Podcasts: Big Nail In The Coffin of Terrestrial Radio

[FredLeonard]

Podcasts Rise In Popularity, Funded By Advertisers And Listeners

Millions are downloading and listening to podcasts. It's the source of original material and growing ad revenue. Apple's iTunes has 1 billion subscribers, and advertisers are seeing dollar signs.

http://www.npr.org/2014/11/30/367544553/as-podcasts-rise-in-popularity-advertisers-pay-attention

One salient prediction from tech columnist John Dvorak: With real-time Internet availability in cars, it's all but over for terrestrial radio and the broadcast model.

Maybe the people who come here looking to start a career in terrestrial radio by getting a job at some station should know that (1) computers at stations have killed their career chances and (2) the computer on which they read this could be their very own podcast station.

 

[TheBigA]

The assumption is that everyone will use internet in cars to listen to internet radio. There is no reason to believe that's true. They can listen to internet radio in cars now. No need to wait for something else to happen. People listen to OTA because they like it, not because they have no choice.

Of course OTA radio stations have been creating podcasts for ten years. Some of the biggest podcast hosts got their start as OTA radio hosts. The big loser here seems to be Sirius, because they are also available in cars, but they don't offer podcasts.

One side of the story that the reporter didn't mention is that while advertisers are interested in podcasts, they're only interested in podcasts that get a million downloads or more. And when they advertise, they spend a whole lot less than on air. So podcast creators have to develop very unique content, and they have to expect to create a lot of podcasts before they get any money. Recording artists are having the same problem with music streaming. They get a couple million streams of their song, and get paid a couple hundred dollars. That's not a dependable income source.

Once again, as I've said for a long time, it's not a one-or-the-other thing. People listen to media content. They listen to multiple sources. The companies that will survive are those who provide content on multiple platforms.

 

[Unregistered]

Internet Radio Distribution

Terrestrial Radio is the big winner in Internet Listening. Over the air radio is not going away as far as content goes, but what everyone fails to realize is the device used to listen to terrestrial radio is changing. No longer do we need a radio to listen to radio. To say terrestrial radio is going away is to fail to think about who is listening to what.

Look at Cable TV. Surely there should not be any terrestrial TV now but how many TV licenses do you know that have been turned in to the FCC. Sure Hulu, Netflix and Amazon will threaten Cable but the content is the key. Funny, staying with friends they touted Netflix and then we watched local TV news, some CNN and then watched Scandal. It's content that is not going away.

 

[FredLeonard]

Terrestrial Radio is the big winner in Internet Listening. Over the air radio is not going away as far as content goes, but what everyone fails to realize is the device used to listen to terrestrial radio is changing. No longer do we need a radio to listen to radio. To say terrestrial radio is going away is to fail to think about who is listening to what.

Look at Cable TV. Surely there should not be any terrestrial TV now but how many TV licenses do you know that have been turned in to the FCC. Sure Hulu, Netflix and Amazon will threaten Cable but the content is the key. Funny, staying with friends they touted Netflix and then we watched local TV news, some CNN and then watched Scandal. It's content that is not going away.

Why turn in a TV license? It gives the holder a preferred position on cable (plus a few hold-outs --- yawn!). Why should Hulu, Netflix and Amazon threaten cable? The cable companies provide high-speed Internet. But this is about audio.

Podcasting is the audio equivalent of on-demand. On-demand (the inmates taking over the asylum) is taking over. Broadcasting - force-feeding of content - is doomed.

Smart broadcasters will switch to on-demand. Others will die.

 

[TheBigA]

Broadcasting - force-feeding of content - is doomed.

Smart broadcasters will switch to on-demand. Others will die.

Why not both? Right now, broadcasters are offering both. Make money twice from the same content. What's the down side?

 

[FredLeonard]

Why not both? Right now, broadcasters are offering both. Make money twice from the same content. What's the down side?

The down-side is era of force-feeding of content (aka broadcasting) is near its end. The era of choice (on-demand) has begun.

 

[TheBigA]

The down-side is era of force-feeding of content (aka broadcasting) is near its end. The era of choice (on-demand) has begun.

So say you. So what?

The era of choice began a long time ago. Maybe it just began in your house.

 

[FredLeonard]

So say you. So what?

The era of choice began a long time ago. Maybe it just began in your house.

I said "has begun." Past participle. Beginning has happened. Now growing. It's been around but it had not yet gained wide-spread acceptance or buzz.

Now move on and find other posts to pick at and disagree with since that seems to be what makes you feel good.

 

[TheBigA]

I said "has begun." Past participle. Beginning has happened. Now growing. It's been around but it had not yet gained wide-spread acceptance or buzz.

So you hear one story on Morning Edition, and that means podcasting has now gained wide spread acceptance, to the exclusion of all other platforms? Anything that's not on-demand is dead. Really?

People are lazy. On-Demand requires them to do something. Laziness is one of the driving forces behind broadcasting, and why such a large percentage still use it in real time. Study your own habits for a day. You'll see what I mean.

 

[FredLeonard]

So you hear one story on Morning Edition, and that means podcasting has now gained wide spread acceptance, to the exclusion of all other platforms? Anything that's not on-demand is dead. Really?

People are lazy. On-Demand requires them to do something. Laziness is one of the driving forces behind broadcasting, and why such a large percentage still use it in real time. Study your own habits for a day. You'll see what I mean.

I listen to podcasts from NPR, APM, PRI, Slate and others. Plus I have an app that I use to select stories from Morning Edition and All Things Considered for a custom podcast feed. Yes, I go to the trouble to pick and choose. It takes less time than listening to something I don't especially care about. Plus my podcast app has VSC, so I can listen at 1.4 (while driving) or 1.7 (other times).

When I feel like music, I use Pandora.

I almost never listen to terrestrial radio. About the only time I do is if it's a very short drive and then I listen to an Oldies HD sub-channel.

I never watch live TV. I use Tivo, Roku (Netflix, Amazon Prime or Hulu Plus) or Xfinity On-Demand.

Once again, you succumb to hyperbole. EVERYBODY is lazy; EVERYBODY opts for convenience over selectivity? I didn't say not on-demand is dead; I said it's getting there. The trend should be clear; even to you.

At the end of the broadcast model, who will be left? The latest of late adopters. Yes, the lazy, indifferent and unconcerned. The same idiots who still listen to right-wing talk and end up on juries. And respond to infomercials.

 

[TheBigA]

Once again, you succumb to hyperbole. EVERYBODY is lazy; EVERYBODY opts for convenience over selectivity? I didn't say not on-demand is dead; I said it's getting there.

If you go back and read post #5 in this thread, you'll see very clearly that I didn't say "everybody." I said "Why not BOTH." I said both will exist side by side. Broadcasting companies are also in the on-demand business. So it really doesn't matter to broadcasters.

Before you tell me what I said, take the time to read what I actually said. You, on the other hand, believe that the era of broadcasting is over. That's fine for you to believe, but it's not correct. People are lazy. You like to Tivo, but you complain that the channels don't make it easy for you. That's just one example.

 

[FredLeonard]

If you go back and read post #5 in this thread, you'll see very clearly that I didn't say "everybody." I said "Why not BOTH." I said both will exist side by side. Broadcasting companies are also in the on-demand business. So it really doesn't matter to broadcasters.

Before you tell me what I said, take the time to read what I actually said. You, on the other hand, believe that the era of broadcasting is over. That's fine for you to believe, but it's not correct.

You said "People are lazy." Blanket statement.

Yes, they will do both, until the demand for not on-demand fades and broadcasting is no longer worthwhile. The radio networks kept their old time radio schedules going until 1957, as the audience shifted over to TV. Early on, some in the industry thought both old time radio and TV would co-exist but didn't happen. There is always a transition period between old and new technology.

 

[TheBigA]

You said "People are lazy." Blanket statement.

But it's also true. Lazy & cheap are two primary motivations in consumption of content. Make it easy and free, and the world will beat a path to your door.

Are there exceptions? Sure. Do the exceptions disprove the rule? No.

But once again, as I clearly said in this thread, broadcasters provide on-demand for their content. It's not a big money-maker, but it's available.

 

[thelegacy]

The assumption is that everyone will use internet in cars to listen to internet radio. There is no reason to believe that's true. They can listen to internet radio in cars now. No need to wait for something else to happen. People listen to OTA because they like it, not because they have no choice.

Of course OTA radio stations have been creating podcasts for ten years. Some of the biggest podcast hosts got their start as OTA radio hosts. The big loser here seems to be Sirius, because they are also available in cars, but they don't offer podcasts.

One side of the story that the reporter didn't mention is that while advertisers are interested in podcasts, they're only interested in podcasts that get a million downloads or more. And when they advertise, they spend a whole lot less than on air. So podcast creators have to develop very unique content, and they have to expect to create a lot of podcasts before they get any money. Recording artists are having the same problem with music streaming. They get a couple million streams of their song, and get paid a couple hundred dollars. That's not a dependable income source.

Once again, as I've said for a long time, it's not a one-or-the-other thing. People listen to media content. They listen to multiple sources. The companies that will survive are those who provide content on multiple platforms.

The broadcast stations that are willing to break FREE of chart only music will have a greater chance to survive. Also you mention about the artists not getting paid enough for streaming? Royalty rates are expected to make a dramatic rise in 2016 which could all but kill small Internet Radio stations like mine unless we ban together. The RIAA and their cronies want more money, but want to keep it for themselves and not the very people who created the music. They shudder at the thought of Internet Radio because it paves the way for Independent artists who can make their own label and simply submit to Internet Radio stations who play their Genre of music and the small non corporate stations will play their music if the DJ likes it. The RIAA is losing control that is what they fear and if broadcast Radio does take a nose dive (It will never die maybe not play music or RIAA Music) it will make an even playing field.

Now lets talk about part 15 stations that can transmit a block or so. If you live near one of the colleges or near a part 15 station you'll hear stuff you won't hear from the big boys. The RIAA wants part 15 transmitters to go away they are the ones who cry when your transmitter goes 1/4 mile instead of 75 feet (unless our throwing out harmonics and interfering with the entire FM band or aircraft band like the cheap transmitters do). I predict there will be more part 15 operators to level the playing field and the RIAA will have to eat crow. The sooner they are out of business the sooner Internet Radio will pave way for real creative music and the public won't have to be shackled to songs that have "Brother Bill" for 15 minutes and nothing to say other than "Brother Bill" with slapping and clapping and running a record back and forth (can teach Jash (who is 2 yrs old to do exactly the same). Real music is played by real instruments, and sung by talented singers and the songs are actually written from scratch not sampled (Pirated I call a spade a spade) from someone else who made the song Aka Vanilla Ice (Oh my God Ice Ice Baby wow real talent). Internet stations like mine can tell folks who request that stuff you're not gonna play talentless dribble and send them to a top 40 station like they did in the 70's when someone requested something outside the stations Genre. Lets take back the airwaves.

 

[Unregistered]

The problem I see with non-chart material is most radio listeners are not that adventurous and prefer known material even if that's plain vanilla in our book.

As for part 15, I cannot find anything to indicate the government wants to shut these down. Have you seen something? Share that if you will. How about carrier current?

I studied lots of college radio, especially internet only. I found very few students bothered to listen via internet. The only stations with any level of awareness were also rebroadcast on cable TV channels that normally ran video scrolls of college related news and announcements.

Of the stations I found, listeners ranged between 1/2 to 1.5% of the student body. I thought this was rather alarming but I also noted many such stations haven't much of a clue about marketing their station. Some complained of being unable to break the figure of 10 listeners at a given time.

The better listening percentages were from stations that had a visible studio where there was plenty of 'walk-by' traffic. One station was set up next to one of the few gathering spots next to a coffee shop. This station managed about 1 in 40 students tuning in but in emails I learned their biggest problem was each show was so vastly different from the next that few students found the station 'consistent' enough to bother with. They faced the situation of adopting a general format with a few specialty shows or the typical free-for-all of every DJ playing what they wanted.

The other point is that while podcasts might be popular, it is content we have to look at. Where did the content come from? If it was broadcast radio, then radio as we know it is still viable. If it's Joe Blow recording a show, then radio is in trouble. Still podcasting is not the atypical listener choice.

Audio listeners are frequently too busy or don't perceive radio as many poster here do. I suspect we have lots of radio listeners who seek a soundtrack for a portion of their day and they'd rather not have to think about it. Yes, that is saying radio is a background feature for many and quite frankly, that's fine. It can be an effective medium that way. In other words, people still listener and head the ads that fund it.

Internet and podcasts will become more dominant in the coming few years. Quite frankly, radio, now more than ever, needs to think beyond the listening device and real time listening.

 

[TheBigA]

The broadcast stations that are willing to break FREE of chart only music will have a greater chance to survive.

The chart is based on airplay. Playing music no one knows may be fun for you, but most people have far more pedestrian taste in music. It would make no sense for YOU to play what the major stations play. But conversely it would make no sense for them to do what you do.

 

[davideduardo]

The broadcast stations that are willing to break FREE of chart only music will have a greater chance to survive.

That's not true. While a few people like extensive music discovery, the immense, vast majority want familiarity. Essentially every time a station has moved to a larger playlist or a deeper playlist or lots of new music, it has lost.

 

[gr8oldies]

The towers are not going to come crashing down next year, the year after, or the decade after that. Even if at some distant date that happens, and 100% of listening is on the internet, it doesn't mean that everyone is going to be listening to the guy in his basement playing his favorite obscure indie bands or talking obscure political philosophy. The major companies, whatever they might be at the time, descendants of CBS, iHeart, Pandora, whatever will get the lion's share of the listening, with a few "deep cut" streams, and algorithm based products. Aside from that, your listening choices will be determined by your internet provider.