Terrestrial Radio sucks per Ken Levine

[Jay Walker]

I couldn't think of a better place to post this so I posted here knowing that moderators or someone would kick it to another forum or kill it if needed...

Ken states:
WARNING: ONE OF MY RANTS

[snip]
Terrestrial Radio is the guy in an iron lung who’s smoking. Except the guy is smart enough to know he’s dying.

For almost a hundred years Terrestrial Radio has ruled the airwaves. And as readers of this blog know, my first love (besides Natalie Wood) is radio. That’s why it really pains me to not only see it heading towards its own demise but sprinting.
[end snip]
Link:
http://kenlevine.blogspot.com/2013/02/terrestrial-radio-sucks.html

 

[RicoGregg]

Deregulation is a key ingredient in all of this.

Radio was truly great when there were rules.

Sorry Mr. Reagan, but self-policing and free market places generally don't work without rules.

The industry and especially their lobbyists have no one to blame but themselves.

Mr. Levine makes some excellent points.

 

[michael hagerty]

I think the world of Ken Levine on a lot of levels (radio talent, writer/producer, human being), but he gets a lot wrong in that piece:

Top 40 stations are running 12 to 14 minutes of commercials an hour, pretty much like when Ken was jocking. The only difference is they're all crammed into two 6 or 7 minute spot clusters rather than 6 or 7 two-minute breaks.

Most radio listening is done somewhere other than the car. The car ranks high on the list, but the percentage of listening everywhere else combined is larger than in-car.

Tom Leykis has millions of listeners? No. In an interview with the L.A. Daily News a month after Ken posted his piece, Tom said it was 400,000 worldwide. And Tom's not known for humility so that might be rounded up a touch. There is not a radio station in Los Angeles that gets a 1.0 12+ that can't beat that cume. KHJ's (en Espanol) is 450,000. About the same time, we had this thread (http://radiodiscussions.com/smf/index.php?topic=231794.0) about how Tom is going on daily rants about how he'll have to close up shop if he doesn't get more advertisers.

Which leads to Ken's assertion that the next big radio star...the next Howard Stern...will come from an internet radio station. No, Ken. Internet radio is by nature more fragmented than terrestrial radio. There's no way for any one talent to get that kind of traction. IF there ever is a "next Howard Stern", that person may well have an internet show on their resume', but that won't be where they break big.

 

[henry]

Speaking from the Millennial Generation, there will be no new radio stars. To ask that is like asking who "the next Vaudeville star" will be ... in 1935.

Is it theoretical that a rising star from YouTube could end up with a show on Premier Networks? Sure. But the day of the home-grown radio star is gone. I think Seacrest was probably the last one.

 

[landtuna]

ITop 40 stations are running 12 to 14 minutes of commercials an hour, pretty much like when Ken was jocking. The only difference is they're all crammed into two 6 or 7 minute spot clusters rather than 6 or 7 two-minute breaks.

While the comparison might be moot in total spot minute terms a spot of +2 minutes will cause me (and countless other millions) to hit the pre-set. Stations which have a reputation of long spots are especially prone to immediate button pushing (hiya KOOL-FM).

Most radio listening is done somewhere other than the car. The car ranks high on the list, but the percentage of listening everywhere else combined is larger than in-car.

If we consider "listening" means actually paying attention to what's being broadcast we can probably eliminate the majority of work locations (other than those which permit the worker-bee to operate without interruptions of any kind) and stores, garages and other retail and wholesale establishments where it is merely background noise. Most waiting rooms and other places where someone would be paying attention have TV's instead. That leaves homes, and the last person who listened to radio in her home was my sister and that was back in the 70's, and cars.

Judging by the asinine antics involved when observing other drivers I make two judgements:

1. Most people are listening to radio as evidenced by their air guitars and dashboard drumming.
2. They are obviously not paying attention to the science of driving.

Therefore, it seems to me listening in cars is not only high on the list but at the top of the list.

Which leads to Ken's assertion that the next big radio star...the next Howard Stern...will come from an internet radio station. No, Ken. Internet radio is by nature more fragmented than terrestrial radio. There's no way for any one talent to get that kind of traction. IF there ever is a "next Howard Stern", that person may well have an internet show on their resume', but that won't be where they break big.

I am certainly no authority on the subject but please note the number of viral "thingies" and where they come from - the Internet. DJ's used to quote newspaper articles in their between-song breaks but now virtually everything on both radio and TV comes from the Internet. And with voice tracking driving the last remaining jobs away the next radio star certainly isn't going to rise up out of the mid-shift. And, actually, anyone with the talent to mimic that of the historic radio stars is probably not going to pursue a career in radio anyway given the miserable prognosis. Just think how much more famous Rick Dees could be today had he pursued a rap career or perhaps a become a judge on AI after the release of Disco Duck?

 

[TheBigA]

Deregulation is a key ingredient in all of this.

Radio was truly great when there were rules.

Who makes the rules for the internet? Who forces the millions of new content creators to play by the same rules? No one.

We live in a world where there are no rules for content any more. That's not just radio. It's the music industry too. It's the newspaper business. It's TV. It's movies. Anyone can do radio, anyone can start their own station, and that lowers the bar for everyone. Because now a radio station that has to pay for towers, transmitters, lawyers, engineers, and staff has to now compete against Pandora, Spotify, and millions of stations operated by hobbyists in their spare bedrooms.

If you're going to bring back rules, let's start by outlawing all technology that's happened in the past 25 years. Then tell me about bringing back regulations.

Sure, let's get rid of commercials. Great idea. How do you pay for the towers, transmitters, lawyers, engineers, and staff? Pay them what they got 25 years ago? You want to tell them that?

You want more local programming? Like what? School board meetings? Coverage of Night Court? How are you going to pay for more local programming if you've already cut the spot load? You want more local personalities? Where are the personalities on Pandora? Clearly what Ken Levine wants isn't what the 300 million Pandora users want. You blame radio for following the Pandora model? Who would YOU follow?

There. That's MY rant. Everyone thinks they know the answer. No one really has a solution. And it's been my experience that people with the biggest mouthes also are the ones who don't have the money it takes to BUY radio stations and run them the way they think they should be run. So they rant about how OTHER people should spend THEIR money. Talk is cheap. Step up to the plate.

 

[RicoGregg]

Deregulation is a key ingredient in all of this.

Radio was truly great when there were rules.

Who makes the rules for the internet? Who forces the millions of new content creators to play by the same rules? No one.

The Internet is a different kettle of fish. It doesn't need rules. It doesn't have rules. If it did, your rant may not have been passed.

I would not want to be a part of an Internet system with rules and censorship. I'd toss my computer out in a minute, Donna Rice, who is now part of a group that wants Internet censorship and regulation, be damned.

We live in a world where there are no rules for content any more. That's not just radio. It's the music industry too. It's the newspaper business. It's TV. It's movies. Anyone can do radio, anyone can start their own station, and that lowers the bar for everyone. Because now a radio station that has to pay for towers, transmitters, lawyers, engineers, and staff has to now compete against Pandora, Spotify, and millions of stations operated by hobbyists in their spare bedrooms.

I don't think that stations like KFI, KLOS, or even a KKOB in Albuquerque is losing sleep over spare bedroom operations.

Deregulation lowered the bar in radio. When a First Class License was required at many stations, you got the best people. When the license was required, stations in remote areas would offer decent pay for ticket holders to come to their stations because recruitment was so hard for them. Small station operators would send themselves, their spouses, and their kids to the various license schools so that they could meet the operator licensing requirements.

With deregulation, many high salaried careers with benefits became part-time hourly waged positions, and the quality of people hired shrunk. And it showed on the air.

Radio is not the attractive career choice that it once was.

If you're going to bring back rules, let's start by outlawing all technology that's happened in the past 25 years. Then tell me about bringing back regulations.

Rules and technology have nothing to do with each other. Just like praying and public education, they are unrelated and don't need to be lumped together.

Sure, let's get rid of commercials. Great idea. How do you pay for the towers, transmitters, lawyers, engineers, and staff? Pay them what they got 25 years ago? You want to tell them that?

Most peoples' complaints about radio commercials is about the length of commercial clusters. Some stations do over-sell. During Howard Stern's run on KLSX, it was relatively common for a spot cluster that aired after 6am (when they were no longer live from New York) to run over 20 minutes.

If I'm a sponsor buying time on a station with decent ratings, I would not want my ad to be in the middle or later in the commercial cluster. I'd be better off hiring a sign twirler.

You want more local programming? Like what? School board meetings? Coverage of Night Court?

What people, especially those in radio hanker for are homegrown radio personalities, like the business used to nurture. Time was, a station like KIOT in Barstow would be staffed with people at the beginning of their careers, and they would be developing their talent and persona. It was all part of paying your dues.

Nowadays, a station like KIOT is more likely than not to be satellite-fed, on automatic pilot with the entire station in a desktop in some office, and the station itself located far out of town with a cluster of other stations from other towns.

Where can new talent pay their dues at? College stations? Not anymore. Most have developed either Public Broadcasting - type of programming, or formats with wine-sipping elitist tastes, such as Jazz or Classical, with experts in those kinds of music hired as "hosts".

Clearly what Ken Levine wants isn't what the 300 million Pandora users want.

The population of the U.S. is around 300 million.

What, did you poll all 300 million Pandora users? ???

I didn't know you were speaking for them.

You blame radio for following the Pandora model? Who would YOU follow?

Certainly not you, even if you were the world's only consultant.

There. That's MY rant. Everyone thinks they know the answer. No one really has a solution. And it's been my experience that people with the biggest mouthes also are the ones who don't have the money it takes to BUY radio stations and run them the way they think they should be run. So they rant about how OTHER people should spend THEIR money. Talk is cheap. Step up to the plate.

Thanks to deregulation, the price of a radio station in L.A. in the 1980s went from $2 million to $45 million - IN ONE DAY!

Then in 1996, when Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which he said "would put more media into more hands", Fewer people owned more stations, and the price of those $45 million stations went up to over $150 million!

I happen to know from an acquaintance at KKGO that in the recent past, owner Saul Levine turned down an offer to sell for $200 million!

Talk may be cheap, including yours, but station properties are not. Just who can afford to buy a station anymore?

 

[TheBigA]

With deregulation, many high salaried careers with benefits became part-time hourly waged positions, and the quality of people hired shrunk. And it showed on the air.

Radio is not the attractive career choice that it once was.

That last line is the funniest one I've ever seen. Had you worked at my first station, you would not say radio was an "attractive career choice." And that was long before deregulation.

The fact is that even if there hadn't been deregulation, the invention of personal computers, cell phones, and other devices were going to alter the marketplace, and lower the bar for radio. Historically, the bar was lowered in the 1940s, when radio stopped creating original content and replaced live bands with recorded music. The minute that happened, talent on the radio was over. You didn't need the kind of skilled people required to produce live music shows, radio drama, or variety shows like the Louisiana Hayride.

Rules and technology have nothing to do with each other. Just like praying and public education, they are unrelated and don't need to be lumped together.

But the technology is what changed the rules. I worked at one of the first stations that had a computer take transmitter readings. Within a couple years, 3rd class licenses were no longer necessary. I worked at radio stations that ran automation from reel to reel tapes. Then in the early 90s, I spoke with some engineers in Austin who told me I could replace those tapes with something called the Prophet System. Technology and rules have a lot to do with each other. Technology makes rules obsolete. Technology makes jobs obsolete. Technology makes the way things used to be obsolete. And there are no rules that can bring us back to the way things were.

What people, especially those in radio hanker for are homegrown radio personalities, like the business used to nurture.

I had a wise teacher once who told me that radio stations don't program to other radio people. They program to the public. And if the public doesn't care about homegrown radio personalities, then you don't need them. When was the last time you saw an LA morning jock walking around the mall? How many LA personalities still make personal appearances like they used to? If a DJ isn't going to leave the studio, then it doesn't matter where he or she is. But radio isn't a federal jobs program. There never was a law that required a station to have live & local personalities. And there were hundreds of stations in the 60s that ran programming from reel to reel tapes.

What, did you poll all 300 million Pandora users? ???

I didn't know you were speaking for them.

Sorry...Pandora says they have 200 million users. We're talking about local personalities. How many personalities, local or otherwise, does Pandora have? If 200 million people use Pandora, and it doesn't have personalities, maybe personalities aren't the draw they once were before people had a choice.

I happen to know from an acquaintance at KKGO that in the recent past, owner Saul Levine turned down an offer to sell for $200 million!

He should have taken it. Because today, he'd get a quarter of that if he's lucky.

You can buy radio stations for the price of a small house today. Not far from LA. I can show them to you. But it won't matter.

The thing about these rants from people like Ken Levine is that they're mainly boomers pining for the good old days. Like my grandpa used to do. Things never are as good as they used to be. That's what I learned from my grandpa. And the deeper you dig, you find out that grandpa's stories were all myths. Here's what I know: The future is not like the past. We can't go back to the way things were. And the way things were aren't as good as we remember them.

 

[landtuna]

Technology makes rules obsolete. Technology makes jobs obsolete. Technology makes the way things used to be obsolete.

Not to get off track here but technology usually creates different jobs with different skill sets. Look at an average corporation today and compare it to one from 70 years ago. You used to see a sea of accounts, clerks, shippers and receivers and all manner of warehouse workers. Now those accountants are many less in number and are doing tax avoidance instead of double ledger entries. Fewer clerks, shippers and receivers and warehouse people because they have automated tools to help them work more efficiently. But then look inside and you will see a room full of IT people who didn't exist way back then. New jobs. New skills.

And if the public doesn't care about homegrown radio personalities, then you don't need them. When was the last time you saw an LA morning jock walking around the mall? How many LA personalities still make personal appearances like they used to? If a DJ isn't going to leave the studio, then it doesn't matter where he or she is.

Something I've brought up again and again. Radio personalities used to do personal appearances. A very few still do (mostly small markets I imagine) but they were very popular in old Top-40 radio. Then they quit doing them. The face became only a name. Still OK but not the same. Then the voice on the radio became an unknown from some other city and took requests off an 800 phone line. Radio became its own worst enemy.

Sorry...Pandora says they have 200 million users.

I'm thinking they meant 200 connections (cume) not individual users. 2/3 of the USA does not listen to Pandora.

The thing about these rants from people like Ken Levine is that they're mainly boomers pining for the good old days. Like my grandpa used to do. Things never are as good as they used to be. That's what I learned from my grandpa. And the deeper you dig, you find out that grandpa's stories were all myths. Here's what I know: The future is not like the past. We can't go back to the way things were. And the way things were aren't as good as we remember them.

I am a granpa and can tell you that not all things were better in the old days than currently but radio was definitely one of them. Yes, it was AM and my favorite station was a daytimer and I hated it when they had to sign off at 6PM. But then there were the far away stations we could listen to like KOMA and stations out of LA and SF and even Boise. The fidelity might not have been great but the experience was. Ask any Olde Farte. We had DJ's that would show up at your buddy's birthday party and hand out 45's. Every weekend we could chase the searchlights in the night sky looking for appearances. You could walk into virtually any station in town and talk to the people working there - and they were usually glad to see you. They ran contests and programs that you could join and every once in awhile go to a big gathering of other fans. It was a social game back then. A face-to-face social experience.

Those DJ's still exist. We have one of them here in my city. People listen to her because she is humorous on-air and can relate to her listeners. She's out almost every weekend at the local watering holes regaling fans with her stories (and picking up material for her weekday morning show). She is the closest thing we have left to the old days and I hope people like her live on-air forever. It ain't the past but it is close.

 

[TheBigA]

Not to get off track here but technology usually creates different jobs with different skill sets.

I agree, and I'm an example of someone who has benefitted from this. If I was still glued to a console waiting for a vinyl record to end, I would have been gone 20 years ago. I've adapted and adapted and adapted again. I've reinvented myself at least ten times in different roles, formats, states, and anything else. And I tell students interested in this business that you HAVE to be adaptable. If you're the kind of person who can only do one thing, better make it a good one that pays well, because broadcasting ain't it.

I'm thinking they meant 200 connections (cume) not individual users. 2/3 of the USA does not listen to Pandora.

In April 2013 Pandora announced that their radio streaming service had passed 200 million users, about 70 million of whom are active monthly.

I am a granpa and can tell you that not all things were better in the old days than currently but radio was definitely one of them. Yes, it was AM and my favorite station was a daytimer and I hated it when they had to sign off at 6PM.

Here's what I've discovered: It was good for YOU. But if you took those exact tapes from that time, and played them for your grandkids, they might enjoy them, but they probably won't. Maybe they would because they're your grandkids, and they grew up with things you liked, and they respect you. But usually younger ears hear things differently when they're not emotionally attached. You probably weren't as excited about Benny Goodman as your parents were either.

 

[RicoGregg]

With deregulation, many high salaried careers with benefits became part-time hourly waged positions, and the quality of people hired shrunk. And it showed on the air.

Radio is not the attractive career choice that it once was.

That last line is the funniest one I've ever seen. Had you worked at my first station, you would not say radio was an "attractive career choice." And that was long before deregulation.

I guess then that it doesn't take much to make you laugh. Please regale us with the details of your first station, and how you overcame your objections to such an unattractive career choice. The tale, whatever its size, must be riveting!

The fact is that even if there hadn't been deregulation, the invention of personal computers, cell phones, and other devices were going to alter the marketplace, and lower the bar for radio. Historically, the bar was lowered in the 1940s, when radio stopped creating original content and replaced live bands with recorded music. The minute that happened, talent on the radio was over. You didn't need the kind of skilled people required to produce live music shows, radio drama, or variety shows like the Louisiana Hayride.

Skilled people were still needed for things like programming, news (which was a pre-deregulation requirement), engineering, air talent, production, continuity, sales, and administration. Every heard of any of those things? ???

If you're referring to things in original content like radio dramas, or live events, those either continue in one form or another, or they died hard. The Grand Ole Opry continues today. The Hayride died in 1969.

If the bar was truly lowered after WWII, it was raised by the advent of rock and roll music, which became a staple of car and transistor radios. Radio found a new relevance that continues today.

Rules and technology have nothing to do with each other. Just like praying and public education, they are unrelated and don't need to be lumped together.

But the technology is what changed the rules. I worked at one of the first stations that had a computer take transmitter readings. Within a couple years, 3rd class licenses were no longer necessary. I worked at radio stations that ran automation from reel to reel tapes. Then in the early 90s, I spoke with some engineers in Austin who told me I could replace those tapes with something called the Prophet System. Technology and rules have a lot to do with each other. Technology makes rules obsolete. Technology makes jobs obsolete. Technology makes the way things used to be obsolete. And there are no rules that can bring us back to the way things were.

If you worked at a station with a valid 3rd ticket, then xmtr readings had to be taken manually. They still had that rule. It wasn't until they started giving licenses out of a notebook without exams that readings could be taken by computer. I'm calling you on this one, Marconi.

What people, especially those in radio hanker for are homegrown radio personalities, like the business used to nurture.

I had a wise teacher once who told me that radio stations don't program to other radio people. They program to the public. And if the public doesn't care about homegrown radio personalities, then you don't need them. When was the last time you saw an LA morning jock walking around the mall? How many LA personalities still make personal appearances like they used to? If a DJ isn't going to leave the studio, then it doesn't matter where he or she is. But radio isn't a federal jobs program. There never was a law that required a station to have live & local personalities. And there were hundreds of stations in the 60s that ran programming from reel to reel tapes.

Times are different these days in case you haven't noticed. Instead of appearing at malls, they're more likely to appear at concerts or sporting events. The recent Coachella festivals, both the regular and the Stagecoach events, were full of radio people broadcasting live to their respective markets at backstage areas.

The Spanish language outlets seem to always have one of their personalities at a market like Gigante or a store in a heavily-Hispanic area. El Cucuy and Humberto Luna seemed to be all over the place.

Every station has a Promotions Director who is always happy to talk to anyone about having their personalities make appearances.

Sorry...Pandora says they have 200 million users. We're talking about local personalities. How many personalities, local or otherwise, does Pandora have? If 200 million people use Pandora, and it doesn't have personalities, maybe personalities aren't the draw they once were before people had a choice.

Uhmm, just how many market areas is Pandora divided up into? Like CBS, and Clear Channel, is there Pandora New York, Pandora Chicago, Pandora Los Angeles, and such? ???

Or, are you once again putting an orange next to an apple?

I happen to know from an acquaintance at KKGO that in the recent past, owner Saul Levine turned down an offer to sell for $200 million!

He should have taken it. Because today, he'd get a quarter of that if he's lucky.

Uh, Mr. Levine would get far more than a quarter of that. You don't know the value of these properties. I hope I get lucky and win Powerball. I want to negotiate with someone like you!

You're going to tell Saul Levine what to do? ???

You can buy radio stations for the price of a small house today. Not far from LA. I can show them to you. But it won't matter.

If the small house is in Beverly Hills, La Jolla, or Newport Beach, maybe.

If your definition of "not too far from L.A. is a place like Bisbee, AZ, or Gallup, NM, then I'll believe you. Until then, it doesn't matter.

The thing about these rants from people like Ken Levine is that they're mainly boomers pining for the good old days. Like my grandpa used to do. Things never are as good as they used to be. That's what I learned from my grandpa. And the deeper you dig, you find out that grandpa's stories were all myths. Here's what I know: The future is not like the past. We can't go back to the way things were. And the way things were aren't as good as we remember them.

And when you're old enough to be a grandparent, you'll be pining for earlier times. It's kind of a natural thing for older people to do.

Speaking of boomers, one thing has definitely improved from our younger prime: No draft for young people to worry about, thanks in large part to the campus protests of the Baby Boomer generation. No nation that calls itself a free country has any business doing conscription.

That means that YOU have never had to worry about being drafted like we did, and you have OUR generation to thank for that freedom. You can thank us posthumously.

Sleep well at night.

 

[davideduardo]

While the comparison might be moot in total spot minute terms a spot of +2 minutes will cause me (and countless other millions) to hit the pre-set. Stations which have a reputation of long spots are especially prone to immediate button pushing (hiya KOOL-FM).

Take a look at this... a report about what happens when commercials come on.

http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Arbitron/What Happens When The Spots Come On.pdf

You may hit the button if you are in the car. But since 70% of listening is not in the car, and not all people hit the button, the effect is far less than you think.

If we consider "listening" means actually paying attention to what's being broadcast we can probably eliminate the majority of work locations (other than those which permit the worker-bee to operate without interruptions of any kind) and stores, garages and other retail and wholesale establishments where it is merely background noise. Most waiting rooms and other places where someone would be paying attention have TV's instead. That leaves homes, and the last person who listened to radio in her home was my sister and that was back in the 70's, and cars.

First, advertisers buy impressions, not "listening". They know not everyone is paying attention to radio, TV or every add in the paper, a magazine or on a web page. So it does not matter how intently people are listening to the radio. And it's "always" been that way since radio last morphed in the 50's.

Second, as mentioned, 70% of listening is at home and at work... with at-home slightly higher than at-work.

Therefore, it seems to me listening in cars is not only high on the list but at the top of the list.

No, it is third after at-home and at work. It does beat "other" which is pretty much limited to at the part, at the beach or somesuch.

DJ's used to quote newspaper articles in their between-song breaks but now virtually everything on both radio and TV comes from the Internet.

And that is bad? The internet is much more timely, and has much more varied content. What with major papers like the Plain Dealer and Times-Picayune going to publishing just 3 days a week, newspaper content is getting to be totally irrelevant.

 

[landtuna]

Speaking of boomers, one thing has definitely improved from our younger prime: No draft for young people to worry about, thanks in large part to the campus protests of the Baby Boomer generation. No nation that calls itself a free country has any business doing conscription.

That means that YOU have never had to worry about being drafted like we did, and you have OUR generation to thank for that freedom. You can thank us posthumously.

Sleep well at night.

Right On! (whoops, just dated myself). There was a post several months ago in which the poster was questioning just what value the Boomers had added to our society. The above paragraphs are a pretty succinct explanation. Wish I'd thought of that. ;D

 

[landtuna]

Take a look at this... a report about what happens when commercials come on.

http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Arbitron/What Happens When The Spots Come On.pdf

That has been referenced before and my objection is still the same.....show me a study done by independent experts and not by self-serving media types. Not that I distrust people who make and sell commercials. :

You may hit the button if you are in the car. But since 70% of listening is not in the car, and not all people hit the button, the effect is far less than you think.

I am still not buying this. Since I turned into a teenager in the late 50's the only place the radio was ever on, except when doing my homework in my bedroom, was in the car. I cannot remember the last time I was in anyone else's house and a radio was playing - maybe once in awhile while a neighbor was working in his garage. It's been TV's instead of radio's for many decades now.

First, advertisers buy impressions, not "listening". They know not everyone is paying attention to radio, TV or every add in the paper, a magazine or on a web page. So it does not matter how intently people are listening to the radio. And it's "always" been that way since radio last morphed in the 50's.

I don't know what an "impression" is nor would I know how to sell it to an advertiser. What I understand to be actual "listening" is being able to recognize and remember what was being advertised (and the 'why' would be a plus). I have had a little test I used to give my wife and kids every once in awhile while the radio was playing in the car. I would wait for a commercial to finish then ask everyone what was just advertised. In the overwhelming majority of cases not a sole could tell me. Nor did I know myself unless I was concentrating. I did the same test as a college student and had the same results. I will grant you that if a commercial is repeated often enough or has a catchy jingle it might bear remembering (I still remember the 800 number of a national hotel chain from the early 70's because I heard it endlessly, in my car, every workday BUT I cannot tell you which company it referred to).

Second, as mentioned, 70% of listening is at home and at work... with at-home slightly higher than at-work.

I used to listen at work too but it was simply background noise designed to fight off the encroaching noise from neighboring cubicles. When I was designing or coding the noise was there so I didn't get distracted by nearby phone conversations but I couldn't tell you what just played. And if your job is one that is constantly being interrupted, good luck. I assume that most "at work" listeners fall into one of those categories.

And that is bad? The internet is much more timely, and has much more varied content. What with major papers like the Plain Dealer and Times-Picayune going to publishing just 3 days a week, newspaper content is getting to be totally irrelevant.

My point was that modern DJ's can fill their between-song time quickly and easily and don't have to do any research the night before or even have a repertoire of personal stories to tell on-air. Doing an airshift used to be a form of show biz but that is very rare these days.

 

[davideduardo]

That has been referenced before and my objection is still the same.....show me a study done by independent experts and not by self-serving media types.

The "study" was simply a tabulation of listener performance as measured by the PPM and cross-indexed to the stopset times and durations of stations. There is no interpretation or bias possible... this is sort of like a tracking of temperature readings at your local airport.

I am still not buying this. Since I turned into a teenager in the late 50's the only place the radio was ever on, except when doing my homework in my bedroom, was in the car. I cannot remember the last time I was in anyone else's house and a radio was playing - maybe once in awhile while a neighbor was working in his garage. It's been TV's instead of radio's for many decades now.

n=1

The fact is that millions of diaries going back to the 70's, when listening location was incorporated in each diary entry, have shown that less than a third of all listening has ever taken place in the car.

In the PPM, out of home listening includes in-car and at work. But at-home is broken out, as the meter knows when it is at home and when it is away. And a third of radio listening takes place in the home. And with the PPM, we are talking about a daily sample approaching 100,000 meters.

I don't know what an "impression" is nor would I know how to sell it to an advertiser.

Advertisers know what impressions are (unless you are talking about "Aunt Minnie's Curio Shop" in Barstow). And that is what they buy.

I used to listen at work too but it was simply background noise designed to fight off the encroaching noise from neighboring cubicles. When I was designing or coding the noise was there so I didn't get distracted by nearby phone conversations but I couldn't tell you what just played. And if your job is one that is constantly being interrupted, good luck. I assume that most "at work" listeners fall into one of those categories.

Again, n=1.

And in the PPM, turning down the radio for a phone call is tracked. Leaving the radio behind to get coffee or visit the rest room is tracked... and so on. At work listening is significant, mostly not done in white collar offices, and accurately measured.

My point was that modern DJ's can fill their between-song time quickly and easily and don't have to do any research the night before or even have a repertoire of personal stories to tell on-air. Doing an airshift used to be a form of show biz but that is very rare these days.

You can't do research the day before, because the news and information cycle is much faster today. You can look up information now right while you are on the air, and even respond to tweets from celebrities and newsmakers. Previously, information was scarce and delayed; today the skill is knowing how to separate what is relevant to your audience from that which is not.

 

[landtuna]

The "study" was simply a tabulation of listener performance as measured by the PPM and cross-indexed to the stopset times and durations of stations. There is no interpretation or bias possible... this is sort of like a tracking of temperature readings at your local airport.

Let's assume I am a PPM carrier. I walk into Home Depot and KOOL-FM is playing in the background but loud enough for the device to hear it. Bingo! KOOL gets a whammy. I then go to my doctor's office where KESZ is playing in the background. Another Bingo! KEZ gets a whammy. The problem is....I was not "listening" to either station. I was just in the proximity. I neither consciously heard nor remember what was playing in either environment.

We have a rule in our family that the driver gets to choose the radio station. I hate my wife's favorite but bite my lip. If I was wearing a device it would record that I "heard" her station when, in fact, I usually have ear plugs in listening to something else (or not paying any attention at all).

PPM is not infallible and in certain situations can actually be misleading. I am not saying they happen often enough to swing the numbers substantially but it is a possibility. I've been alive long enough to have a pretty good handle on human behavior and I think I can smell a day old fish.

In the PPM, out of home listening includes in-car and at work. But at-home is broken out, as the meter knows when it is at home and when it is away. And a third of radio listening takes place in the home. And with the PPM, we are talking about a daily sample approaching 100,000 meters.

But what the meters cannot tell you is whether the human wearing the device "hears" the radio station. What happens when a child is talking to the PPM person? What happens when the phone is answered and the radio stays on? The doorbell rings and is answered. The person is wearing the meter but is building cabinets with a power saw in the garage? In all those cases the meter hears the station but the person most probably doesn't.

Advertisers know what impressions are (unless you are talking about "Aunt Minnie's Curio Shop" in Barstow). And that is what they buy.

I always thought advertisers either wanted to sell you something immediately or at least put a reminder in your brain the next time you went shopping. That doesn't sound like an "impression" to me. My "impression" of Hyundai is that it is a quality line of products but I didn't get that from radio or TV, I got it from other owners. My "impression" of DISH is they are a bunch of greedy carpetbaggers and I won't do business with them and I got that impression from actually dealing with them, not from radio or TV.

And in the PPM, turning down the radio for a phone call is tracked. Leaving the radio behind to get coffee or visit the rest room is tracked... and so on. At work listening is significant, mostly not done in white collar offices, and accurately measured.

My working career was done in a wide variety of locations from giant corporation cube farms to quiet 4-person suites to government office buildings and military installations. If I listened to radio while working I had to wear ear phones for obvious reasons so PPM would not work in that case. But while working in a factory environment the radio was basting away in the corner all day long and as long as I was in the same huge room it would be tracked but I wasn't listening because I hated the station.

I can think of 100's of scenarios like the above but it doesn't make much difference. If advertisers believe their messages are getting through then the station prospers. If I were an ad buyer instead of a common listener I would want a ton more info before signing the check.

You can't do research the day before, because the news and information cycle is much faster today. You can look up information now right while you are on the air, and even respond to tweets from celebrities and newsmakers. Previously, information was scarce and delayed; today the skill is knowing how to separate what is relevant to your audience from that which is not.

I know what you are saying but I clearly remember Frank Kalil in Tucson's KTKT making reference to books. BOOKS! Not timely info but stuff written years, sometimes centuries, beforehand. Paul Harvey used to mix old and new in much the same way. It was called 'entertainment' and wasn't focused on the latest antics of Beiber or Lohan. Those guys actually dredged up interesting material from, at times, classic sources, and presented it in an entertaining way. That indeed seems to be a lost art.

I hate to say it but perhaps you are right. Today's prime demos are just too stupid to understand anything but this morning's fluff and flotsam.

 

[TheBigA]

Those guys actually dredged up interesting material from, at times, classic sources, and presented it in an entertaining way. That indeed seems to be a lost art.

I don't see it as a lost art. It's available every day on NPR. The reason Congress started NPR is that commercial radio in the 60s was getting away from that kind of thing. Sure you had Karl Haas hosting Adventures In Good Music in Cincinnati, and Studs Terkel at WFMT in Chicago. But for the most part, the highest level of "entertainment" was The Further Adventures of Chicken Man, which was a syndicated feature. Boss Radio KHJ was built around minimal involvement by the DJs. One of the reasons why ABC split into four networks was to get Paul Harvey off the Top 40 radio stations so they could play more music and give more gossip about The Monkees or whoever was hot at the time.

 

[TheBigA]

And when you're old enough to be a grandparent, you'll be pining for earlier times. It's kind of a natural thing for older people to do.

You have no idea how old I am, so don't lecture me.

The point is that Ken Levine is entitled to his opinion, as are you. But it has nothing to do with reality. If the world was still the same as it was 40 years ago, he'd have a point. But things change. They always do. Radio in the 70s wasn't doing the same thing it did in the 30s. So it stands to reason that radio now doesn't do the same thing it did in the 70s. We can argue all day about whether it's better or worse, but it doesn't matter. We're not living in the 70s, and what worked then won't work now. Neither you nor Ken have any real solutions to the problems faced by broadcasters today other than to force us to operate under antiquated rules. You can't force profit-making companies to lose money. That's why local department stores went out of business after the rise of big box national chains. That's why the passenger railroads went out of business after the government forced them to operate under a bunch of work rules. So forcing radio stations to operate under 1970s rules doesn't mean the stations will sound the same as they did then. It means you'll have fewer radio stations operating with less money.

 

[davideduardo]

Let's assume I am a PPM carrier. I walk into Home Depot and KOOL-FM is playing in the background but loud enough for the device to hear it. Bingo! KOOL gets a whammy.

KOOL does not get credit unless your PPM detected the station for enough contiguous minutes to meet the requirements for credit in each quarter hour. If you wandered around, and sometimes heard the station, and sometimes not, you did not even give them a single quarter hour of credit.

The problem is....I was not "listening" to either station. I was just in the proximity. I neither consciously heard nor remember what was playing in either environment.

Advertisers understand this. The prime motivation for radio to pay 70% more for the PPM than for the diary was that agencies wanted a measure of impressions, not just conscious "I remember it later in the day when I fill in my diary" listening.

PPM is not infallible and in certain situations can actually be misleading. I am not saying they happen often enough to swing the numbers substantially but it is a possibility.

Above 90% of the listening to stations, on average, comes from just 50% of the cume in PPM. So that incidental listening is essentially irrelevant to the success of a station in overall ratings, while at the same time giving the advertising buyer what they want... true reach.

But what the meters cannot tell you is whether the human wearing the device "hears" the radio station.

The issue, again, is what advertisers want. Ratings are bought to sell advertising.

What happens when a child is talking to the PPM person? What happens when the phone is answered and the radio stays on? The doorbell rings and is answered. The person is wearing the meter but is building cabinets with a power saw in the garage? In all those cases the meter hears the station but the person most probably doesn't.

If you can hear the station, the meter can't. If the station sound is interferred with or masked, the meter does not detect. The buzz saw, etc., will mask the sound. If you move around with the meter on your belt or whatever, the meter hears what you hear.

I always thought advertisers either wanted to sell you something immediately or at least put a reminder in your brain the next time you went shopping. That doesn't sound like an "impression" to me.

Advertisers know that most advertising is ignored. I would never buy a pickup truck, so my mind tunes out ads for F-150s and Tundras and such. What advertisers seek is a lot of impressions, and they know that the message will get through to a percentage of people who hear the message, even in their subconscious, and are interested in the offer. Still, 90% of the job in advertising is in the message, the product availability, the price, the brand, the reputation, etc. That is not radio's job.

But while working in a factory environment the radio was basting away in the corner all day long and as long as I was in the same huge room it would be tracked but I wasn't listening because I hated the station.

But you heard it. That is what advertisers want to know.

 

[michael hagerty]

Subliminal and subconscious are major factors in advertising. All those impressions add up over time.