It's not just KRTH, and not just Los Angeles.

[tall_guy1]

That wasn't about moral conduct so much as it was ABC covering its tail with affiliates in more conservative markets. In 1997, this was new territory.



Again, not a rule or moral stance, but a promotional positioning statement. Identify what the competition is doing that might not appeal to a segment of the audience you want and promote yourself as the opposite. 45 years ago, during the "Saturday Night Fever" craze, some stations had "No Bee Gee Weekends."

The moment there's an upside to playing those things, they absolutely will do it.



Again, a positioner. Before it was ABC Family, it was FOX Family, and they had bought it from the Christian Broadcasting Network. They could have blown it up and started fresh, but it made sense not to do that and simply segue that audience to family-friendly programming delivered by a secular company.

Trouble is, there's more attractive, more relevant programming for mom, dad and the kids (maybe not all at once) on TV (especially cable) and it doesn't fly. FOX unloads it to ABC in three years.

ABC, being owned by Disney, seemed like a natural for a family channel, but even the Mouse recognized the limited appeal of "all G-rated, all the time" and started tinkering before they even launched---that was 2002.



Anyone who doesn't understand that a business plan and viewer tastes can change over 25 years is really naive.



Huh?

I know all that. To viewers/listeners though, some might have perceived them as moral stances whereas in reality they were business moves and it includes their song choices. I am not one of those people.

 

[michael hagerty]

I know all that. To viewers/listeners though, some might have perceived them as moral stances whereas in reality they were business moves and it includes their song choices.

That's the viewers/listeners problem. And over 25 years, you'll have cycled out an entire demo, with your new target being mostly if not completely unaware of what you were or were thought of as in 1998.

 

[tall_guy1]

That's the viewers/listeners problem. And over 25 years, you'll have cycled out an entire demo, with your new target being mostly if not completely unaware of what you were or were thought of as in 1998.

I am not one of those people, but some on this thread might possibly be.

 

[davideduardo]

I am not one of those people, but some on this thread might possibly be.

And, in our discussions of radio here on, redundantly and intentionally, Radio Discussions, we are not typical listeners. Not even everyone in the business likes to talk about it in a mixed group of fans, followers, newbies, veterans and all the rest.

We look for interesting things to talk about, even if we are not on the staff of a particular station or residents of a particular market. This is for fun, for the mental challenge, and for entertainment too.

 

[davideduardo]

That's the viewers/listeners problem. And over 25 years, you'll have cycled out an entire demo, with your new target being mostly if not completely unaware of what you were or were thought of as in 1998.

This is a good time to mention, again, that stations that test their libraries (either as a group or by individual market) nearly always test the same group every time. That means that each year, a group of people who were eligible to be interviewed "last time" have aged out of the target demographic cell and another group has aged in.

So a station that targets 35-54 may research 35-49 only. Five years from now, a full thirds of the potential participants have aged out of the target, and another third of the recruits is brand new to the format target.

And, speaking of "targets" a station will also have quotas for gender, for "younger" and "older" within the target and also for ethnic group in markets where the station hopes to reach more than one group.

My point is that the target audience is constantly changing. New competition may cause the station to revise its target to respond or protect. Changes in music "mood" can make a station want to try songs it would not have played even a few years before.

This is like one of those shooting contests at the state fair... it takes a combination of luck and skill to win a stuffed panda for your kid!

 

[vchimpanzee]

That wasn't about moral conduct so much as it was ABC covering its tail with affiliates in more conservative markets. In 1997, this was new territory.

It seems like at least decades ago, which is what some stations are working away from now, stations both TV and radio did appear superficially to have their own set of "rules" and moral code which might not have been genuine. For example, ABC put a disclaimer for "adult content" on the Ellen sitcom when she came out as gay.

I got that backwards, but to show you how far we have come, the TV-G-rated "Jeopardy" has contestants who refer to having same-sex spouses. Last night I watched a TV-G-rated "Price is Right" with two gay couples.

 

[michael hagerty]

I got that backwards, but to show you how far we have come, the TV-G-rated "Jeopardy" has contestants who refer to having same-sex spouses. Last night I watched a TV-G-rated "Price is Right" with two gay couples.

It's been 25 years since the "coming out" episode of "Ellen". Unless there's a discussion of something that would earn a TV-PG if discussed by a heterosexual couple, there's no need for a rating other than TV-G.

 

[davideduardo]

Also, I completely understand that any format name that a station gives to their music is only a label for the advertisers, and there is no set definition for a format. The station can name their format anything they wish, regardless of the decades or the songs they play. So a format name makes no difference. To repeat : I do understand this, and so do most listeners here, because that point has very clearly been made.

Remember, a station may (and often does) use one format descriptor as a positioner on the air while it uses a different term to describe the station to advertisers.

Going back many decades to when I was doing an early FM Top 40 in Birmingham in 1972, on the air we were "good time rock 'n' roll" while in sales presentations we were "Top 40".

The station was a rock-leaning southern Top 40 (Think Macon and not Philadelphia) and on the air we wanted to stress that we were Allman Brothers and not Jackson Five. But to advertisers, were were just like WQXI or WBBQ or WMAK or WKGN.

Do you include these songs in the test list of songs that you send out to the focus group? Do you let the focus group decide?

For starters, radio does not measure music in focus groups. A focus group is a small number of people (8 to 10 usually) that you gather to talk about the morning show or station image or feel.

Music is tested in what is traditionally called an AMT, or Auditorium Music Test. Usually about 100 people. When these used to be done in person, it was at the meeting room of a hotel or even a school or community center. Now, it's done online using a smartphone or tablet.

Here is a description of different methods, but done before a lot began to migrate to online: STATION RESEACH: Proprietary research by radio stations

Anyway, a station might include hundreds of songs in the test list that it does not play. Some are songs that are just off recurrent playlists for stations that play currents... or they may be older songs that just entered the target age of our listeners. But a lot are just "what if".

There are ways of measuring "fit" on our format using things like cluster analysis but that is pretty complex.

Or do you just automatically exclude those songs, because even though they were huge, they don't sound like KRTH?

We don't really know how we sound until we ask listeners. We test a lot of stuff to see if tastes are changing or migrating and we decide how deeply we want to follow new trends.

P.S I also realize that we were advised not to have a discussion about individual songs, but I thought that it might be okay here, because this entire thread is about songs. - D.

The reason why individual song discussions are dangerous is that each station and market is different, and the purpose of testing is to be able to separate songs that have enduring appeal from the ones that have burnt out.

 

[tall_guy1]

It's been 25 years since the "coming out" episode of "Ellen". Unless there's a discussion of something that would earn a TV-PG if discussed by a heterosexual couple, there's no need for a rating other than TV-G.

Ellen was actually re rated TV-G in syndication with those episodes, so yes initially it was just nervousness about affiliates and covering new ground which might have upset more people at the time since it was less culturally acceptable as a whole. I remember watching a Simpsons episode in 2004 with a similar disclaimer with a gay marriage themed episode, yet now Smithers is openly gay, so times have changed a lot in 2+ decades! (Just as some aspects of today will look different several decades out.)

 

[Weiserguy]

One last thing on Harry Chapin (remember, this thread is about Classic Hits stations adding newer songs):

Harry had the misfortune of being innovative when Elektra signed him—-a singer/songwriter who told stories—-but up against a far more commercial group of guys who also fit that description (Paul Simon goes solo, Jim Croce arrives) by the time he actually starts trying to get airplay and sales.

I know I'm bouncing back a couple of pages, even though it's only a half dozen-or-so hours ago.

I've been a fan of Paul Simon, with and after Art Garfunkel, since they first came on the scene in the mid-60's. I've loved their music, and my favorite song, bar none, is The Boxer. ("Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest" is a simple but universal observation.) Simon is unquestionably the more talented of the two (singer, musician, songwriter, lyricist, performer), but I'd rather spend a Sunday hanging with Artie than Paul. Paul strikes me as a difficult, moody person to befriend.

I write the above in the context of Harry Chapin. Harry wrote thoughtful story-songs, sometimes deep, sometimes depressing. But as a person, he was fun and genuine.

Harry was New York, and more specifically Long Island, through and through. He did benefit concerts there, to raise money for local organizations. He volunteered, including for a time on the board of the Long Island Philharmonic. That was also my brother's first professional home, and he used to delight in bringing home anecdotes about Harry at the Board meetings.

I saw Harry and his band more than a few times, but one stands out. They were booked to do a performance in Summer 1974 at the Shaeffer (beer) Music Festival in Central Park. I worked in Manhattan, so getting up to Central Park wasn't a big deal for me. But the friend who was meeting me for the concert had to commute in from Long Island, and the day started out rainy and nasty. So I checked with the festival office to see if the concert would be cancelled, and was told no, that the forecast was for the storm to pass by afternoon and for a nice evening. So my friend came in from the Island, and we went into the (as it was called then) Wollman Skating Rink to wait for it to start.

And of course the rain returned.

There was a modest delay, and then the band came out from backstage and got positioned under the bandshell. Harry comes out with his guitar, sizes up the situation, his audience getting wet waiting for him, and says, the guys can't play in the rain because of all the electrical equipment, but I at least can get wet with you. And he carries the mic stand out from below the overhang into the rain, and then the guitar, and he sits down and proceeds to perform, getting soaked with the rest of us until the rain eventually stops.

Has anyone else ever experienced such a performance? Doubt it, and that's why Harry Chapin's audience loved the guy and remained loyal to him until his untimely death, and well beyond. He was genuine, and it came through.

So what if his songs weren't #1's. He was.

 

[TheBigA]

Has anyone else ever experienced such a performance?

I actually have quite a few, some that I was a part of. This is one I wasn't, but it makes my point:

Taylor Swift Danced in the Rain During a ‘Full On Deluge’ at Gillette Stadium

"This was a full on deluge that never let up," TayTay writes.

www.billboard.com

As I recall, she did it at a couple of other shows. She likes getting wet.

I was at a stadium show she did where she left the stage and walked into the crowd shaking hands and taking selfies with everyone on the floor. And you're right when you say these are the things that make fans passionate.

 

[Signal Geek]

What were college kids doing in the 70s? Getting stoned. So you had Harry Chapin singing a song about driving a cab while getting stoned. That image connected with a ton of college kids.

Chapin's morose, wordy style is also on full display with his song "W-O-L-D" A song sure to piss off radio guys (its about a washed-up older deejay getting older...)

 

[tall_guy1]

That's the viewers/listeners problem. And over 25 years, you'll have cycled out an entire demo, with your new target being mostly if not completely unaware of what you were or were thought of as in 1998.

A lot of older listeners/viewers you can sometimes find comments which remember their perceptions of the brands years ago with comments like "You used to have such a moral backbone. What happened?"

 

[TheBigA]

Chapin's morose, wordy style is also on full display with his song "W-O-L-D" A song sure to piss off radio guys (its about a washed-up older deejay getting older...)

Ironically singing about a time (the early 70s) that some people today view as the golden age of radio.

 

[michael hagerty]

A lot of older listeners/viewers you can sometimes find comments which remember their perceptions of the brands years ago with comments like "You used to have such a moral backbone. What happened?"

Answer: “You completely misunderstood our product and how our business works. Worse, you applied your personal concept of what is and isn’t moral to it. We never were that, and what you were briefly confused about was more than 20 years ago. Do you really not have anything better to do?”

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

Remember, a station may (and often does) use one format descriptor as a positioner on the air while it uses a different term to describe the station to advertisers.

Going back many decades to when I was doing an early FM Top 40 in Birmingham in 1972, on the air we were "good time rock 'n' roll" while in sales presentations we were "Top 40".

The station was a rock-leaning southern Top 40 (Think Macon and not Philadelphia) and on the air we wanted to stress that we were Allman Brothers and not Jackson Five. But to advertisers, were were just like WQXI or WBBQ or WMAK or WKGN.

For starters, radio does not measure music in focus groups. A focus group is a small number of people (8 to 10 usually) that you gather to talk about the morning show or station image or feel.

Music is tested in what is traditionally called an AMT, or Auditorium Music Test. Usually about 100 people. When these used to be done in person, it was at the meeting room of a hotel or even a school or community center. Now, it's done online using a smartphone or tablet.

Here is a description of different methods, but done before a lot began to migrate to online: STATION RESEACH: Proprietary research by radio stations

Anyway, a station might include hundreds of songs in the test list that it does not play. Some are songs that are just off recurrent playlists for stations that play currents... or they may be older songs that just entered the target age of our listeners. But a lot are just "what if".

There are ways of measuring "fit" on our format using things like cluster analysis but that is pretty complex.

We don't really know how we sound until we ask listeners. We test a lot of stuff to see if tastes are changing or migrating and we decide how deeply we want to follow new trends.

The reason why individual song discussions are dangerous is that each station and market is different, and the purpose of testing is to be able to separate songs that have enduring appeal from the ones that have burnt out.

Thank you David, and thank you Michael. I appreciate both replies. From now on, I will refer to surveys about songs as "Auditorium Music Tests."
Thank you for sending the link to the proprietary research by radio stations. I save on my computer that information that I learn here, so I can go back and read it. That way, I don't keep asking the same questions over again. I appreciate your patience and for taking the time to educate listeners about the business of radio. -- Daryl

 

[cc333]

Harry's an acquired taste.

Yes, he is. It took a few listens for me to fully appreciate "Taxi," but I liked it right off (I like sad songs).

Elektra wanted him to be a big star, but who knows (and now we can't ask) if that's what Harry wanted?

I'm gonna guess he didn't. He didn't seem to bend his approach to chase chart hits.

Not everyone goes into show business with the goal of being a top ten star. Clearly he enjoyed performing (why would he perform if he didn't like it?), but he didn't particularly care how famous he was.

In my book, the closest thing to commercial (again, "Cat's In The Cradle" just touched a nerve) he ever did was "Sunday Morning Sunshine" (his third single, which peaked at #75 in 1972)---and it still is a full minute before he suggests the idea of happiness. The fact that it came from an album called "Sniper and Other Love Songs" just illustrates the problem.

"Sniper and Other Love Songs" is an interesting and thoughtful examination of, among other things, how love and hate are sometimes intertwined in sometimes weirdly complicated ways.

I've been a fan of Paul Simon, with and after Art Garfunkel, since they first came on the scene in the mid-60's. I've loved their music, and my favorite song, bar none, is The Boxer. ("Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest" is a simple but universal observation.)

I like them too (I have every S&G album, and have thoroughly enjoyed all of them). There is one exception: I prefer the acoustic version of "Sounds of Silence" as found on their debut album "Wednesday Morning, 3 AM", because it seems more real and authentic (the backing band overdubbed onto the electrified version seems a bit out of sync somehow). But whatever, it was their breakthrough hit.

Simon is unquestionably the more talented of the two (singer, musician, songwriter, lyricist, performer), but I'd rather spend a Sunday hanging with Artie than Paul. Paul strikes me as a difficult, moody person to befriend.

Simon is a very poetic and prolific writer, and his songs (particularly during the S&G era) are very eloquent, but they do come across kind of intellectual, and he tends to use rather large concepts that the average lister might have some trouble understanding. Almost more like art music than commercial folk pop, especially their debut album (this at least partly explains why it was a flop).

I think both have very strong personalities. Simon comes across to me as thoughtful and intelligent, but kind of arrogant and as you say moody. He is probably nice enough once you get to know him, but since he seems reserved and kind of remote, getting to know him is probably kind of hard.

Garfunkel seems more laid back, but is also a bit arrogant and self important. That said, he seems much more level headed, but kind of sensitive and easily hurt.

I write the above in the context of Harry Chapin. Harry wrote thoughtful story-songs, sometimes deep, sometimes depressing. But as a person, he was fun and genuine.

I can see that. "Six String Orchestra" is a fun novelty song that shows he could be more lighthearted with his songs.

He was genuine, and it came through.

Yup. It's a shame he died so young.

So what if his songs weren't #1's. He was.

Agreed 100%

I never had the opportunity since he died long before I was born, but I'm sure I would've enjoyed his concerts very much.

Speaking of concerts, I did get to see Tom Paxton (one of the relatively few 60s folk era greats still alive) live a few years ago (about two weeks before the COVID shutdowns, actually), and that was fun quite fun (but let's not go there, lest this thread get even more off topic!!)

c

 

[davideduardo]

Thank you David, and thank you Michael. I appreciate both replies. From now on, I will refer to surveys about songs as "Auditorium Music Tests."
Thank you for sending the link to the proprietary research by radio stations. I save on my computer that information that I learn here, so I can go back and read it. That way, I don't keep asking the same questions over again. I appreciate your patience and for taking the time to educate listeners about the business of radio. -- Daryl

By the way, all those pictures are of the operations of SIP, the internal Univision Radio research department which was one of my areas of responsibility. And going to all the music tests and in-station presentations, I became lifetime American Airlines Platinum for doing over 5 million miles!

 

[michael hagerty]

Chapin's morose, wordy style is also on full display with his song "W-O-L-D" A song sure to piss off radio guys (its about a washed-up older deejay getting older...)

We covered "W-O-L-D" (exhaustively) on pages 8 and 9 of this thread.

 

[CTListener]

We covered "W-O-L-D" (exhaustively) on pages 8 and 9 of this thread.

And, on a board full of radio geeks, we somehow all avoided mentioning the problem with a station in Boise having a "W" call. Until now, that is.