Why would someone today wait for a DJ to play what they like when they can go to Spotify to hear it right this instant? All of the "bring back the old days" talk around here doesn't acknowledge that it is in fact, not the 1960s,70s, 80s or 90s.
-
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
borderblaster said:
You (and others) are not listening!
Only part of the attraction is the music. The other attraction is the DJ him(her)self. The information, emotion and entertainment of the PERSON on the radio.
If you guys don't understand what I am saying then there is no hope for you.
Yes, the music matters but it isn't the only thing that matters.
Then there's the assumption that today's young listeners would actually care about anything a DJ has to say, let alone want to go visit them at remotes.
Most of us realize that this isn't the '60s, '70s, '80s or '90s. Technology has changed the way we live our lives and the way we entertain ourselves.
BUT, the current path that the radio industry is following is not improving the industry and is not giving listeners the information, excitement and entertainment (thank you, Landtuna) that it did in the past. It's unfortunate to say, but it's an industry in decline. You just need to look at the NAB yearly numbers over the past several years to see it.
Now, the big question is...if some of you do not think that using ideas and solutions that did work in the past, be it 15 years or more in the past, will work...then what do YOU think will work in the present? I'd really like to hear them.
It's really easy to say that this or that won't work, but it's much harder to actually come up with original ideas that you either think or know will work to reverse this trend.
By the time you go about 'Reinventing the wheel', it may be too late for radio.
BUT, the current path that the radio industry is following is not improving the industry and is not giving listeners the information, excitement and entertainment (thank you, Landtuna) that it did in the past. It's unfortunate to say, but it's an industry in decline. You just need to look at the NAB yearly numbers over the past several years to see it.
Now, the big question is...if some of you do not think that using ideas and solutions that did work in the past, be it 15 years or more in the past, will work...then what do YOU think will work in the present? I'd really like to hear them.
It's really easy to say that this or that won't work, but it's much harder to actually come up with original ideas that you either think or know will work to reverse this trend.
By the time you go about 'Reinventing the wheel', it may be too late for radio.
landtuna said:
I'm not saying "no." Young people have said "no." Lots of stations still have DJs and operate as you'd suggest, and they aren't attracting young people in substantial numbers. You don't attract today's youth with yesterday's solutions. Just as 1930s radio drama didn't attract fans of The Beatles and Rolling Stones. What we in radio are doing, and it's working, is providing a multi-platform presentation that uses all media. And it's working just fine. The ratings prove that young people today use radio in the same numbers as they did 40 years ago. But they are ALSO using other media. There is nothing radio can do that will cause people to throw away their cell phones. That's a fact, and we live with it.
landtuna said:
Teen radio was popular years ago because there was no alternative. That's not the case now. You can hire the exact same DJs who made radio popular in the 60s, and they will not attract young people today. I've tried it.
Lotus503 said:
You can lead a young horse to water, but you can't make them drink. I've been involved in countless examples of radio projjects that give "information, excitement, and entertainment." I do it every day. But just because you build it doesn't mean they will come. The reality is there is too much media, too much information, and too much entertainment. Consumers are simply overloaded.
Once again, try to understand that it's my job to come up with original ideas. I do it all the time. It's not a hobby, and I've already tried the old ways of doing what worked 40 years ago. And I'm not the only one.
TheBigA said:
Young people are not listening to music radio in large numbers for the same reason no one else is....the presentation sucks. If music radio just plays music and provides no other benefit I will listen to my mp3 player....and so will others. Read again what I suggested. It is a complete presentation.
landtuna said:
Teen radio was popular years ago because there was no alternative. That's not the case now. You can hire the exact same DJs who made radio popular in the 60s, and they will not attract young people today. I've tried it.
[/quote]
There was an alternative years ago. It was called television and it sucked an enormous number of teens off evening radio. But TV then was what radio is now....an empty presentation. No emotional ties to the hosts and nothing outside of the medium. TV people were never teen idols. Radio DJ's were.
But 60's style DJ's would not be the complete or only solution either. See my previous post for what I believe would work. You have to get your on-air people into the teen culture for anything to work.
I knew very few, if any, teens in my high school who had a TV in their room. They had to watch the family TV and fight for the show they wanted. I don't quite get the comment about TV "hosts" not making "emotional connections", what hosts are you talking about? The local news guys? Dick Clark? Johnny Carson? Nonetheless, the standard teen bedroom now has a laptop, smartphone, TV, DVD player and game system. In the 70s phone time was limited because there was one landline phone which had to be shared (where I grew up we were on party lines; if a family member didn't kick you off the neighbors would). That world doesn't exist now.
Even in those days..and here's the deep dark secret...everyone wasn't in love with the DJs. There were countless listeners to radio stations, even the CKLWs and WLSs, who could not tell you what DJ was on when, or what DJ they were listening to "right now". They were more concerned with the big game and trying to get laid.
Even in those days..and here's the deep dark secret...everyone wasn't in love with the DJs. There were countless listeners to radio stations, even the CKLWs and WLSs, who could not tell you what DJ was on when, or what DJ they were listening to "right now". They were more concerned with the big game and trying to get laid.
borderblaster said:
That is correct. My house had only one TV and I watched it with my parents (sometimes). Surprisingly, they didn't watch it all that much though. And I had homework to do during the school year. There was a radio in my room (and lots of other rooms) and when I was in there it was on.
borderblaster said:
The radio DJ's were "our people". They understood what we liked to hear. They gave us information about our world. They were people we wanted to emulate. I can't think of anyone on TV back then with the single exception of Dick Clark but you knew he wasn't talking to YOU. He was talking to the kids in his studio and the other million watching his show. It was a performance, not an interaction. I could phone my DJ and talk to him. I could go visit his station and watch him do the magic. They would come to my school and emcee sock hops. Dick Clark did none of those things.
borderblaster said:
That is true. There are many more ways teens of today are spending their time. Obviously they are not studying as we did. That makes the job of enticing them all that more difficult for radio. But what is radio doing? Nada. They think by appearing on social media web sites the listeners will tune back in. Uh-uh. Not gonna happen. The thing that will get them back is the very same thing that got them there 50-60 years ago. Involvement. Information. Entertainment.
borderblaster said:
Of course. Teens will always be teens. But football games are not played but once per week in season. And the other.....well, nothing is going to compete with that anyway so why worry?
landtuna said:
TheBigA said:
I'm not in the biz and am going by comments published on this board and several radio sites. Unless I am totally confused what I've heard to date was that music radio isn't being listened to at the same or greater rate than in years past. I realize that the genre's are far more fragmented today than yesterday so it may also have something to do with apples vs oranges comparisons.
TheBigA said:
Uh, no. We had record players and not too much later tape players. While a party DJ might today bring his laptop as the music source it is essentially the same thing as that sack of 45's from years past. No real difference.
This board and others like it are filled with former DJs who want 1975 back. Though there are pros on this board, we don't have a representative sample of radio listeners or potential listeners, certailnly not to know that DJs talking up intros and hittin' the post is radio's answer.
landtuna said:
Nope...as I said in my previous post, our programming features multi-media approaches which are specifically built around involvement that far exceeds anything imagined 40 years ago. Our talent have proven credibility with the music they present, and they all interact with their listeners in very direct ways.
TheBigA said:
That's great! Then you are doing what you need to do to get your market's youth back into radio. My post(s) were directed at those people who asked what they could do in their situations. Apparently they feel what is currently being done is not working for them. Even though my suggestions (and that of others) continue to draw flak from some of you who feel they don't have a problem I have yet to see any other suggestions (at least on this board). The OP asked for suggestions. Surely there have to be more than just yours and mine?
You do raise a question.....just what is meant by "credibility with the music"? DJ's are notorious for lacking the talent of a professional musician. They are akin to art brokers dealing in someone else's talent. That is not a slam, just an observation. So, in that context, how are DJ's or PD's "credible"?
TheBigA said:
But if that "credibility" is not apparent to the listener (after all, is the common wisdom these days for the jock to play the music and shut up?) how does it become apparent to the listener?
Just this morning I saw a regular feature on my TV morning show which were radio morning show people. The main jock was talking about a dinner he attended at Reba's house over the weekend. He is a country jock so this probably fits in well with his audience. But I don't hear such stories from non-country on-air staff - ever. Those people are mostly gone over the past few years. Today's jocks may not be speaking from liners but they seem to have a very limited amount of time to say anything. That is the missing entertainment factor I was speaking of earlier.
- Status