• 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

National Assoc. of Broadcasters radio commercials vs. reality

A

AllForADeuce

Guest
>My bad, I mislabelled it initially a FREE FM spot. I had have been corrected >that it was a National Assotiation of Broadcasters spot. Either way, it is >pro-terretrial/anti-satellite spot that is farcical and a joke...

Opie and Anthony played some FREE FM spots while discussing terrestrial radio's refusal to step up, their univentive, fake and lame old formats will toll their untimely death. All three bits ended with the archaic land-line-payphone operator tone (paraphrasing) ".25 if you want to listen for the next 3 minutes". Two of the bits made me laugh in hysterics:

1) They played a faux baseball game and as the game went on, they cut in with ".25 for the next three minutes". How STUPID is that? First, if they cut into a commercial, as a terrestrial radio listener, you are handcuffed into either listening to the commercials or rumbling around your presets maybe listening to a tune or two. Well, MAYBE one or two tunes if you can find a station NOT playing commercials. Um, note to satellite radio haters...ESPECIALLY with the playoffs going on and the races get tighter, if you had satellite radio you could listen to COMMERCIAL FREE music oooooor you could tune into another game that could be playoff crucial!! How about if you're a transplant from another city? If I listen to WEEI Boston I am forced to listen to the Red Sox...but what if I am a Brewer fan? Terrestrial radio = wait for score updates. Satellite = flip over to the Brewers game and hear your local announcers call your team!

2) Another FREE FM spot had an announcer with her AWFUL, fake radio voice talking how a HUGE star was arrested on stage. What they were arrested for was SO AWFUL they can't tell you exactly what they did, BUT IT WAS AWFUL!! Then the operator tones kick in and ".25 for the next three minutes" plays. HAHAHAHA that add played RIGHT INTO satellite's hands. As Opie & Anthony proved with the Pat O'Brien tapes, as TV and terrestrial radio gagged and teased how horrendous his language and requests were, O&A played the tapes 100% unaltered and unedited. The FREE FM ad is actually 100% wrong because satillite radio isn't handcuffed by FCC restrictions so they didn't need to tease the tapes like that fake DJ played to do. The FREE FM radio had to coy and tease the tapes. Satellite radio would have not only told you WHO got arrested but WHAT they did without any play on words (can you say Gary Glitter news updates?).

3) Maybe terrestrial radio has lost almost 8 million people because of there horrendous math skills. .25 for the next three minutes? WHAT? Let's put FREE FM's math to the test:
60 minutes x 24 hours a day = 1440 minutes per day
1440 mpd x 365 days a year = 525,600 minutes per year
12.95 sat. cost per month x 12 months per year = $155.40 per year
$155.40/525,600 = .000296 per minute a year...oh it gets even BETTER!
.000296 x 3 = .000888 the ACTUAL cost of three minutes per year
.25/.000888 = 281.531532 minutes you'd receive for .25
281.531532/60 min. per hour = 4.692192 HOURS of commercial free music you would get for .25

FREE FM claims .25 for 3 minutes, MATH claims 281.53 minutes. Now 281.53 minutes with barely a dolt of a DJ with fake radio voice, 281.53 minutes of commercial free music, 281.53 minutes with songs radio haven't played in YEARS taht may be your fave songs...wow, makes me glad I subscribe to satellite radio even more than before....

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by AllForADeuce on 12/30/05 02:12 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: FREE FM radio commercials vs. reality

Hate to C-Block your agenda...BUT!!!!

Those spots have NOTHING to do with FREE-FM.

They are a multi-conglomerate ad campaign that the major radio corporations banded together, and agreed to run on their stations touting the entire concept of "free" commercial, conventional terrestrial broadcast radio vs. the entire concept of satellite radio.

They have no correlation to the FREE-FM concept of CBS Radio. None.

They're not good either way. And terrestrial radio had better do something more than negative ad campaigning to keep listeners. I've been glued to XM for over a week. For true music fans...it's awesome.

Anyone wanna hire me?
 
Re: FREE FM radio commercials vs. reality

> Hate to C-Block your agenda...BUT!!!!
>
> Those spots have NOTHING to do with FREE-FM.
>
> They are a multi-conglomerate ad campaign that the major
> radio corporations banded together, and agreed to run on
> their stations touting the entire concept of "free"
> commercial, conventional terrestrial broadcast radio vs. the
> entire concept of satellite radio.
>
> They have no correlation to the FREE-FM concept of CBS
> Radio. None.
>
> They're not good either way. And terrestrial radio had
> better do something more than negative ad campaigning to
> keep listeners. I've been glued to XM for over a week. For
> true music fans...it's awesome.
>
> Anyone wanna hire me?
>

He is absoloutely right I know because I auditioned to voice some of them, I got there and realized what it was about and wanted nothing to do with the campaign so I made sure I didnt get the gig. The tag line was something like "radio, you shouldn't have to pay for it" they were AWFUL!. However paul is right those spots have ZERO to do with Free Fm.
 
Re: FREE FM radio commercials vs. reality

> "radio, you shouldn't have to pay for it"

Despite the fact among the advertisers who do pay for terrestrial radio are XM and Sirius. They run these pro-radio spots, then they tell me to buy a satellite radio. I've called their bluff.
 
Gotta Give Credit....

> > "radio, you shouldn't have to pay for it"
>
> Despite the fact among the advertisers who do pay for
> terrestrial radio are XM and Sirius. They run these
> pro-radio spots, then they tell me to buy a satellite radio.
> I've called their bluff.
>

A few years ago Entercom mandated that no mention of satellite radio was to be allowed broadcast on any of their stations. If a network spot was for either provider it was to be scratched, and local advertisers were not allowed to feature satellite in their copy.

They actually refused all revenue.

That's admirable.

But they have no problem taking TV, internet, and newspaper ad revenue...

So...where does one draw the line?
 
Re: Gotta Give Credit....

> A few years ago Entercom mandated that no mention of
> satellite radio was to be allowed broadcast on any of their
> stations.
>

jeez, talk about sticking your head in the sand. terrestrial radio, sooner than later, is going to have to convince its audience not to shell out a few bucks for sattelite.

i've heard how great it is musically, but what about whe it comes to local news? is it true that metro/shadow or some traffic service is providing local reports on satellite? and if that's so, how long will it be before the traffic evolves to local news?

sounds ominous...
 
Re: Gotta Give Credit....

> > > "radio, you shouldn't have to pay for it"
> >
> > Despite the fact among the advertisers who do pay for
> > terrestrial radio are XM and Sirius. They run these
> > pro-radio spots, then they tell me to buy a satellite
> radio.
> > I've called their bluff.
> >
>
> A few years ago Entercom mandated that no mention of
> satellite radio was to be allowed broadcast on any of their
> stations. If a network spot was for either provider it was
> to be scratched, and local advertisers were not allowed to
> feature satellite in their copy.
>
> They actually refused all revenue.
>
> That's admirable.
>
> But they have no problem taking TV, internet, and newspaper
> ad revenue...
>
> So...where does one draw the line?
>


Weel as Opie & Anthony have proven with thier copy of Stern's commercial read for XM radio, they had NO PROB taking advertising money when they thought sattelite radio was a joke and a passing fad. Now almost 8 million people later, they are playing pro-radio ads and verbally dismissing it in public as still a joke. Essentially, sattelite radio has taken the population of New York City proper (last I'd seen the numbers) away from free radio.

What is sad is that they would rather take the time in trashing sattelite radio rather than investing that time in making radio better
 
Re: FREE FM radio commercials vs. reality

> I've been glued to XM for over a week. For
> true music fans...it's awesome.
>
> Anyone wanna hire me?

What, so you could promote XM on their free signal?
<P ID="signature">______________
"environmentalism is collectivism in drag."
--George Will (or won't)</P>
 
Re: FREE FM radio commercials vs. reality

> > I've been glued to XM for over a week. For
> > true music fans...it's awesome.
> >
> > Anyone wanna hire me?
>
> What, so you could promote XM on their free signal?

It's not free if half my ride to work is spots.
 
Re: FREE FM radio commercials vs. reality

> > > I've been glued to XM for over a week. For
> > > true music fans...it's awesome.
> > >
> > > Anyone wanna hire me?
> >
> > What, so you could promote XM on their free signal?
>
> It's not free if half my ride to work is spots.
>

Which is one of the many reasons terrestrial radio is losing to other technologies. Between satillite radio and iPod-like devices being utlizied in cars, it isn't much suprise that radio had it's worst year to date.

And what are they doing to combat the situation? Not a hell of a lot. A whole bunch of denial is all I have seen.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom