Songs You Remember And Like But Never Get Played

[TheBigA]

Radio used to be this way and it's no longer.

It's not "radio" because other formats and stations are programmed differently.

You are now admitting that when an "overplayed" song comes on, for a listener to "switch the station".

I'm offering it as a solution to someone who feels certain songs are "overplayed." I use that word in quotes for a reason, because we all know lots of songs that stand up to repeated plays very well. I was in a bar one night and heard Patsy Cline's "Crazy" every third song. I'm not kidding. There was a person, or maybe a few, who never tired of that song.

The simple fact is that radio stations spend a lot of time working on their music selection. It's an ongoing process. But if a particular listener has a problem with the songs, and finds there aren't enough, or they get repeated too often, it's up to the LISTENER to take action, and not expect the radio station to respond to a specific complaint from one or two listeners. So yes, change the station. There are far too many satisfied customers to make a change simply to appeal to a few. We are not here to create a free personalized music system for individuals. I've said that enough times that you should be tired of it by now. Unless you like repetition.

People "switching the station" when an "overplayed" song comes on (but to you, a positively tested song) is exactly what causes ratings to drop.

It's not "people," but a person. A person who's out of market listening on a stream.

In the PPM world, we can see minute by minute ratings. We can line up song titles with the ratings, and see exactly when someone switches a station. We know that there can be other circumstances that lead to someone switching the station. So we watch that song several times, and see if it gets the same results. That's how we know it's the song's fault. Not by getting a call from an out of market streamer.

 

[oldies76]

It's not "radio" because other formats and stations are programmed differently.

Classic hits radio.

 

[TheBigA]

Classic hits radio.

Classic hits radio is a format that is evolving as we speak. What was true about the format ten or fifteen years ago is no longer true, because the audience is changing and aging. It's not "radio" or certain programmers. It's the audience. That's what's changing.

 

[Avid Listener]

It's the audience. That's what's changing.

And the single biggest change in all of the world, the change that those mired in the paradigms of the past will not or cannot see, is that the fragmentation of the audience that used to be based on the year the members of the audience was born has changed. The false god everyone worships, the almighty "demo", is no longer primarily based on certain threshold years of age. It's based on economics, lifestyle choices, education levels, and a host of other measurable characteristics but the broadcast industry is still stuck in the mud of four decades ago, when age was the determining factor. There are some short-sighted advertising people who share that faulty vision.

 

[ok walters]

Age IS the determining factor - what age you can draw the highest rating from? Age is also a factor in advertising decisions as the older demos are far less desirable than the under 54 demo - am I wrong so far? When you are aiming at that older demo as you are with classic hits or oldies, you had better appeal to as many as you can and playing deep cuts and B sides is not the way to do it. It wasn't the way to do it when the songs were popular, and it still isn't the way to do it decades later. The key word in "classic hits" is "hits", and deep cuts and B sides were not hits then and will not be winners now. What you are referring to is "narrow casting", and unfortunately to achieve the highest success you need to "broadcast".

 

[TheBigA]

but the broadcast industry is still stuck in the mud of four decades ago, when age was the determining factor. There are some short-sighted advertising people who share that faulty vision.

You have your groups switched. Broadcasters would love nothing more but to continue to program music formats to aging baby boomers. Heck, almost all of the radio company CEOs are aging baby boomers. Why in the world would those CEOs ever allow their companies to give up on formats that are still delivering ratings and they themselves personally love? Because there's no money in it. Simple. By the way, we also include all those other factors like education and income level too. And the studies that are done are NOT from "four decades ago," but are actually done annually. I've seen them, and I've even been a part of them. And the conclusions are that the behavior of people over 55 is pretty much unchanged from their parents. And we see it expressed on these message boards by aging boomers who are angry their music is going away, but also say that they hate commercials, they don't want any commercials interrupting their music, and they ignore advertising when making buying decisions. Aging boomers are their own worst enemy. Just like you, they'd like to believe they're not subject to the patterns of their parents. But they're very honest in poll after poll. So they have to take their money to platforms where they have to subscribe for their music service, like satellite or the web.

Here's the other "paradigm of the past" that I've been hearing for ten years: That the younger generation, raised on iPods, computers, and cell phones, will never use OTA radio, because they weren't raised on it. Amazingly, and this has happened in just the last six months, we're now seeing studies that absolutely disprove this myth. Young people are loving radio, and the size of their generation, with their interest in certain formats, is really having an effect on the radio industry in a lot of ways.

 

[davideduardo]

And the single biggest change in all of the world, the change that those mired in the paradigms of the past will not or cannot see, is that the fragmentation of the audience that used to be based on the year the members of the audience was born has changed. The false god everyone worships, the almighty "demo", is no longer primarily based on certain threshold years of age. It's based on economics, lifestyle choices, education levels, and a host of other measurable characteristics but the broadcast industry is still stuck in the mud of four decades ago, when age was the determining factor. There are some short-sighted advertising people who share that faulty vision.

As I previously said, your conclusions in recent posts are more often than not based on a false premise or two.

In the larger markets, where the top tier of stations pursues agency business as a huge part of the potential revenue, buys are made based on each agency client's target demo. That means, predominantly, age ranges and gender and sometimes ethnicity within ranges of ages.

Most buys fall under the scope of 25-54 or 18-49 or some subset of those, like Men 25-44 or Hispanic Females 18-34.

Requests for rates will come based on similar specifications and giving the client goal of cost per point (CPP) against that group.

First, you will note that 55+, irrespective of income level, liefstyle choices, educational attainment or whatever, is not in the age ranges that include essentially all agency buys.

Second, if ad buyers target by age, gender and ethnic specifications, radio has to program and deliver audiences based on the same parameters.

Oh, and there have been lifestyle metrics for many decades... things like Prizm... and they never were widely used for transactional business. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claritas_Prizm

 

[Unregistered]

"most of us believe that you can play a stiff 1000 times and it is still a stiff. "

That's interesting - given a study that showed that people "liked" a song more that they perceived to be already popular.

Which suggests to me that people are led by the hype. I recall certain stations playing hit acts like Adele months before they became "massive." Ryan Seacrest suddenly announces it's "#39 this week.." and everyone you talk to is now an Adele fan. Radio can and does lead tastes (or lack thereof, depending on your musical preference.)

 

[Unregistered]

I wouldn't use a bar as a reasonable example of human behavior as relates to music, unless your station is targeting drunks.

 

[Avid Listener]

Age IS the determining factor - what age you can draw the highest rating from? Age is also a factor in advertising decisions as the older demos are far less desirable than the under 54 demo - am I wrong so far?

No, in one sense you are not wrong at all, but Yes, in another sense you are terribly wrong.

The use of age as the primary decision factor in which market segment advertisers should pursue is an outdated paradigm, a relic of yesteryear that should be consigned to the ash heap of history. However, since broadcast radio is a dying medium, and the best and brightest creative minds are abandoning it for other opportunities, it continues to operate under decades old understandings of collective psychology. So, for the fuddy-duddies in radio who remained mired in the past, and the shrinking pool of advertisers who use broadcast radio, age IS the determining factor. It's a foolish, stupid thing to continue doing, but that doesn't mean that the people doing it are going to stop.

 

[davideduardo]

No, in one sense you are not wrong at all, but Yes, in another sense you are terribly wrong.

The use of age as the primary decision factor in which market segment advertisers should pursue is an outdated paradigm, a relic of yesteryear that should be consigned to the ash heap of history. However, since broadcast radio is a dying medium, and the best and brightest creative minds are abandoning it for other opportunities, it continues to operate under decades old understandings of collective psychology. So, for the fuddy-duddies in radio who remained mired in the past, and the shrinking pool of advertisers who use broadcast radio, age IS the determining factor. It's a foolish, stupid thing to continue doing, but that doesn't mean that the people doing it are going to stop.

You'd be surprised to know that TV and cable also are bought principally based on age groups, then.

Because TV and Radio are push models, and most new media is pull based, comparisons that don't take that into account generally fail. The fact that just last week Nielsen released data showing radio to have greater reach than previously reported negates your "dying medium" statement as does the failure to recognize that broadcasters are moving into new media as part of their sales package. What is on the decline is time spent listening to AM and FM, but AM and FM are distribution methods.

The best creative minds are looking at how to incorporate the new definition of radio which is device-independent with richer content, additional services and things like music purchasing and discovery. Look at iHeart in the general market and Uforia in the Hispanic market for examples of the non-death of radio.

 

[ok walters]

No, in one sense you are not wrong at all, but Yes, in another sense you are terribly wrong.

The use of age as the primary decision factor in which market segment advertisers should pursue is an outdated paradigm, a relic of yesteryear that should be consigned to the ash heap of history. However, since broadcast radio is a dying medium, and the best and brightest creative minds are abandoning it for other opportunities, it continues to operate under decades old understandings of collective psychology. So, for the fuddy-duddies in radio who remained mired in the past, and the shrinking pool of advertisers who use broadcast radio, age IS the determining factor. It's a foolish, stupid thing to continue doing, but that doesn't mean that the people doing it are going to stop.

Nothing "foolish and stupid" about doing what works and has been proven time and time again - except to people who want old music on the radio. It isn't proven to them because they don't want it to be true as it pushes their music choice off the air. Jazz is pretty much gone off the air not due to ratings as much as a lack of revenue. Oldies and any other demo that draws large over 55 audiences are facing the same fate in many parts of the US where seniors don't dominate the population like in Florida and Arizona. Studies have proven not only does it take more repetition to reach seniors, they tend to spend less money on average. I know you want an oldies format with deep cuts on the radio, but the business model is not one that works in most of the US.

 

[Avid Listener]

Nothing "foolish and stupid" about doing what works and has been proven time and time again - except to people who want old music on the radio.

If "doing what works" without changing with the times is such a great concept, why doesn't radio still have shows like Fibber McGee and Molly, or the Goldbergs, or The Shadow?

 

[ok walters]

If "doing what works" without changing with the times is such a great concept, why doesn't radio still have shows like Fibber McGee and Molly, or the Goldbergs, or The Shadow?

Because it doesn't work anymore - came from the same time period or before that the oldies you want came from. Appeals to the wrong age group to be commercially viable.

 

[TheBigA]

If "doing what works" without changing with the times is such a great concept, why doesn't radio still have shows like Fibber McGee and Molly, or the Goldbergs, or The Shadow?

Historically, the reason those shows left radio was because the companies that produced them moved them to TV. And actually, in a lot of markets, you'll find formats like oldies, outlaw country, and deep cuts that don't work financially for OTA radio available now on HD Radio. The financial pressures aren't the same, and most companies operate HD stations like internet stations. Obviously it depends on your market, but I know that Clear Channel and CBS have made an effort to do less commercial formats on their HD stations.

 

[davideduardo]

If "doing what works" without changing with the times is such a great concept, why doesn't radio still have shows like Fibber McGee and Molly, or the Goldbergs, or The Shadow?

Because, with the advent of radio with pictures, sometimes called TV, drama shows, sitcoms and variety programs migrated to the visual medium.

Such programs stopped working on radio. The producers moved on or closed.

Radio started adopting the music based model 62 years ago.

 

[Avid Listener]

Because it doesn't work anymore - came from the same time period or before that the oldies you want came from. Appeals to the wrong age group to be commercially viable.

Sorry, but those programs were gone from the radio back in the 1950's. The songs I'd like to hear added to classic music format stations comes from the late 60's at the earliest, but mostly from the 70's and 80's. And, the artists I'm talking about still sell a boatload of expensive concert tickets to people in their 30's. How can anyone say that a band doesn't appeal to someone who'll shell out over $100 for a concert ticket to hear them?

 

[davideduardo]

Sorry, but those programs were gone from the radio back in the 1950's. The songs I'd like to hear added to classic music format stations comes from the late 60's at the earliest, but mostly from the 70's and 80's. And, the artists I'm talking about still sell a boatload of expensive concert tickets to people in their 30's. How can anyone say that a band doesn't appeal to someone who'll shell out over $100 for a concert ticket to hear them?

OK. Let's take a "significant" venue in NYC or LA or Chicago... one with perhaps around 20,000 seating capacity.

The cume of a significant station in those markets is going to be in the 1.5 million (Chicago) to 2.5 million (NY and LA) range.

So the actions of 20,000 persons seems totally insignificant.

And how many "classic hits" groups can fill such a venue, today?

And that's without going into the differences in the concert experience (nothing is more "active" other than playing in the band itself) and the gold based format listening experience (generally among the more "passive" radio audiences).

 

[TheBigA]

How can anyone say that a band doesn't appeal to someone who'll shell out over $100 for a concert ticket to hear them?

Once again, the issue here isn't about music or fans, but advertisers. And trust me, I've gone to agencies who've sponsored reunion tours and tried to get them to buy advertising packages on my station, and they've said no. The promoter might buy a few spots, and might want to give some tickets away. But it's not a source or real revenue for the station.

If those listeners have $100 to buy a ticket, they can afford a $15 a month satellite subscription, or buy an unlimited package from Pandora or Spotify. In return, they will be financially supporting their favorite artists, which is a benefit they don't get from OTA radio.

 

[ok walters]

You asked why the old radio theater shows are gone and it is because they are for too old of an audience to be commercially viable. You tend to dismiss the fact that a radio station is in the business of selling a specific audience to an advertiser, so you play what will draw the largest targeted audience and deep cuts are not in that mix.