Mike McVay on Live & Local and Great Content

[yugoidar]

It's a topic that's been kicked around here before. Now, McVay, the Cumulus Sr. VP of Programming offers this thought and others in an allaccess.com interview this week:

"What makes radio successful is changing, but the key is to grasp "the absolute" on what makes radio successful -- and that "absolute" is great content. It's not about being "live and local" or any of those myths we once believed. The bottom line was, is and always will be about great content.

When Howard Stern first launched on WNCX/Cleveland, I was consulting cross-town WMJI. I remember everyone saying that our being local will beat his "out of town" show. That certainly wasn't true. He became a serious contender in most markets and he did become #1 in several.

Look at the best talk shows today -- Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Sean Hannity, John Batchelor and others. The great ones post huge ratings ... and they are syndicated.

So when you say the industry changed because being "live and local used to win, but it doesn't now," that misses the point. I disagree with your statement. Smart broadcasters grasp what does win and what doesn't win -- and they can't win without great content".

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

McVay makes a point about compelling radio. That's what attracts a lot of people to talk radio and why I've gravitated to NPR in particular. I'd also offer that "live and local" offers a great opportunity to be compelling. Knowing what buttons to push and when to push them is key. Problem is, with music radio these days, even a good personality-performer-jock-announcer-file jockey (whatever the hell they're called these days) doesn't get a lot of time or points in the hour to be compelling. Those positioning statements and liners take up a lot of valuable time, especially when a jock is doing his/her best to make them sound fresh, enticing and compelling.

A few days ago I was listening to a legacy jock-weatherman doing a tease for music "coming up in the next hour." It was a laundry list of titles and artists. No mystery to it whatsoever. I wasn't enticed to listen. Had he done even a "Casey Kasem" tease for one of those songs/artists, I might have been intrigued. As it was, I just said, "heard 'em 37 hundred times, played 'em 64 hundred times, no thanks."

On the other hand, I heard a Canadian jock ask, "Why would anybody want to hear a song from an album that's 27 years old..." He then rolled a brief phoner from a listener who had seen a concert in BUFFALO on that particular date about 20 years ago, but the jock either deleted the title of the song or clipped it... "it's a great song, you haven't heard it in a while, but I'll play it right after this." Rolled commercials, came out of commercials and said "Jerry, what's the song you want to hear?" Rolled the phoner with the song title and had the guy recall some of the concert.

The phoner may have been 15 or 20 seconds, if that, but it was very good. The jock did his homework and made it interesting. The song was Horizontal Bop by Seger. Yeah, it's pretty crusty, but I don't think it's one of the 375 best testing classics. I listened. Probably not the best example to success in a PPM world, but it worked for me and beat the pants off a laundry list.

I expect Chas108 to add some specific examples to this discussion because he's living in a PPM environment and has made some good points about doing radio under the PPM gun. Chas? Enlighten us.

 

[Bob1370]

Fascinating how someone leading his company through a round of bank-dictated corporate anorexia is trying to justify it. We all know that the "great content" he says can be gotten off the satellite or hard drive, isn't really great--but it sure is cheaper than doing it live and locally. Limbaugh et. al. are losing their edge, they're wearing out--and the ratings aren't, in fact, so great any more either. The've never pulled well with the female half of the populaton and they're not doing so well with under-55s any more either. Canned music has NEVER done well against live hosts. Didn't we learn anything from the meltdown of Jack in New York--or from how the ratings quadrupled and pushed WCBS-FM from #22 up to #2 in market #1 when it went live and local again?

The Stern example isn't a good one either. He did great in markets like NYC, DC, Philly and Detroit where he had a history as a local personality before he went national. But wherever he went up against a strong local personality (and we saw this in both Buffalo and Rochester) he never got beyond second best. Ask Brother Wease and Larry Norton...the memory of how they each bested Stern is sure to bring smiles to their faces. (Ironically, Wease is now carrying on his shoulders, the station where Stern once competed against him.)

Cheap radio may be momentarily profitable--and make no mistake, reliance on the satellite is cheap. And some of the name hosts you download may be familiar. But that doesn't mean people in your town are listening regularly, or advertisers are making long term commitments to buy time on their shows. Far more often than not
it's the local guy who's pulling both the numbers and the dollars. Ask the top brass at station groups that truly
succeed in ratings and the bottom line, like Dan Mason at CBS...you'll hear a story of how truly local radio IS the winner, and always will be.

I understand why Mike McVay has to say what he does, because he has to sell an increasingly canned product. But calling it compelling? Lipstick and rouge on the proverbial pig...

 

[Nick Gerard]

Can't help but notice that the examples McVay chooses are talk hosts. But what about "compelling content" in music formats? Let's modify that to "entertaining content" which is just as valid.

When we recall the great air personalities we loved and who inspired us, many were the guys doing middays, afternoons, evenings and overnights creating great fun around the music. Jackson Armstrong, Shane, Sandy Beach, Cousin Brucie, Don Berns, Pat Riley, CHUM jocks like Scott Carpenter, Tom Rivers and Terry Steele were just plain irresistible. When we traveled to other cities, even medium-sized cities, we always heard at least one or 2 guys in those dayparts who we thought were fantastic. "Compelling" by today's strident and often raunchy standards? Certainly not. But they were wildly entertaining.

Considering the "music" dayparts outside of AM Drive, there are certainly fine music jocks on the air today who are relatable, who execute well, and seem to connect with listeners. But where is the fun, the entertainment and the joy that make us say "I love listening to this guy?" That, to me, is "compelling content" and to my ear it's all but extinct. There's just no room when you're choked with trite live imaging and "seven song supersets."

Stream Jim Carson or Shotgun Tom at www.kearth101.com and you'll hear the fun. They're superb and can make you fall in love with radio again. But they're old school guys in an old school format. Is there a 21st century version of this kind of entertainment outside of AM Drive on today's Hot AC or CHRs?

Nick Seneca

 

[Paul_Warren]

For Mike to use Stern on WNCX vs. WMJI in morning drive as an example of how Stern beat live & local is a little silly. 'MJI was an Oldies-Based AC, if I recall correctly, and I think Ron Foster was doing mornings. Ron was a smooth, friendly-sounding time & temp/yuckster kinda guy with familiarity in the market, but hardly comparable to or competition for what Stern was doing.

Mike may actually believe what he's saying. But he didn't leave much room at client stations for the local part.

I worked at a McVay-consulted station in the '80s. He came to town with a shrink-wrapped three-ring binder which created a pretty constricting mold for even a live & local station. One instruction I remember in particular was for a liner to end the hour which promoted "more than X minutes of music!" in the next hour, using the formula 60 - minutes of spots. Our management didn't want to hear any questioning of Mike's orders, so the on-air PD returned to the studio and dutifully preceded an hour with no spots by promising "more than 60 minutes of music!" It was that canned. There were specific categories for bits, all planned in advance on a clock, and not much room for being spontaneous, especially outside morning drive.

Having live, local bodies is no advantage if you try to make them sound like liner jocks from Cleveland.

A variant of that is a problem with many live/local personalities. Many of them seem to try, or be directed to try, to emulate the sound of things which are considered national ideals, rather than to create content unique to their markets. Clint Buehlman and Danny Neaverth both struck me as guys who were compelling in their respective primes in Buffalo, but probably would not have done as well in other markets.

The Clear Channel talk station here in Salt Lake, KNRS, runs Beck, Rush, Hannity, a local PM drive guy named Rod Arquette who is quite good, then Dave Ramsey and Coast to Coast. It gets slaughtered in the ratings by KSL, which is live & local from 5am - midnight with hosts who focus intensely on local content and their own styles.

I think live & local can be a big edge, but only if you let them be really local.

 

[Element9]

McVay's selling a product. He's always right because the companies he works for pay him a lot of money, so they have to believe he's right. It's the way it works in every industry.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Mike McVay and TheBigA sound like the same guy. One would hope that McVay wouldn't have enough time to post here as often as TheBigA...

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I wade through a lot of newspaper content and forum chatter just looking for little thought-starters... concepts and phrases that convey NOTHING to another reader, but things that resonate in my head.

I am NOT and never was a good music programmer. But let me share with you what this thread stirred in my peculiar little brain.

First, let me set the stage. I grew up in rural America. We were a farm family My dad was very methodical about being in listening distance of the radio when the things that "churned his life" were scheduled. Weather: Can I cut hay tomorrow. Market prices: Would Wednesday be a good day to take a couple of steers to the sale barn. Are the prices up? Meeting schedule Announcements: Will any speaker be in my area next month that I would want to go hear and ask questions. Seed expert. Fertilizer expert. Today, the farmer does not have that same love affair with the radio. The Internet and the SmartPhone allow the farmer to get all that info on HIS schedule, not some radio programmers schedule. So the radio programmer in farm country has to sweat more today.

NOW, the music issue, and "Live and Local". The music business changed dramatically about half a century ago. The big, big studios (there were only a few) suddenly found all these new up-start studios and music promotorers opening up new routes to exposure and stardom. And the "channels" by which musicians connected with promoters who in turn connected with studios who then connected with radio stations who then connected with listeners was robust, changing, creative, mysterious and just plain fun. Where is the listener going to learn about music other than the radio. (No MTV, etc yet.) And where is the on-air "live and local" personality going to keep up to speed except through his(her)connection to record company reps. Remember, boys and girls, that was an era where picking up the phone in the radio station and making a long distance call could get you severly reprimanded, yea verily,even terminated. And a lot of music was local and regional. Without some face time with the record company rep and a few phone calls FROM HIM (on HIS dime) how can I be the in-the-know personality making live and local really neat and nifty.

Fast forward to today. The consumer (we used to call them listeners) has direct access to the world of music and entertainment. (just like the modern farmer has direct access to weather and markets on the internet.) No longer is it important to have an on-air host who connects well with people... not just the audience... but would be the first to hear from the record company because they liked working with the warm and fuzzy on-air guy. (Being a good radio personality worked BOTH DIRECTIONS. Made the listener happy. Made the upstream resources very productive.

So pity the farm area radio folks. They no longer are the exclusive resource for what the farmer wants, needs and enjoys.

So pity the metropolitan radio folks. They no longer are the exclusive resource for what the music listener wants, needs and enjoys.

I went on line and found the music charts I want to see. I went on line and visited discussion forms on music and I know what is going on. Dear Radio Station: Please play the music and just shut the hell up!

So, Mr. McVay... just between us girls... what is Great Content?

 

[chas108]

I heard a Canadian jock ask, "Why would anybody want to hear a song from an album that's 27 years old..." He then rolled a brief phoner from a listener who had seen a concert in BUFFALO on that particular date about 20 years ago, but the jock either deleted the title of the song or clipped it... "it's a great song, you haven't heard it in a while, but I'll play it right after this." Rolled commercials, came out of commercials and said "Jerry, what's the song you want to hear?" Rolled the phoner with the song title and had the guy recall some of the concert.

The phoner may have been 15 or 20 seconds, if that, but it was very good. The jock did his homework and made it interesting. The song was Horizontal Bop by Seger. Yeah, it's pretty crusty, but I don't think it's one of the 375 best testing classics. I listened. Probably not the best example to success in a PPM world, but it worked for me and beat the pants off a laundry list.

Sounds like that Canadian jock would do well here in PPM-land. All he'd need to do is substitute "in 4 minutes" or "at 4:24" for "after this". Create those listening appointments!!

McVay's point - that compelling syndicated content beats live & local - is legitimate.

BUT IMO it's really apples-and-oranges.

Let's see a fight between compelling syndicated and compelling live & local, in the same format, and I'll bet live & local prevails in the long run.

Once you've identified your target listener and have a handle on their lifestyle (knowing that and catering to it oughta be part of the station's mission!)...the next question I have to answer before every shift is..."What's Topic A"? What's my target listener most likely talking about to their friends...at work...on social media?

Sometimes, "Topic A" can change two or three times over the course of an airshift. Breaking news...a snowstorm...a 5-car wreck stops traffic on the 190.

Yesterday I filled-in on the Midday show and one of my topics was the Oklahoma teen mom who shot an intruder on New Year's Eve (complete with some of the 9-1-1 audio). Posting the "What would you do?" angle on Facebook with a link to the story, and opening up the phones, yielded plenty of local, interactive and (I hope!) compelling, timely content in the Noon hour.

Length becomes a problem only when the listener perceives it. A 2:00 compelling story trumps a :20 laundry list every time. Common sense dictates that music radio jock content may not always consist of 2:00 stories...but how often do we look at the laundry list and think..."How can I present this so it connects with my listener?" Someone I trust told me to use the "WGAS" test on my content... WGAS as in "Who Gives A S**t?" When four stations in three formats are playing Lady Antebellum, it becomes a vital point of differentiation.

A jock can be flawless in their execution but if the content doesn't make an emotional connection with the listener, it's useless.

Having live, local bodies is no advantage if you try to make them sound like liner jocks from Cleveland.

As for McVay, just like Bob Pittman, I think both have compromised their credibility by lying down with Cumulus and Clear Channel.

Paul, your story of working at the mercy of a McVay three-ring binder provides a look into a "live & local" past that in many cases was in name only. Sure the liners were delivered by a live jock in the city of license but if spontaneity is verboten...how do you handle it when a breaking story takes place that your listeners care about?

McVay's selling a product. He's always right because the companies he works for pay him a lot of money, so they have to believe he's right. It's the way it works in every industry.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[TheBigA]

Mike McVay and TheBigA sound like the same guy. One would hope that McVay wouldn't have enough time to post here as often as TheBigA...

That's funny. I know Mike. I'll tell him that.

You guys yammer about wanting "real broadcasters" run things instead of bean counters. So now you have McVay and Pittman, who are real broadcasters with decades of credibility. And because they don't drink your kool aid, and agree with you, they're the enemy. When will you guys wake up and realize you're living in the past? The reason they pay him a lot of money is he delivers results. Results mean ratings. So he must know what people want to hear on the radio. Why is that so hard to accept?

 

[heydaybegone]

A jock can be flawless in their execution but if the content doesn't make an emotional connection with the listener, it's useless.

Touche'

But it still circles back around whether the format allows it or not. (another new thread here in the sewing department?)

That's all

 

[TheBigA]

But it still circles back around whether the format allows it or not. (another new thread here in the sewing department?)

You assume the jock and the content are the same thing. "Content" covers many things.

 

[heydaybegone]

You assume the jock and the content are the same thing. "Content" covers many things.

True
The point was..the format! Give 'em :20 of talk and they can't find their way out of the paper bag (the jock) Hence the McVay way. Shotgun Tom (KEARTH) was mentioned earlier. A pro....knows the way out of a paper bag...he never gets in it!! It's what you can do within the format without worrying about "hearing yourself speak".
This is not new stuff...was debated back in the '80's!!

HDBG

And it continues.........

 

[SirRoxalot]

You guys yammer about wanting "real broadcasters" run things instead of bean counters. So now you have McVay and Pittman, who are real broadcasters with decades of credibility. And because they don't drink your kool aid, and agree with you, they're the enemy. When will you guys wake up and realize you're living in the past? The reason they pay him a lot of money is he delivers results. Results mean ratings. So he must know what people want to hear on the radio. Why is that so hard to accept?

Considering how well radio is doing these days compared to the past, they might want to look backward for a little inspiration. Much of what McVay and Pittman have done in the past has more to do with selling their consulting services than making great radio. Their sales pitch has been "my format is reduces the role (and cost) of talent". Lots of GMs were willing go in that direction, especially if they didn't have a chance of beating a dominant station already in their market.

In Buffalo, it's like Jack taking on 97-Rock. Jack gets less than half the numbers, but has very little cost. Their net ain't as good as 97-Rocks, but they make an easy profit - especially in combo with a dominant (and very personality-oriented) market leading Country station. The cost of a real challenge to 97-Rock's entrenched audience would be prohibitive as long as 97-Rock continues to invest in their product. If Cumuless starts cutting away at the heart of 97-Rock, all bets are off. They could become beatable if Cumuless cuts much more talent.

 

[TheBigA]

Considering how well radio is doing these days compared to the past, they might want to look backward for a little inspiration.

It's easy to do well when you have no competition. When radio was the only portable entertainment device, it did very well. The minute people had alternatives, it started to suffer. I submit radio is doing very well considering the amount of competition that exists today for people's time.

You really should at least take a moment to read Pittman's bio. He's never been a radio consultant. You could criticize him for his time in TV or AOL, but this is silly. McVay has never promoted formats, in particular jockless formats. You obviously have him confused with someone else. Maybe you're thinking of Alan Burns. McVay is in fact a well respected talent coach who has worked with thousands of top on-air talent. That obviously doesn't include you.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Radio hasn't been the "only portable entertainment device" in its history. Record players - going all the way back to victrolas, came in portable versions. The 8-track, cassette, and CD walkman were all challenges to radio. MP3s expanded the playlist somewhat, but still don't offer music discovery, time, temperature, traffic conditions, and information beyond title & artist - if you can look at the device while you're doing other things.

We've already heard about McVay's 3-ring binder and restrictive formats directly from people who've experienced it. Pittman is actually a fan of live and local content if it's done well. As far as my talents or success are concerned, you have no idea where I've been or what I've done. And you've already stated that you didn't have much of a career as on-air talent.

 

[TheBigA]

Pittman is actually a fan of live and local content if it's done well.

So you admit this was a complete fabrication?

Much of what McVay and Pittman have done in the past has more to do with selling their consulting services than making great radio. Their sales pitch has been "my format is reduces the role (and cost) of talent".

 

[Element9]

It's always the jocks. Never the eight minute commercial breaks. :


_________________________________________________
Hey, I'm script-tracking on multiple threads, kinda like Premium Choice. If CC can do it, why cannot I.

 

[rubberchicken]

For Mike to use Stern on WNCX vs. WMJI in morning drive as an example of how Stern beat live & local is a little silly. 'MJI was an Oldies-Based AC, if I recall correctly, and I think Ron Foster was doing mornings. Ron was a smooth, friendly-sounding time & temp/yuckster kinda guy with familiarity in the market, but hardly comparable to or competition for what Stern was doing.

Actually, John Lanigan was the morning host at WMJI. Still is in fact, since 1985. He has several co-hosts with him and plays no music during the show. He drives the revenue on that station and when he retires, they may as well flip the format. So yes, it is a decent comparison.

WMMS would be the better comparison. WNCX chased WMMS for several years with little success until they picked up Stern. Lanigan was bested first, followed by WMMS' Jeff & Flash. WMMS staffers famously cut the wires on Stern's 'funeral' in Cleveland after he beat both shows, silencing the entire network.

Being a Clevelander, just wanted to correct that. Carry on.

 

[chas108]

I have two ancient points of reference with Bob Pittman.

WPEZ-FM/Pittsburgh...mid-70's...it was the low-key jukebox competitor to Heftel's personality-oriented AM, 13Q. It carved out a niche but that's all.

WNBC/NYC...1977-78 - this was when Pittman put his girlfriend Ellie Dylan on mornings (according to NYC print media at the time she was his girlfriend). Don't remember specifics, just that it was Not Good. One of their positions was "we play the long versions of the songs", then play the short version of some core artist's current hit.

Probably irrelevant to the thread but there you go.

I remember Mike McVay's AC station in Pittsburgh being liner-card heaven but then again after 10AM you'd have been hard pressed to find much personality on any Pittsburgh music station. But if you could interpret liners about having the station everyone can agree on whether at work, in the car, on the toilet...the dial position is...and our name is...well you might have a future!

Funny thing is I've read great stuff from McVay that sounded more like Jay Trachman wrote it. I can't explain the dichotomy.