutted market, and that's the story with radio now. So when XM came out with a great product that required everyone buy a new radio, plus pay a monthly fee, only a small percentage took the bite. Same with HD Radio. I own three radios, they all work just fine, I like what I can receive, so why should I buy another? Especially when my computer and my car came with radios built in. If I can get radio on other devices for free, why buy another device that only receives radio?

That's why I say this is mainly a hardware problem, not a software problem.

 

[davideduardo]

Prove me wrong, but I think those F&I guys now own and run the audience survey companies. No matter how much the real radio audience shrinks, they figure out some new method of selecting the participants who keep diaries or wear those little PPM receivers so that only hard-core listeners are surveyed.

There is a fundamental disconnect here. Ratings companies survey the population, not radio listeners or TV viewers. They attempt to survey a sample of the population that mirrors the entire population. And always, a percentage don't listen to radio at all, a percentage only listen a little, and some listen a lot.

FTC or somebody has written rules to make sure the surveys are authentic, but I don't believe it.

Well, there was an investigation in the 60's... and we have as an offshoot the Media Ratings Council which looks at methodology and implementation of every system every year... in radio, for every market, too. And they give accreditation if the survey is properly done. Much of the MRC is made up of people from the advertising and ad agency client side.

And as long a gung-ho broadcasters really believe those surveys and can convince advertising buyers they are authentic, they are not going to fine-tune or repair radio.

It's the agencies and the MRC that have to believe. In fact, agencies made radio switch from Pulse and Hooper to Arbitron. And their lack of acceptance of a half-dozen other alternatives like Birch caused the startups to be unable to last.

 

[TheBigA]

I've never worked for Bob Pittman, but I've spoken with him many times. I've always admired his passion for what he does. So when he comes back to radio after careers in other media, I'm interested in what he says. This is one quote from a speach he gave today:

"We have brand permission to give them more than things in the audio stream. Replays, new parts of the show, coupons, access to artists ... it's the power of being local. We have a social connection, which adds a whole other layer. Radio really does have a tribe who wants to talk to each other."

Just a reminder that he works for Clear Channel. And he's talking about more interesting things than EBITDA and cutting staff. He's talking about the next step in radio.

 

[local oscillator]

Cowboy, I do agree that the radio industry is having a difficult time "being radio." The optimism I have about my station turns to pessimism when I look at the industry as a whole. I do think that quite a bit of radio was "done right" back in the eighties, but the industry has been eaten from inside by consolidation, self-serving consultants, and digital distractions. Radio is still "done right," but by far too few stations. This stuff isn't rocket science. Be local and live 24/7/365 if at all possible. Have a human answer the phone 24/7/365 if at all possible. Have a local news presence. Be involved in community events and organizations. Do local research, and give your listeners what they want. Be a part of your community. Sell effective advertising and serve your clients well. Hint: Facebook, Twitter, podcasts, HD Radio, syndication, voice-tracking, mobile apps, e-mail blasts, etc. have very little to do with it. Hint #2: You can't fake it, and you can't phone it in. Hint #3: If you can't afford to do it "right," success will be elusive.

I think that BigA is right about radios. When everyone has several of them (over a billion total in the US), it's really easy to see how 240 million Americans can be radio listeners without clamoring for a bunch of new models at Best Buy.

To get back to the original topic of this thread, I think there is currently no national leadership in our industry. The NAB train went off the tracks several years ago, and no other entity has stepped in to fill the void. The NAB is unfortunately a proponent of many of the items I previously mentioned that I feel are detrimental to the radio industry's success.

 

[TheBigA]

To get back to the original topic of this thread, I think there is currently no national leadership in our industry.

That's OK. There's no national leadership period. Why should broadcasting be different?

 

[local oscillator]

Good point!

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Cowboy, I do agree that the radio industry is having a difficult time "being radio." The optimism I have about my station turns to pessimism when I look at the industry as a whole.

Back in the 1960s I worked for Jerrell Shepherd in Moberly, MO. It was a time when he was putting a match to the afterburners on his little station. I was not there for the glory days and I don't know how much he modified (if any) his basic philosophy about radio. It was a radio station where optimism was overflowing.

It was the best job I ever took. It was the worst job I ever took. I can say (with crossed fingers): HE RUINED MY LIFE!!! He showed me how great radio can be. He in some ways made a perfectionist out of me! Unfortunately I was not able to live up to the greatness he introduced me to. And I have trouble accepting radio... in fact any business enterprise... where we do not live up to the kind of service and performance he pioneered.

Look guys. I know I am playing the role of the contrarian in this conversation on how radio should present itself, how radio should be marketed, how radio should be interfacing with the audience. When in my mid-life years I made a run at being an I.T. guy, a computer guru, two different companies gave me this test the industry developed to spot people with the ability to spot patterns, which was supposed to mean you can look at data and figure out what is consistent with the big picture, and what is at dissonance with the big picture. That is supposed to be a predictor of your ability to create programming to process data.

I'm just commenting on what is dissonant in the big picture of radio as we practice it today. Traditionally the big bucks go to the folks with the skill to simply deal with the business climate we are in at the time. Sometimes they have careers or develop enterprises that last a lifetime and maybe even pass them along to the next generation. sometimes they have careers that last for a decade and when the business climate matures or changes, they can't change.

Every business is also influenced from time to time by those who find the dissonance, and like an archeologist keep following the trail until they find the origin. Sometimes identifying the cause of dissonance in the business model is productive, and some times it is useless!!! But when your brain is wired like mine, you have little choice but to keep sifting through the data and trends... looking for the needle in the haystack.

And radio today is full of strange little haystacks. ;D

 

[Roger That]

Wow...so there's been an argument for the idea that Radio's problem is in the hardware, and more posturing that being a utility is a good thing. I'm seriously beside myself that some radio people actually believe some of this to be true.

 

[flashback]

[/quote]



But yes, there's a huge perception problem. The programming isn't the problem. Radio needs a cool new device that people will want to own. Remember how cool that iPhone was when you bought it? You showed it to everyone. It's just a phone. You don't show everyone that 5-button black thing on your desk. But an iPhone is cool. There are no really cool radios that have features I'd want to show someone. That's what leads to the perception that radio isn't cool.
[/quote]

the answer is not some cool new device .it is programing.if radio had better programing more people would listen to it.

radio needs a wider variety of music in the statios playlists.to be original.it`s the same thing everywhere.the same songs .the same talking points on political talk shows.radio stations need to branch out in ideas and not do the same thing over and over.

 

[TheBigA]

the answer is not some cool new device .it is programing.if radio had better programing more people would listen to it.

Radio has better programming. Compare radio programming to any internet stream or Pandora station and it's obvious what's better.

Bigger playlists are available in many markets and they don't attract listeners. There is variety available across the radio dial, but most listeners stick with one or two stations. There's very little experimentation among the users of radio, and as a result they miss out on the variety available. I often said if you get tired of the music on a rock station, try a different format. You'll hear lots of music and artists you've never heard before, and it may open you to something different. But very few people ever step out of the safe box they already know. The successful talk stations are those that say the same thing. The ones that branch out with new ideas are like trees falling in the forest. As I said, very little experimentation by listeners. If it doesn't hit them over the head, they don't try it. Lots of radio stations have gone out on limbs with music and talk topics, only to find themselves in the ratings basement.

 

[amfmxm]

Couple of thoughts--on an important subject (maybe radio's most important subject)...

Some of the misperception that radio suffers from has been fostered by (mostly print) reporters assigned to the "media" beat--largely a phenomena of the past 20 years or so--who feel required to periodically write something about radio, and tend to focus on the "new" (Sirius/XM, Pandora, Slacker, HD--whatever) and use terrestrial radio as the comparison point--without actually researching the subject. If they did just a tiny bit of research they'd find radio usage at just about where it was a dozen years ago (93 percent versus 95 percent). Yeah, that's cume rating, the percentage of the population tuning-in weekly. But too often, that kind of stat refutes the point the "media reporter" wants to make.

FWIW, let me point out that USA Today did run a positive feature in the Money section a few weeks ago: www.usatoday.com/.../2011-03-21-Radio-listeners-growing.htm. Nice to see, for a switch.

Now, at the same time, as David E. has pointed out several times in recent years here on R-I, there has indeed been erosion in TSL/AQH--listeners aren't sticking around as long as they used to. And that may be a reflection of the general competition for the time and attention of listeners fueled by all the media choices now available. Or it could be a reflection of the sameness and predictability of the programming on radio. Or, as Big A suggests, perhaps a lack of curiosity by the audience--consumer laziness. Maybe a bit of all of that...

More later...