"Isolation" & The Effects on the Future of Radio

[John FL]

Over the years I’ve read comments on the boards and you can put me in this camp as well that there was a time radio had an emotional bond with listeners. Today, I believe the draw to a specific personality is mostly limited to national talkers such as Rush, sports shows and to morning shows both local and national. Many say tastes and times change and it’s just left there. I have thought for quite some time that something else was at work.

Isolation, I believe, is taking on a new meaning in today’s world. It has very little to do with being off in some remote location but rather the end result of cost cutting and our love of everything technology. Let me explain.

Recently I got rehired to handle a project where I used to work. Typical of a corporate environment, my cubicle is located in an office park – a cluster of look-alike buildings where even the landscape is all uniform and in compliance. There was a time finding a parking spot after a certain time would have been tough – not any more. Many floors are practically all empty and it’s not all from layoffs.

My employer is not different from many. Workers are increasingly doing their jobs from their homes saving the company lots of $$$. Many people are not aware that cubicle space has a rental fee. Throw in the computer and telephone lines along with printing and supplies and it adds up. Today, those water cooler conversations are becoming a thing of the past. How often did radio personalities count on those chats as promotion or even validation? In the privacy of someone’s home office they can listen to anything they want and there’s a strong probability it isn’t AC that was the office station.

The big thing we have at work now is instant messaging. The human interaction of hearing a voice or actually hearing the sound of laughter have now been replaced with LOL or . I think we are becoming so accustomed to texting that I wonder if those who are in a leadership role on the job can even deliver a presentation in front of a live audience anymore.

Corporate trainers have been replaced with web-based training. If we need assistance, there is always the help button as long as the anticipated question has been loaded into the system. The telephone is often a joke as a means to find answers to questions. How many times has something arisen that is not a part of the menu selection? Even the old trick of hitting “0” or shouting “representative” doesn’t result in anything but frustration.

I know my mind works in weird ways but I’m always thinking of radio and the future. Radio stations just like their office park counterparts have a lot of empty space where humans used to laugh and bitch about the boss or their spouse. It’s now the sound of silence – pretty much the way radio is with one song segued into another via sweeper or by a voice that really isn’t live – just like what we get on the phone for customer service.

Many of us keep wondering how radio will compete in a marketplace that not only has increasing alternatives but by nature these options complement the isolation that is now the norm. Back in the day, I used to hear “new” music on “survey” day – too funny. Today, people download all kinds of music in the privacy of their little world. When I was a kid, concerts were pretty cheap. I enjoyed music with people from all different backgrounds, race, religion – you name it. Now we sit alone in our private world even if we are hooked up to a laptop in a crowded coffee house.

Radio is supposed to be a communications medium. But with texting instead of talking or social networking instead of actually meeting and talking with others, one has to wonder how radio fits into all of this. With so many working from home, even going out to lunch with the gang and hearing radio along the way or at the restaurant don't exist as much. Perhaps another reason radio listening is down.
For a long time, I advocated that radio be different from alternatives and that it should be a place where listeners hear the sound of a human voice and that they can relate to that “guy on the radio.” Now, I don’t know – I’m more confused about the future of radio than ever before. One thing though is the content must be good. Alternatives are beating radio in that arena too. Many who are the movers and shakers are locked into very old ways of doing things. People demand variety and they are getting it elsewhere. Radio continues to fragment and they are happy with small numbers as long as they hit targets. It’s nuts.

Anyway, submitted for your approval and discussion.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Excellent effort to structure some logic for a new view.

Somewhere in my youth I remember coming across someone expressing the thought: "Mentally you need to learn to pretend you are standing behind, trying to hide behind a phone pole, and watch your self walk by. Learn to see yourself the way other people do." I always found that to be a scary thought.

Most of us are not skilled at trying to do what you just did in your post. You suggested that people working in traditional office settings could talk about what was just on the radio while gathered at the water fountain and that was good for radio. The contrary view would be: Working in offices, particularly those with cublcles, may rule out radio listening, lest it disturb your neighbors. (Not to mention poor reception in today's office park buildings.) Working from one's home and automobile opens up the opportunity to have the radio play with abandon. What is bad for radio... may be good for radio!

So here is my take-away thought: Programming that worked well when people listened and socialized may be different than programming that works when people are encapsulated in privacy coated with isolation.

 

[TheBigA]

What you're talking about here is a "Balkinization" of American, similar to what happened in Yugoslavia almost 20 years ago, where a single nation broke down into numerous diverse ethnic groups. The US once prided itself on being a melting pot, but in the last 30 years, there's been less melting going on. So there's less "group-think," and less shared experience.

Broadcasting is based on shared experience, common likes and dislikes, and mass appeal. In this society, there's less of a mass.They're cooped up in cubicles, or in their home office, away from the social experience. After a day of being alone, they want to get out and interact. Instead of people listening to radio, which was passive, there is more interest talking, either through the phone, or through new technologies like texts, blogs, and tweets. In other words they want to PARTICIPATE in the process: pick the music, talk back, be heard, and have their own 15 seconds of fame.

So this breakdown in mass culture, mass media, and mass activities is hurting broadcasting. It doesn't mean people aren't listening, but they aren't listening as much, and they aren't all listening to the same stations, so no one station is an obvious ratings winner. All that makes it tough to attract advertisers, who are looking for efficient ways to reach lots of customers. That is the problem broadcasters have now. The only way to address it is to diversify, and use multiple platforms, rather than focus all of ones resources on the air signal.

It's also less about what you called "good content," and more about content I agree with or content I'm interested in. The quality doesn't matter as much. Content creators need to understand that. A great example is TMZ. Hardly great content, but its presented in an interesting and fun way, and also in a information buffet, where people can take what they like.

I was watching news coverage of the Tea Party convention taking place this weekend. They were saying that this isn't a typical or traditional opposition rally, but rather a chance for lots of diverse sub-groups to network and learn organization techniques and leadership. So it's less about listening and following, more about speaking and leading. The bad news is that we are a country where the majority rules. When you have lots of small grass roots groups all aimed at diverse goals, it's hard to reach consensus. That's been the story of American politics over the last ten years.

 

[Lee Rust]

Broadcast radio belongs almost entirely to the 20th century, both culturally and technically. The 1900's were an era of top-down mass media, when distribution of information and entertainment were one-way and highly filtered by a tiny class of elite producers and performers.

All of us here grew up in that last century and naturally see it as 'normal'. Although many of us have successfully adopted some of the newer technologies and lifestyles, we might still feel uncomfortable about new phenomena like the 'isolation' observed here.

It's debatable as to whether or not this isolation is healthy in the long run, but there's no question that the younger generations don't worry about it very much. They're happy with their personally-controlled media and can't imagine having it any other way. We grew up waiting until Sunday night to discover a new band or singer on Ed Sullivan. Children of the 21st century can check out YouTube anytime they want. If they miss something, one of their friends will clue them with a text message. They don't have to wait until Sunday, and they don't need a DJ or PD to pick out songs for them to listen to. If they want to get together physically, a simple tweet or text will gather a crowd. I really don't think that they consider themselves to be very isolated at all. They probably won't ever know or care what a "water cooler" was.

Many of us here have been or still are members of that tiny class of producers and performers who participated in the mass media of the 20th century. Naturally, we would like to hold on to our remaining power and influence as long as we can. There's no question that clever and innovative programming will continue to attract the remaining members of our generation to their radios, TV's and newspapers. But those games will be over when we're gone.

Significantly, the new Apple iPad device seems to be aimed at the 20th century set in particular. Not only is the screen big enough for us to see without our specs and devoid of confounding buttons, but it lacks a camera, an essential element of any interactive device. The iPad is designed as a one-way top-down media consumption device, just like the ones we all grew up with. It's the perfect companion for a Jitterbug cellphone.

As Jerry Del Colliano so incessantly preaches on his blog "Inside Music Media", the only element of 20th century media that can make the leap to the 21st is the programming and the intellectual content. Most of the transmitters, receivers and presses of the old mass media will eventually fall into irrelevance and dusty disuse. Of course, a few of these devices might be maintained by future antiquarians for sentimental operation, just like steam railroad and horse farming enthusiasts do now.

As an owner and operator of one of those transmitters, this is a hard future to face. Broadcast radio in particular is an elegant and efficient way to distribute intelligence and entertainment. However, for any medium of distribution, there have to be enough listeners, watchers or readers to make a venture worthwhile. In just the past two years, the accelerating fractionalization of available audiences amongst existing and emerging media has been shocking. There is a minimum level of audience or readership below which a traditional media operation with relatively high fixed costs is not financially viable, no matter where the money comes from.. donations, grants or advertising dollars.

For the new internet-based media however, the initial technical cost of getting a website, blog or podcast online is inconsequential compared to broadcast or newspapers, and the ongoing overhead is relatively low. This affordability and accessibility of internet distribution is the key to the variety of programming available online. Anybody can do it if they want to, for any reason and on any topic.

On the one hand, if an internet programmer is not too ambitious or is topically specific, a daily audience measured in the dozens or hundreds might be acceptable. The only limitation is the creative time and energy of the operator. Producers who get bored, burnt out or discouraged by lack of support are instantly supplanted by an exponentially growing number of eager replacements. When Jerry Del Colliano gets tired of complaining about Citadel and Clear Channel, he can close up his laptop and go play golf. Some other radio refugee will open a Blogspot account in his absence.

On the other hand, a determined site operator can quickly develop a worldwide audience and advertising base that surpasses any old-style broadcast network or newspaper chain. A little more than a decade ago, there was no such thing as Google. Now, even with their huge investment in multitudes of servers worldwide, they have plenty of excess profits left over to indulge in their grand plan of digitizing the entire analog planet.

That's a tremendous amount of operational range within the same distribution system, and gives a website almost infinite flexibility when adjusting overhead up or down in response to economic or audience variables.

Contrast this with a broadcast operator or newspaper publisher who, in addition to normal personnel and business expenses, has to pay fixed monthly charges for thousands of kilowatt hours of power or tons of newsprint, plus attend to ongoing transmitter or printing plant maintenance and replacement. Not to mention the fact that internet distribution has worldwide reach at no extra cost, while broadcast and print coverage are strictly limited by physical, financial or regulatory constraints.

Since the worldwide web is still just a few decades old and rapidly developing, we really don't know how the business model will evolve. I expect there will always be a few hugely profitable sites like Google and Amazon, plus millions of hopefuls. Network operators like Comcast will continue to make lots of money off the distribution of no-cost popularly-produced content. All media will be distributed online, assuming that network reliability, capacity and bandwidth can be indefinitely expanded and maintained.

Meanwhile, I'll stick with broadcast radio. Maybe alone and possibly isolated. Call me an antiquarian if you like.

 

[gr8oldies]

Very interesting points. Will we see the day of only a couple of stations on the air in each market?

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Greetings, Lee. A bit earlier I read the post by TheBigA and decided that later today after some errands I would send him a Private Message thanking him for his thoughts. And now you have added another layer on his thoughts.

I also follow Jerry Del Colliano and his daily erruption. I would like to have attended his "clinic" last week but at my age, my place in life, I had a hard time justifying why I would spend that much money (by the time travel and lodging was added in) for a one day event that could be anywhere from the worst choice I ever made to the most valuable choice I ever made.

As you suggested, Jerry will come to a time when he hangs it up, leaves the pontificating to the next generation, and moves on to something appropriate to the season of his life. I ask myself about that kind of decision from time to time.

But here is one of the things that keeps me in here... asking questions.... activing the part of a rodeo clown some days. I am active in an organization built around issues of faith. (As Rush might say: For you people in Loma Linda... think church.) And our "called out ones" of the faith have recognized that we are living in the 21st century and we have awakened to some of the issues you and TheBigA have laid out. The tools that various religious organizations have used in America for last 100 years to communicate, both internally and externally, including broadcasting, are changing so rapidly that we don't know where we are.

I find myself on a Communications Committee, which in its current assignment is a first in our organization. And our first job is to figure out.... what we are supposed to figure out! Churches have done a lot of top-down one-way communicating. In this age of Twitter, Facebook, blogs and now Ipads, we as a committee need to be very, very inventive, creative and all those other buzzwords. Maintaining my connection with radio and trying to help (if only through conversation) let's me go to committee meetings with insights (sometimes known as "wild haired ideas") and bits of catalyst ingredients.

Will we turn off all the broadcast transmitters... if not in my lifetime, in the lifetime of my children? Is there a more useful and valuable form of commerce that could use these frequencies in a better way? And then the question that I have to pose to religious groups is: With all this isolation gadgetry at our fingertips that allow us to do just about everything in isolation: has the time come for religious groups to abandon large meeting space for a more useful and valuable form of commerce? Has the time come to quit building stadiums? We can all watch the Super Bowl in our isolation in a few years.

I don't raise these questions in a mocking tone. They are not intended to be silly. Our government can't seem to find enough cash to operate on a balanced budget. Radio stations in many cases can't sell enough to operate on a balanced budget. Churches are stretched thin (in spite of the occasional Mega-church that rivals Disney World) Families find their budgets stretched to the tearing point. In the Isolated life of the 21st century it will be interesting to see what we gladly shed, and what we insist on hanging onto.

Now. Which one of these buttons is it that I push to get Morning Edition?

P.S. Lee: I dropped the ball and let our previous off-line conversation die. You asked a question I never answered. Answer on the way later today.

 

[Carmine5]

Good observations, JohnJax.

Of course, unemployment has pretty much decimated the workplace. Where I work we've lost about half of our staff and the rest of us are having to make up for this loss by working extra. So there really is little time for "water cooler" talk about anything, let alone radio or what we saw on TV the night before. I'm sure this scenario is being repeated all across the country. Yes, it's a little depressing and that along with a heavy workload may cause some to stay isolated in their cubicles. Plus others in my department, when they have a break, are also working on outside projects and can't be bothered with socializing.

But as has been mentioned, there are so many choices for news and entertainment now that it is hard anymore to find two people in a workplace who have seen or heard the same things. We are indeed seeing an audience fragmentation the likes of which we have never seen before. This lack of a shared experience may also contribute to less discussion.

If myself and my co-workers talk anything that isn't work-related it's usually something in the news. But even here, most of us get our news from the web and not all from the same website. Hardly anyone I know listens to news on radio or even sees it on TV.

I'm not sure if this addresses the isolation you speak of but this what is happening in my workplace and I'm sure in most others as well.

c5

 

[amfmxm]

Great topic. Right up there with "What is the meaning of life?"

Did any of y'all see "Up in the Air?" Contrary to its ad campaign, the movie was not a light-hearted romantic comedy, but rather a fairly deep character study of a man who had created a life of isolation--and was wrestling with its implications. (Four stars--but a sad flick, so be prepared).

GRC, I think you stumbled on part of the answer: get involved with people. Don't allow yourself to be isolated. JohnJax, with your work circumstance, this likely needs to be a conscious priority for you outside of work hours. Yes, there are still millions of folks who talk to each other face-to-face! But it is very easy to let the gadgets take over...

And I'll humbly submit that broadcast radio--good ol' traditional terrestrial radio--is still a great place for "mediated" conversation. Outstanding radio talents have long been masters of facilitating such conversation, and still are.

But as we've previously discussed on parallel threads, too many of our industry chiefs have fallen in love with the "illusion of conversation" begat by voice-tracking/automation/networking, while whacking so many gifted real conversationalists.

Time to invite them back into the biz.

 

[TheBigA]

And I'll humbly submit that broadcast radio--good ol' traditional terrestrial radio--is still a great place for "mediated" conversation. Outstanding radio talents have long been masters of facilitating such conversation, and still are.

Hmmm...sounds like talk radio to me. No shortage of that on the radio. If you want to add music to your "mediated conversation," you have Delilah and John Tesh. That's sort of their expertise. And if you tune around the dial, you'll hear lots of local "mediated conversation." Most markets do a local dating game where listeners make a "love connection" on the air for all to hear. Very compelling radio, at least for those who are involved. But not for everyone, every daypart, or for every format. So it often gets overlooked.

 

[gr8oldies]

Big A usually agree with you but the last time I heard a "Desperate and Dateless" show anywhere was in the 80s. Not that someone couldn't try it again but I think the 8000 dating websites might make it a moot point.

 

[TheBigA]

Big A usually agree with you but the last time I heard a "Desperate and Dateless" show anywhere was in the 80s. Not that someone couldn't try it again but I think the 8000 dating websites might make it a moot point.

The local country station here does their nightly "Leavin' Lovin' Lookin'" segment (or something like that) every night. Lots of country stations do them.

 

[TheBigA]

By the way, Citadel country stations were all offered a 7-mid syndicated show called GAC Nights Live from Nashville, and all but two refused. They kept their live & local hosts. As a result, the syndicated show was canceled. There's a lot of that going on now, where stations are insisting on localism, regardless of what corporate is telling them.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Let me see if I've got this right...

"Top down" communication is over.

People will choose to gather and program their own content rather than listen to content compiled by someone else.

Broadcasting as we know it will be dead in the near future.

Just tryin' to keep this succinct....

 

[TheBigA]

Funny...you seem to be looking for simple consistent rules for things.

Here's what I know: There are no rules.

Some people gather their own content. Some people don't.

For some people, broadcasting is dead. For others, it isn't.

For some, corporate tells them what to do. For others, corporate gets ignored.

You want "succinct?" Not gonna happen. There's an exception to every rule.

 

[JimmyJames]

The subject no one has ever successfully explained to my satisfaction is how if we're in a world of people who carry all their music around on an IPod and have no interest in listening to anything others "program" for them:

1. how these people discover new music to put on their IPods
2. how people who don't have time to discover new music will be introduced to it.

I know a broad range of people. The people with the time and inclination to seek out new music and download and such are generally young people. Even younger professionals really don't have a lot of time to spend on music discovery. This doesn't mean these people (including older people who grew up on "classic rock") don't enjoy new music when exposed to it. It just means that in and of themselves, they won't. And I think if it is properly presented in context, then it's a viable niche for "radio" as we think of it.

 

[TheBigA]

The subject no one has ever successfully explained to my satisfaction is how if we're in a world of people who carry all their music around on an IPod and have no interest in listening to anything others "program" for them:

I think I offered a theory in my last post: There is no one single answer.

Music is omni-present. People hear things in the strangest places, usually by accident. I heard a song I never heard before on the in-store music system at the grocery store. I looked up the title via some lyrics. I'm sure some people heard Pinball Wizard for the first time during the Super Bowl. I hear new music all the time on various TV shows. I know a guy who just cruises through iTunes looking for good things to download. Then again, Pandora has a unique program that helps people find new music they might like based on songs they already own.

Back in the old days, new music was hard to come by. It wasn't on TV very much. It wasn't on lots of radio stations. They didn't play new stuff in stores. You only had a couple of options. And there wasn't that much new music. Now, that's not the case. Is music discovery a niche for radio? I think there's way too much new music to sift through, and radio isn't good at personalization. And people have too many reasons to turn it off. I think one of the problems with music radio now is that in an effort to differentiate radio stations from each other, they've become hyper-niche. Formats called Rhythmic Adult Contemporary. If you need three words to describe your music, you're just a bit too nichy. Someone needs to be mass appeal again. Just play the most popular music, regardless of format. I think there's a market for it.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The subject no one has ever successfully explained to my satisfaction is how if we're in a world of people who carry all their music around on an IPod and have no interest in listening to anything others "program" for them:

Though we can group humans into quick, simple divisions: Fat, thin. Old, young. Cute. ugly. Easy to anger, peacemaker. Intelligent, i.q. of a box of hair.

Truth is, the diversity of humans never ceases to amaze me.

You seem to make the assumption that everyone toting an iPod has music on it. Mine has nothing but talk, Podcasts if you please.

Our thread has focused on the "isolation" of people but they do have significant others and spouses to help them discover new music. Many people in their line of work are required to attend seminars and conferences. When at home I never go to clubs, concerts, cabarets. On a trip I will, along with scanning the radio dial in the distant city.

Get a big RC cola, a legal tablet and go sit in your favorite chair and think for awhile. Paul Simon sang that there must be 50 ways to leave your lover. I bet in a couple of hours you can think of 50 ways people of today can discover new music even if the never turn on the radio.

 

[JimmyJames]

My point was more focused on the idea that there are tons of ways to "discover" but that most adults don't really have the time to engage in that process. So, is that a role radio can play for them still? I think so.

 

[TheBigA]

My point was more focused on the idea that there are tons of ways to "discover" but that most adults don't really have the time to engage in that process. So, is that a role radio can play for them still? I think so.

I think what you'll find is there are a lot of stations doing that, and they're all at the bottom of the ratings pile. That's what a lot of non-commercial stations do. WFUV in New York is a great example. Indie 103 did a wonderful job in LA until its owner pulled the plug. If you can make your payroll without getting ratings, then this is for you. But it's not going to be a mass appeal thing and it's going to be a struggle getting money. Adults, as a whole, simply aren't all that interested. Those who are already subscribe to satellite or something that gives them personalization options.

I spent a chunk of my career thinking that it's all about the music, and the public is as passionate as I am about music and artists. I played all the obscure music and told all the stories about the songs. Then I found out that PT Barnum was right, and what he said still holds up after 150 years.

 

[adma]

My point was more focused on the idea that there are tons of ways to "discover" but that most adults don't really have the time to engage in that process. So, is that a role radio can play for them still? I think so.

I think what you'll find is there are a lot of stations doing that, and they're all at the bottom of the ratings pile. That's what a lot of non-commercial stations do. WFUV in New York is a great example. Indie 103 did a wonderful job in LA until its owner pulled the plug. If you can make your payroll without getting ratings, then this is for you. But it's not going to be a mass appeal thing and it's going to be a struggle getting money. Adults, as a whole, simply aren't all that interested. Those who are already subscribe to satellite or something that gives them personalization options.

I spent a chunk of my career thinking that it's all about the music, and the public is as passionate as I am about music and artists. I played all the obscure music and told all the stories about the songs. Then I found out that PT Barnum was right, and what he said still holds up after 150 years.

Though there, you have to aim lower on the totem pole than you might have a few decades ago; mostly because the "higher-functioning" end of the past mass-appeal marketplace does have such personalization options, and has thus factored itself out of the equation. Similar to how even discount retailers had, by today's standards, surprisingly broad book sections 40 years ago, but have now deferred to the Barnes & Noble or Amazon end on that count.

Ultimately, given the circumstance, what passes for a "mass appeal" audience today might be that for which the officially-decreed march of media and technology and society is just too pretentiously much to bear. A "stop the world, I want to get off" demo--not unlike, in fact, the Tea Partiers vs Obama...