Times Are Changing...

[Jock-O]

Atlanta radio definitely has more changes to come....but is it really change and is it gonna help for the better? Most people have been listening to XM ( which by the way is starting to phase out as well because they're adding more talk shows) and listening to CD's, MP3's, and Online streaming. Personalities in this market have been altered and/or recycled. So I don't know if this is changing for the better. Does anybody think local radio will eventually come to a breaking point where 99.9% of listeners will turn their ears away from tuning in?? Due to lack of entertainment...due to the poor economy....due to well, whatever else the big wigs have up their sleeves to ruin what used to be fun called RADIO?? What will corporate do? What will become of PPM? Just like the Matrix...every beginning has an end and eventually the system will crash. Thoughts?

 

[whit979]

Some thoughts, for what it's worth.

- I continue to dispute the idea that "most people" are listening to XM/MP3/CD/WWW. Show me the hard numbers that say at least 51% of all listeners are tuning to something other than radio, and I won't dispute it anymore. It's easy to forget about the non-vocal majority who *are* listening to radio, either because they don't care about those devices or cannot afford them. I say: Don't let yourself get fooled by marketing tricks and current fads. Just remember who your real audience is: They're the people who don't have the time or the money for Steve Jobs' latest dream.
- Agreed that Atlanta radio lacks real star power anymore when it comes to personalities. It is a market weakness for sure. Will it be remedied? Doubtful in the next few months, as budgets are slashed.
- Will 99.9% of listeners turn away from local radio? Not in our lifetime. When it comes to things such as this, there are three groups of people: Those who adopt new ideas first, those who adopt them at the peak of their popularity, and those who adopt them after they have become staples of society. We are far from the day when most of society turns away from radio. And, because of the free and widely-available nature of the medium, it would likely take a government mandate for people to even consider turning away from it. Doesn't matter how bad we radio gurus think the programming is. Most people--who are listening to radio for the pure entertainment factor or just to keep them company--don't care, save for the most egregious programming errors. Just because I don't like the programming on HGTV doesn't mean I'm going to throw out all of my television sets.
- Corporate will still be corporate. PPM will allow us to glean little tidbits of information from radio. Some will be surprised to find that PPM data is mostly data that we already--consciously or subconsciously--knew. I look forward to the day when PPM will uncover statistics on the relation of audio processing to cume and TSL.

Just my two cents...

 

[taylorengineer]

Radio is not going away but the technical means used to deliver radio is going to change.
Radio has evolved from spark gap transmitters to multichannel, digital, "HD" radio. The next step will be IP delivered audio over wireless services. The equipment is already here and in operation - who here has not at least tried a 3G card in their laptop or used a 3G enabled device of some sort?
With "flash" type storage devices in the gigs it won't be long until data "chunks" will be downloaded in your car radio and allow almost real time programming and minimize network congestion. We are in the infant moments of wireless IP - the world ten years from now might be much different.
The real question is just when the major broadcasters will have their "epiphany" and move to restrict access to the internet. I don't see any major broadcaster being happy about increased competition. They, with political/governmental complicity, will find the means to squash access for anyone not wealthy enough to "join the club."

 

[RTibbs]

I do listen to a lot of radio stations on my iphone. Out of town, state and country stations and also local AM stations. I think wi-fi is a real solution for the viability of AM stations down the road. Clearer signal no powering down.

 

[agentUrge]

Agreed on the wi-fi solution...lots of mobile devices are wi-fi ready...of course there are companies like big red that have yet to offer a device that's wifi ready (or at least a device that's wi-fi ability hasn't been disabled by the carrier) but I'm sure the demand will come. I'd rather buy an ipod touch and run slacker or some internet stream. Now if we can only come up with a better solution to get audio from the device to my stereo - fm modulators are teh suck.

 

[JoshuaC]

A lot of research I've seen seems to state that radio still is a powerful medium for a huge amount of any market. It vastly outranks newspaper (the only mainstream media I would agree is "dying"), and it paces as well against Television as it usually does. I think the rumors of Radio's death are greatly exaggerated.

Satellite Radio is having trouble already, only about a decade in. It's hard to justify a pay service in a crappy economy when the product is not actually all that much better than what you are getting on terrestrial radio.

Portable MP3 players are dropping in price, but $200 on a Mp3-doodad is still a rough decision to make to the guy who is struggling to make his next month's mortgage payment.

Same goes for Wi-Fi... a great idea but a new one which means it's going to be pricey. I heard something on the news the other day that consumer electronics choices for 2009 are likely going to be more about augmenting your existing devices than purchasing the next "big thing."

Radio has survived enough in the past century for me to believe that it will weather this crisis as well. I will grant you that it is VERY likely radio in 10 years time is going to be a different animal than it has been in the past. I agree with many of my age group in that multimedia content will ultimately be the way to go (whether we want it to be or not). Radio will need to be prepared for different methods of broadcasting, but the concept of broadcasting will survive. It's not that huge of a jump, especially for those current 20-somethings and 30-somethings who have grown up in a tech-savvy world, to patch our "air feeds" into internet streams and HD subchannels and whatever the next project is.

 

[RoddyFreeman]

The death of radio has been predicted forever, starting with the introduction of TV.

The fact that people forget when talking about the decline in programming is that AM and FM radio have a much better delivery method than the other devices. Virtually everyone has access to a radio. There's no buffering or anything else.

Radio's audience has not declined to the point where radio has had to provide better programming. If it got to that point, radio companies would have to improve the product. But by doing so, the delivery system would keep radio on top.

Radio's audience will be somewhat smaller in the future due to all the competing delivery methods. But it will still have more audience than any other form of audio. And yes, WiFi is a delivery method that can improve reception quality. But the day when you can get into your car and drive across town listening to streaming audio uninterrupted will not arrive for a while.

My radio blog: www.atlairwaves.blogspot.com

 

[jabba17]

I've said this before...terrestrial radio will always do better than just about anything else* for local news, weather, traffic, sports, local talk, and full-service/community affairs/HS sports, because of the ubiquity of radio sets and the limitations on satellite channels. You get D1-A (FBS) college and major league pro games on satellite, but not as much sportstalk, and forget about FCS college games or minor league pro games. Even in larger markets, satellite traffic and weather is a joke. You get reports immediately (not just at the top and bottom and on the fives), but they are often stale.

Similarly, terrestrial radio will always have a market among those without the means to pay for pay-radio or a wireless provider, such as ethnic markets (country, urban, Latino) and teen markets (alt, active rock, CHR).

*Having said that, I believe that satellite will be threatened by software defined radio (radio over wireless IP, such as WiMAX, etc.). People will quit paying for satellite when they can get it for "free" (or cheaper) over IP.

A friend of mine, who runs Play By Play Advertising (http://www.playbyplayadvertising.com/ ) used to run HS sports on Lake 102 (before they got sold and flipped to Latino), and also on local cable channels. Problem was, cable was too expensive, it was hard to sell spots across multiple cable companies (Charter, Comcast, and Adelphia, not counting multiple offices with different channel lineups), and if you had dish you were SOL. He has now gone strictly online--you can stream games live or download podcasts. Now anyone with broadband (even mobile broadband) can get his broadcasts.

Terrestrial radio will survive (including HD Radio, if iBiquity can get their act together and market it as aggressively as satellite has). Satellite will be a niche market in 10 years, relegated to those without reliable access to a wireless broadband Internet connection (rural customers, long-haul truckers, etc.--similar to DirecPC for broadband Internet)--although it's not impossible that Sirius XM could transition customers to a hybrid satellite/IP product. IP radio will be what does satellite in, with its choice of "free" and listener-paid options, including the ability to pick and choose those stations you pay for, as opposed to buying a package. Imagine a radio that could pick up streams of terrestrial stations, HD subchannels, satellite channels, and Internet (only) stations.

To Roddy's point, wireless broadband Internet good enough for streaming will have decent enough coverage (in large metro areas, along major interstates, etc.) in about 5 years, I'm guessing, with wide enough coverage to be a serious player in 10-15. It will come sooner than you think, if the economy permits.

 

[scottwoodside]

The only people that are listening to atlanta radio are the homeless. Why? They can't afford a freaking IPOD, or an internet connection or a ten dollar monthly fee to sirrius/xm. come on you know the atlanta radio market has always sucked! This is the worst radio market in America. Always has been and always will be. Thank God for new technology. Atlanta radio sucks!

Radio for the Homeless! I mean, why would anyone in their right mind listen to Atlanta radio and claim to like it? It's a joke!

 

[whit979]

Atlanta is certainly one of the more under-served markets in America. But we must all understand that the average listener does not care. For the person who has lived in or around Atlanta for most of his or her life, they know nothing of radio in other markets or are too indifferent to consciously turn away from it.

With regard to music, radio is still one of the better choices (if not the best) to stay up with new material. Where else are you going to go to discover new music?
MTV? No.
iTunes? Maybe, but then you have to pay.
XM? Maybe, but again, you have to pay.
MySpace? Maybe, but you have to wade through a lot of crap.

Talk radio could use some improvement but everybody knows that. Then again, that's another area where most people are probably indifferent.

And so what if we're programming to people who take the bus to work, spend a chunk of their paycheck on lotto tickets, and bust their butts to pay all of the bills each month? Their needs deserve to be taken into consideration just like any other human. If that was not the case, then television stations wouldn't bother broadcasting a free over-the-air signal. Has anyone noticed how many people have come out of the woodwork to buy converter boxes and ask questions ahead of the DTV transition? That tells you something right there.

 

[taylorengineer]

The only people that are listening to atlanta radio are the homeless. Why? They can't afford a freaking IPOD, or an internet connection or a ten dollar monthly fee to sirrius/xm. come on you know the atlanta radio market has always sucked! This is the worst radio market in America. Always has been and always will be. Thank God for new technology. Atlanta radio sucks!

Radio for the Homeless! I mean, why would anyone in their right mind listen to Atlanta radio and claim to like it? It's a joke!

That's why Tom Shane is in trouble. He's been trying to sell diamonds to homeless people.

 

[jabba17]

With regard to music, radio is still one of the better choices (if not the best) to stay up with new material. Where else are you going to go to discover new music?
MTV? No.
iTunes? Maybe, but then you have to pay.
XM? Maybe, but again, you have to pay.
MySpace? Maybe, but you have to wade through a lot of crap.

And so what if we're programming to people who take the bus to work, spend a chunk of their paycheck on lotto tickets, and bust their butts to pay all of the bills each month? Their needs deserve to be taken into consideration just like any other human. If that was not the case, then television stations wouldn't bother broadcasting a free over-the-air signal. Has anyone noticed how many people have come out of the woodwork to buy converter boxes and ask questions ahead of the DTV transition? That tells you something right there.

If you want to discover new music by old (70s/80s) artists, you're pretty much stuck with paid services like download services, satellite, or RoIP (radio over IP--yes, the station may be free but the connection isn't).

My daughter wants to know why MTV stands for "Music Television" when they don't play music.

I heard Joan Jett's 2006 cover of Sweet's "A.C.D.C." on Sirius XM's Underground Garage yesterday. You're NOT going to hear that on terrestrial radio, except maybe on a college radio show at a particular day and time. If you hear Joan Jett on terrestrial radio, it's going to be one of her five biggest hits from back in the day.