The Community

[Element9]

After years of posting and reading here, it occurs to me that this is quite the "community" of communicators, malcontents, dreamers, visionaries and realists. The word "community" came up a few days ago while listening to a Toronto jazz station on 91.1 and again while listening to the Lake, which for years has used slogan "The Lake Community" to describe its listeners. A friend of mine has a car radio with a USB port. Now he plugs his mp3 player into his car system and goes merrily on his way listening to everything he liked, from Elvis to Elvis Costello... from America to ZZ Top, including Johnny Cash. He says "radio isn't that important" to him anymore. Radio needs to get him back into the "community."

 

[topsound]

Salient points:

http://www.chrisbrogan.com/audience-or-community/

 

[AndrewLawson]

I'm not much of a joiner, but neither am I a loner. I played team sports, volleyball and baseball, but wasn't interested in being the captain. There are radio stations that I regularly listen to for music and personalities, but there isn't one that I feel a part of like a team. I listen to the Lake, 97 Rock and WYRK along with WBFO, Q107 and even WDCX; WBEN, WECK, WNED and AM 740. I like each of these stations for a different reason, but I don't feel like I'm a member of a special club when I listen. Maybe I don't get the "community" thing.

 

[SirRoxalot]

The problem is all about relatability. Some stations are better than others at finding common ground with listeners. "The Lake", for example, tries to find common ground by offering information about music and artists. Unfortunately, their stilted, mostly voice-tracked delivery sounds more like someone reading liner notes or AOR show prep than real relatability.

97-Rock is one of the better stations at relating to its audience - at least from 6A-7P. Love 'em or hate 'em, they do what they do very well, and a lot of people feel connected to the personalities that they have onboard.

WBFO has brilliant moments, and some that are less so. They have some of the most relatable local hosts for the type of music and programming that they present. Bert Gambini, Doug Blakely, Debbie Sims, Jim Santella, and Anita West (yup - I'm into blues), do a fine job. WBFO loses that touch when they switch to NPR for large portions of the day. BTW, this is not meant as a criticism of NPR programming. Certainly, discussion of national topics deserves a place on the public radio dial.

I'm not a country listener, but WYRK is clearly doing something right, and their listeners seem to feel at home with them. I am a fan of Q107 out of Toronto. The Can-con can get a little tedious, but they make up for it with a great presentation, more variety than 97-Rock, and a very good group of air personalities that get to entertain.

I've taken to avoiding talk radio most of the time. Propaganda from the left is as objectionable as propaganda from the right. WBFO and WNED-AM offer much better DISCUSSION of important topics.

Otherwise, there's a "vast wasteland" of vapid, voice-tracked, over-formatted radio out there. Radio can't survive being a music delivery system. EVERYBODY has an MP3 player, stocked with their own favorites. What the MP3 player doesn't offer is immediacy, and companionship. The worst thing about voice-tracking is that too many times, corporate wants to cut costs so much that they're using the cheapest, least experienced, least entertaining people to voice-track. They sound dull, lifeless, and formulaic at best. Even the best people are expected to lay down shows in so little time that show-prep is minimal at best.

Corporate (i.e. ABC/Citadel) has even taken to voice-tracking syndicated channels. At least syndicated channels USED to be live and timely. If an event like 9-11 happened, they'd react. Now? The music just rolls along, and "Mr./Ms. Sunshine" just keeps babbling away.

Relatability, immediacy, companionship. That's what separated radio from 45s, albums, 8-tracks, cassettes, and CDs. The MP3 player ain't what's killing radio. Radio corporations are what's killing radio.

 

[TheBigA]

Radio needs to get him back into the "community."

There is no "community." There are loads of individuals, each one wanting...even demanding...their OWN radio station. So your friend likes Johnny Cash and ZZ Top. That works for him. But his next door neighbor doesn't like Johnny Cash. What do you do?

The fact is there is no cookie cutter approach to programming music on the radio. Everybody has their own favorites, and no two people like the same thing. The best you can do as a programmer is find a few artists and songs that a lot of people like, group them in ways that make sense, and have listeners switch from one station to the other and make their own mash-up that suits their personal taste.

The MP3 player ain't what's killing radio. Radio corporations are what's killing radio.

And yet non-corporate stations aren't doing a better job, either.

People have become used to one-on-one communications. Radio is not one-to-one. It's a mass medium. Changing ownership is not going to change the fact that you can't turn a mass medium into individual medium, and still pay everyone the kind of money they once made. This is a sociological revolution, and you guys are still acting like nothing has changed except radio ownership.

Community is what you make it. Lots of people live in cyber-communities, with cyuber-identities. It's not restricted by geography. Radio is still limited to its signal coverage area. But communities aren't.

 

[TheBigA]

What the MP3 player doesn't offer is immediacy, and companionship.

But the cell phone does. Which is why people carry cell phones and not radios. And there's nothing radio can do, no amount of money it can spend, no number of people it can hire, that will provide the immediacy and companionship that you get from a cell phone.

 

[Bill Myers]

But his next door neighbor doesn't like Johnny Cash. What do you do?

There are only two kinds of neighbors in this world:
Ones who like Johnny Cash and ones who will like Johnny Cash.

 

[Bill Myers]

What the MP3 player doesn't offer is immediacy, and companionship.

But the cell phone does. Which is why people carry cell phones and not radios. And there's nothing radio can do, no amount of money it can spend, no number of people it can hire, that will provide the immediacy and companionship that you get from a cell phone.

I just bought a new cell phone the other day and I loaded it up with almost a thousand of my favorite songs. It'll take me days to get through 'em all. That's listening non-stop. I'd rather listen to that in the morning on my way to work than listening to some jabbermouth taking full advantage of his 'Morning Voice' which is already a few registers lower when you first get up outta bed (if you're a guy) and trying to sound more balsy than you already are thanks to coffee and nic sticks.

 

[Radknowski]

Would not a station's P1 listeners constitute a community?

Stations like WYRK (Country, for them what's not from around here); WBLK (Heritage Urban); WWWS (Rhythmic Oldies); WNED-FM (Classical) and at one time, Oldies 104 (duh, Oldies); WNED-AM (NPR) and WBFO (NPR-Jazz-Blues) would seem to have a large exclusive cume and plentiful P1 listeners that would constitute some kind of community. Kinda like the Moose Club members who might also belong to the Knights of Columbus.

You gotta love the Moose, Lions, Elk. And in Lancaster, the Orioles Club. And of course, Dom Polski!

 

[TheBigA]

Would not a station's P1 listeners constitute a community?

Maybe...returning to the original post, format radio has led to audience sharing. So while a country listener may like Toby Keith, he also may like Lynyrd Skynyrd, and they're not played on the same station. So he has to switch from station to station. In my community, I live in one house. I don't move from house to house as my mood changes. But musical taste and interest isn't constant or predictable.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

Speaking for myself I'm an Amateur Radio operator (Ham Geek) so that's my community. I have an iPod and more music and podcasts than any radio station or stations could bring me. When I turn on the radio I get a seven minute commercial set or some blowhard that's spewing hate politics. So I go back to Ham radio or the iPod.

TV has been a casualty at my house too. We tend to watch more TV on the PC. Hulu gives us lots of shows, old and new, what we want when we want it. They put one commercial in the commercial break not 10 like the cable networks. There is no recording, no expense of a Tivo.

Radio plays a much more diminished role in my life. TV is going in the same direction. Radio's answer to this has been cost cutting through longer commercial sets, voice tracking and syndication. TV's answers are, longer commercial sets, reality shows and canceling any show that doesn't have huge ratings, not giving shows a chance to catch on. Radio and TV seem to be hastening their demise.

 

[TheBigA]

Radio and TV seem to be hastening their demise.

What could radio do to change your habits? Become more like your ipod? Eliminate commercials? Shut up and play the music?

I'd suggest that radio isn't hastening its demise. You've simply made changes in your life, built around your personal interests and schedule. And there are now devices that allow you to do that, and they didn't exist 20 years ago. There's nothing radio could do that would make you change your new habits, or replace your favorite activities.

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

Radio and TV seem to be hastening their demise.

What could radio do to change your habits? Become more like your ipod? Eliminate commercials? Shut up and play the music?

Fair questions, especially since the environment now is markedly different from what it was ten years ago, even five years ago.

Become more like your ipod?

That's a losing proposition, for sure. Even the Bob and Jack "variety" stations (a mile wide but an inch deep) are no match for a person's ipod or mp3 player.

I'd offer that localism and relatability go a long way to achieving success, along with proper research, promotion as well as being vital and tuned-in to your listeners. As NFL Hall of Fame Coach Marv Levy is fond of saying, "The answer is simple, but it's not easy." Succes requires skill, experience, discipline, trying to find out as much as you can about the product you're selling and the customers who you want to sell it to, packaging it properly, execution and playing smart. Show prep, localism, relatability and customer service.

I'd suggest that radio isn't hastening its demise. You've simply made changes in your life, built around your personal interests and schedule. And there are now devices that allow you to do that, and they didn't exist 20 years ago. There's nothing radio could do that would make you change your new habits, or replace your favorite activities.

Some truth here, too. But again, from what I've observed (especially since Januray 23rd of this year), I'd suggest that radio can do a lot to lessen its demise. BTW, IMHO, HD, especially as it's being utilized, isn't one of the options.

As compared to five or ten years ago, there's plenty more competition on and off the air, such as message boards, Twitter, Facebook, Pandora, Shoutcast, 800 songs on my phone and alternate sources of information and entertainment. But listen to the good local talent (Clay Moden, JP, Roger Christian) in Buffalo in any format (WYRK, 97 Rock, Star) and any daypart and it's clear that they're working harder and more diligently than ever to relate and entertain on the air and off the air using their websites: Blogs, podcasts and special promotional features. The stations that are falling by the wayside are those that can't keep up with the local standards set by those that are performing well. It's a day to day battle. On my Facebook page, I've remarked that I'm listening to radio as a "civilian" these days, especially between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. I'm finding that I'm using radio more than I ever expected, enjoying its diversity and what it avails. Yes, I slip in a CD from time to time, but not that much more frequently than I did when I was "on the reservation."

Coincidentally, as I'm editing this, I'm in my studio. I have access to CD, WinAmp, 700+ songs in the hard drive, Pandora and cable TV, but I'm listening to radio: Christian Contemporary Reach FM 89.3. (Don't ask. I'm just curious and sampling. It began yesterday when I heard them having issues while I was station surfing. Carrier on. Two seconds of audio. Audio off for a minute. Repeat. The station was on when I turned on the radio and I just left it on.)

 

[TheBigA]

I'd offer that localism and relatability go a long way to achieving success, along with proper research, promotion as well as being vital and tuned-in to your listeners.

That may be what YOU'D offer, but my question was posed to Mike. Mike made it clear that he's more interested in a service that adapts to his schedule than anything available in real time radio. He mentioned he likes podcasts and Hulu. You don't offer him that.

It's clear that they're working harder and more diligently than ever to relate and entertain on the air and off the air using their websites: Blogs, podcasts and special promotional features.

That's true. Back in the old days, radio wasn't a job. It was an obsession. They paid you for your time in the office, but you worked around the clock. The DJs I follow on Twitter are there at all times of the day. Not just during their shift. They are REAL personalities, not characters that only exist during their shifts. They share their experiences in doing show prep, in meeting celebrities, and attending events. One guy I follow is doing a second show on Twitter that is completely different from what he does on the air. He plays different music, more oriented around trying out new songs, he provides pictures, he links in Tweets from celebrities, and all this while doing his format shift on the air. And it doesn't cost a dime!

 

[SirRoxalot]

That's true. Back in the old days, radio wasn't a job. It was an obsession. They paid you for your time in the office, but you worked around the clock. The DJs I follow on Twitter are there at all times of the day. Not just during their shift. They are REAL personalities, not characters that only exist during their shifts. They share their experiences in doing show prep, in meeting celebrities, and attending events. One guy I follow is doing a second show on Twitter that is completely different from what he does on the air. He plays different music, more oriented around trying out new songs, he provides pictures, he links in Tweets from celebrities, and all this while doing his format shift on the air. And it doesn't cost a dime!

There are plenty of "REAL personalities" out there, working the streets, putting in a lot of hours that they don't get paid for, blogging, and using sites like Twitter and Facebook. In fact, a lot of them are far more creative on Twitter and Facebook because they don't have the same restrictions that are imposed by strict corporate formats. Isn't it sad that "REAL personalities" have to resort to other media to flesh out the fact that they're a real, entertaining human being instead of a liner-spewing station promo machine?

Radio is getting uglier by the day - more cuts, more generic out-of-market voice-tracking, more morning show sidekicks tracking mid-days. Half of those side-kicks never even held down a full-time shift by themselves. But, they work free, or darn cheap, because they're told it's now "part of the job".

Production is cranked out, not produced. Sales people take time off the street to write copy - usually with less than stellar results - and an ever-shrinking pool of talent is expected to deliver the same volume of output.

And, now they're supposed to Twitter, FaceBook, Meetup, and MySpace like happy idiots 24/7/365 - promoting the people who are cutting their pay, increasing their workload, and firing their friends and support staff. Yet you say that they're "overpaid", "lazy", and generally coddled. Be careful what you ask for, or they might start telling listeners how they REALLY feel.

 

[TheBigA]

Isn't it sad that "REAL personalities" have to resort to other media to flesh out the fact that they're a real, entertaining human being instead of a liner-spewing station promo machine?

Not at all, because at the end of the day, they speak to hundreds on Twitter. They speak to much larger audiences on the air. The goal of mass media is to reach large audiences. And you do that by using ALL media available to reach a wide and diverse audience. It gets back to what I said earlier in this thread, that there is no one community, but lots of sub-communities.

And, now they're supposed to Twitter, FaceBook, Meetup, and MySpace like happy idiots 24/7/365 - promoting the people who are cutting their pay, increasing their workload, and firing their friends and support staff.

There's an easy way to keep their friends and support staff on the payroll: Have the highly paid contract DJ offer to hire them as his own staffers. In some markets, DJs have done that. They've taken employees off the station payroll and put them on their own staff. They can afford it.

 

[SirRoxalot]

There's an easy way to keep their friends and support staff on the payroll: Have the highly paid contract DJ offer to hire them as his own staffers. In some markets, DJs have done that. They've taken employees off the station payroll and put them on their own staff. They can afford it.

How about if the guys making millions in the corporate suite take their secretaries, accountants, assistants, and support staff off the payroll, and offer to hire them as their own staffers? After all, THEY can afford it a lot better than most jocks. Not only that, but the jocks aren't the ones who screwed up and badly overpaid for radio stations. The guys at corporate are the ones who failed to realize that recessions happen, "regional synergies" didn't really cut expenses as much as they thought, and 13-15x multiples of cash flow - not profits - were unsustainable. In fact, they're the ones who made a very tiny percentage of jocks "highly paid contract DJs". Most jocks earn less than those corporate honchos expense on lunch during the course of the year.

Yeah, yeah. I know. Jocks are evil. Syndication and voice-tracking are the saviors of the company. The company is always right. They can do what they want with THEIR money (it SURE ain't the shareholder's money anymore). Blah, blah, blah.

 

[TheBigA]

How about if the guys making millions in the corporate suite take their secretaries, accountants, assistants, and support staff off the payroll, and offer to hire them as their own staffers?

Some already have.

 

[Element9]

Not at all, because at the end of the day, they speak to hundreds on Twitter. They speak to much larger audiences on the air. The goal of mass media is to reach large audiences.

Far as I know, Arbitron rates what goes over the air and the 'net stream. Twitter and Facebook aren't (yet) rated, so the air product deserves the most attention because that's where the listeners are. Too bad most radio stations don't recognize the creativity of their personnel and allow for some of it to enter what they do on the radio. It's just "Zap! Pow! Ten in a row! Your at work favorites from yesterday, today and the day before." You mean to tell me a live jock can't articulate that message just as well, if not more creatively with more impact, while relating it to what's going on locally and at that moment? Seriously.

As to Twitter and Facebook, I'm not so sure Tweets and Facebook posts like "Jeff Jackschidt is going to play a block of Nirvana today at noon" are very enticing, especially given the way Facebook and Twitter are used. It's the same as getting a Tweet that says, "blow drying my cat." Okay, to the eight people in your community that care, perhaps it's important. But after a while, doesn't the novelty wear off?

Frankly, I'm just waiting for the Facebook tease that reads, "My PD told me not to do it but today at noon I'm playing three of my favorite songs from Zappa. If I get fired, you'll know why. If I'm still here at 12:15, my PD's not the asswipe I thought he was."

How about if the guys making millions in the corporate suite take their secretaries, accountants, assistants, and support staff off the payroll, and offer to hire them as their own staffers?

Some already have.

Some haven't.

 

[Mike Sheridan]

Radio and TV seem to be hastening their demise.

What could radio do to change your habits? Become more like your ipod? Eliminate commercials? Shut up and play the music?

I'd suggest that radio isn't hastening its demise. You've simply made changes in your life, built around your personal interests and schedule. And there are now devices that allow you to do that, and they didn't exist 20 years ago. There's nothing radio could do that would make you change your new habits, or replace your favorite activities.

I knew I'd get some flack for my post. Yes I have made changes but part of the reason for the change was my frustration with traditional media.

Here is what radio could do to change my habits. Shorter commercial sets (I'd rather have more frequent shorter sets), bigger play lists, and personalities outside of morning drive. Talk shows that discuss more than politics and flying saucers. News capsules, maybe just a 2 or 3 minute headline cast on a music stations so I don't feel that I'm missing anything major. A wider variety of formats while I'm dreaming to include radio drama, not just variations of rock and Urban.

TV should look back to it's past for "new" ideas. Local game shows, local talk shows, network series that last more than 10 episodes, and fewer commercials. Please while we're at it stop showing the same commercial twice in the same break, we saw it once, we get the idea.

Other than that, everything is fine! ;D