Now What?

[RadioMetalMan]

The radio show my partner and I did would be considered "offensive" to many. We pulled no punches, didn't go out of our way to ruffle feather. We just did what we thought was funny and our PD gave us carte blanche to explore and be ourselves.

We even had unofficial sponsors to the show. Business who weren't even paying us, but we liked the way they did business and there was an DEFINITIVE impact from our small little show at these business. Radio CAN work, if it's honest.

And yes, our paid advertisers also saw a return from our brand of theater of the mind. We specialized in pranks and outright fun.

 

[awp69]

Interesting conversation. I do think that when Wi-Fi becomes standard in cars, local radio, which already is in trouble, is going to face a big uphill battle.

Local air talent is great, but to me no matter how great your on-air personalities are --- aside from talk radio, of course --- it still comes down to your playlist. Period. I don't know too many people who listen to a station that they hate the music they play but just happen to like their local DJ. If you don't like country, you aren't going to listen to a country station because the guy who spins the tunes is cool.

That's oversimplification, but I'd listen to a local radio station over a voice-tracked or Internet radio station any day if it played the music I liked. Up until recently, I really didn't find any station in the GSP market that "met" my musical tastes. I would have filpped my lid if I was able to stream a station from another area just because I didn't identify with any local station (at least without flipping -- a lot). And that's where people flock to streaming while at work, or iPod listening in the car.

Ironically, the station that I now listen to X98.5 (both in the car and streaming) may have "local" advertising, but it has no on-air talent so it's no different than listening to a station that could be located anywhere in the country. Would it make a difference if there was good on-air talent on it? Don't think it would make much of a difference as long as they're playing the music I like.

So what does all that mean? I think it's really going to force local stations not just to have decent air talent, but to really look at what they play. Too many radio stations have become complacent and stagnant. Same playlists with little risk taking. Widespread Wi-Fi streaming, if it dosen't kill local radio all together, should push on-air stations to move forward. To have a need to change and adapt to listener's desires. It could be a good thing. Or it could be the end. It's up to the corporate thinkers which way it ultimately goes.

Local talent can give a bigger sense of identity. But that's not going to matter if the entire station doesn't truly compete with bigger playlists and the variety you can find elsewhere.

 

[TheBigA]

Too many radio stations have become complacent and stagnant. Same playlists with little risk taking. Widespread Wi-Fi streaming, if it dosen't kill local radio all together, should push on-air stations to move forward.

The problem is everyone's music tastes are different. There's way too much music out there. Radio isn't in the music business. So if your main interest is the music, you're probably better off with a specialized stream of some sort.

 

[awp69]

The problem is everyone's music tastes are different. There's way too much music out there. Radio isn't in the music business. So if your main interest is the music, you're probably better off with a specialized stream of some sort.

But that may be the problem. Radio stations should be in the music business. I'm not saying any one station is going to be "perfect" for any one person. Even with specialized streams, there's usually going to be something you don't like to hear. Frankly, I found my wife's Sirius XM to be too specialized. Not enough variety of a music type on any station. I don't want to hear just '80s music or just the biggest hits.

I still think it all comes down to playlists. Rock 101 or Magic 98.5 here in the Upstate. Have either of those stations changed much over the years? I'd say no. Maybe a little update here or there, but basically, they stay the same. Small playlists can't compete with huge playlists/variety even in the same format. When people can start streaming anything, variety and depth IMO will be a factor.

 

[TheBigA]

But that may be the problem. Radio stations should be in the music business.

But they're not. Music is just one form of programming that radio uses to attract listeners. But radio companies don't make money from music. So when people stream music, it doesn't matter to radio stations. That's not their business. If people stop listening to music on the radio, then radio will do talk, sports, or news.

 

[awp69]

But that may be the problem. Radio stations should be in the music business.

Music is just one form of programming that radio uses to attract listeners. 

If people stop listening to music on the radio, then radio will do talk, sports, or news. 

I understand what you're saying, but you are right music is one way that radio attracts listeners. Getting more listeners means getting more advertisers...which leads to the revenue that's going to help the station survive. The same goes for talk, sports or news. All of those can also be found on the Internet or through satellite radio. Guess I just feel the product (including music) has to be compelling enough to pull listeners away from those sources if (when) it becomes more commonplace as a competitor. I absolutely agree that local talent can help build a relationship with the listeners as well, but as in the example I mentioned, there's probably few -- if any -- people who listen to a station just for the chatter of the DJs. It may not be what people who are on the other side of the microphone want to hear, but it's the truth. At least in my opinion.

 

[TheBigA]

Guess I just feel the product (including music) has to be compelling enough to pull listeners away from those sources if (when) it becomes more commonplace as a competitor.

It doesn't have to be compelling. You said it yourself: They have to play the songs YOU want. If they don't, you're gone. The problem is everyone likes different things. And there aren't enough radio stations in a given town to accomodate all those different tastes. When you're competing against millions of individualized radio stations, there's no way to win. So it's not even worth playing that game.

 

[DudeFan]

A successful local radio station in the future will be one that is a social hub of information and "news" (in quotes in purpose) and which serves the function of being a way of connecting to others and that provides listeners a feeling that they are connecting to others in the community. The music programming simply serves as the glue which holds everything together.

Has it been done before?

Yes.

Except it was called full-service.

In every community the music that held the service elements together was different. Some communities it was MOR, other it was Top 40 or Country or Rock. I believe it will be that way again.

 

[Gatekeeper007]

Dude your right and pretty well on top of things but playing enough music that people really want to hear doesn't hurt.

 

[GordonSims]

Sadly, a new standard is being set.
At home, teens keep up w/ new music while never owning a radio
In the car, "AM" and "FM" are just in the way while scanning for "XM" or "Input" (ie iPod)
If a radio station IS doing "local" information, it comes from a tv news/weather/sports anchor over the phone

Its what future listeners are growing up with, and what current listeners are just growing accustomed to.
Its really sad. Even depressing.

And (in my opinion anyway) radio is screwing up with social media too.
A traffic tweet isnt very helpful (unless it says 'stay away from the guy driving and reading Twitter')
Websites are all cookie cutter and rarely updated
Facebook has become the platform that listeners use to b*tch about fired on-air staff (until mgmt delets the posts)
Instagram would be great for pictures...but nobody does remotes anymore.

There will be a time when a Superstorm Sandy hits a market NOT in the top 100.
The 1k mom and pop station will get knocked off the air, the 100k will be in the middle of the Ryan Seacrest show
Then, we'll REALLY miss radio.

 

[TheBigA]

Sadly, a new standard is being set.
At home, teens keep up w/ new music while never owning a radio

Everybody owns radios...just not as free standing devices. Radios come with other things. Like cars or phones or computers.

 

[awp69]

Sadly, a new standard is being set.
At home, teens keep up w/ new music while never owning a radio

Everybody owns radios...just not as free standing devices.  Radios come with other things.  Like cars or phones or computers.

It may be unfortunate, but cars are really the only place people regularly listen to radio. Phones and computers may be ways to get radio, but it's also where the split begins to occur....streaming Internet radio (sometimes including actual radio stations outside of their market), Pandora, Grooveshark or their own downloaded music. Some -- including myself -- may still stream local stations, but I do agree that the youth market is migrating away.

I was shocked when my teenage son told me last week that he was getting into dubstep music. I was like, where did you even get exposed to it? The Internet, of course. I've always been a music lover so I seek ways to find new music, but my son isn't "big" into music yet word spreads through middle and high schools about music and it's easier than ever to find what you're looking for. So I do think the next generation has a totally different perspective of the way they listen to or get their music.

 

[TheBigA]

It may be unfortunate, but cars are really the only place people regularly listen to radio.

Not according to Abitron. They say the workplace and home still rank higher. Lot of workplace listening via desktop computers.

 

[awp69]

It may be unfortunate, but cars are really the only place people regularly listen to radio.

Not according to Abitron. They say the workplace and home still rank higher. Lot of workplace listening via desktop computers.

I'll be curious, however, to see if the same holds true as today's youth go into the workplace.

 

[TheBigA]

I'll be curious, however, to see if the same holds true as today's youth go into the workplace.

Arbitron's demographic data indicates that it already has. The demos for OTA radio are about the same as what they were 25 years ago.

Employers don't allow their employees to spend work time building music playlists. As "today's youth" become adults, they will discover they no longer have as much time to spend creating music playlists and seeking out new songs. When they find an app that does it all for them, they'll use it, even if the app is actually an OTA radio station.

 

[awp69]

I'll be curious, however, to see if the same holds true as today's youth go into the workplace.

Arbitron's demographic data indicates that it already has.  The demos for OTA radio are about the same as what they were 25 years ago.

Employers don't allow their employees to spend work time building music playlists.  As "today's youth" become adults, they will discover they no longer have as much time to spend creating music playlists and seeking out new songs.  When they find an app that does it all for them, they'll use it, even if the app is actually an OTA radio station.

Guess time will tell. Not trying to argue with you. Just think it's unrealistic to think that when Wi-Fi becomes more prevalent in cars, etc., that it won't have a negative impact on OTA radio. Technology moves on. Just like many small- to mid-size markets are already losing more and more local talent to voice tracking because it's easy to implement and a lot of people don't even notice the difference.

I truly don't want radio to go away. In fact, I hope the challenges that come only cause OTA radio to get better.

 

[TheBigA]

Just think it's unrealistic to think that when Wi-Fi becomes more prevalent in cars, etc., that it won't have a negative impact on OTA radio. Technology moves on. Just like many small- to mid-size markets are already losing more and more local talent to voice tracking because it's easy to implement and a lot of people don't even notice the difference.

That's why all the major companies are investing in streaming. But here's a fact: It's one thing to type in "www" on a home computer. It's a different thing while driving at 70 mph. I don't expect wifi to become as prevalent in cars as OTA radio, especially in rural areas and smaller states like South Carolina. The city of Philadelphia had big dreams of providing free wifi city wide, and the whole thing fell apart. The telecom companies want to charge premium dollars for streaming charges, and penalize big users, like those who download video and audio files. OTA radio is still the most efficient means of transmission, and for the majority of people, the music and talent available are just fine.

 

[awp69]

That's why all the major companies are investing in streaming.  But here's a fact: It's one thing to type in "www" on a home computer.  It's a different thing while driving at 70 mph. 

I do agree there. That's why a lot of the cars coming out with streaming are doing so with things like Pandora. I think iHeartRadio is doing great and probably will be right there next to Pandora and other streaming options. Only risk there is consolidation. Since voice-tracking is becoming more common and companies want to cut back, more and more stations may become less local. Again, I'm not rooting for that. I think local radio is important to communities. Just not sure if corporations that own them and that care more about the bottom line think about the local aspect as much.

Earlier a few posts mentioned that those being negative were outsiders bitter that they are no longer in radio. I'm completely on the outside, never having been employeed by radio (former print journalist, however, another medium that's on the way out -- and, no, I got out of that biz long before that started happened so no bitterness there). I actually joined these forums because I do, in fact, love music and radio and have followed it for years. Guess I just come with the perspective of the changing landscape.

Hope that radio can adapt and survive.

 

[TheBigA]

Since voice-tracking is becoming more common and companies want to cut back, more and more stations may become less local. Again, I'm not rooting for that. I think local radio is important to communities. Just not sure if corporations that own them and that care more about the bottom line care as much.

But the real issue is what audiences and advertisers think. And there really hasn't been a huge demand for local talent. You can see this most obviously in public radio. Most NPR stations run the national programming all day, and they've become very competitive in the ratings. Gen Y and Gen X have grown up in a cable TV world, where there is no local. Their local world is about their friends and family, not their media. Media is the worldwide web. The only local needs they have are weather and traffic. The rest is best handled by someone with credibility, and that's not someone local.

 

[DudeFan]

Actually, the NPR New/Talk affiliates that simply act as network repeaters do not do well in the ratings. The ones that are heavily localized like WAMU or WUNC do indeed do very very well. WAMU, for example, has a local announcer do local news and weather cut-ins during the breaks 24/7. The ones that underperform, like ETV Radio, simply fill the broadcast day with NPR network fare.