The Song in Indy is Gone

[radioelizabeth]

Radio Elizabeth, do you have a program that's picked up by stations via satellite? If so, no wonder you're jamming the idea that national radio can be as personal as local radio. If you truly want to have a personal connection with your listeners, pick the market where you'd like to work that has a CCM station and apply for a job. That will be personal radio.

I'm a little confused by this statement. I've never once suggested that local radio is not personal, or positive, or a good thing.

I've also not once suggested that there is an agenda or bias with my perspective.

I am however suggesting that there is a bias...against sat. radio.

I'm trying to dig deeper to determine exactly why that is. So far "personal" is not what I'm hearing.

hometown, local, live is.

but that does not necessarily make something more "personal".

Your personal comments are not focused on the discussion, but rather an attempt to suggest I need to work at a local CCM to understand "personal" radio. And, as you said earlier, you don't know me...how can you make such a statement?

My experience in local markets has garnered me consistent #1 ratings with the target, so to suggest I don't have experience to know how personal local radio can be is a false assumption.

I've also worked for companies that have national sat. feeds...and I can tell you, "personal" is not the correct word for the discussion.

It's perfectly acceptable to have a preference to one style and not another, but let's just get to the heart of what the preference really is...and in my experience, "personal" is not what it is about.

 

[radioelizabeth]

I agree with MightyFrenchman...

Have you seen her last two or three emails??? Someone has a lot of time
on their hands...wow!

Are you suggesting that contributing to a discussion on a radio board within a couple days is a negative way to spend time in the industry?

If a discussion stays on topic, and doesn't tangent into a personal attack on character, there is much benefit that can come to all.

If I choose to spend a half an hour scoping a board or two, and in that process get someone thinking about something differently, I'd say that is a pretty positive use of time.

You may disagree, but I would submit my posts have had more meat than a two line personal slam against someone who's calendar you know nothing about.

just a thought.

 

[justalurker]

Is it worth fixing the quoting to respond? <sigh>

... 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.

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.

One more time ... this time don't miss any words. Particularly toward the end of what you quoted.

The local jock only has to concentrate on their own area. Perhaps they never made it to Benton Harbor, but they saw the TV coverage of the snowfall and the morning paper. And they TALK to others at the station who have made it to Benton Harbor. The odds of a local jock, even a new hire, knowing about a city within their listening area is higher than a satellite voice who could, quite frankly, care less were Benton Harbor is.

... 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.

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?

It depends. You have not named the regard. Is the satellite DJ more personal because they have a better education, perhaps a PhD or have training that helps them with the topic of the show? What's personal about someone possibly thousands miles away who (quite often) won't tell you where they are unless you put them on the spot? What is next, VT outsourced to Banglador?

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.

Once again you dismiss what a satellite voice cannot do as if it isn't important. I thought that girl on the radio liked me, but she wouldn't give me the time of day.

 

[justalurker]

My experience in local markets has garnered me consistent #1 ratings with the target, so to suggest I don't have experience to know how personal local radio can be is a false assumption.

This being a religious forum I had hoped that there were more important goals than getting people to listen longer. There are a lot of mega-churches that don't preach the Gospel out of fear that they will lose membership. Bigger isn't always better.

Getting involved somewhere in the community helps tie a person in. You probably do stuff where you live, but unless you are the busiest woman on earth you can't be everywhere. An occasional trip (if any) to each market you serve is no replacement for living with your listeners.

 

[radioelizabeth]

Is it worth fixing the quoting to respond? <sigh>

There is a limit to the number of characters, I was hoping you would do the edit, rather than I. Thanks.

... 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.

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.

One more time ... this time don't miss any words. Particularly toward the end of what you quoted.

No, I read that...and the statement still stands...but you elaborate below...so I'll just touch it there...

The local jock only has to concentrate on their own area. Perhaps they never made it to Benton Harbor, but they saw the TV coverage of the snowfall and the morning paper. And they TALK to others at the station who have made it to Benton Harbor. The odds of a local jock, even a new hire, knowing about a city within their listening area is higher than a satellite voice who could, quite frankly, care less were Benton Harbor is.

This assumes the jock is good at what they do. Again, let's compare the best to the best...ok, if the best, most talented jock who realizes that local flavor is what the station is after does their research and takes the "hometown" mentality to heart, then we can say that the local jock has an advantage over the sat. jock in being more hometown. I'd say they have a different connect with their listeners, definitely. But again, I don't suggest that hometown necessarily means more personal, as much as it means personal in a different way.

Again, I'm in no way suggesting hometown does not add a different flavor in the broadcast day, but is that flavor necessarily "personal"? Or is it simply connecting to a different heart string that sat. does not always connect to? Let's for the sake of the discussion compare "hometown" to those hand written letters (again, the extreme example for argument's sake).

Station A is local and the quality jock connects with hometown flare.
Station B is sat. and the quality jock writes a personal note to a listener.

Who of the two is "more personal"?

... 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.

Perhaps, as new talent local or sat. would be doing the same...the only difference is one does it locally, the other does it in another ways.

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?

It depends. You have not named the regard. Is the satellite DJ more personal because they have a better education, perhaps a PhD or have training that helps them with the topic of the show? What's personal about someone possibly thousands miles away who (quite often) won't tell you where they are unless you put them on the spot? What is next, VT outsourced to Banglador?

I gave one example. Let's give another. Remember, we're hoping both jocks have the talent, training and education to connect personally, regardless. That way, we don't have any other variables working except the local/sat difference. Fair?

Station A is local and uses the break to talk about the weather.
Station B is sat. and uses the break to send up prayer.

Which station is "more personal"?

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.

Once again you dismiss what a satellite voice cannot do as if it isn't important. I thought that girl on the radio liked me, but she wouldn't give me the time of day.


I don't suggest it isn't important. I'm suggesting that it isn't what makes a station more "personal". A sat. station may not be able to give local traffic and weather, but again...let's go to the comparison above. If a sat station does something else to compensate that IS personal that the local station does not do...then we've got a tie...so side by side, weather and traffic can't be the only things determining what makes something "more", especially because many local stations aren't very personal about that anyway. We shouldn't have to lower the bar to discover that...it's just the logical deduction.

 

[radioelizabeth]

My experience in local markets has garnered me consistent #1 ratings with the target, so to suggest I don't have experience to know how personal local radio can be is a false assumption.

This being a religious forum I had hoped that there were more important goals than getting people to listen longer. There are a lot of mega-churches that don't preach the Gospel out of fear that they will lose membership. Bigger isn't always better.

I'm not sure I understand why religious radio would have a more important goal than having more people listening more often and listening longer? I mean, it is radio isn't it? And if it's radio, regardless of the format, bigger is better...because bigger implies a greater reach. If impact and ministry is the concern, certainly that is a priority...and I never discounted that. I also never suggested a comparison to church or that fear ought to be a driving force in programming. My statement was in response to the post that suggested I needed experience to know what I was talking about. I think I've proven effectively, I have it.


Getting involved somewhere in the community helps tie a person in. You probably do stuff where you live, but unless you are the busiest woman on earth you can't be everywhere. An occasional trip (if any) to each market you serve is no replacement for living with your listeners.

Of course involvement in the community matters. I've never suggested otherwise. I'm simply digging into the statement that this makes one "more personal" than the other. I have maintained it is simply a different personal connection. There are advantages to both.

Let me state again, so there is no mistake...I am FOR local radio. But I am MORE FOR quality radio, regardless. Local or sat makes little difference to me as long as we are talking about GREAT RADIO. I do not have a preference for anything other than GREAT RADIO...and I'd like to dismantle some of the bias that seems to exist when talking about the pros and cons.

Let's put two GREAT RADIO stations side by side and compare the GREAT things they do and encourage each other to that end. Local can then learn from sat, sat can then learn from local and everyone wins.

But if we continue to assume one is "more" this or that and we use the wrong terms after, we've hit a wall in the discussion.

More Personal are simply not the words we should be using here, in my opinion...because we haven't shown that hometown, weather/traffic, and living in the geographic area makes a jock more personal than another.

Let's instead talk about what makes a jock more personal, regardless of if they are local or not...then we all improve, and both local and sat become GREAT RADIO.

 

[neutralobserver]

There are a lot of mega-churches that don't preach the Gospel out of fear that they will lose membership.

Please name them. Having said "there are a lot," I assume you have a list standing ready.

 

[justalurker]

No, I read that...and the statement still stands...

Listen, Elizabeth. You cannot continue to ignore what I write and try to force your point by repitition. Your statement falls apart when one considers the entire quote.

This assumes the jock is good at what they do.

And you love making assumptions. Anything to make your side look better than anything else.

Station A is local and uses the break to talk about the weather.
Station B is sat. and uses the break to send up prayer.

Which station is "more personal"?

Station C, that does BOTH in the same break in a relevant way.

If a sat station does something else to compensate that IS personal that the local station does not do...then we've got a tie...

And once again you ASSUME that the local station is a bad one. The local station can do BOTH. They don't have to compensate for their failures the way a satellite voice has to compensate.

Name anything that a satellite station can do to "compensate" and it will be something that a local station can do as well. Which STILL leaves the local station ahead.

I think I've proven effectively, I have it.

You have a huge following. So do the megachurches with weak Gospel messages. It doesn't matter how many people are following the piper if they are on the wrong path.

Let's instead talk about what makes a jock more personal, regardless of if they are local or not...then we all improve, and both local and sat become GREAT RADIO.

Does that mean that you are ready to conceed that a local station can do everything a satellite station can do, and more?

You have conceeded that there are limits to what a satellite station can do. Any localization has to be overlayed or inserted. You can't tell time the way a person on the street or in the office would tell time. Satellite must compromise.

What are the limits of local radio? Money? Given enough a local station could hire someone just as talented (if not more so) than the satellite voice. Dedication? That is up to the jock and the direction they get. A handwritten note can come from a local jock as well. Perhaps even with a tour of the studio and a photograph in the room where the magic happens. They may even run into you in Target (or Macy's, depending on lifestyle). Or better yet, at church.

How about at a station concert or a remote. Sure, pipe in that some stations don't do those but remember we are talking about the best stations, not the worst. Does a satellite voice get out much? Perhaps swing through town for a sharathon or big event? Or is it always a voice in the box who goes everywhere (GMA, NRB, overseas missions trips, etc) but not where the listener goes?

Please, conceed the "more". I know you don't want to. I can tell from your writing that there is always one more nit to pick on a local station to make satellite look better ... but all things being equal local stations can do everything satellite can do, and more.

 

[justalurker]

There are a lot of mega-churches that don't preach the Gospel out of fear that they will lose membership.

Please name them. Having said "there are a lot," I assume you have a list standing ready.

I'm not here to out churches. I'm here to discuss radio.

 

[radioelizabeth]

No, I read that...and the statement still stands...

Listen, Elizabeth. You cannot continue to ignore what I write and try to force your point by repitition. Your statement falls apart when one considers the entire quote.

How so? The quote originally spoke of the talent being more personal because they either were there or met someone who was...my statement stands that new talent from another market faces this same challenge whether local or not. New talent still has to get familiar, so to suggest local is more personal because they know someone locally won't cut it. Because what if the sat. jock knows 10 people from that area? What if they are from that area? What if they have family in every town coast to coast. I'm simply breaking down the analogy. Since the example went further...I elaborated as well.



This assumes the jock is good at what they do.

And you love making assumptions. Anything to make your side look better than anything else.

Of course I'm going to assume the jock is good at what they do. If we are going to compare side by side, then we must assume both jocks are good at what they do.

Regarding my side? I'm not in a fight here for sides. It was my understanding we were having discussion. I've already stated my position is for GREAT RADIO either way. I'm simply not seeing that one beats the other out for more personal.


Station A is local and uses the break to talk about the weather.
Station B is sat. and uses the break to send up prayer.

Which station is "more personal"?

Station C, that does BOTH in the same break in a relevant way.

So you added a new variable. If we are suggesting that one is "more" than the other, than we can only compare the two. To add a third station into the discussion now, assumes that both are at least personal things to do...ok, so without station C, we've got a tie.


If a sat station does something else to compensate that IS personal that the local station does not do...then we've got a tie...

And once again you ASSUME that the local station is a bad one. The local station can do BOTH. They don't have to compensate for their failures the way a satellite voice has to compensate.

I didn't assume it was a bad station. I assumed both jocks were talented. I bring no other variable. What if station A, that is local, opts to not have prayer breaks or doesn't have the time to send out letters, but Station B does...you assume failures with satellite without actually showing they failed here.

Name anything that a satellite station can do to "compensate" and it will be something that a local station can do as well. Which STILL leaves the local station ahead.

Money. Resource. Time. Energy. Let's say the satellite station has employed enough people to allow each talent the time to send those personal notes. Station A simply does not have that resource. Now, certainly Station A, that is local, may still be able to do this, but if we are going to go side by side...we already know that there are advantages to satellite that local doesn't have...including staffing....so, if both start with the same budget, one does have an advantage of reach as well.

You say "ahead", but how is it "ahead"?

I think I've proven effectively, I have it.

You have a huge following. So do the megachurches with weak Gospel messages. It doesn't matter how many people are following the piper if they are on the wrong path.

Wait a minute, I was responding to a specific comment on my experience to speak on radio being personal at a local level. I've not once suggested a weak Gospel message or the wrong path. Your comparison to that and my success is unmerited and not following our discussion.

Let's instead talk about what makes a jock more personal, regardless of if they are local or not...then we all improve, and both local and sat become GREAT RADIO.

Does that mean that you are ready to conceed that a local station can do everything a satellite station can do, and more?

No. Because a local station can't. Not always. And even if they could do many of the things a sat. station could, that would not necessarily make them "more personal" than the sat. station. Again, I'm not debating which is better or worse, I'm suggesting our word choice is incorrect.

If we are going to determine why one is opted over another, let's at least be fair.

You have conceeded that there are limits to what a satellite station can do. Any localization has to be overlayed or inserted. You can't tell time the way a person on the street or in the office would tell time. Satellite must compromise.

Tell me how saying 10 after 10 is different from 10 after? In honesty, if we are speaking of brievity in the break, I don't need you to tell me what minute it is, I need to know if I'm going to be late for work. Again, if the discussion is more personal, sat. does not need to compromise, they simply need to find other ways to do it.

What are the limits of local radio? Money? Given enough a local station could hire someone just as talented (if not more so) than the satellite voice. Dedication? That is up to the jock and the direction they get. A handwritten note can come from a local jock as well. Perhaps even with a tour of the studio and a photograph in the room where the magic happens. They may even run into you in Target (or Macy's, depending on lifestyle). Or better yet, at church.

Certainly if a local station is equipped they can do these things. Of course. Let's assume both have equal resources at their disposal...we still aren't showing that local is more personal...because again, sat. can still be personal...but just doing it in different ways. Maybe not at the local Target, but they can connect personally.

How about at a station concert or a remote. Sure, pipe in that some stations don't do those but remember we are talking about the best stations, not the worst. Does a satellite voice get out much? Perhaps swing through town for a sharathon or big event? Or is it always a voice in the box who goes everywhere (GMA, NRB, overseas missions trips, etc) but not where the listener goes?

You're talking about events, which I already addressed. If a sat. station can't be at an event, that does not mean they can't find another way to be personal.

Please, conceed the "more". I know you don't want to. I can tell from your writing that there is always one more nit to pick on a local station to make satellite look better ... but all things being equal local stations can do everything satellite can do, and more.

First, I have not nit picked on local at all. It's a false assumption you are making. I've consistently stated that my issue is with the word "personal". You want to say that local is better at doing live events in the community...fine. But to suggest that alone makes them "more personal" as a broadcast station I won't concede...because where one station adds hometown flavor, another might opt for a different approach...and BOTH can be personal.

Again, Dave Ramsey is PERSONAL...He is not local. That is one example. I suggest that many of the air talents on sat. feeds have connected personally to their listeners, regardless of being local. To suggest local has cornered that market is in error.

 

[radioelizabeth]

There are a lot of mega-churches that don't preach the Gospel out of fear that they will lose membership.

Please name them. Having said "there are a lot," I assume you have a list standing ready.

I'm not here to out churches. I'm here to discuss radio.

Then why did you bring up mega churches?

 

[neutralobserver]

There are a lot of mega-churches that don't preach the Gospel out of fear that they will lose membership.

Please name them. Having said "there are a lot," I assume you have a list standing ready.

I'm not here to out churches. I'm here to discuss radio.

Then you shouldn't have made the nebulous charge...and then made it again:

So do the megachurches with weak Gospel messages.

Which ones are these? Name them!

 

[justalurker]

Station A is local and uses the break to talk about the weather.
Station B is sat. and uses the break to send up prayer.

Which station is "more personal"?

Station C, that does BOTH in the same break in a relevant way.

So you added a new variable. If we are suggesting that one is "more" than the other, than we can only compare the two. To add a third station into the discussion now, assumes that both are at least personal things to do...ok, so without station C, we've got a tie.

It is a variable that you REFUSE to accept. Local stations CAN do both ... satellite CANNOT. So you dismiss station C and limit the power of local radio to fit your arguement.

Name anything that a satellite station can do to "compensate" and it will be something that a local station can do as well. Which STILL leaves the local station ahead.

Money. Resource. Time. Energy. Let's say the satellite station has employed enough people to allow each talent the time to send those personal notes. Station A simply does not have that resource. Now, certainly Station A, that is local, may still be able to do this, but if we are going to go side by side...we already know that there are advantages to satellite that local doesn't have...including staffing....so, if both start with the same budget, one does have an advantage of reach as well.

So you are honestly saying that a satellite station with the same budget as a local station can reach more people and individually minister to them than a local station committed to it's own market? Perhaps if they don't have to pay the affliate's costs of building and maintaining the local stations. Perhaps they can pay some of those staffers to write the personally handwritten notes to listeners for the DJs? That certainly would give the jock more time to service other stations.

No. Because a local station can't. Not always. And even if they could do many of the things a sat. station could, that would not necessarily make them "more personal" than the sat. station. Again, I'm not debating which is better or worse, I'm suggesting our word choice is incorrect.

And I believe you are hung up on a word. It must be burning at you that people consider local radio more personal than satellite or you wouldn't waste your time on that word. You are also downplaying the abilities of the local station, again. In your mind local radio cannot do some mystical thing that satellite can do. The only thing that comes to my mind is be everywhere at once - which is more potential listeners but no guarantee of a personal connection with any of them.

Tell me how saying 10 after 10 is different from 10 after? In honesty, if we are speaking of brievity in the break, I don't need you to tell me what minute it is, I need to know if I'm going to be late for work.

If I wake up to you saying "10 after" I need to check another source to find out if I'm late for work because you have not told me if it is "10 after 8" or "10 after 9". You expect me to know the hour? I'm a night person, I'm lucky to know my name at that time in the morning!

But of course, that's my problem. Not the problem of the satellite jock several states away. Another example of the disconnect between the jock and the listener. And the same issue comes up when it's time to go home. I'm watching that clock tick toward 5pm while a California jock is just getting started on his afternoon. Later on California listeners are getting out in their cars while East coast jocks are settling in for a relaxing evening (or are already home with the kids with a VT playing). How do you serve both? Go for average ... aloof and bland. Talk about anything except what the listener is doing right now.

I'd rather have a jock that knows that people are getting off work in their market in 10 minutes than one who needs to curb their excitement because they know other people still have three hours to go or went home three hours ago. The hour matters.

You're talking about events, which I already addressed. If a sat. station can't be at an event, that does not mean they can't find another way to be personal.

And yet you still dismiss that a local station doesn't NEED the other ways. They can do both. Satellite can't.

Again, Dave Ramsey is PERSONAL...He is not local. That is one example. I suggest that many of the air talents on sat. feeds have connected personally to their listeners, regardless of being local.

Dave never tells the lie that he is in Chicago unless he happens to be in Chicago. He runs a national radio program as a national radio program - not as a personalized satellite feed to his many affiliates. The most he allows is bumpers in and out of breaks where he will provide voiceovers to tie the station into the national feed. He never tries to give the impression that he is at any station he is broadcasting through (unless he truely is at that station).

You cannot say that about all satellite voices. There are too many feeds out there with magic calls and quick calls that are supposed to blend with the satellite feed and "make it sound local". One of the biggest selling points of those feeds to affilates is that they will try to sound local through use of liners and other overplays/inserts. You can even hire the satellite voices to do production for you ... just like a local station would have their DJs produce spots (although some voices won't produce, they will only voice and leave the production up to the station).

Dave Ramsey is excellent and connects, which is why I brought him and Rush Limbaugh up in the conversation. But it is a different kind of radio. The mask is off and everyone knows that when Dave mentions the two feet of snow in Benton Harbor he likely needed a map to find the city. There is no pretence. And his listeners in California can accept talk about snow in Michigan because they are told every hour that Dave is in Tennessee.

To suggest local has cornered that market is in error.

To suggest that I said they had is a lie. Both types of radio make personal contact, but as stated until my keyboard wears out, satellite radio is limited in ways that does not affect local radio.

Then why did you bring up mega churches?

Because they can be like satellite radio ... a mile wide and an inch deep. I'm not going to name the worst of the satellite voices either. It would be impolite.


[Note: some posts have been relocated to TIO: See redirection topic in this board.]

 

[neutralobserver]

...and Indy has no station that can celebrate with Coach Dungy in the full context of how he is celebrating....

 

[justalurker]

...and Indy has no station that can celebrate with Coach Dungy in the full context of how he is celebrating....

True. There is always some sports star thanking God and his momma on TV after a victory but it was pretty clear, even on CBS coverage, that this was not the ordinary flipant reference.

I couldn't help remembering the movie "Facing the Giants" when it was all over. The game wasn't as close and the opposing team (Chicago) wasn't heathonistically run like the Giants were portrayed, but it was nice to see team leadership openly profess more than a passing interest in God and have other commentary (how Dungy ran practices) back up their commitments. Win or lose they were ready to give glory to God.