Radio Days

[upstate29651]

When you say "active rock," do you mean a currents-based rock format? If so, I'd say the answer is yes.

With the median age in Jax in the mid-30's, I would say active is a smarter choice than adult hits. Also, people forget how Lex & Terry treated Jax when they first left. I had the opportunity to listen to them in Savannah shortly after they bolted for Dallas. They had nothing but disparaging words for the people, places & things that make up "freakville". Fact is, Jax is over L&T. They don't belong here anymore and no one cares about them. Having then on from 6-11 is overkill & suicidal.

It's bad enough Iheart moved Planet from the superior 106.9 frequency to the horrible 97.3 (and lied to the listeners by saying the move would be an improvement). Hemmed in by stations in Gainesville & Savannah, Planet's effective listening radius is maybe 5 miles? When I can stare at their tower and clearly pull in WSKY...we have a problem.

 

[upstate29651]

It got me thinking about “real rock.” I’ve also long wondered why their CHR didn’t find a home on that great signal on 107.3. Then again, why is “Planet” on a translator signal?

Planet is a very well-known brand in Jacksonville. There's also lots of love and affection and history. Why they aren’t on either on 97.9 or 107.3 is puzzling. History will tell us the company simply didn’t want to go into a costly war with a competitor. Perhaps that’s still true. It's a helluva way to operate if you ask me being afraid to do battle.

But then, I’ve seen one particular poster talk about the fact that Jacksonville does not have a modern rock format on a full market signal. I will confess my ignorance. There’s X1029. I thought that was the home for new rock. It’s listed as Alternative.

Alternative, in its current "Pop" form, is dead. A city with a rock heritage like Jax needs....nay, deserves a full tilt rocker.

Make no mistake. Cox intended to blow up Rock 105 years ago. It had nothing to do with shifting demos. Jax is still a deep red city in her politics & on her neck. Cox wanted an FM talker (for some reason...WOKV was doing just fine on 690 & 106.5), so they tweaked the format so that it would intentionally lose to 102.9 (which was 10% alternative, 90% current-90's gold rock) at the time.

 

[John FL]

Why did Schwartz talk about Sinatra? Because his father was Broadway composer Arthur Schwartz. Because of this, Jonathan was a lover of that kind of music. Schwartz would also talk about his love of the Boston Red Sox at a time when the New York Yankees were winning the World Series year after year. Any New Yorker will tell you there is no team that is more hated than the Red Sox. Talking with great passion about the Red Sox isn't going to get you great ratings on a New York radio station. So ultimately, Jonathan got an ultimatum: Stop playing Sinatra or go to the AM station. In 1976, he took the latter.

Talking about Sinatra and the Red Sox was bad because there was another rock station in town. WPLJ was a less talk/more music station. WPLJ had great personalities too. They had Zacherle, Tony Pigg, Carol Miller, and Pat St. John. They were cool and hip, and didn't talk about the hated Red Sox or play Sinatra, and they got much better ratings than WNEW. So the powers that be at WNEW decided it was time to tighten things up. In the bigger scheme of things, FM was changing. Prior to 1975, FM could do pretty much anything. A DJ could play an entire album by an artist. A DJ could read poetry. A DJ could play Sinatra. But by the mid 70s, young people started to listen to FM, and that had never happened before. They were leaving AM stations like WABC and WMCA, and listening to rock stations on FM. In 1971, it was possible for WNEW-FM and WPLJ to work together and air the final concert from Bill Graham's Fillmore East. That wouldn't happen just a few years later. There was no co-operation, but competition. Competition for audience, and competition for money. That's why radio in New York changed in the mid-70s, and it would never go back to the way it was. There simply was too much at stake.

Excellent analysis. Actually, you proved a point I made earlier. WPLG proved successful, therefore WABC-AM had no place to go under the 2 owned station rule for the NYC market for ABC Radio.

I remember stations cooperating with each other on various things. The last time I saw that was in 1990 when a DJ named Cramer Haas passed away at a very young age. He worked at 3 S. Florida stations. Each of these three radio stations had a moment of silence in tribute at the same time. It was the right and proper thing to do from a humane standpoint but those days are over.

I remember the talent lineup you mention of WPLJ. It seemed everyone I knew was more into WNEW-FM so I didn't realize 'PLJ was the actuall ratings champ.

Suddenly I'm thinking of "Alice's Restaurant" by Arlo Guthrie. Every Thanksgiving, a bunch of radio stations played that song at the same time, at least where I was living.A year or two ago, I saw a link to the song n a station's website. Time changes everything.

 

[John FL]

With the median age in Jax in the mid-30's, I would say active is a smarter choice than adult hits. Also, people forget how Lex & Terry treated Jax when they first left. I had the opportunity to listen to them in Savannah shortly after they bolted for Dallas. They had nothing but disparaging words for the people, places & things that make up "freakville". Fact is, Jax is over L&T. They don't belong here anymore and no one cares about them. Having then on from 6-11 is overkill & suicidal.

It's bad enough Iheart moved Planet from the superior 106.9 frequency to the horrible 97.3 (and lied to the listeners by saying the move would be an improvement). Hemmed in by stations in Gainesville & Savannah, Planet's effective listening radius is maybe 5 miles? When I can stare at their tower and clearly pull in WSKY...we have a problem.

I never knew L&T had disparaging words about Jacksonville. If it wasn't for Jax, there wouldn't have been other markets. For the life of me, I can't understand wjy iHeart would even bring these guys back considering they proved to be a heavy anchor on Planet. I agree, 5 hours of them is overkill and suicidal. These radio decisions are made for all kinds of reasons. To us mortals, they aren't always logical.

 

[John FL]

Alternative, in its current "Pop" form, is dead. A city with a rock heritage like Jax needs....nay, deserves a full tilt rocker.

Make no mistake. Cox intended to blow up Rock 105 years ago. It had nothing to do with shifting demos. Jax is still a deep red city in her politics & on her neck. Cox wanted an FM talker (for some reason...WOKV was doing just fine on 690 & 106.5), so they tweaked the format so that it would intentionally lose to 102.9 (which was 10% alternative, 90% current-90's gold rock) at the time.

Appreciate your comments. I'm planning on talking more about "manipulation. It happened with other formats as well. Yes, WOKV was doing well on 106.5. But from what I understand is corporate at Cox wanted to have their news/talk formats on the best possible signal. Also, with Cox buying CBS 47 and Fox 30, this was probably their strategy to cross promote everything on a full market signal.

 

[TheBigA]

Excellent analysis. Actually, you proved a point I made earlier. WPLG proved successful, therefore WABC-AM had no place to go under the 2 owned station rule for the NYC market for ABC Radio.

The FCC simulcast rule is basically what created WPLJ, which had been WABC-FM. They were required to come up with unique programming on FM. It took about 8 years for the rock format on FM to evolve. The company was managing them separately too. Basically operating as competing stations. The AM was still fairly successful as the FM grew. They continued music on AM until the early 80s.The AM went talk, and was successful as a talk station for over 20 years.

 

[davideduardo]

I remember stations cooperating with each other on various things. The last time I saw that was in 1990 when a DJ named Cramer Haas passed away at a very young age. He worked at 3 S. Florida stations. Each of these three radio stations had a moment of silence in tribute at the same time. It was the right and proper thing to do from a humane standpoint but those days are over.

The moment of silence extended to many if not most of the stations in the market, with even a couple of the Spanish language FMs honoring him.

The wide respect for Cramer (who did not use his last name on the air) also involved his military service in Vietnam where he was on the AFRS/AFVN stations there and made famous the "Gooood Morning Viet Nam" show opener that was picked up for the movie with Robin Williams.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gZPe_gJ6Us

 

[John FL]

The Final Chapter – Part 1

For a long time, I’ve wanted to write a radio saga that spanned the decades. Nostalgia has its pitfalls. Our recollections can get disjointed over time. Thanks, Mr. Eduardo for your previous post clarification. There is a human bias as well. We tend to remember fondly a lot of the good while forgetting the bad.

Music entertains us no matter what is going on in the country or the world. Sometimes, it can be needed escape. Radio has played a big role over time in delivering music to a captive audience. For people such as myself and for some of the readers, we grew up with very little entertainment options. There was TV, radio, and we played outside. Oh yeah, there were board games too.

Today, I can listen to some of my favorite “DJs” from the past in airchecks and wonder how we even enjoyed radio. “More music” was a couple of two and a half minute songs in a row, lots of chatter and tons of spots. Yet, we thought it was all great. The fact is, it was – for the times.

Our “Radio Days” journey is now in this century. I’d like to discuss the contents of the following article that talks about the demise of an oldies format in Jacksonville in 2006 and what the prevailing thought process of radio execs was at the time:

http://jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/102906/bus_5837243.shtml

This is an interesting article. But it doesn’t tell the real story. I’ve read many radio press releases in the trades that revolve around the end of one format and the beginning of another. Management is always excited that they have found utopia and they usually list a reason or two why a change was needed. No one ever admits they screwed up or a format dies because management had every intent to blow it up.

Years later, the PD of the “second” WKQL (KOOL not Cool 100.7) was brave and truthful admitting he was in over his head. I grew to respect him. He didn’t know and understand the format. The owner had options. There were many great and talented displaced folks from the former Cool 96.9. Eventually, one was brought over – Tom Murphy who is mentioned in the article but it was too late.

Aside from a horrendous launch (lots of dead air) and sloppy programming, their 25-54 position could have been better had they advanced the music even more. But, in doing so, I believe there was fear KOOL would have become a more pronounced indirect competitor to their AC cash cow, WEJZ. It was another doom scenario for the station.

I’ve never seen things in just black and white terms. I truly understand that a GM is responsible for growing revenue. But, you need to understand, this particular GM oversaw the firing of many on air personalities on Christmas Day when Oldies Cool 96.9 flipped to classic hits 96.9 The Eagle. His former employer, Cox, probably helped shape his opinion and ultimate bias. Now, don’t misunderstand. I clearly saw the need to advance the music. Playing lots of 50’s and early 60’s music by this century had certainly run its course.

My philosophy was to build on what you already have. But, in the end, time is money lost. As TheBigA said earlier “the stakes are high.” Obviously, some companies took a different approach. Perhaps there’s different philosophies or core values, maybe even different expectations. No radio station can be better than the GM or local management.

The article also gets into a little bit about the role of talent. Listeners want more music and less DJ talk. Lots of Catch 22’s in radio. We see one individual talk about how hard-pressed a listener would be to name a talent after morning drive. Well, give them just a couple minutes per hour to say something and who the hell is going to remember that, especially if their personality is suppressed to a point they sound just like the voice imaging?

The fix is in folks. Look, I’m not expecting nor would I want broadcast delivery to sound like it once did. But surely, if expenditures are made to hire talent, they need to have an opportunity to be remembered. Below is “Broadway Bill Lee’s” Twitter. He's a long-time personality at WCBS-FM. Look for the #OhWowWednesday tweet. He talked for a brief time which is the trend, but what an impression! If only Jacksonville......

As far as I’m concerned, there’s a lot of manipulation and rigging of the system in radio. By the way, ask the average WCBS-FM listener who is on in the afternoon and I’d guarantee you, they wouldn’t be hard-pressed to tell you.

https://twitter.com/broadwaybilllee?lang=en

More “The Final Chapter” upcoming

 

[TheBigA]

The fix is in folks. Look, I’m not expecting nor would I want broadcast delivery to sound like it once did. But surely, if expenditures are made to hire talent, they need to have an opportunity to be remembered. Below is “Broadway Bill Lee’s” Twitter.

Exactly. Thirty years ago, radio personalities didn't have Twitter or social media. The only platform they had was on air. That was one-dimensional presentation was certainly milked to the max. Today, an air personality has many platforms at their disposal, many ways to connect with their audience, 24/7, and even visually. That makes for a stringer connection, and allows them to show more sides of their personality. What they say or do on the air augments the overall presentation. It's very different from 30 years ago. The personality has less to do on terms of "disc jockey" and more to do as far as be an actual personality. They are making personal appearances at music events, so the listeners can meet them face to face. They're blogging on the station website, so the listeners can share the musical knowledge and experiences a personality has. And then there's Twitter & Facebook, which allow the personality to interact and engage with the listeners in ways that far exceed anything they did before. It's different, but it's also better.

 

[b-turner]

I'm absolutely loving the words I am reading here in all these pages of texts.

I'm one that announced records to a pencil in first grade. I've been a student of radio all my life. I love studying details of stations and learning the whys and such, understanding the thinking that went in to the decisions, etc. I know a little but have seen a bunch. I suspect I'm like many that have posted here. Simply put, I cannot just listen to radio for the enjoyment but rather I analyze as I listen.

People say I have a great memory. Maybe I do but an event that struck me was in 7th grade. We had gone to Nashville, Tennessee for Christmas. One night I was listening to WKDA. This was during it's heyday. About a decade ago I listened to an aircheck of WKDA and as I listened I realized I was hearing the very same thing I heard live in 7th grade. To listen with my 'radio ears' what I heard was a DJ who was having a blast on the air but was obviously needing about 10 cups of coffee to pull off all he was doing. He didn't sound that great. The format didn't sound that great. In fact the station didn't sound much like I remembered or should I say the pedestal I had placed the station seemed to be much higher compared to what I heard in 7th grade. As mentioned, it was great for the times, if not exceptional.

That helped lead me to my thinking that radio has honed it's craft over the years. We have learned so much about the listener and how to assemble as many listener as possible to our spot on the dial, the earlier recordings, while exceptional, seem inferior in many ways. I am not insulting the talent. If anything, they truly entertained and had so much fun on the air it pilfered through the radio speaker and stuck to you so completely that you were having fun by merely listening. You felt connected to the world in a way that might seem no different than the internet allows a virtual connection.

I am in no way saying radio is finished in its job of the learning curve to perfection. I gather we will see that light in the tunnel but never quite make it to the light but we will be, if we are not currently, close. I think we made errors along the way. I think radio needs to make some changes and I don't buy all the research findings. For example, I don't feel radio listeners hate the DJ but rather that the DJ is pretty meaningless to them. Does anyone else see this? I mean, if your morning show is 'personality driven' and a big reason you have your audience, then how can the DJ be hated. Might it be that the DJ is meaningless because what they're permitted to say is also pretty meaningless? I do agree that outside morning drive the jock might need to think 'Twitter' for their length of talk time but those words can count and mold a defined personality if allowed. I think the problem is too many times the jock isn't allowed to show themselves to the listener to build a bond. I'm rambling.

JohnJax has spoken of stations that failed, that did or didn't move toward the future at the right speed and such. I agree, the buck stops at the GM's desk. I would contend that a breakdown in programming or sales is more the fault of decline than anything else. Granted, the GM sits firmly on the barbed wire fence trying to create the best product for the advertiser and the best product for the listener. Considering we have taught the listener to hate commercials, it is akin to trying to make the south pole meet and shake hands with the north pole. We haven't found a way beyond the 60 second commercial being our standard. I think we need to do that fully realizing we need to change the thinking of the advertiser first. That is a monumental task, if not virtually impossible.

I believe stations change formats when the format is not working. A format has to work for listeners and advertisers. When either fall below the minimal level or it is imminent, expect a change. I'm sure some stations are programmed to create a better venue for sales among a company's holdings or perhaps to prevent a competing group owner from reaching billing nirvana in the market, but I suspect, more often than not, the company sees greener grass elsewhere and changes the station to center itself in the middle of that green grass. I am not a believer that stations opt for a format they know will fail because they are businesses after all and that just is not good business to try to be unsuccessful. I'm not saying some companies miss the mark like Coke did when they introduced New Coke. Fairchild did that with KLIF by not buying KNUS FM, not preventing McClendon from operating a station in Dallas/Fort Worth and not understanding what they had. In a short time KLIF was the Titanic striking an iceberg and a few cases of 'Stop Leak" wasn't going to help.

My point is, even with today's criticism of radio, I think we offer a much better product for listeners. Radio from decades ago had exceptional talent in many cases. Just imagine what that talent from decades ago could do today. They weren't working with the same knowledge we have now. Thinking it out, I doubt they'd outshine today's talent but would sure be a contender.

In summary, some feel radio is dead. I don't. Radio is simply in transition. It always has been and always will be. And we cannot imagine what radio will be like in the coming years and decades. Yep, I think it will still be around in decades. Just as we find it difficult to imagine a family staring at the radio, listening attentively in the living room, we will likely find radio of the future in much the same way.

 

[davideduardo]

By the way, ask the average WCBS-FM listener who is on in the afternoon and I’d guarantee you, they wouldn’t be hard-pressed to tell you.

I'm reminded of a well recruited perceptual project done a couple of years ago in a Top 20 market.

The morning show on the station being studied had been on the air over 20 years. In its target demo, it had been #1 for 19 of the 20 years; the only year it was not at the top was the first year.

The lead talent on the show was also on TV in a significantly watched show. Both he and the sidekick had been there the full 20 years.

50% of the people could not name the lead talent on the show. Of those who could, half said "that guy who is on TV".

The sidekick was identified as "the other guy who tells the jokes".

For every Ryan Seacreast or Howard Stern, there are hundreds of well-liked and good radio shows that get listenership but where the specifics are not top of mind. That, in part, is why the PPM was introduced: people were writing down more listening than what they actually did to some stations, and not even writing down other stations that they also used.

 

[TheBigA]

For every Ryan Seacreast or Howard Stern, there are hundreds of well-liked and good radio shows that get listenership but where the specifics are not top of mind.

All of this is due to the fact that there is much more media available today, and people are barraged by messages every waking moment of their day. Obviously the goal is to break through the competition, and talent is part of that approach. When talking about talent, you also have to talk about the music. Because there are lots of songs and artists that people like that they can't identify. When a song comes on, they turn it up. But faced with a quiz about who is the artist, they might not know. There's a big gap between hearing a song on the radio, and actually buying that song. Even bigger gap between hearing a song and buying a ticket to a concert. Yet every day, artists go through the motions, engage in all the same activities that radio personalities do, with social media and other media contact, in order to reach that 1%. Radio personalities are just one part of that process.

 

[b-turner]

That's a very good point. I know people that listen to stations they cannot name and listen to music they like without knowing the song title or the artist. They even have a tough time fitting the songs in a format box when asked (ie: is it rock, country, etc.). I couldn't tell you the percentage of folks like this but I've always suspected it was far more than we might suspect.

 

[John FL]

Given the amount of comments generated on what I wrote about a few posts ago, it’s probably best to restate and clarify.

When I wrote of talent who needs to be memorable, it was to make a good business case in justifying that talent's expense. I’ll agree that morning drive probably represents the one daypart where name recognition is at its highest. But there’s also other factors to consider. Also, I believe we are missing the big picture. Given the limited participation of talent today, it demands, in my view, exceptional delivery to motivate that listener not only to tune in for the music but for all those things that come with making a connection.

Listeners get used to a familiar, friendly voice. They may not always know the name, but they know the “sound.” It’s also important to realize you can’t have it both ways. I experience lots of contradictions in radio. In those famous press releases I often find amusing, I’ve seen the same manager delight in the fact that he/she got rid of an AM drive talk show only to replace it with another one down the road when all music didn’t work. These press releases are a hoot when they clearly contradict themselves.

Even Jacksonville’s “big name” “The Greaseman” was brought back to PM drive a number of years ago. You think they did it for old time’s sake? It probably had to do with generating more local sponsor interest for starters.

How often have you seen talent go to a competitor in the same city after their non-compete ends? It’s not uncommon. Man, look at S. Florida’s WFEZ. Just about everyone over there past and present came from rival WLYF. And then WLYF picked up market-known talent from rival Cox’s WFLC. Listeners like familiarity and on-air people they know.

I understand talent has a lot more arenas in which they get exposure and have a chance to perform and interact. But, let’s be real. There has to be something about that talent that will draw the listener to their blog, social media page or even to a promotional event. If it’s someone who just reads station taglines and introduces a song, that’s not going to generate excitement and a listener bond – something I find lacking in a lot of radio today.

 

[TheBigA]

But, let’s be real. There has to be something about that talent that will draw the listener to their blog, social media page or even to a promotional event. If it’s someone who just reads station taglines and introduces a song, that’s not going to generate excitement and a listener bond – something I find lacking in a lot of radio today.

Not everyone can be a big star. How many big name personalities have we talked about in this thread? Ten or 12? Maybe a few more. Over the history of 40 years and several cities. That's not a lot of people out of the thousands and thousands of people who have actually been on the air. Not everyone can be the Greaseman. Even the Greaseman reached a point where HE couldn't be the Greaseman anymore. In the military, they base it on rank. You have a lot of soldiers, and only a few generals. There are lots of Indians, and not everyone makes it to become chief. Same with radio. You have lots of voices on the radio. Not everyone is going to be a memorable personality. That's just how it is.

As I said earlier, with competition for attention the way it is, it becomes harder and harder to become that kind of personality who will be memorable. When people complain about the folks in radio who read tag lines, I always ask them to name all the big personalities on Spotify or Pandora or Apple. They can't. If you listen to Sirius, there are a lot of channels that sound just like commercial radio, with minimal talk. There is a lot more of non-personality radio when you look at all of the possible platforms. The plus side of that is it makes those few personalities who DO bring more to the radio, like the morning show hosts, even more special. And that's what they are. There is only one spot at the top. You can't have a radio station with all shifts filled with big stars. The budget can afford them, and the egos won't allow it. When Imus and Howard Stern worked at the same station, they were at each other's throats. The fact is there really aren't a lot of talented people. That's what makes those with talent so great.

 

[davideduardo]

You can't have a radio station with all shifts filled with big stars. The budget can afford them, and the egos won't allow it.

It's tough, but it can be done. It has been done.

 

[TheBigA]

It's tough, but it can be done. It has been done.

Sure. But for how long? How long until the morning guy gets it written in his contract that he is the only personality allowed on the station? That has happened too.

 

[b-turner]

I think we might be missing the point. The air talent needs only to be able to communicate to the audience. You don't have to be a morning show talent or some big name to express yourself and be personable enough for the listener to see the human side. I contend that those little peek at what makes that air talent unique are points where the listener might establish a bond with that station/show even when done only a few seconds at a time. The ultra talented that do AM drive and set the stage as they are few and far between and most stations would be hard pressed to budget such talent around the clock so they don't need to try, which also means a designer set of straight jackets for the management team that had to put up with all of them can be scratched off the list too.

 

[TheBigA]

I contend that those little peek at what makes that air talent unique are points where the listener might establish a bond with that station/show even when done only a few seconds at a time.

I agree. That is a talent. You do it not with what you say, but how you say it. It's been done. For those who need more time to express themselves, there are entire formats that allow them larger canvases on which to paint. They can become what Howard Stern became, a talk show host. For Howard, the music became an interruption. No problem.

 

[davideduardo]

Sure. But for how long? How long until the morning guy gets it written in his contract that he is the only personality allowed on the station? That has happened too.

There are always talent jealousies, but if your PM drive, evening and mid-day blocks are as good as mornings, and the morning show does not get higher ratings than some of them, it is sustainable. I was with a station that kept the formula working for 22 #1 years. The biggest issue in the end was that over the years, salaries increased and the economy got hit by the recession and the team later split up when salaries had to be adjusted (the market was off nearly 60% in the recession).

Egos can, to some extent, be controlled. The economy can't.

By the same token, KFI in LA has had "morning shows" all day long for nearly three decades with a huge audience that is only diminished by the aging of its format itself. Not a music station, but definitely a station with a bunch of star personalities.