radioelizabeth said:
justalurker said:
... Know it because you spent a day at the Berrien County Youth Fair a few years back, or you've met another DJ at the station pulled that duty this past year.
So what you really mean is someone who has been in the market for more than a year? Because hiring new talent tomorrow from a state on the West coast isn't going to capture this either, right?
Would you like to read what I wrote and try that response again? I didn't say you had to be the one at the Berrien County Youth Fair. :
I read it again, and again..."know it because you spent a day at the Berrien County Youth fair..." This same circumstance you describe would apply to any new talent in the house that moved there from another market.
... Perhaps you can pull from past experience ... that winter when you were snowed in ... and pull off a decent shift. I'd expect that from a radio pro. But what do you tell your listeners in Grand Rapids (where it barely snowed) or California (where snow practically lacks definition)?
Again, this means market experience...and a new talent in the market will be at the same disadvantage.
And again, a person IN the market, even if only for their first week, will easier relate to the issue. In fact, their initial reaction (even if clueless) may endear them to the listener as they BUILD the relationship with their new market.
I can appreciate that, but the example still seems to falter when comparing local to national...a new talent will still be at the same disadvantage, so if the example posed that it's more personal because they've been there stands, it has to be applied to new talent as well...that new talent in a market is not as personal. Ok, we're closer to the definition of personal now...that "hometown" seems to make it more personal. Got that.
If hometown advantage is what makes local more personal than national, then we could still easily say that it is simply more personal in that specific regard. National still can offer more personal things in other regards, wouldn't you say?
Satellite provides an instant disconnect. You can talk on a national feed about the problems over in Benton Harbor... It may even foster a global view ... where snow problems in Benton Harbor are just as important as hurricanes in Florida and earthquakes in California ... and connect on a higher level. But it also makes you sound aloof ... as if the problem in Benton Harbor doesn't really affect you.
I think there is a way to not sound aloof. I'm not suggesting it will be the same, of course not...but again, we're talking about the difference being mostly weather/traffic. Local stations may not even have that kind of local connect...so to suggest that is more personal, I think we've got the wrong definitions in play.
Weather and traffic are the beginning of the relationship. So is the time of day (not x past or x till, the TIME). I suppose it makes it easier on a satellite voice or voicetracker if all that basic stuff is left up to the affliate - or not aired at all. But it is a separation. Everyone is doing their little bit to fill the hour and then the next hour but the connection between the elements is broken.
I don't agree that weather and traffic are the beginning of the relationship. I think they are key ingrediants that flow in a seemless break, but unless we're talking major storm or morning commute, I'm just not seeing time/temp as being that vital. And if we are talking morning drive, national can give the same information local does "10 past" still means "10 past" whether you include the hour or not. Now traffic, of course that is something that local can do that national can't...but if traffic and weather are the only elements being used to define a station as more personal, than we've simply forgotten how to do personal radio, wouldn't you say? Because logic then says that any station that doesn't do traffic or weather is not personal.
At some point it is nice to say "HERE" on the radio. You can't do that on a satellite feed. Unless you are on location somewhere... the word HERE cannot be used because HERE is too many places. That is where satellite loses it's personal touch. Nothing happens HERE ... it always happens over there or it just doesn't get mentioned.
But do you concede that there are moments sat can say "here", when talking about issues that are effecting everyone, on a personal level?
It isn't a real here ... as in here in Indy.... or here in San Fransisco. It is a mystical here ... perhaps here in the USA would work but you can't go local on satellite unless you give up and make your show a national show.
I think I didn't make that clear enough. What I am suggesting is that a national "here" can still be a personal here. If something is impacting our nation, it's personal. Example, 9-11...if you were in NY, it was "here", if you were in Tulsa it was "here", if you were in Europe it was "there". It was still personal to everyone.
Perhaps that is what you are doing. Completely giving up on the idea of being in any market and just being a national voice with everyone knowing that you are not from around there and you don't work at the local station or anywhere else in the local market. Being more like a Dave Ramsey or Rush Limbaugh ... everyone knows that these guys are affilated ... there is no ruse of being live and local, they are live and national. The dynamic is different.
I believe the dynamics are different. Different is my point. But the suggestion is that one is more personal than the other...and outside of traffic and weather and some local events, I haven't seen it effectively demonstrated as anything but different. For example, Rush and Dave are personal. Dave Ramsey is in fact very personal. I think we'd be remiss to suggest that although these shows run nationally, they aren't personal. They have a different dynamic of course, but can we really say that Dave is less personal than a guy working for the local AM that does something similar? I just don't think "personal" is the right word.
If you are suggesting a "live and national" style show I'll let you off the hook.
But if you are trying to do local via satellite in multiple markets there is no way you can remain personal when the converation starts with a false statement (or an intentional omission designed to lead people to believe something false).
I don't suggest one or the other. I simply want to dig to the heart of these terms, because I think we are simply incorrect to suggest local means more personal, regardless.
Scan the stations in California and see how many are mentioning the two feet of snowfall in Benton Harbor in a way that would sound personal to a listener in Benton Harbor. It is likely that they are not mentioning it at all. If they are mentioning it they are doing it in a "trivia" sort of way --- ....then on to the next thing so you don't bore the California listener or annoy the New York state listener who got 3 ft and wonders why you mentioned Benton Harbor.
But again, does that make one more personal than the other, or simply a different kind of personal, take the weather out of this mix and I'm simply not seeing we are using the correct terms. Weather doesn't make a station more personal anymore than prayer makes a station more spiritual. Make sense?
What makes sense is that you want to eliminate anything that makes satellite worse than live local. Rationalizing that satellite is OK because some stations are as bad as satellite in staying connected with their audiences.
Actually, I'm not advocating one over the other, and I'm not suggesting sat is the best option. I've been pretty consistent on this board that there are issues with both. But if we are going to use these examples to show one better than the other, then yes, I'll break it down to the basic and offer up examples that counter the claim.
On that I can agree, satellite is better than the worst local stations. But it seems that one must lower the bar from the best local stations to make one's definition of "just as personal" work.
If we compare, side by side, the best in local and the best in sat, then we're at a better discussion...then we can effectively deduce what is making each station "personal" in their own right. I think a case can be made for both...differently.
I don't see how you can be more personal on satellite than someone who is local and sharing the same world. The only way I see you can do it is by ignoring what is going on outside and concentrate on what is going on inside the listener. Something that can also be done by a live local or VT local DJ --- putting satellite on an equal footing except local can also talk about the "outside" influences - making local more personal.
But again, a new talent in the market faces the exact same obsticles you bring up. And we could again suggest that the talent working for the sat. station goes above and beyond to connect with listeners, say by writing that hand written letter...that is personal. It might not be local, but it is personal.
A local station may do it differently, but I think we're simply defining personal incorrectly.
What percentage of your listeners get a handwritten letter? Sure, it is nice to have personal contact with a few, but we are talking about RADIO. The personal contact is supposed to be over the air -- relating to the thousands who never write.
I was using an extreme example to show the word "personal" is incorrect. If a jock did this on a national level, they'd blow the theory of sat. being less personal out of the water. Of course it won't happen, but it isn't happening locally either. Again, put the local station that does traffic and weather up against a sat. station that writes a handwritten letter to even 100 listeners, and the comparison is seen quickly.
Listeners are not stupid. They understand new talent and accept that they need to learn their new market. It is harder to accept an old voice who is just oblivious to the community becuase they just are not there.
And this comes back to "hometown". If "hometown advantage" is what we are going to call "personal", then that is very different than "local" as well. And again, we could compare this "hometown" advantage the same way we could compare other differences found in sat, they are different.
Again, my heart is to discover why we are suggesting local is more "personal", thus better because of it.
It seems what I'm hearing most is:
1. local weather and traffic
2. local events
3. hometown experience
4. face to face interaction.
If I missed any, let me know.
But let's put down 4 examples of how sat. is personal as well...and compare side by side and see if "personal" or "more personal" is really what we're talking about, or if it is simply a bias towards local that causes us to claim personal is the same?
Fair?
