• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

job cuts

SirRoxalot said:
"Most of those let go were in management"?

Can you cite me a reference for that statement? It doesn't jibe with the statement that Emmis issued, saying that most of the cuts were "part-timers and back-office personnel".

Of course, the weekends aren't really important anyway, are they? Saturday 10a-3p is only one of the most listened-to time periods of the entire week.

I think that most of us here are aware of the realities of commercial radio. We're also aware that many companies have cut programming to the bone, and are now extracting marrow. The result has been voice-tracked & syndicated radio that has turned off listeners nation-wide. THAT'S why revenues are falling.

Reference was to CBS' statement.

And, don't blame voicetracking and syndication- that's been an excuse for mediocre radio talent for 30 years (more syndication than VTing, of course, since voicetracking has only been around about 10 years). Oh, yeah, I forgot: better throw *the consultants* into the mix, since they also know nothing and get jocks fired.
 
Get Back

So, radio now is better than it was before 1996? Or 1986? Or 1976? I guess that's why the industry is in crisis now and not deemed "sexy" anymore.

I'm not sure what you mean by:

And, don't blame voicetracking and syndication- that's been an excuse for mediocre radio talent for 30 years (more syndication than VTing, of course, since voicetracking has only been around about 10 years).

Do you mean to say that syndication - and later VTing - propagate mediocre radio talent? If so, I'd agree. Syndication and VTing are mediocre programming compared to live and local talent, properly programmed under the direction of talented programmers. I don't care how good the syndication, or the tracker, the loss of immediacy and local content just doesn't measure up.

There's a lot of talent out there that goes unused or unrecognized. Guys with a lot of experience and great track records are getting tossed. A lot of other very good jocks are working formats that are so restricted that it's almost impossible to have a major effect on the outcome. When promos and voice guys get more breaks per hour than the jocks, and the jocks have a multitude of "must" elements every time they crack the mic, what chance do they have to establish a one-to-one relationship with the listener?

It's time for the suits to take the bullet instead of the grunts. If radio doesn't get its act together - literally - WiFi radio may just move the radio star to another outlet. I'm not so sure that some people in high places might not welcome that development. They'd love to free up more of the electromagnetic spectrum for digital data delivery.
 
Your line, "It's time for the suits to take the bullet instead of the grunts" just confirms your lack of understanding of big business. We could say that about General Motors, Yahoo (who cut 14% of their work force last week), most airlines- the list goes on and on.

I don't disagree with you on that point but if you think it'll ever happen, your head is buried deep in the sand.

On your former point about radio being better than in the '70s, '80s or '90s- radio IS different and the world around us is different. This "back in the day" mindset is poison for any business environment. I find it sad and tragic so many in our industry are so obsessed with how radio used to be instead of putting their energies into what radio could be in the future. You're all woried about DJs and promos and voice guys; your energies should be into a future of providing relevant content, regardless of the delivery platform.

This is WAY bigger than guys losing DJ gigs and how many breaks per hour you get.
 
Lack of Understanding

I understand big business. I understand that gross overinflation of executive salaries while their companies cut the people doing the day-to-day work in the business. It's rarely the people in the trenches - be they on the production line, cracking a mic, taking a support call, or flipping a burger - who bring down a company. It's the people who are the best insulated from failure that make the decisions that ultimately bring down a company. Executive salaries have gone through the roof in the last 15 years, while American industry has taken it in the shorts.

If the people running major funds - who happen to be making HUGE salaries - weren't in cahoots with the boards of those corporations, there would be a shareholder revolt. Unfortunately, most shareholders now are interested in how their diversified fund is doing, not individual companies. Once in a while, a corporate raider grabs a chunk of stock in hopes of making a killing and makes a stink (i.e. Regent), but most boards go unchallenged.

When your business model fails - as it has for Clear Channel, CBS, and others - you need to go back to when the business model worked. The business model worked when real people were delivering content that was relevant to the target audience, usually on a local level. Some syndicated shows work, usually because they target a very specific audience and/or have content that is universal in nature. NOBODY turns on a syndicated show to find out what's going on locally - especially in case of an emergency.

The world around us is not as different as you think. Free music came on CDs, records, tapes, cassettes, 8-tracks, and even videotape. Songs got recorded and swapped. Computers shortened the time it takes to make a recording, and widened the number of people you could swap with, but they have not fundamentally changed the process.

What has changed is radio programming. Radio no longer makes that "one-to-one" connection. It's no longer relatable in many cases. There are still stations that do it well. Look at the market leaders. Almost invariably they have the most hours of live and local talent in the market, programmed well, and fairly compensated.

The future IS relevant content. Perhaps you need to explain what you mean by "relevant content". Delivery of music is easy. RELEVANT content is more than music, which is where "added value" from talent makes a difference, whether you're delivering it OTA, on the web, or via WiFi/WiMax.
 
The "big business" of radio happens one listener at a time.
It's not wholesale, it's retail.
The execs have made it wholesale, and wrecked their own profitability by not understanding big business.
 
Re: Get Back

cflmusiclover said:
And, don't blame voicetracking and syndication- that's been an excuse for mediocre radio talent for 30 years (more syndication than VTing, of course, since voicetracking has only been around about 10 years).

Voicetracking is a "new" name for simply carting the tracks and running the carts with the songs they went with, going back to the early 70's. I have had pairs of GoCarts or Carrousels with music and matchin "voice tracks" in the mid 70's, or Instacarts ganged with intros and songs, with sets of carts to change with every DJ shift. It even gave the time, with the right jocks. It allowed us to have weekday talent on the weekends, or even to take the jocks to the street more of the day....

When I went in to what would become all-live Kicks in Birmingham in '72, they had a voice tracked oldies format. We just did no know that we were supposed to call it voice tracking instead of "recording the shift" at that time. At no time were a greater percentage of US stations voicetracked than in the 70's, though.
 
Voice-Tracking

DavidEduardo said:
At no time were a greater percentage of US stations voicetracked than in the 70's, though.

David, you've said this repeatedly. Can you give us a source for that contention, please?
 
I can't say for sure whether the 70s had more "recorded shift" radio stations than in any other decade. What I can attest to is what aired on radio where I lived during that decade ... and I'll include some info on the early 80s, too, which were similar to start but marked a change.

In my "home market" in the 70s, there were: multiple beautiful music automated stations; an automated soft rock (adult contemporary); and an automated "continuous country." Most of these FMs were paired with AMs that had full 24/7 DJ staffs (not to mention news departments). The AM jocks were to keep an eye on the automated FMs, and did things like record weather for the FMs while doing their shifts on the AM (one AM-FM combo I know of had a recording cart machine in the AM studio. Jocks would throw the board into "audition" and record tracks for the FM while music was playing on the AM.)

In the early 80s I went to college. In that medium market, in 1981, there were: automated beautiful music stations; an automated Top 40 (!) and automated soft rock and country stations as well. It was during that period when the situation started to flip.

One example: One AM-FM combo had a top-40 AM with live jocks and an automated FM soft rock station. Noticing that they were losing in the ratings to the automated top-40 FM in town, they moved the top-40 to their FM with live jocks and made the AM an automated country station.

That was the birth of what many markets have today: A group with a few FMs and AMs. The FMs have live jocks (at least most of the day). The AMs run syndicated talk or sports talk and have no live board ops. It's up to the FM staff to check on the AM(s) every once in a while.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom