Jack without the flak?

[westlife]

Are there any stations which have adopted an Adult Hits format, minus the "in-your-face" liners that have become associated with "Jack FM" and his clones? The extreme of this would be a station with absolutely no "imaging" -- just music, commercials, and a legal ID once an hour.

Infinity's 102.7 WNEW in New York operated an imaging-less CHR-Pop format in exactly this manner for several months following the demise of their "FM Talk" format. With unusually relaxed audio processing, too, it was quite interesting to listen to, but it didn't set the ratings charts ablaze, and was only a stop-gap measure before the introduction of the ill-fated "Blink" format on WNEW.
<P ID="signature">______________

</P>

 

[radiolover78]

> Are there any stations which have adopted an Adult Hits
> format, minus the "in-your-face" liners that have become
> associated with "Jack FM" and his clones? The extreme of
> this would be a station with absolutely no "imaging" -- just
> music, commercials, and a legal ID once an hour.
>
> Infinity's 102.7 WNEW in New York operated an imaging-less
> CHR-Pop format in exactly this manner for several months
> following the demise of their "FM Talk" format. With
> unusually relaxed audio processing, too, it was quite
> interesting to listen to, but it didn't set the ratings
> charts ablaze, and was only a stop-gap measure before the
> introduction of the ill-fated "Blink" format on WNEW.
>

I think some of the Jack clones don't all have attitudes. Not sure though. On the subject of WNEW, remember when they flipped to all Christmas in November of 2003 and were just 102.7 FM?<P ID="signature">______________
The Place for the Latest Happenings in Radio
www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
</P>

 

[OldiesCat]

without the flak?

the "attitude" is part of the attraction for listeners. They view the approach as Jack thumbing it's nose at (what listeners perceive as) corporate, repetitive, predictable radio.

> Are there any stations which have adopted an Adult Hits
> format, minus the "in-your-face" liners that have become
> associated with "Jack FM" and his clones? The extreme of
> this would be a station with absolutely no "imaging" -- just
> music, commercials, and a legal ID once an hour.

 

[HomerJay]

> Are there any stations which have adopted an Adult Hits
> format, minus the "in-your-face" liners that have become
> associated with "Jack FM" and his clones? The extreme of
> this would be a station with absolutely no "imaging" -- just
> music, commercials, and a legal ID once an hour.
>
I'd submit that Ben in Philadelphia doesn't use as strongly "in your face" imaging as Jack stations. They're somewhat irreverant, and use a light touch to the humor. In particular, the liners recorded by dance king John O'Hurley keep it on the comical side.

>

 

[Joseph_Gallant]

How about a "Jack"-type format with live personality announcers??

I think it would be wildly successful!

 

[HomerJay]

> How about a "Jack"-type format with live personality
> announcers??
>
> I think it would be wildly successful!
>
Honestly, don't see how personalities will make a lick of a difference. The "star" of the format is the music, not DJs.

 

[DiamondJoe]

> > How about a "Jack"-type format with live personality
> > announcers??
> >
> > I think it would be wildly successful!
> >
> Honestly, don't see how personalities will make a lick of a
> difference. The "star" of the format is the music, not DJs.

Exactly. The addition of personalities would defeat the purpose of some of these Jack stations that put the music first.<P ID="signature">______________


New York City Radio and TV</P>

 

[westlife]

No-name stations

> I think some of the Jack clones don't all have attitudes.
> Not sure though. On the subject of WNEW, remember when they
> flipped to all Christmas in November of 2003 and were just
> 102.7 FM?

For a while in the mid-'90s, 105.1 in NYC simply called themselves "FM 105.1" on the air. They had an AC format and used the WNSR call letters (which once stood for "New york's Soft Rock"), but I believe the station was sold and the new owners initially didn't know what to do with it, so they kept it going as the generic "FM 105.1" for a while. They had live DJs and everything, but there was essentially no imaging.
<P ID="signature">______________

</P>

 

[OldiesCat]

Jack

Most Jacks will eventually add some personalities. Otherwise, it would just be the "iPod on shuffle" WITH commercials.


> How about a "Jack"-type format with live personality
> announcers? I think it would be wildly successful!
>

 

[Oldbones]

Re: without the flak?

> the "attitude" is part of the attraction for listeners.
> They view the approach as Jack thumbing it's nose at (what
> listeners perceive as) corporate, repetitive, predictable
> radio.
>

I know you're a big fan of this format, but isn't that theory a bit much? "Jack" and it's clones is just as corporate, repetitive and predictable as any other station. It's not like they're breaking any new ground. Many of the songs they play went away because people got sick of them...it may be cool to hear them again since they've been gone awhile, but the same could be said about "jammin' oldies", and we all know what a long-term success story they were. My guess is that the "attitude" is gonna wear thin especially if they intend to have anyone much over 23 or so listening.

 

[OldiesCat]

Jack flak?

No, it makes total sense. Listeners totally and overwhelmingly "get it".

And, what makes anybody think this "attitude" is wearing thin with ANYBODY? Jack (and it's brethren) are going great guns in most markets, up to #1 25-54 in several significant markets with big growth in most others (save NY). So...

- doesn't matter if they're breaking new ground to us
- doesn't matter if you (a radio junkie) have heard the songs before
- doesn't matter that radio people think it's "corporate, repetitive and
predictable" (because it isn't to the listeners)
- doesn't matter than many of the songs "went away" for awhile and now
they're back (they're all hits)
- doesn't matter that radio hacks compare it with jammin oldies because the
listeners are not

None of any of this matters- Jack is doing well, despite all the radio nay- sayers. Last time I checked, ONLY the votes of radio listeners (specifically Arbitron diary holders) really count.

>
> I know you're a big fan of this format, but isn't that
> theory a bit much? "Jack" and it's clones is just as
> corporate, repetitive and predictable as any other station.
> It's not like they're breaking any new ground. Many of the
> songs they play went away because people got sick of
> them...it may be cool to hear them again since they've been
> gone awhile, but the same could be said about "jammin'
> oldies", and we all know what a long-term success story they
> were. My guess is that the "attitude" is gonna wear thin
> especially if they intend to have anyone much over 23 or so
> listening.
>

 

[Yeziknoradio]

Re: Jack flak?

> None of any of this matters- Jack is doing well, despite all
> the radio nay- sayers. Last time I checked, ONLY the votes
> of radio listeners (specifically Arbitron diary holders)
> really count.

And if ratings do slide, the format is tweakable, without having to invest in a new format. In some markets, adding some "new" music to the play list, may or may not be required.
Also, I believe, because most Jack stations are classic driven, that if a classic artist has a new song, Jack should be the first to play the song...if it's a crappy song, than that's a different story.<P ID="signature">______________
"If you never say NO, How much is your YES worth?"
</P>

 

[radiolover78]

Re: Jack flak?

> No, it makes total sense. Listeners totally and
> overwhelmingly "get it".
>
> And, what makes anybody think this "attitude" is wearing
> thin with ANYBODY? Jack (and it's brethren) are going great
> guns in most markets, up to #1 25-54 in several significant
> markets with big growth in most others (save NY). So...
>
> - doesn't matter if they're breaking new ground to us
> - doesn't matter if you (a radio junkie) have heard the
> songs before
> - doesn't matter that radio people think it's "corporate,
> repetitive and
> predictable" (because it isn't to the listeners)
> - doesn't matter than many of the songs "went away" for
> awhile and now
> they're back (they're all hits)
> - doesn't matter that radio hacks compare it with jammin
> oldies because the
> listeners are not
>
> None of any of this matters- Jack is doing well, despite all
> the radio nay- sayers. Last time I checked, ONLY the votes
> of radio listeners (specifically Arbitron diary holders)
> really count.

You bring up a lot of good point OC. Although, I need somethings explained to me. I really didn't pay attention to radio during the jammin' oldies era, but I do know it was basically a failure. Obviously JO and VH are different formats, but what made listeners turn off the jammin' oldies stations? The repetition? The presentation?

<P ID="signature">______________
The Place for the Latest Happenings in Radio
www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
This site has been updated! Check it out! Thanks
</P>

 

[OldiesCat]

Jack-Jammin Oldies

The entire premise was a brainstorm of Steve Rivers with AM/FM at the time. At first it was supposed to be "black hits for white folks", but few understood that and it turned into an urban oldies and lost it's mass appeal. There wasn't enough major, mass-appeal hit music to make the format viable.

My feeling is that the comparisons by Jack-haters to Jammin' Oldies is one big reach. Jammin' Oldies never, EVER got the number of major signals in large and major markets like Jack/V.H. has done. It was a bogus "idea of the day" format that lasted about 3 days.

> Obviously JO and VH are different
> formats, but what made listeners turn off the jammin' oldies
> stations? The repetition? The presentation?
>

 

[tibbs]

Re: Jack flak?

> > None of any of this matters- Jack is doing well, despite
> all
> > the radio nay- sayers. Last time I checked, ONLY the
> votes
> > of radio listeners (specifically Arbitron diary holders)
> > really count.
>
> And if ratings do slide, the format is tweakable, without
> having to invest in a new format. In some markets, adding
> some "new" music to the play list, may or may not be
> required.
> Also, I believe, because most Jack stations are classic
> driven, that if a classic artist has a new song, Jack should
> be the first to play the song...if it's a crappy song, than
> that's a different story.
>

Interesting thought on whether Jack should have an occasional
ground breaking new artist or song. Why has there been so
little comment on why Jack is not focused on "new music"
when it's so "all over the board." I'll say this to my
friends listening on Jack in Nashville. Dance, and some
pretty cool AA-type 90's additions are happening. The
subtle weekly changes make it more interesting. Extended
play stuff coming soon? Already happenin' So far, so good.

 

[peppertree]

Two months after Bob-FM started in Austin and got #1 ratings, Classic Rock Z-102 fired all its jocks, expanded its playlist and for about six months was automated as Channel 102.3-Austin's World Class Radio Station. Their playlist rocks a bit more than Bob. There is no disco, but they do play songs outside of Classic Rock such as Monday, Monday.

I think their playlist is very similar to Bob, but they are just there to serve the public and play good music (their mission, sort of).

> Are there any stations which have adopted an Adult Hits
> format, minus the "in-your-face" liners that have become
> associated with "Jack FM" and his clones? The extreme of
> this would be a station with absolutely no "imaging" -- just
> music, commercials, and a legal ID once an hour.
>
> Infinity's 102.7 WNEW in New York operated an imaging-less
> CHR-Pop format in exactly this manner for several months
> following the demise of their "FM Talk" format. With
> unusually relaxed audio processing, too, it was quite
> interesting to listen to, but it didn't set the ratings
> charts ablaze, and was only a stop-gap measure before the
> introduction of the ill-fated "Blink" format on WNEW.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
[email protected]</P>

 

[radiolover78]

Bob and 102.3

> Two months after Bob-FM started in Austin and got #1
> ratings, Classic Rock Z-102 fired all its jocks, expanded
> its playlist and for about six months was automated as
> Channel 102.3-Austin's World Class Radio Station. Their
> playlist rocks a bit more than Bob. There is no disco, but
> they do play songs outside of Classic Rock such as Monday,
> Monday.
>
> I think their playlist is very similar to Bob, but they are
> just there to serve the public and play good music (their
> mission, sort of).

What is the ratings battle now? Is Bob continuing to beat 102.3? Which station do you prefer?

>
> <P ID="signature">______________
The Place for the Latest Happenings in Radio
www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
This site has been updated! Check it out! Thanks
</P>

 

[Oldbones]

Re: Jack flak?

> No, it makes total sense. Listeners totally and
> overwhelmingly "get it".
>

"Get" what? There's nothing to "get". It's this year's fad format. Nothing more, nothing less. Maybe it will fly long term, maybe it won't. No one knows yet.

> And, what makes anybody think this "attitude" is wearing
> thin with ANYBODY? Jack (and it's brethren) are going great
> guns in most markets, up to #1 25-54 in several significant
> markets with big growth in most others (save NY). So...
>

The whole Jack "phenomenon" has only been around for 6 months or so...the history of broadcasting is filled with one-book wonders. We don't know yet if Jack is going to be a long-term success.

> - doesn't matter if you (a radio junkie) have heard the
> songs before
> - doesn't matter that radio people think it's "corporate,
> repetitive and
> predictable" (because it isn't to the listeners)
> - doesn't matter than many of the songs "went away" for
> awhile and now
> they're back (they're all hits)
> - doesn't matter that radio hacks compare it with jammin
> oldies because the
> listeners are not


Listeners (aside from radio geeks) don't consider CHR, oldies, altrock, AC, etc. to be "corporate, repetitive and predictable" either. Radio is just wallpaper to most of them. You're making Jack-type stations sound like the greatest thing to come along since sliced cheese. It isn't. It's just this year's fad format. It's nowhere near the sensation you make it out to be. There's no big secret to "get", it's just songs. Will people get sick of them a year from now? Guess we'll find out in a year.

 

[OldiesCat]

Jack flak?

If I have to explain what "get it" means, you clearly don't. If you're blowing off JACK/V.H. as a format, why in God's name would you invest your time talking about it (or more descriptively trashing it)?

I don't know how the future looks for Jack, but I'll make a deal with you right now: your run-of-the-mill AC or oldies or classic rock vs. my Jack/Variety Hits station. Right now. Let's go.


>
> "Get" what? There's nothing to "get". It's this year's fad
> format. Nothing more, nothing less. Maybe it will fly long
> term, maybe it won't. No one knows yet.
>
> > And, what makes anybody think this "attitude" is wearing
> > thin with ANYBODY? Jack (and it's brethren) are going
> great guns in most markets, up to #1 25-54 in several
> significant markets with big growth in most others (save NY). So...
> >
>
> The whole Jack "phenomenon" has only been around for 6
> months or so...the history of broadcasting is filled with
> one-book wonders. We don't know yet if Jack is going to be
> a long-term success.
>
> > - doesn't matter if you (a radio junkie) have heard the
> > songs before
> > - doesn't matter that radio people think it's "corporate,
> > repetitive and
> > predictable" (because it isn't to the listeners)
> > - doesn't matter than many of the songs "went away" for
> > awhile and now
> > they're back (they're all hits)
> > - doesn't matter that radio hacks compare it with jammin
> > oldies because the
> > listeners are not
>
>
> Listeners (aside from radio geeks) don't consider CHR,
> oldies, altrock, AC, etc. to be "corporate, repetitive and
> predictable" either. Radio is just wallpaper to most of
> them. You're making Jack-type stations sound like the
> greatest thing to come along since sliced cheese. It isn't.
> It's just this year's fad format. It's nowhere near the
> sensation you make it out to be. There's no big secret to
> "get", it's just songs. Will people get sick of them a year
> from now? Guess we'll find out in a year.
>

 

[Oldbones]

Re: Jack flak?

> If I have to explain what "get it" means, you clearly don't.
> If you're blowing off JACK/V.H. as a format, why in God's
> name would you invest your time talking about it (or more
> descriptively trashing it)?
>
> I don't know how the future looks for Jack, but I'll make a
> deal with you right now: your run-of-the-mill AC or oldies
> or classic rock vs. my Jack/Variety Hits station. Right
> now. Let's go.
>

I'm not bashing "Jack"...I rather enjoy "Mike" in Boston. As for whether it sticks around or not...doesn't matter to me one way or another.

My comments are that there is nothing to "get" about it. Some people like the music mix, others don't, but it's just another radio format, not some lifestyle-altering phenomenon. You're taking this way too personally.