My Take On What's Wrong With Radio

[scooty430]

OK, so I think you basically proved my point. If you subtract the specialty shows (Beatles, Elvis, the 60s show) the number of songs that are actually in the playlist is much lower.

The recent 12 week number of about 1400 was seriously inflated by Xmas songs, and the (awesome!) Top 1001 of all time, where they actually played Splish Splash, Good Timin', old Elvis tunes....

I can actually see how pre-64 would drive some away - in fact, that's why I never listened to KRTH when I was in my 20s - I was at KLSX and KLOS. The 50s sounded like ancient history to me. But I guess I've developed a taste for it.

As for "variety means better songs, not more songs" I don't quite follow that. Sounds like something out of 1984. (The book, not the year.)

 

[davideduardo]

As for "variety means better songs, not more songs" I don't quite follow that. Sounds like something out of 1984. (The book, not the year.)

That comes from actually talking to real listeners, not chatting with radio geeks or industry pundits.

When you "measure" variety via lengthy personal interviews, you find that listeners point very consistently to the stations with the shortest playlists as those having the most variety. The reason is that those stations, by eliminating songs that people are not passionate about, seem to always be playing one song they like after another. The longer playlist stations get comments like, "they play a bunch of songs I don't like" on the other hand. And when asked directly as to which has better variety, the short power hit playlist wins.

This is somewhat akin to asking listeners of current based formats how often, on the average, they would like their favorite station to play their "most" favorite songs. The answere in 95% or better of the cases is, "every hour." So repetition is not playing songs to often, it is playing bad songs.

 

[scooty430]

As for "variety means better songs, not more songs" I don't quite follow that. Sounds like something out of 1984. (The book, not the year.)

That comes from actually talking to real listeners, not chatting with radio geeks or industry pundits.

When you "measure" variety via lengthy personal interviews, you find that listeners point very consistently to the stations with the shortest playlists as those having the most variety. The reason is that those stations, by eliminating songs that people are not passionate about, seem to always be playing one song they like after another. The longer playlist stations get comments like, "they play a bunch of songs I don't like" on the other hand. And when asked directly as to which has better variety, the short power hit playlist wins.

This is somewhat akin to asking listeners of current based formats how often, on the average, they would like their favorite station to play their "most" favorite songs. The answere in 95% or better of the cases is, "every hour." So repetition is not playing songs to often, it is playing bad songs.

I get what you're saying. It sounds like a matter of perception.

For current stations, I would agree, though, that you want heavy rep. The songs are fresh and you want to hear them frequently and not have to wait. You're also probably young and not listening all day long.

I'm referring more to the stations that only play old music. Over the years, they have really shrunk their playlists, following the logic you outline above.

The basic problem with this "less is more" approach is that in trying to please everybody, and offend nobody, they come out really bland.

I'll use my brother as an example. Not a radio geek at all, and younger than me: he's 35. A guy who commutes 70 minutes a day each way in Boston, so he's got plenty of radio listening time to fill. Though he has plenty of rock CDs at home, he can't stand any of the local choices - WZLX, WODS... It isn't because he doesn't like the songs - they're all great songs. He's just sick of hearing them.

So like many people he listens to sports talk, or pops in a CD.

 

[KFodor]

As for "variety means better songs, not more songs" I don't quite follow that. Sounds like something out of 1984. (The book, not the year.)

That comes from actually talking to real listeners, not chatting with radio geeks or industry pundits.

When you "measure" variety via lengthy personal interviews, you find that listeners point very consistently to the stations with the shortest playlists as those having the most variety. The reason is that those stations, by eliminating songs that people are not passionate about, seem to always be playing one song they like after another. The longer playlist stations get comments like, "they play a bunch of songs I don't like" on the other hand. And when asked directly as to which has better variety, the short power hit playlist wins.

This is somewhat akin to asking listeners of current based formats how often, on the average, they would like their favorite station to play their "most" favorite songs. The answere in 95% or better of the cases is, "every hour." So repetition is not playing songs to often, it is playing bad songs.

I get what you're saying. It sounds like a matter of perception.

For current stations, I would agree, though, that you want heavy rep. The songs are fresh and you want to hear them frequently and not have to wait. You're also probably young and not listening all day long.

I'm referring more to the stations that only play old music. Over the years, they have really shrunk their playlists, following the logic you outline above.

The basic problem with this "less is more" approach is that in trying to please everybody, and offend nobody, they come out really bland.

I'll use my brother as an example. Not a radio geek at all, and younger than me: he's 35. A guy who commutes 70 minutes a day each way in Boston, so he's got plenty of radio listening time to fill. Though he has plenty of rock CDs at home, he can't stand any of the local choices - WZLX, WODS... It isn't because he doesn't like the songs - they're all great songs. He's just sick of hearing them.

So like many people he listens to sports talk, or pops in a CD.

Congratulations, Scooty...you hit the nail on the head!

"Perception is reality". It's not what you do, but what the listeners "perceive" you as doing that makes the difference.

Now, listeners come in 2 catagories. The people who listen to a station for extraordinary lengths of time (people stuck in offices with the same station on...radio geeks...etc.) And...people who listen to the radio as a distraction or for entertainment as they are running around taking kids to soccer practice, driving between work meetings, to work or on the way home from it. These people listen about 75 to 90 minutes total per day.

It's the latter that represents the biggest percentage of most station's audiences. Those are the people for whom you cultivate the most "occasions of listening", and that helps drive your ratings because good songs keep listeners coming back. Now, depending on format, playlist size can vary, but as a general rule, shorter is better. And, how do you learn this as gospel? You screw up a time or two programming radio stations.

Now, I can appreciate people who listen for 8-10 hours or more complaining about repeats. But, those folks are in the minority percentage of the audience.

I got an interesting e-mail not long ago from a listener complaining about hearing "the same songs every 3 hours" on one of our stations. He was talking about the stations' "hot currents". I reminded him CHR stations spin that catagory about once every 45-70 minutes. Duh!

I frankly wouldn't expect a guy like your brother not to be sick of certain classic rock or classic hits stations. He's, frankly not "in demo" (or just barely in it) for those types of stations. His tastes would differ from the "typical" listener to that type of format. Typically, a lot of those stations are aimed 35-54, some even aim 45-54 as a secondary target.

 

[radioresearcher]

One company that runs VERY tight gold-based formats is Cox. You can look at their playlists for their Classic Rock stations and they vary anywhere from around 220 to 340. By the way, they are predominantly market leaders - including WBAB/Long Island, WSRV/Atlanta, and WXGL/Tampa all perform very competitively playing their power rotation songs 18 times/week.

And, in markets where the PPM currently exists or is coming - station playlists are getting smaller. Now that we see the reality of radio listening (more cume, lower TSL) people are expecting to hear songs they like.

David is correct that variety is about perception. If I tune in and hear a stiff, I am going to be out. A big key to success for any radio station is the number of tunes in per week. I usually wind up cutting the library of most stations when I get in.

Ironically, there are people that think the Adult Hits format is winning because it is deep. Realize that it is broad, but still play HITS. Jack/L.A. plays a wide variety of hits - but they are hits for L.A.

Jhani didn't go "deep" with KRTH - he just enlarged the era that it was playing.

 

[davideduardo]

Now, depending on format, playlist size can vary, but as a general rule, shorter is better. And, how do you learn this as gospel? You screw up a time or two programming radio stations.

A friend, upon being fired in a major market, was told by the station owner, "Son, we don't learn from our successes."

All of us have learned the same way you say. Those who say they haven't are either not good programmers or are fibbing.

Now, I can appreciate people who listen for 8-10 hours or more complaining about repeats. But, those folks are in the minority percentage of the audience.

With PPM, where average weekly exposure is around 2.5 hours, not the 7 or 8 hours of the diary, it's all about being as good as you can for short intervals.

I got an interesting e-mail not long ago from a listener complaining about hearing "the same songs every 3 hours" on one of our stations. He was talking about the stations' "hot currents". I reminded him CHR stations spin that catagory about once every 45-70 minutes. Duh!

What is amazing is that nearly every listener, when asked, wants to hear their favorite songs every hour!

 

[scooty430]

One company that runs VERY tight gold-based formats is Cox. You can look at their playlists for their Classic Rock stations and they vary anywhere from around 220 to 340. By the way, they are predominantly market leaders - including WBAB/Long Island, WSRV/Atlanta, and WXGL/Tampa all perform very competitively playing their power rotation songs 18 times/week.

And, in markets where the PPM currently exists or is coming - station playlists are getting smaller. Now that we see the reality of radio listening (more cume, lower TSL) people are expecting to hear songs they like.

David is correct that variety is about perception. If I tune in and hear a stiff, I am going to be out. A big key to success for any radio station is the number of tunes in per week. I usually wind up cutting the library of most stations when I get in.

Ironically, there are people that think the Adult Hits format is winning because it is deep. Realize that it is broad, but still play HITS. Jack/L.A. plays a wide variety of hits - but they are hits for L.A.

Jhani didn't go "deep" with KRTH - he just enlarged the era that it was playing.

I just don't get it.

Who exactly is listening to stations like KLOS or these boring-sounding Cox stations? Am I the only one hearing regular people in my life say, "Man, those stations are boring. I'm sick of those songs." Or...."KLOS? They're still on?" Heck, I know people who haven't listened to radio in ten years!

I bet the PPM shows basically nobody is listening anymore. Probably why they delayed it. The truth is too scary.

Doesn't radio need to be MORE interesting/compelling to get people to turn off the ipods? I just can't see someone bothering to tune in a station playing the same freakin' "power tracks" that have been spinning non-stop since 1978, through AOR, Classic Rock, All Rock and Roll Oldies, and now Classic Hits? Are there people who still get excited about Hotel California and Go Your Own Way?

 

[davideduardo]

I bet the PPM shows basically nobody is listening anymore. Probably why they delayed it. The truth is too scary.

The PPM rollout was delayed because the sample was far from proportional. In Houston, where it is running for 8 months as currency and nearly 3 years including the testing, the result is that there is much higher cume, and lower TSL and the shares are very similar to diary shares.

 

[doublecashkgb]

Radio Researcher-You sound like a lot of people I knew in the 80's & 90's who researched their a** right out of the business. Look around, the world has changed and so has the way people consume media. Your old methods are outdated & everyone has the same research available.

 

[davideduardo]

Radio Researcher-You sound like a lot of people I knew in the 80's & 90's who researched their a** right out of the business. Look around, the world has changed and so has the way people consume media. Your old methods are outdated & everyone has the same research available.

Everybody does not have the same research available. Stations depend on custom research for much of what they do programming-wise, and there is a wide range of such research that can be done. Just read Sean Ross' interesting comments on this site for some insight.

 

[whirlwizard]

With that said, it does appear that a lot of radio stations are still functioning the "old fashion" way without taking into consideration what is new out there. Granted a large number of radio stations do not have the funding to go exploring, but we are not even hearing changes occuring in the larger broadcast companies. Sure they move slower, but the larger markets don't seem to excite the listener any more. This thread seems to prove that.

 

[Stewy]

Wanted to bring this thread back to the top in light of this weeks revenue releases this week. David, as I said, revenue is down, that is virtually indisputable. The relevance to this topic is whether it is because of just the economy, the poor on air product thanks to the bean counters running the show, or both.

I vote both. :'(

 

[davideduardo]

Wanted to bring this thread back to the top in light of this weeks revenue releases this week. David, as I said, revenue is down, that is virtually indisputable.

Actually, revenue was flat to up last year. In larger markets, it was either flat or down, except for Hispanic. In medium and smaller markets, revenue was up. This year, the Kagan forecast is for 2% to 3% increases in general market, and 6% to 8% increases in Hispanic radio.

The relevance to this topic is whether it is because of just the economy, the poor on air product thanks to the bean counters running the show, or both.

I vote both. :'(

It's mostly the economy, as where there is some hurting is in national sales in larger markets, where the mortgage/housing/banking and automotive accounts have suffered.

 

[Stewy]

Whoa, there must be sleet in the underworld, David almost agreed and almost did a 180 from previous posts. :-*