• 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

passion

99% of the listeners are not tuning in to hear us? GEE..ya think that might be because we have 8 seconds to get in the calls and a dumb*** catch phrase? Radio sucks now because there are VERY FEW true Program Directors anymore, but we are up to our necks in Program Implementors. "Here's the 300 songs you can play and here is what your jocks have to say." Oh yea, that's gonna draw a crowd. If you want radio to be great then be a PD. If you're just working your way up the ladder, shame on you.
 
cheese said:
99% of the listeners are not tuning in to hear us? GEE..ya think that might be because we have 8 seconds to get in the calls and a dumb*** catch phrase? Radio sucks now because there are VERY FEW true Program Directors anymore, but we are up to our necks in Program Implementors. "Here's the 300 songs you can play and here is what your jocks have to say." Oh yea, that's gonna draw a crowd. If you want radio to be great then be a PD. If you're just working your way up the ladder, shame on you.

Yeah, because when left to their own devices and with the freedom to talk as long as they want, the so-called "entertainers" really deliver the content. LOL

We agree on a couple things:

- Accepting what you read and hear as gospel and simply implementing things without understanding the "why" is bad form.
- Most PDs are bad

Problem is, most jocks are worse. Any so-called "policy" that people think is instituted by big-bad-corporate radio is more likely a method to remove "creative license" from the lowest common denominator until they can either be shown a better way to do it, or shown the door and replaced by a better option.

No one may like that answer, but to assume that suits don't want their radio stations to get better is just naive and someone looking for the first opportunity to bash something to make themselves feel better. The reality is, we're in a turning point as an industry, and sometimes you have to identify what's BAD, and remove it, before you can start implementing what's GOOD.
 
No one said let jocks talk as long as they want. "So called entertainers?" Which moron hired 'em? The "so-called PD?" Yes, we agree most PD's are bad....they're not PD's.

You really think corporate radio is just trying to remove the lowest common denominator? LOL! More like holding on to whatever power they have...God forbid someone with a lesser title might know what's better for their market. The majority of the suits don't know the difference between GOOD and BAD radio. All they know and care about is how big that end of year bonus will be. Oh, they want their station to be better....Lower you overhead (more voice tracking) and (Golly) "look! all you shareholders our profits are up ;D .........Don't forget to straighten your tie and put on some chapstick when you head up the hall for your meeting.
 
Roger that....Let me apologize. Didn't mean to attack you. At least it sounds like you want GOOD radio. I applaud that. I have had a bad day and took it out on this board and you. My bad. I've lost all faith in Corporate radio. I guess it depends on which company you're working for. I swear to you I know the difference...I know in my heart what is good (winning) radio. Been behind a microphone and Programmed for way too many years to admit. I'm going to walk away from it and head to a smaller market. I give up, they win.
 
I understand and appreciate your thoughts and points. I'm sorry to hear you've lost faith in corporate radio (You're not alone). I did, but then really challenged it. You can't just accept their reasoning without questioning it. You'd be surprised how many will respect that, and how much easier it may be if you actually understand where they're coming from.

You still have some things in your control. Focus on those things, and make what you have control over the best it can be. Hating corporate radio, to me, is just a scapegoat. It's easy to hate things you don't have control over. It take a real programmer to focus on what he/she can control and make that great every day.

PS...radio isn't the only big-business industry. You'll find the same conflicts in any industry. Make the best of it!!
 
Roger, good to see you back on the boards.
100% in agreement.

Easy to point the finger, (or give it) to corporate.

Past 30 years I've worked for both Mom and Pops and corporate.
I'll take corporate any day.

Reality, as in any business, if your exceptional you will survive and prosper. The cream rises to the top.
Also, economics and technolgy has changed the landscape.

Remember when you pulled into Mobil and a person came out to fill your tank, wash your windows and check the air in your tires?
No longer necessary, no longer expected.
 
And you wonder why TSL continues to fall...

Corporate is Good.

Greed is Good.

Profit is Life.

Advertisers and shareholders are our customers, not listeners.

Listeners are sheep.

Talent is an expense, not a revenue-generator.

More Kool-Aid please.
 
SirRoxalot said:
And no restaurant survives serving up the same dishes over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

To that I say, "Ruth's Chris."
 
Re: And you wonder why TSL continues to fall...

SirRoxalot said:
Corporate is Good.

Greed is Good.

Profit is Life.

Advertisers and shareholders are our customers, not listeners.

Listeners are sheep.

Talent is an expense, not a revenue-generator.

More Kool-Aid please.

Great talent in any industry ARE revenue generators.

You can choose to be the best you can be and have a fat paycheck, or you can choose to be a starving artist.
 
Indeed, good air talent is a revenue generator. Just any talent filling a chair is not neccesarily a revenue generator.

And yes, advertisers are the customers as long as they are paying the bills. XM/Sirius, or subscription internet radio is a different story, but even the most popular channels there aren't super niche, eclectic channels. I don't honestly know what multi-millionaire hobbyists you think should be given all of the nation's radio stations after presumably they are all taken away from "corporate radio". You really think then we'll have all this eclectic programming that will appeal to a total of five people. I've heard stations that were programmed to "me and my friends" and they suck.

I will say first, I have my issues with the Clear Channels of this world, lest I be accused of being an employee of theirs. Our hot A/C station had an event with 10 bands that were famous in the 80s with thousands of people in attendance. If I stood on the corner and said "Mix 107.7 is owned by an evil corporation that fires DJs and doesn't air public service talk shows during peak listening times..sign this petition" most of the people who pass by would think you were nuts.

And the more I think about the restaurant analogy, the proper analogy would be Ruth's Chris saying one day "you know, I'm tired of cooking steaks for this corporate restaurant. people who come here are tired of ordering the same steaks over and over again, so this week we're going to serve shark. People need to be exposed to shark. Next week it's vegetarian because people need to become vegertarians."

Whether we like it or not, the person working in the office singing along to Elton John will be singing along to Elton John tommorrow. We can argue that it's not a good thing, this listener should be exploring obscure CDs instead of listening to Elton John. But she's not. All the high-minded legislation and redistribution of licenses won't change that.
 
Simple Logic

Talent that's ALLOWED to perform has a better chance of adding value to tired programming.

Advertisers only pay for advertising if there are listeners to hear it. No listeners, no advertisers, no money.

There's no need to give radio stations to "multi-millionaire hobbyists". Simply put stricter limits on the number of radio stations that one owner can control in a geographic area, and competition will resolve most issues. In fact, if stock prices continue to decline, several of the big corporate entities are likely to collapse under their own weight and mismanagement.

I'm not familiar with Ruth's Chris, but I'm guessing that they offer more than one cut of steak, cooked in more than one way, and have a selection of other dishes and sides. I also doubt that people go to Ruth's Chris - or any other restaurant - day after day after day.

I am familiar with Elton John's discography, and he had more than the five hits that most ACs seem to repeat endlessly in their 300 song rotation. There's no need to explore "obscure CDs".

The continued decline in TSL indicates that corporate programming practices aren't working, and are driving listeners to get their music from other sources.
 
Re: Simple Logic

SirRoxalot said:
I'm not familiar with Ruth's Chris, but I'm guessing that they offer more than one cut of steak, cooked in more than one way, and have a selection of other dishes and sides. I also doubt that people go to Ruth's Chris - or any other restaurant - day after day after day.

Ruth's Chirs has a menu that is consistent year after year, decade after decade. There are only a couple of dozen options, and a special or two. But you know that what you had that you liked the last time is likely going to be on the menue 5 years from now. Similarly, at the opposite end, you know the same thing about McDonalds or KFC or Taco Bell. They may rotate in and our some specialties, but you know what you will get each time you go.

Listeners to radio, in the coming PPM, spend around 2 to 3 hours a week with their favorite station, and listen to 6 to 7 stations a week. Were a person to eat out 7 days a week, they would likely go to 6 or 7 different restaurants, but each week they would likely go to much the same set of establishements, and would not get tired.

I am familiar with Elton John's discography, and he had more than the five hits that most ACs seem to repeat endlessly in their 300 song rotation. There's no need to explore "obscure CDs".

"Had" is is the keyword. Stations that play gold play songs that are hits today, and most of the ones you are likely thinking of are not hits today and the bulk of listeners do not want to hear them. Playlist size is not decided in advance of doing research, it is the product of research which narrows down the "was a hit" to "still is a hit" and each format and each station has a different range.

The continued decline in TSL indicates that corporate programming practices aren't working, and are driving listeners to get their music from other sources.

The decline in TSL was inevitable. In fact, the biggest reason why 12-34 TSL is off has to do with the 120,000,000 gaming consoles in the US, not iPods or web streams. The amount of gaming time today is roughly equivalent to the loss of male TSL since the late 80's. In a correlation analysis, gaming is the issue, not programming and not iPods.

You forget that, besides Arbitron, radio spends a couple of hundred million a year on research even today. We do have an idea of what we can do and what we can not do. Expanding playlists, save in a couple of more niche formats, will reduce TSL a lot...
 
Re: Simple Logic

SirRoxalot said:
Talent that's ALLOWED to perform has a better chance of adding value to tired programming.

Advertisers only pay for advertising if there are listeners to hear it. No listeners, no advertisers, no money.

There's no need to give radio stations to "multi-millionaire hobbyists". Simply put stricter limits on the number of radio stations that one owner can control in a geographic area, and competition will resolve most issues. In fact, if stock prices continue to decline, several of the big corporate entities are likely to collapse under their own weight and mismanagement.

I'm not familiar with Ruth's Chris, but I'm guessing that they offer more than one cut of steak, cooked in more than one way, and have a selection of other dishes and sides. I also doubt that people go to Ruth's Chris - or any other restaurant - day after day after day.

I am familiar with Elton John's discography, and he had more than the five hits that most ACs seem to repeat endlessly in their 300 song rotation. There's no need to explore "obscure CDs".

The continued decline in TSL indicates that corporate programming practices aren't working, and are driving listeners to get their music from other sources.

OK, lets use the restaurant analogy.
A great waitstaff knows their role.

Friendly, informative, attentive, serve up the food and get out of the way!
Do a quick check to see if all is well and get out of the way.

The meal/music is the star of the show.

Nothing more annoying than a pain in the butt waiter.

Besides, I came here for steak, not shark!! :mad:
 
Re: Simple Logic

SirRoxalot said:
Talent that's ALLOWED to perform has a better chance of adding value to tired programming.

Better way to put it: "Talent that ACTUALLY HAS TALENT that's allowed to perform has a better chance of adding value to tired programming."

Everyone assumes that just because they can punch buttons and talk on a mic, that it constitutes "talent," when in truth, that is a MUCH smaller percentage.
 
"There's no need to give radio stations to "multi-millionaire hobbyists". Simply put stricter limits on the number of radio stations that one owner can control in a geographic area, and competition will resolve most issues." BULLSEYE!

Expanding a playlist will NOT reduce TSL if you know the market and know your target audience. That's a consultant talking because they don't know the market and believe that their are only "300 safe songs" to play. WRONG. It's much easier to fly into town with your top secret 300 song playbook, they to really understand the wants and needs of the market. If you don't know how to work in, sell, sneak in, or "oh wow" your audience with some songs then you aren't a Program Director...you are a Program implementor. I'd love to Program across the street from someone with that mentality. I'd bury you.
 
cheese said:
Expanding a playlist will NOT reduce TSL if you know the market and know your target audience. That's a consultant talking because they don't know the market and believe that their are only "300 safe songs" to play. WRONG. It's much easier to fly into town with your top secret 300 song playbook, they to really understand the wants and needs of the market. If you don't know how to work in, sell, sneak in, or "oh wow" your audience with some songs then you aren't a Program Director...you are a Program implementor. I'd love to Program across the street from someone with that mentality. I'd bury you.

I've programmed "the big list" against a tighter list, and lost horribly although I had been doing that format for over a decade... I thought my superior market knowlede and music background would allow me to win with "all the songs" that had been past hits.

I've also, quite recently, programmed the very tight list against a station that did an expanded list. We consistently won, by a margin of almost 10 to 1, over about 10 books until the other station changed formats.

Playing the right number of songs is what gives TSL. Playing less than right is as bad as more than right... one is fatiguing, the other is still-laden and destroys TSL.

Consultants don't determine the right number of songs, the local listeners do. It all depends on how many songs test positively (meaning they do more good than harm). Each format has a range... ACs will be around 300, Country around 600, CHR around 100, etc. Again, playing many more or less is wrong. Every format implementation has a sweet spot... and an AC in Birmingham may have a different sweet spot than an AC in Eugene... so looking at their playlist will reveal different numbers of songs in rotation.
 
Not to throw a monkey wrench in the discussion, there was an interesting similar topic discussed on another board about iPod vs. Radio, and a really good point was brought that actually made me stop and think for several days.

The iPod is great for what it is, giving me the choice of listening to what I want when I want to, but what the iPod doesn't give me is the NOW element. While many station may offer Podcasts or downloading of their morning or afternoon show with funny bits and interviews, it doesn't give it to me now. Think about it sorta like TV. Back when cable TV came out, everyone thought that would be the complete destruction of the big networks, but they didn't die. How did they survive than? "Must see Thursday." Family Fridays, all these gimmicks and creating a buzz. Crafting content that you knew would be watercooler talk the next day. Making it so that if you missed it, you would feel like you were out of the loop the next day when people talked about it. Think about shows like "The Office." A show that hits the 18-35 year old demo and these are people that have grown up with almost always having Cable, Video rental, and portable music players available, yet religiously they watch that show, and then go and download the episode (even paying for it!)

Getting back to the beginning of what I was saying, the vast majority of radio listening is in the car (let's be honest with ourselves.) Now picture yourself in a car, driving. You have your iPod, your cell phone and your radio. What is available to you? I want music, I can use the iPod or the radio. So what is the radio offering me that I can't get while I sit at the wheel from my iPod, pretending you are alone in the car. Companionship? Maybe, but even a good friend in the car with me can be annoying if he drones on and on about his kids or the concert he went to. Traffic? Well this has been a sticky one for me, because most of the time you are already screwed by the time you hear about an accident on the freeway. News? That a bit more in the right direction.

Think of it this way: have you ever had that friend that just always seemed to have the coolest stories about the time him and some buddies after a concert, saw the star of a concert at the bar after the show and they all went out to a golf course drunk and someone ended up with a huge gash on their forehead? Or maybe happened to know this really cool fact about how you can only find a beer made a certain way in your city at this one small bar downtown? It may not always be about what the story is that friend tells but the way they tell it, gets you excited to hear what happened in the end.

Do you get what I am saying?

Be that cool friend. Give the listener something they can not get anywhere else.

Music IS important! But it's not everything. Jocks should think more like entertainers. When your jock is doing an artist interview, are they asking the usually questions about how they got started, who there influences are, the same stuff I can look up on Wikipedia or the artist website, or are they relaying a story about how the last time the artist was in town, how your jock and them ended up wearing each others pants on their heads at a Karaoke bar while singing Cheap Trick?

Part of that comes down to the PD getting involved with the talent. If your talent is a four-an-out-tha-door kind that can't stand the music they play and refuses to go to events or remotes, ditch 'em. Unless they are one of the funniest people in the world or are attending superstar coke parties on the weekends, they will have nothing to offer the listener.

I would even go so far as to put it like a sandbox. The music is the sand. It sits in the box, and pretty well defined from the rest of the landscape, but now you grab your shovel and pail and start building a castle. How and what you build is up to you. The sandbox is your confines, but you can still have a ton of fun in that box, and maybe, just maybe so passerby's will jump in and play along with you!

:)
 
Lies, Damned Lies, and Research

Several of you are making dangerous assumptions:

1) You're assuming that the research isn't biased in one way or another. For example, specific music is selected for a test. You know nothing about the music that wasn't tested.

2) Most research targets the existing P1 audience of your station and/or your perceived competition. It tells you little about the people who have already given up on radio, or seek other entertainment because of the endless repetition and lack of variety. In other words, you have little chance to grow the radio audience. At best, you may cause a small subset of the existing audience to shift their habits.

Look at results in the marketplace. Please explain why almost every market is dominated by the stations that have the most compelling live and local content to go with their music.

As far as the "restaurant analogy" is concerned, you select the restaurant because you want steak for that meal. Even in the steak house, most people vary their orders each time they dine their. They select different cuts of beef, and different preparations. Exceptional restaurants offer dishes prepare dishes based on the freshest ingredients that are in season, so there is some variation. No, you don't go to a steak house and expect shark, but you also don't expect the "same-old same-old" every time you dine there.

I think that most people percieve the entertainment value of radio has having declined significantly in the last 10-15 years. That's one of the reasons that stock prices have declined so sharply. Investors simply feel that the stations are not worth the value assigned to them - or paid - by broadcast management.

Corporate radio may be on the verge of a huge crash and burn, which may allow real broadcasters to get back into the game. I'm becoming convince that on-air people don't have a lot left to lose, and have a lot more to gain in the long run if the current regime is ousted.

PS - It's hard to evaluate "talent" when you're allowed to crack the mic 4 times an hour, and all of those breaks are rigidly formatted and limited to the length of a pre-programmed music intro. How much time is spent on "talent development" by PD's who are chained to a computer running Selector for multiple stations, scheduling airshifts, attending meetings, and engaging in CYA paperwork to avoid being thrown under the bus by upper management, consultants, and/or corporate programmers?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom