TheBigA said:
I read and re-read the study, and don't see where it says "lack of opportunity to entertain."I think what it's saying is they have the opportunity, and they fail, often because they're more focused on their own personal interests than those of their listeners.
I'm not sure if you're deliberately obtuse, or if you have a problem with reading comprehension. Let me quote from the study:
The typical music radio station in the U.S. has 14 breaks an hour (think of it as 12 songs, 2 stopsets, and a transition into each as a "break"). The results of our analysis indicate that:
10 of those will contain station positioning language, either live or recorded.
7 of them will contain contest, promotional, sales merchandising, website and/or text program information.
ONE of them, on average, will contain something said/designed solely because a listener might be interested in it, having nothing to do with the station.
On an average music station - outside of mornings - the number of opportunities for a jock to TALK is limited to about 5 times an hour. Most, if not all of those "opportunities" have required format elements that leave very little time personalization or adding relatable elements to the content. The other 9 breaks have NO opportunity because they're pre-recorded either as jingles or station imaging. They're not under control of the jock.
They're not involved in the same activities as their listeners, they're not speaking the same language (slang), they don't have Facebook or Twitter, and their lifestyle is different.
I don't know what market you're talking about, but that's untrue in any market with relatively ubiquitous, relatively cheap high-speed Internet service. I know very few jocks who aren't on at least one social networking site.
Part of this, I think came from the morning zoo concept. Everyone needs a cast of thousands to put on the show, and they're all talking with each other, leaving the listener completely outside the conversation.
I realize that mornings are the only daypart left that's live and local on a lot of stations, but it's not the ONLY daypart. Applying observations about morning shows to radio in general is disingenuous at best.
Couple that with the fact that most DJs are, how can I say this kindly, OLDER then them. I see loads of photos of DJs in the trades, and they are obviously older than their target demo, many with grey hair, often overweight, and certainly not relatable to younger people. Some look like perverts, and then we discover that some of them actually are! This is not an ownership problem, folks.
It's not? Who hires them? Why are so many older jocks still working younger formats? Because there's NOBODY COMING UP TO REPLACE THEM. Younger people have been abandoned by radio, and in turn have abandoned the medium as both an entertainment source and as a career.
It's the DJs job to do the show prep and come up with content to share with their audience. It's their job, and they're doing it badly. In my opinion, they've been doing it badly for a long time. My biggest criticism of DJs is their unwillingness to spend time WITH their listeners. What is the point of having local DJs when the local listeners never SEE them or get to interact? they might as well be in some other city. THIS is what has marginalized the value of local talent, and it was brought about by the talent themselves. Interacting with the audience is part of show prep. Answering their own email, instead of turning it over to a minion. Attending concerts and manning the station booth, instead of having a promo kid or "stunt boy" do it. That whole "stunt boy" thing revolts me. Imus personally ordered 50,000 hamburgers to go. He didn't have his stunt boy do it.
Maybe all of that is true in some rarified atmosphere of the upper echelon of major markets, but it sure ain't true in the rest of the radio world. All of those who have "minions" answering their e-mail, raise your hands. In fact, all those of you who DON'T have a station e-mail address published for the public, raise your hands. It's amazing how many stations DON'T publish an e-mail address for jocks because they want to completely control public communications.
A LOT of on-air personalities are willing to press the flesh IF they're asked, and IF they're compensated for appearances where the STATION is making money. Most guys - especially outside of the morning show - will make free appearances for charity or not-for-profit events. Morning show guys are less willing, because they're usually sleep-deprived, and they in greater demand. If you do one, how do you turn down others? With rules changes, you can't even get "freebies" anymore, because the tax on the face value is deducted from your paycheck. So, you go work the concert booth, but it's going to cost you $50 to see the concert because you got "free" tickets? And you wonder why some folks who are living on the edge of poverty turn that down?
Sure there ARE some local talent who actually make personal appearances. Yes there are some folks who keep up with what's going on. But for the most part, I think local talent needs to take charge of their own careers, take responsibility for what they do, and not just do whatever the boss man tells them. There are ways to do both IF the talent is actually interested in communicating with the audience. They also need to stop obsessing over getting compliments from the boss, or positive reinforcement from the CEO. That's all inside baseball. If you're on-air, your boss is the listener. Strive to get a compliment from THEM every once in a while. Make every minute on the air count for something.
Nice that you recognize that there are still a TON of broadcasting professionals out there. Sadly, doing all of the above won't save your job, or your career. Good, solid professionals are getting whacked daily - in spite of superior performance - because MANAGEMENT overextended the company, and has to cut expenses. Management is opting for the low-cost alternative IN SPITE OF what it's doing to ratings or revenue. Who loses? Everybody. Listeners, radio pros, and ultimately the company.
