the state of radio today

[TheBigA]

How does radio compete if it's just a bad version of Spotify?

Radio competes because it's omnipresent. It doesn't require an internet or cell connection. It's free. No username or password. If you have a device, you can receive it. In today's world, with the potential for identity theft, there's value in something that doesn't require a subscription.

On the other hand, there are things Spotify does that radio can never do. Listeners want to skip songs. They can't do that with radio. Listeners want to make their own playlists. They can't do that with radio.

Radio was doing unhosted music formats dozens of years before there ever was a Spotify. If there's an audience for it, and it attracts advertising, then it's worth doing. This idea that all of radio was once live and locally hosted is mythology.

What is between the songs is what differentiates radio from those streaming services. And a big part of that is who is on the air and what they have to say that is interest to the listener.

I can be, or it can be an interruption. It depends on the listener. Those of us who work in the business know that not all listeners want the same thing. So the job of a programmer is to anticipate that, and have options available for multiple needs.

 

[b-turner]

And it is a myth that when there was a warm body in the studio very hour that radio was better. Many, many of the jocks were not that good or cared or weren't lazy. Nothing worse than a warm body running the top of hour ID, plays a song, then one commercial they hit dead and no re-entry....rinse and repeat. 45 minutes later the jock has not said a word and instead of bunching commercial breaks as they are shown on the program log. That was all too typical. The pros, they were exceptional given they had to make everything happen.

 

[TheBigA]

And it is a myth that when there was a warm body in the studio very hour that radio was better. Many, many of the jocks were not that good or cared or weren't lazy.

Correct. Many were there for one reason: They had a 1st class FCC license, so they could operate the transmitter. Once transmitters could be run by automation, which may have been in the late 70s, that person was no longer necessary. That's what led to stations running syndicated programming at night. Long John Nebel and Larry King were beneficiaries.

 

[Bongwater]

I called an Uber to the bar. First the driver had on wzzo playing a shinedown song which was just awful. Then they had a breaker/promo. He did not have the patience to listen to it fully, and turned to 99.9, The Cars Magic was on. When that ended they had the 99,9 promo, He turned it to some Philly station. By then I reached my destination. Point is some people don.t care about any breaks on the radio. They just keep switching as soon as the music stops.

What you've witnessed is actually quite normal. People will often zap between stations when they're driving alone the nanosecond a spot break begins. But to do that as a cab or Uber driver would be downright annoying.

 

[davideduardo]

Move away from music completely or finally succeed in convincing Madison Avenue that older listeners are worth their effort to reach.

It's not "Madison Avenue" that determines to buy ad time only against people under 55. It's the clients of the ad agencies that cite their research and the multiple reasons why it is generally not particularly profitable to target older people.

Those clients have, in some cases like Proctor & Gamble, hundreds of millions of dollars worth of research, test marketing, brand preference studies and the like that show them that there is no significant value in specifically targeting older persons.

That way, radio can super-serve the 55+ crowd without destroying its advertising base by programming music with strong appeal to older listeners.

But there is no advertising base there. CBS TV spent years and millions trying to convince advertisers (not their agencies) to go after at least 25-64 demos instead of TV's customary 18-49 metric. No luck.

 

[TheBigA]

CBS TV spent years and millions trying to convince advertisers (not their agencies) to go after at least 25-64 demos instead of TV's customary 18-49 metric. No luck.

Which is why they're now focusing on building their streaming platform that's based on viewer subscription rather than advertising.

 

[davideduardo]

Correct. Many were there for one reason: They had a 1st class FCC license, so they could operate the transmitter.

In "the old days" most transmitters could be operated by a "fill in your name" 3rd Class FCC license. Only directional AMs required a 1st Ticket when operating in directional mode. By the mid-70's, even stable directional could be run by a 3rd Ticket operator, meaning "anyone".

And many stations that ran syndicated programming had the right license holder just running the board.

Once transmitters could be run by automation, which may have been in the late 70s, that person was no longer necessary.

For most stations, even in the early 60's a 3rd Ticket was enough. Even way back then, only directional AMs and higher power non-directionals required a 1st Ticket.

That's what led to stations running syndicated programming at night. Long John Nebel and Larry King were beneficiaries.

But it was not until much later that a live body was not required. For example, there were companies in the 80's that would take the required regular transmitter readings remotely; the restriction was long distance phone cost.

The reason stations would run those syndicated shows was the same reason that stations take syndicated shows now: they either cost less or they are much better than what can be done locally... or both.

 

[davideduardo]

Which is why they're now focusing on building their streaming platform that's based on viewer subscription rather than advertising.

As is evident from the Paramouny+ addition of quite a few shows now that were produced only for the streaming platform and will not run on over the air TV.

 

[secondchoice]

As is evident from the Paramouny+ addition of quite a few shows now that were produced only for the streaming platform and will not run on over the air TV.

I guess it costs extra to produce two versions: one with profanity and one without for OTA.

 

[Steve Green NEPA]

The insistence here is me keep harping on something for reference that I read twenty years ago on another radio-discussion forum.
A talk-show host who is no longer among us (Bob Smith of WXXI Radio in Rochester NY) was a frequent contributor to the site. QUITE far back he had noted on some source a decline in listenership 12-17, and pointed it out.
Don't ask which 'source'; it was 20 years ago! I've harped on that very observation every chance I've been given, and not ONCE have I read about anyone disputing that initial claim.
Now, he and I always got on real well, eMails, a few telephone chats (which means squat, I realize). But disregard that association. My point is, that culpable 12-17 erosion began long before any of the 2025 myriad distractions and alternatives to radio existed. And when the math is done, figure that the original 12-17 desertion now includes people between 35 and 45, followed astray by younger radio listeners.
(I blame the newer music. Your mileage will vary, and rightly so.)

 

[davideduardo]

My point is, that culpable 12-17 erosion began long before any of the 2025 myriad distractions and alternatives to radio existed. And when the math is done, figure that the original 12-17 desertion now includes people between 35 and 45, followed astray by younger radio listeners.
(I blame the newer music. Your mileage will vary, and rightly so.)

The teen and 18-34 erosion is due to the combination of the internet and the smartphone. It has nothing to do with the music, as each generation has its own preferences.