LA Times article on the struggles of AM Radio

[Wimmmex]

This article is LA-centered but is a well written analysis of the state of AM radio.

Here in Boston a few of the big flame-throwers (50kw) have some life left...but most of the 5KW stations are all irrelevant now.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-fi-am-death-20140902-story.html#page=1

"There is very little reason to be optimistic about AM radio, though there are some very strong remaining stations," said Larry Rosin, president of Edison Research, who follows the media industry. "AM retooled with talk radio, but even with that, people are listening to it less and less as time marches on."

"As recently as 1990, AM radio accounted for about 45% of stations licensed with the Federal Communications Commission. Now FM counts roughly 10,700 outlets, more than doubling AM's 4,700."

 

[blackgold]

There are rumors that Digital Radio Mondiale may be tried here in the USA after the "failure" of HD Radio. Digital Audio Broadcasting isn't doing very well in Europe, either.

 

[MarioMania]

Do you really think people wants to buy a new radio for a Digital Broadcasting?

There's no reason to upgrade, People have there Radios for like 30 years

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

People already HAVE upgraded. It's called the Internet.

 

[Wimmmex]

People already HAVE upgraded. It's called the Internet.

Are you saying that RF radio is doomed to be replaced by internet distribution? D you have any solutions for envigorating and extending the life of AM?

There are 3 reasons *I* don't listen to AM as much.

1.) Content...there is less and less content of value (to me anyway).

2.) Audio Quality...is worse than ever before. We all know that AM Audio quality can sound better than it currently does.

3.) Interference and static. There is more static and interference on AM radio than ever before.

If those things were fixed...I'd spend more time with AM radio...I'm sure others would as well.

Do you really think people wants to buy a new radio for a Digital Broadcasting?

If the content is there that people want? Yes. People did it for Sirius/XM. People did it for Howard Stern.

 

[TheBigA]

If the content is there that people want? Yes. People did it for Sirius/XM. People did it for Howard Stern.

Really? How many satellite radios do you think they sold? What if I told you next to none? You don't see Elton John hawking those Stiletto radios any more.

The main ways people listen is either in the car or password protected internet site.

 

[Wimmmex]

Really? How many satellite radios do you think they sold?

More than they would have without Howard.

And in this case they bought "subscriptions" for radios that came with the cars.

(i.e....they didn't have to buy the actual radios, as they were included with the cars they bought. But the sale was subscriptions instead.)

 

[Wimmmex]

And put this in Coast to Coast, It doesn't belong here

Back to a Boston Focus....WBZ and WRKO will survive for awhile.

850AM is already irrelevant....and 1510AM is struggling for relevancy.

Whats the future of 590, 740, 890, 950, 1090, 1150, 1200, 1260, 1330, 1550, etc., etc.

 

[nowradioguy]

There are rumors that Digital Radio Mondiale may be tried here in the USA after the "failure" of HD Radio. Digital Audio Broadcasting isn't doing very well in Europe, either.

DRM is another format for digital radio, although, unlike HD on the AM band, there is no analog main channel.

 

[nowradioguy]

There are 3 reasons *I* don't listen to AM as much.

1.) Content...there is less and less content of value (to me anyway).

2.) Audio Quality...is worse than ever before. We all know that AM Audio quality can sound better than it currently does.

3.) Interference and static. There is more static and interference on AM radio than ever before.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that the technical quality of just about EVERY AM station is now so poor it probably would not pass many of the FCC-mandated tests from bygone years.

AM noise is particularly severe in some automobiles, even those that aren't electric. And don't get me started on audio quality. Many AM stations used to get out to 7500 Hz at one time. Now, some barely get to 5000 Hz, and there's that annoying background hiss from HD on 1030 KHz around here. Makes the station sound distant.

Around here AM is where you go to get your ethnic programming, news, and talk. True, 'BUR also does news and both they and 'GBH do talk, but their brand does not suit us all.

A lot of seniors would be ecstatic if Bittner's 740 could get a huge power boost both day and especially at night. Oh, what - this demo is not even counted, let alone sought after.

 

[TheBigA]

(i.e....they didn't have to buy the actual radios, as they were included with the cars they bought. But the sale was subscriptions instead.)

Exactly. Your previous post said great content sells radios, and used them as an example. The point is great content doesn't sell radios. It sells subscriptions.

This is radio's biggest problem today. The device itself if obsolete. So putting great content on AM radio isn't going to sell AM radios.

 

[Wimmmex]

Exactly. Your previous post said great content sells radios, and used them as an example. The point is great content doesn't sell radios. It sells subscriptions.

In the case of subscription radio....yes.

In the case of some kind of compelling content on a digital AM radio (non-subs)....I think it would sell digital radios. (precisely because that's the definition of compelling.)

Question is...what is compelling content (or does it even exist)...that's another question.

You see what a huge success HD radio has been....

Not as bad as lots of people would like to characterize. More listeners than ever, more radios than ever. I know many people in Boston who bought HD radios to hear Classical, Jazz and Oldies that they couldn't get on analog.

However, you are right that apathy for anything about radio is rampant....AM, FM, SW, HD, CB, V/U Scanners, etc.

 

[TheBigA]

In the case of some kind of compelling content on a digital AM radio (non-subs)....I think it would sell digital radios.

You see what a huge success HD radio has been....

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

If those things were fixed...I'd spend more time with AM radio...I'm sure others would as well.

Those things will never be fixed. Not because the FCC won't take the necessary action, but because today's technology literally makes it impossible. You're not going to eliminate the electronic interference of the devices that people demand, and as the listeners continue to tune out in droves, the content will continue to get worse. It's a self-perpetuating cycle.

Besides, Internet distribution already has replaced AM. It won't replace FM for some time to come, because most people actually recall that the FM side of the dial still exists. But ask anyone age 25 or younger if they've ever listened to AM radio. Even if they were listening to Radio Disney, they'll say no, because they weren't listening on AM, they were listening through the app. No improvement in content is going to change media consumption habits today. You go where the people are, you don't beg and plead with them to come back to an inferior technology. (And let's not argue whether or not it's actually inferior, because all that matters is in the minds of the consumer, and they've already made that decision FOR us.)

Eventually, yes, most media will be delivered online. It's already happening to AM, it's already happening to FM, and TV is just starting to experience the transition now, as well. Either broadcasters get on board or they'll go the way of the dodo.

 

[CTListener]

Those things will never be fixed. Not because the FCC won't take the necessary action, but because today's technology literally makes it impossible. You're not going to eliminate the electronic interference of the devices that people demand, and as the listeners continue to tune out in droves, the content will continue to get worse. It's a self-perpetuating cycle.

Besides, Internet distribution already has replaced AM. It won't replace FM for some time to come, because most people actually recall that the FM side of the dial still exists. But ask anyone age 25 or younger if they've ever listened to AM radio. Even if they were listening to Radio Disney, they'll say no, because they weren't listening on AM, they were listening through the app. No improvement in content is going to change media consumption habits today. You go where the people are, you don't beg and plead with them to come back to an inferior technology. (And let's not argue whether or not it's actually inferior, because all that matters is in the minds of the consumer, and they've already made that decision FOR us.)

Eventually, yes, most media will be delivered online. It's already happening to AM, it's already happening to FM, and TV is just starting to experience the transition now, as well. Either broadcasters get on board or they'll go the way of the dodo.

Or the magazine, a print format that seems to be dying off even faster than the newspaper. Only one of the six magazines I had subscriptions to five years ago is still around in print -- Sports Illustrated, and I dropped that as being not worth the cost when the issues started running a skimpy 48 and 54 pages. All the others are either dead or online only. The Internet is an amazing thing, but it has turned out to be more than a bit of a Pandora's Box for mass media.

 

[Wimmmex]

Besides, Internet distribution already has replaced AM.

You tried to make that point a few times previously. However, if you look at AM radio in Boston (WRKO, WBZ, etc.)......how many people are listening to that programming by "internet distribution"? Less than 0.1%

While, yes, there are more options for listening.......so called internet distribution has not already replaced AM distribution.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

You tried to make that point a few times previously. However, if you look at AM radio in Boston (WRKO, WBZ, etc.)......how many people are listening to that programming by "internet distribution"? Less than 0.1%

Nice logical fallacy. People don't listen to traditional AM or FM stations online, they listen to online sources like Pandora, podcasts, independent streams and so forth. Arguing that AM listening still surpasses Internet listening because people don't listen to AM stations online is like saying that people aren't driving cars because less than 0.1% of the cars they're driving are Ford Model T's.

 

[Wimmmex]

Nice logical fallacy. People don't listen to traditional AM or FM stations online, they listen to online sources like Pandora, podcasts, independent streams and so forth.

It's your own logic.

What percent of NYC is listening to AM over-the-air broadcasts on the ride home in PM drive? About 10%

What percent of them are listening to "like Pandora, podcasts, independent streams and so forth" . Less than 0.1% (i.e...too little to measure.)

Disproving your "Internet distribution already has replaced AM" argument.

 

[davideduardo]

You tried to make that point a few times previously. However, if you look at AM radio in Boston (WRKO, WBZ, etc.)......how many people are listening to that programming by "internet distribution"? Less than 0.1%

That´s incorrect.

Nielsen Audio does not effectively measure listening on mobile devices when earbuds or headphones are being worn. You have to look at other sources for streaming measurement, such as those that monitor session starts and concurrent sessions.

 

[JoshTheRadioDude]

It's your own logic.

No, it's not. Whatever words you've tried to put in my mouth you can take right back out. I don't utilize logical fallacies.

What percent of NYC is listening to AM over-the-air broadcasts on the ride home in PM drive? About 10%

What percent of them are listening to "like Pandora, podcasts, independent streams and so forth" . Less than 0.1% (i.e...too little to measure.)

As David points out above, that's entirely incorrect. And if you take sources that measure streaming and put their data in comparable terms to Nielsen, you'll find you're FAR off base.

Disproving your "Internet distribution already has replaced AM" argument.

You could only wish that's what you've done. Instead, you've only proven your ignorance of the facts. How sad for you.