Struble's Latest Commentary

[clouseau]

In an era of smarter competition, television continues to pump millions into rich content. TV is trying new ideas! Radio, has IBOC and so far offers listeners more jukebox formats. And a small percentage of operators offer different jukebox brands, like Boson’s Irish Channel.

Expect smart jukeboxes (ipod like devices) to become smarter, fully mobile and free to access all kinds of online content.
Expect Flat screen TVs to come with internet protocols.
Expect fast, cheap wireless internet access.
Expect auto manufacture to include wireless internet access as standard equipment
Expect radio to move towards more syndicated programming.

In a marketplace with unlimited media choices, broadcasters will have to invest in talented people and rich media content. Playing more jukebox music stations, when “free music is available everyplace” won't cut it.

If we can get by the predictable "Radio doesn't get it" take, here, there are a few things your post brought to mind.

Specifically, smarter competition. There is continuous pontification by the would be experts regarding radio's inability to "Get it". I totally disagree. Radio is doing today what generates the biggest audience today. Sure it's demographic specific per station, but I think it's pretty arrogant to assert that radio is Jukebox formats. If you actually listen to "radio" as a whole, I think you'll find some pretty decent programming in places. And a good deal of junk in places. I'm trusting you're not holding up Soapnet, ShopNBC or TBN amongst your heaping praise for TV. I suspect you're not swooning over the judge "Fill-in-the-blank" shows either. I'd put MTV in that category as well, but maybe I'm just too old. But if Springer can start a campaign to get an Emmy...

Sure TV has bright spots. However I think you are a lttle short sighted or just too bitter to recognize much of the news and opinion based talk programming, from many political views compels a large audience to actually try and use their brains on the radio. As a "near misser" from Hurricane Ike, it was interesting to watch KHOU-TV programming to a radio audience as the power went out in Houston. They did a great job of provideing coverage for their "Radio Partners". (They did have trouble talking to the population in the field, though. Seems half the people they talked to live were singing the praises of 740 KTRH.)

Certainly much of the NPR programming is high quality as well. But let's not forget, despite YOUR belief elsewise, that radio does what gets the biggest audience.

You accuse radio of being more syndicated. That's because unless you are in a major market, syndicated fare tends to get a bigger audience than local due to quality. Bob Savage doesn't strike me he's down to his last dime. Yet he runs a regianally syndicated morning show IIRC. Why? Because it's better programming. Don't think for a moment that if Limbaugh didn't draw as well as a local host, they wouldn't run a local show. Heck, you even have to pay for Rush IIRC.

I'd also point out that these "Millions" that TV is pumping to to rich content like Rock of Love, I Love New York and Wife Swap, (Amongst others) are ALL non local. AKA Network or syndicated. I'm not so sure I'd hold up the vast majority of TV programming as "Rich Content" . You are convienently comparing apples and oranges.

You also seem to love the internet. We're all going to have WiMax in our cars next week. I have personal experience with Wimax. I've had a Wimax modem at my office since late last year. It's in the shadow of their tower (Literally about 200 yards max.) It's GREAT. They called me last week to offer me a free test of their laptop card for Wimax. Since after the free month trial it was only $10 more for BOTH, I said what the heck. Now my HOUSE is 1.1 KM from their tower. With with the external antenna plugged into the card and pointed just the right way and if I didn't leave the room, I got a marginal signal. At one mile it was totally unusable, even in a static location. After a lengthy discussion with tech support and an actual visit, they agree, it doesn't work here. When I took it in the car, I was lookinig at about .5 -.7 miles without an external antenna. Stick to EVDO. My experience with Mobile Wimax was B.A.D. Seriously, my experience with WiMax makes HD radio look like DirecTV.

Back to your post... I just think you have a fairly limited view of what radio needs to be. You just gloss over how the most experienced people in radio are working to find a way to get a bigger audience every day. I guess if you can get by that, and believe YOU have the answer, then everyone in radio is an idiot.

Sorry. I don't believe Bob Savage is an idiot. I don't believe Chuck Conrad is an idiot. (Even if he does run a computerized jukebox) I used to program radio for a living. If I may be so bold, I don't think I'm an idiot either. (Wife may disagree)

And I don't believe a majority (as in more than half) of the radio programmers are idiots either.

Maybe there's a little more to the story than what is being put out here.

Clouseau

 

[pocket-radio]

I spent over 20 years in radio, on the sales side. I had stops in tv and print too.
You’re right I love the web. I’m 48 and still enjoy hearing new music and with the web I have unlimited access to any catalog. Podcasts and more. I’ve discovered more music by observing the play list of a few global friends. I didn’t really understand the term social networking, until I found sites like Last.fm, Pandora. Many sites are like this.

In regards to radio and tv, I see a much bigger picture evolving. Mass media is slowly dying. Not today and not tomorrow, but within the next 10 or 20 years wireless web will be playing a much bigger role in the lives of everyday people. Towers will remain, but won’t have the impact they once did. Even today we’re witnessing the decline of listeners and viewers. The age of top down programming is dead. Listeners and viewers want to hear or see what they want, when they want. Media glut and time scarcity are two killers for mass media.

Look at newspapers to understand radio's & tv’s future. Newspapers lost classifieds to the web. They lost auto to the web, supermarket and retail to mass mailers and free total circ. products. Radio revenues have declined 15 months in a row, as big players shift traditional media dollars to new media. This trend started long before our current meltdown.

I’m between two mid sized metros, Jacksonville and Orlando FL. My radio time is limited to drive time by choice. Jacksonville has a great NPR talk station that I enjoy very much, can’t beat it. Rush and Hannity say the same things over and over. I used to like them both, now they’ve become annoying, so I don’t listen. Many of the music stations sound similar. It’s the same promotional junk, music that’s repetitive and limited. With 10 spots played back to back. I’m unable hack this for long, before turning the radio off and listening to my ipod or anything. I grew up with radio and I’m not dissatisfied with radio’s sound quality, it’s the lack of quality content that has caused my media shift away from radio to other sources.

I’m a little bitter, who isn’t. But I’m also a listener who’s a little frustrated with the current state of content on good old radio. I have a high respect for Savage and others. Sadly, I’ve noticed raving radio fans, live on hype and can’t think clearly enough to interpret facts. Many executives have been at their current position too long and are essentially burned-out. This makes their opinions unreliable. Kool-Aid kills brains. I know operators and market managers are under unrelenting pressures from corporate, stock holders and the bank, so radio is stuck doing what once worked in mass media years ago. And perhaps they’re fearful of change and radio’s future.

IBOC maybe radio’s stopgap as it transitions into what’s next. Though I’d bet on the web and developing compelling rich content! The radio game has changed from increasing shares to protecting and keeping what you have, from towers to producing content.

Clear Channel knew this, they understood media glut and it’s deadly implications. That’s why they sold, before their stock tanked to fifty cents, like ABC/Disney/Citadel. I could buy Citadel stock or a candy bar. I’d rather have a candy bar.

 

[pocket-radio]

From RI today: Ryan Seacrest's latest conquest - the Big Apple, on New York's Z100. They'll be more! If you like Ryan Seacrest you're happy.

 

[clouseau]

I spent over 20 years in radio, on the sales side. I had stops in tv and print too.
You’re right I love the web. I’m 48 and still enjoy hearing new music and with the web I have unlimited access to any catalog. Podcasts and more. I’ve discovered more music by observing the play list of a few global friends. I didn’t really understand the term social networking, until I found sites like Last.fm, Pandora. Many sites are like this.

In regards to radio and tv, I see a much bigger picture evolving. Mass media is slowly dying. Not today and not tomorrow, but within the next 10 or 20 years wireless web will be playing a much bigger role in the lives of everyday people. Towers will remain, but won’t have the impact they once did. Even today we’re witnessing the decline of listeners and viewers. The age of top down programming is dead. Listeners and viewers want to hear or see what they want, when they want. Media glut and time scarcity are two killers for mass media.

Look at newspapers to understand radio's & tv’s future. Newspapers lost classifieds to the web. They lost auto to the web, supermarket and retail to mass mailers and free total circ. products. Radio revenues have declined 15 months in a row, as big players shift traditional media dollars to new media. This trend started long before our current meltdown.

I’m between two mid sized metros, Jacksonville and Orlando FL. My radio time is limited to drive time by choice. Jacksonville has a great NPR talk station that I enjoy very much, can’t beat it. Rush and Hannity say the same things over and over. I used to like them both, now they’ve become annoying, so I don’t listen. Many of the music stations sound similar. It’s the same promotional junk, music that’s repetitive and limited. With 10 spots played back to back. I’m unable hack this for long, before turning the radio off and listening to my ipod or anything. I grew up with radio and I’m not dissatisfied with radio’s sound quality, it’s the lack of quality content that has caused my media shift away from radio to other sources.

I’m a little bitter, who isn’t. But I’m also a listener who’s a little frustrated with the current state of content on good old radio. I have a high respect for Savage and others. Sadly, I’ve noticed raving radio fans, live on hype and can’t think clearly enough to interpret facts. Many executives have been at their current position too long and are essentially burned-out. This makes their opinions unreliable. Kool-Aid kills brains. I know operators and market managers are under unrelenting pressures from corporate, stock holders and the bank, so radio is stuck doing what once worked in mass media years ago. And perhaps they’re fearful of change and radio’s future.

IBOC maybe radio’s stopgap as it transitions into what’s next. Though I’d bet on the web and developing compelling rich content! The radio game has changed from increasing shares to protecting and keeping what you have, from towers to producing content.

Clear Channel knew this, they understood media glut and it’s deadly implications. That’s why they sold, before their stock tanked to fifty cents, like ABC/Disney/Citadel. I could buy Citadel stock or a candy bar. I’d rather have a candy bar.

Stock prices are not necessarily the product of the ability to sell radio. They are the product of the ability to generate profit, including operational and aquisition costs. Many Bean counters have seen radio as a money machine. Frank Lorenzo did it in the airline business and Farid has tried it in the radio business. Clear Channel isn't that for behind.

What you are doing, though, is dismissing the talk section of radio because "They've become annoying and you don't listen". You, AS A LISTENER, certainly can do that. The Public, AS LISTENERS, isn't really doing that. Just because you, TODAY, don't care for the fare doesn't make it bad. Overall, the numbers don't support your assertion. You'll note I caveated much of what I held up as the "Wasteland of TV" as a personal choice. Everything does not appeal to everyone.

I still believe it is grossly unfair and just WRONG to say radio is nothing but Jukebox formats.

I see your point about mass media becoming less relevant, but I do not TOTALLY agree. I believe you are correct with regards to entertainment. I think local network TV is totally screwed. Give it 10 years. With DVRs and on demand, I'm glad not to fight that war.

Radio? I suspect some problems, but not quite so much. Radio is News, Information, Talk and "Ipod on auto". Sure, there will definitely be a loss of dominance. But elimination. I doubt it.

When I was a young buck, I had a killer stereo in my house. Today. I'm OK wih a home entertainment component that plays DVDs as well. (The guys at Stereo Review would be so ashamed)

Radio has an advantage in that you do not have to work at making it work well. No play this and don't play that. No sequencing or clocks. Radio is easy.

Like TV. Let me blow through 10 channels to see what's on and I'll watch.

Fact is... The older I get, the less I want to go to the movies.

Sorry if you are biiter about the biz. You asked who isn't. I'll raise MY hand. Me! Me!
I have, for the last decade or so, understood what radio is. At least professionally. Do I love it? Yes. Is it my life? Thank God, NO. The business has changed. More accurately, THE BUSINESS HAS CONTINUED TO CHANGE. NO more soap operas. No More Lone Ranger. No more Wolfman Jack. And no more 50 shares at night. So What? It is what it is... TODAY.

Radio can work if the cost structure is right. Ask Savage. Ask Chuck. Paying top dollar for every station you buy is probably not a great strategy. Farid seems to be the poster child for that. Just like every business, there are winners and losers.

The old girl ain't dead yet. And I'll still put my money on yet another reincarnation.

Nah, I'll put my MONEY somewhere else. But I still believe it.

Clouseau

 

[Mike Walker]

Well I agree with Pocket that, for adults "of a certain age", public radio is where the content lies. I disagree that "mass media will die". Of course it won't. It'll morph. But just as new media like podcasting and streaming may start in the hands of amateurs, they eventually end up being programmed, and dominated by people "in the biz" who actually understand audiences, meeting needs, and producing a business model that actually makes money. That's your local (and national) radio and tv broadcasters.

I appreciate that there are lots of great podcasts, and other new media. The ones I actually pat attention to are from longtime BROADCASTERS like Leo Laporte (Twit, The Tech Guy, etc), and others. The best thirty bucks I ever spent is on a program called "RadioTime" that runs in the background on my computer, and catches all the radio programs I love, but often can't tune in for at broadcast time. That's using new technology, but using it to capture programming from old-line media...terrestrial radio.

Anyone who things radio will eventually "go away" really should do some research into the number of times that's been predicted in the past. Radio is scrappy. It keeps "comin' at you". If not analog, digital. If not music, talk. If not AM, FM. If not HD, then streaming. If not streaming, then podcasting. If not conservative, then liberal. If not rock, then classical. If not national, then local. If not big, then small (and vice versa). Radio will outlive every one of us. And ya' know what? of all the technical marvels in our lives, if suddenly someone who died seventy years ago came back to life, the one they would immediately recognize and be able to use...is the RADIO!

 

[pocket-radio]

I agree not today or tomorrow. But down the road I see a different animal than what we have today. Maybe with a wireless connection and addressable digital radio, the listener might be programming the music for his or her own personal taste. Now, if digital radio can make that happen, that’s wicked cool. Maybe advanced 4g, more bandwidth, will allow more programmers to express their creative side without being tethered to a tower site or that nagging FCC. Maybe digital radio will receive 4G. More radio stations, oh my god! Digital radio may very well be a pandora’s box. Only time will tell.
Till then we’ll debate. LOL

 

[Carmine5]

In an era of smarter competition, television continues to pump millions into rich content. TV is trying new ideas! Radio, has IBOC and so far offers listeners more jukebox formats. And a small percentage of operators offer different jukebox brands, like Boson’s Irish Channel.

Expect smart jukeboxes (ipod like devices) to become smarter, fully mobile and free to access all kinds of online content.
Expect Flat screen TVs to come with internet protocols.
Expect fast, cheap wireless internet access.
Expect auto manufacture to include wireless internet access as standard equipment
Expect radio to move towards more syndicated programming.

In a marketplace with unlimited media choices, broadcasters will have to invest in talented people and rich media content. Playing more jukebox music stations, when “free music is available everyplace” won't cut it.

You also seem to love the internet. We're all going to have WiMax in our cars next week. I have personal experience with Wimax. I've had a Wimax modem at my office since late last year. It's in the shadow of their tower (Literally about 200 yards max.) It's GREAT. They called me last week to offer me a free test of their laptop card for Wimax. Since after the free month trial it was only $10 more for BOTH, I said what the heck. Now my HOUSE is 1.1 KM from their tower. With with the external antenna plugged into the card and pointed just the right way and if I didn't leave the room, I got a marginal signal. At one mile it was totally unusable, even in a static location. After a lengthy discussion with tech support and an actual visit, they agree, it doesn't work here. When I took it in the car, I was lookinig at about .5 -.7 miles without an external antenna. Stick to EVDO. My experience with Mobile Wimax was B.A.D. Seriously, my experience with WiMax makes HD radio look like DirecTV.

I just finished up an assignment in Humbolt County in No. CA. My associate and I drove back by way of the Redwood Hwy to Redding. This route goes through some steep, mountainous and isolated terrain. For fun I took out my Blackberry and started e-mailing and using the internet during the trek just to see how successful I would be. With the exception of two dead spots I was easily able to send photos by e-mail and read Jerry Del C's blog and the radio-info site while driving through the Shasta-Trinity National Forest.

This really impressed on me just how far the mobile communications infrastructure has advanced and how robust it is. In fact, I was able to use the internet long after the FM signals in Eureka and Arcata faded out. It will be interesting to see what the mobile phone carriers will accomplish with their newly purchased 700 MHz spectrum.

So there's no doubt in my mind that this is where radio will ultimately end up as soon as it becomes economically feasible to do so. The only stickler is the cost. Broadcasting over the AM/FM bands is still more cost effective. But I'm sure that will change.

C5

 

[Chuck]

Back to your post... I just think you have a fairly limited view of what radio needs to be. You just gloss over how the most experienced people in radio are working to find a way to get a bigger audience every day. I guess if you can get by that, and believe YOU have the answer, then everyone in radio is an idiot.

Sorry. I don't believe Bob Savage is an idiot. I don't believe Chuck Conrad is an idiot. (Even if he does run a computerized jukebox) I used to program radio for a living. If I may be so bold, I don't think I'm an idiot either. (Wife may disagree)

And I don't believe a majority (as in more than half) of the radio programmers are idiots either.

Maybe there's a little more to the story than what is being put out here.

Clouseau

There is. The truth of the matter is radio stations, large or small, do what they need to do to stay alive. In my case, it is true that the station is computerized. Most are. It's even fair enough to call it a "jukebox" if you like. But you have to admit that it is a fairly unusual jukebox. It has a weekly play list that varies from 1200 to 1500 songs from a music library of roughly 8000 songs. Some of them are even performed by local people who live close enough to actually hear themselves on the radio station. Imagine that.

The format (Standards) couldn't sustain itself in a small market with a live and local on-air crew (as much as I'd really like to do it). Without using automation, it is very doubtful that the format would be available in our market at all. If it did, it would most certainly be satellite delivered. If you take the time to listen to us for a while, you'd have to admit that it is a fairly local jukebox. We even do lost dog reports. We have a 66% rate of recovery at last count.

We do live college sports coverage, occasional live local remotes and run PSA's and other announcements for other local groups and organizations. If you want to know about a local free concert, or where the next Church Fair is, we're for you. This week, you will hear us promote a church fair, a local Volkswagen car show, a local Film Festival, a local Alzheimer’s walk, a free ballroom dance night, local college football, a local "art walk," a free concert, and several other community events. We'll also be trying to find new homes for dogs and cats from our local animal shelter. And yes, we do use computerized automation to bring that to you. It's a practical solution.

The fact of the matter is some sort of automation has been around in radio for a very long time. Used properly, there is nothing wrong with it. I've heard some great stations that were automated. Listeners seem happy enough with it, and in the end, it often allows niche formats to be available.

Like anything, it can be used improperly. A computer with 80 songs stuffed and forgotten in a closet is not going to be a good radio station. It takes daily work and a lot of attention to make automation work to your advantage. But it certainly can be done.

 

[clouseau]

Like anything, it can be used improperly. A computer with 80 songs stuffed and forgotten in a closet is not going to be a good radio station. It takes daily work and a lot of attention to make automation work to your advantage. But it certainly can be done.

Chuck,

As you know, the devil is in the details. And virtually EVERY radio station has somne type fo comupterautomation or live assist. The last hold out in our market added it 3 years ago. The station before that was the one I ran at 6 years ago. Our addition changed a 1KW AMer from losing $18K a month to break even in about an hour. When having time to coordinate sales, it became profitable in short order thereafter.

Many of our town's local morning shows use VTing for the final product. I have first hand knowledge that ABC's Oldies format does this "FOR THE FINAL PRODUCT". Average turnaround time for one of their bit is about 5-8 minutes. No one is pervect, but they always are since you can redo gaffs.

As you correctly stated, the devil is in the details. Also, if you have ever worked with VTing on a music format, it pretty easy to create a good priduct. And if you're good an EXCELLENT priduct. VTing is just a tool like digital editing for phoners.

It's obvious you and Savagr and others here understand that. Regrefully, there are some who profess a lengthy radio carreer who do not.

The lack of understanding of the AVERAGE radio listener by some of the posters on this board is amazing. But I guess it's to be expected from a "Radio people" and "want to be radio people" internet message board.

Clouseau

 

[Chuck]

Many of our town's local morning shows use VTing for the final product. I have first hand knowledge that ABC's Oldies format does this "FOR THE FINAL PRODUCT". Average turnaround time for one of their bit is about 5-8 minutes. No one is pervect, but they always are since you can redo gaffs.

We can always go on the air "live" if the situation warrants (which it has occasionally). It is as easy as getting up from my desk, walking into the control room and pushing a button. Music would still be on hard drive, unless I really wanted to play a record or CD, which is as simple a loading CD in the player or cueing up a record on the turntable. But when you do the reality check, why would I want to do that, unless it was to play something that is not on the hard drive?

Otherwise, you can do a new voice track insert in no time and have it on the air. For people like me who are "announcing challenged" it is very handy to have a second chance at getting it right. Digital editing makes it quick and simple. In fact, I think it greatly improves the product. It isn't very often that you'll hear a voice stumble over the pronunciation of a name or word. Technology makes that possible. I think it is great.

On the other hand, I have heard a couple of HD-2 formats that were lack-luster at best. It is probably because there is no incentive to do any better. There just aren't that many people listening right now.

When I was a kid, I used to visit a small station in Henderson, Texas. It was a 1 KW AM day-timer that was the top dog in town. Eventually they got a license for the town's first FM. They ran it off of two Wollensak reel to reel tape decks, the kind you used to see in schools. I'm not sure if they ran at 3 3/4 ips, but I think the programming was actually at 1 7/8. It was pretty low-fi. When the tape would run out, the AM DJ would eventually notice, and he'd unplug a 1/4 inch jack from the output of one deck, plug it into some kind of home-made mic preamp that had an Altec "salt-shaker" mic attached to it. He'd recite the station's call letters into the mic, unplug the cable, and plug it into the second deck and hit play. That was it. Since very few people in this town of 10,000 or so had a radio capable of receiving the FM signal, there was little point in doing much more.

Somehow, I think we are at about the same point with secondary HD channels. The only improvement is the technology to program them for little or no money is much better.