"Urban" myth or fact?

[nd2023]

In the mid 2000s when hip hop dominated top 40, the proportion of whites listening to "urban" stations was much higher.

 

[Ciao9999]

"Urban" is just a code word for Black, and it's sad that advertisers shy away from listeners based on color.

The "urban" term was, when adopted, considered to be more contemporary and all-encompassing than previous terms for African American targeted stations, such as "R&B" in the 60's, "Negro" in the late 50's and "race music" in the 40's and early 50's (these terms, as unfortunate as they seem today, were the broadly used ones at the time; consult Broadcasting Magazine or Broadcasting Yearbook for evidence. Looking at trade ads for WDIA is particularly enlightening.)

"Urban" is a reference to the music of such-named stations, particularly soul and Motown, which had sprung from the urban environments of the American cities with large Black populations.

If anything, the term made Black-targeted stations more appealing to advertisers.

This is not how people speak in real life. Of course the radio execs are going to insist why urban is the term that must be used. The rest of the population doesn't describe stations like that. Ask a listener, and they will identify Hip Hop, R&B, Old School, Gospel.

Even XM and Clear Channel know this. IHeartRadio doesn't list and "Urban" station on its menu, it lists Hip Hop and R&B.

 

[davideduardo]

This is not how people speak in real life.

Nobody said any differently. Format names, in general, are used for sales purposes to describe to agencies and advertisers what kind of station you are offering.

On air, stations tend to use more flamboyant terms, decorated with the utmost in hyperbole.

Of course the radio execs are going to insist why urban is the term that must be used.

No. Radio executives are going to desire the use of broadly understood terms and descriptors so that ad buyers can be reassured that a station that chooses a particular descriptor among Arbitron's station description options will represent what that term means nationally.

The rest of the population doesn't describe stations like that. Ask a listener, and they will identify Hip Hop, R&B, Old School, Gospel.

Yes, and station names and slogans that are given to an AC station in one market may be used at an Urban station in another or a CHR in still another. On air positioning and marketing is not what we are discussing.

 

[davideduardo]

In the mid 2000s when hip hop dominated top 40, the proportion of whites listening to "urban" stations was much higher.

I took four representative major, Top 15, markets where there is a significant African American population, and took a 6 book average on adults from 2005-2006 and then one from 6 PPM books prior to the new Arbitron policy issued two months ago which restricts data than can be publicly discussed. In other words, an 18 month average around 2005 and a 6 month one from late last year and early this year.

Aside from the extreme difference in methodology, I don't see any evidence that Urban stations got any greater non-African American listening then than they do now. In fact, the listening by non-core groups was actually lower back then.

The problem with doing this analysis is that the mid-2000's data is diary based, and the more current data is PPM based and really should not be compared conclusively. The first real issue in a comparison is that the PPM picks up random listening well... the stuff we used to call "phantom" cume... so perhaps many more non-African Americans listened all along, but we can't tell that. On a pure statistical analysis, Urbans had fewer non-African American listeners back in 2005 and surrounding years.

With that in mind as a caution and caveat, I did see some interesting numbers.

I looked at the Urban station or the leading Urban station if there was more than one. In all markets, the percentage of listening by African Americans was more in the 2005 era, and in two cases significantly more. Thus, at the height of the hip hop phenomenon, it appears that Urban stations may have actually lost non-Black listeners.

So, it can be said that, even with this small number of markets, that on average, the percentage of listening to Urbans by non-Blacks was lower 7 years or so ago than it is today. In some cases, it is radically lower today than it was back then.

The stations I looked at on 18+ were WEDR, KKDA, KBXX and WGXI. I avoided several markets where the competitive environment has changed so that the leading Urban station then is not the leading station now.

 

[Ai4i]

I thought that rating services categorize listeners by gender and age group only.
I have never seen a ratings report which divided listeners by their ethnicity.

 

[TimeIsTight]

In the mid 2000s when hip hop dominated top 40, the proportion of whites listening to "urban" stations was much higher

So, it can be said that, even with this small number of markets, that on average, the percentage of listening to Urbans by non-Blacks was lower 7 years or so ago than it is today. In some cases, it is radically lower today than it was back then.

I suspect that the difference here is an "age gap" and that further analysis would show that in the mid-2000s younger non-Blacks were hearing lots of hip hop on their favorite Top-40 station and regularly switching to the local "Urban" format to hear more of it. If you have ever watched a teenager work a car radio, when the music stops, they hit the button to look for something else they want to hear and they don't care if that other station is Classic Rock or "Urban" as long as it is playing music they like when their favorite station is not.

On the other hand, Hip Hop is a total turnoff to "most" people above a certain age. Many don't even consider it music. And that's where the line is drawn.

At the same time, and for the same reasons, but from longer ago, non-African Americans of the older demos may also show up in a non-Hip Hop "Urban" station's cume because many of the songs played are also familiar to them from their own Top-40 days, or have a similar rhythmic and jazzy sound.

Scanning the NYC FM dial on a Sunday, listeners of a certain age would come upon the late, and certainly great, Hal Jackson playing his "classics" on WBLS, or WRKS doing something competitively similar. They would play a lot of R&B classics that no longer make it to the "tight" playlists of "Classic Hits" formats, but are still very familiar, and a treat to hear, for former Top-40 listeners of a certain age and era.

So, we can have situations where older non-black listeners can be attracted to non-Hip Hop urban stations, and situations where younger non-black listeners can be attracted only to "urban" stations that offer Hip Hop. The confusion here is really in the use of the overly broad term of "Urban" to cover any format listened to predominantly by African Americans, without also being able to further describe demo and cultural differences at the same time. That's why, on the street, the use of the words Hip Hop conjures up one specific cultural image, and R&B, Old Skool, Quiet Storm, and, even, Jazz conjure up others.

The bottom line here is that "Urban" has become just a substitute term for "Black" and the jargonistic industry terms that various "Urban" radio stations use to further describe their formats make it harder for "knowledgeable" advertisers to pick up the specific cultural targets of those formats easily. There certainly are advertisers who would want nothing to do with most listeners of Hip Hop, and there are other advertisers who would specifically want to target a Hip Hop audience, and it's very possible the "Urban" radio industry has reasons why they don't want big general national advertisers to easily pick up on those differences from short written descriptions. They might just want to be included in the "urban" spot buys either way.

 

[davideduardo]

I thought that rating services categorize listeners by gender and age group only.
I have never seen a ratings report which divided listeners by their ethnicity.

Arbitron data can be broken out by daypart, hour range, age, gender, ethnicity, language preference (Hispanics only), geography (to the ZIP Code level), income, education and in many combinations.

This type of granularity of information increased with the PPM, but began to be abundant with the first electronic delivery of books back in the 90's, so we are approaching two decades of extreme detail. Even before that, each book had "Ethnic Composition" and I am looking right now at a 1990 LA book that has multiple pages of data about Black, Hispanic and "Other" listening percentages by station.

 

[davideduardo]

The confusion here is really in the use of the overly broad term of "Urban" to cover any format listened to predominantly by African Americans, without also being able to further describe demo and cultural differences at the same time....

The bottom line here is that "Urban" has become just a substitute term for "Black" and the jargonistic industry terms that various "Urban" radio stations use to further describe their formats make it harder for "knowledgeable" advertisers to pick up the specific cultural targets of those formats easily.

The fact is that Urban" is a term that replaced "r&b" back when it was recongnized that "r&b" did not encompass the new variants such as soul and Motown that made up the formats of contemporary Black targeted radio stations.

There never was any intent to make either "r&b" or "Urban" stand for anything other than "Black targeted." One of the major selling points for such stations was the ability to reach listeners that other stations did not deliver well, so they emphasized in their trade advertising their delivery of African American audiences.

When "Urban" developed variants, such as Urban AC, Arbitron split the classification so stations could self-select (Arbitron does not assign format names... the station picks them) the urban variant that best fit the format.

Today's "Urban Contemporary" format description covers r&b, hip-hop, the remnants of rap and all other components of a younger skewing Urban station. There is no need to change the format name every time the blend of styles changes as it is assumed that such a station will play whatever music is popular among 18-34 or 18-49 African Americans.

Just as the term "Contemporary Hit Radio" replaced "Top 40" in the 70's, we continue to use it with no variation despite moments when CHR leaned towards rock or dance or hip hop or rhythmic. It's understood that, while the hits may change in style, the format of the station is intended to cover those changes.

"Urban Contemporary" is basically "Contemporary Hits" but for a Black core. "Spanish Contemporary" (A misnomer of sorts) is a format of "Contemporary Hits" but for people who are Spanish speaking.

It is really quite clear.

Advertisers who use ratings at all clearly understand that "Urban Contemporary" indicates a station that is principally targeted at Blacks, although it may attract even sizable "other" and Hispanic audiences as well. They also know that "Urban Adult Contemporary" also targets African Americans, but that such a station will likely have almost no non-Black listeners.

"Knowledgable" advertisers placing multi-station buys first screen all stations to see if they meet the cost per point objectives and the demo target for the buy. Then they try to pick a combination of stations that gives optimum reach and frequency... adding one or more Black-targeted stations will usually increase reach quite nicely, making such a move an imperative.

Since music stations started to appear on the American radio landscape around 1950 (concurrent, to a great extent with the decline in the AFM and the indictment of Petrillo) such broadcast facilities have defined format descriptors to make time buying easier. When we had "MOR" stations buyers did not care if you played The Andrews Sisters but not Perry Como or did or dn't play Glenn Miller and Woody Herman, but that you were MOR and not "Country and Western" (still described by some stations in the 50's as "Hill Billy") or "Negro" or "Top 40." (Using the now-unfortunate term for Urban formats).

 

[Ciao9999]

Yes, and station names and slogans that are given to an AC station in one market may be used at an Urban station in another or a CHR in still another. On air positioning and marketing is not what we are discussing.


[/quote]

That's not what I was discussing either. Re-read the post. Look at the music category options on XM or I Heart Radio. None uses the word urban. Both direct listeners to Hip-Hop and R&B.

 

[davideduardo]

Yes, and station names and slogans that are given to an AC station in one market may be used at an Urban station in another or a CHR in still another. On air positioning and marketing is not what we are discussing.

That's not what I was discussing either. Re-read the post. Look at the music category options on XM or I Heart Radio. None uses the word urban. Both direct listeners to Hip-Hop and R&B.
[/quote]

XM and iHeart use consumer-specific terminology.

Names like "Urban Contemporary" and "Spanish Adult Hits" and "Contemporary Hit Radio" are used in the radio and advertising communities to facilitate communication for the purpose of buying and selling advertising. The standardized format names are a lingua franca that cuts through the hype and exaggeration used by stations, streams, satellite and such to attract listeners.

 

[Ai4i]

XM originally identified an "Urban" category, just checked my display, it is now "Hip-Hop/R&B".
Blues has always been in the jazz category and gospel was moved a few years back from what was then Urban into the new (@ the time) Christian category.

 

[TimeIsTight]

For what it's worth, if you look at the "Formats" discussion area of this website, there is one board for "CHR/Rhythmic/Hip-Hop" further described as "Rhythmic Current Hits" and in New York that would, presumably, include Hot 97 WQHT, and Power-105.1 WWPR.

On the WWPR website the station describes itself as "R&B and Only the Best Hip-Hop."

On the Hot 97 website, that station describes itself as " Hip Hop and R&B."

Then there is a separate discussion board on this website for "Urban/Urban AC/R&B Oldies" and in New York that would currently describe only WBLS. On its website WBLS describes itself as "Your Number-1 Source for R&B."

So all three stations claim to offer R&B, and on the Arbitron ratings list the two that also offer Hip Hop are listed only as "Urban" while the one that only offers "R&B" is listed as "Urban AC."

Then there is a third format discussion board on this website for "Rhythmic AC, Rhythmic Adult Contemporary" which in New York would be WKTU, which is part of the same Clear Channel cluster as WWPR, but certainly with different audience targets.

I think most of us who have listened to the New York stations, even only occasionally, can tell the differences between their formats and target audiences. I also suspect that most of the major national advertising buys on these stations are done by agency time buyers using sophisticated software that works using all the numbers, and that the short format descriptions don't really mean that much in the final decision making. The computers are doing all with numbers and algorithms.

And if the client's product and advertising managers have done their jobs, in many situations the additional data like age, income, education level, and even zip code might be part of the calculations. That's why WPLJ can have relatively low overall ratings but do just fine in billing thanks to all the upscale suburban soccer moms, that many advertisers covet, who listen.

And those same computer crunched additional numbers are among the reasons why "Urban" formats aren't doing as well as they used to. Time buyers are working with more sophisticated raw data, and infinitely better crunching abilities and however the stations may try to "obfuscate" the realities with these confusing short descriptions, the PPM numbers tell the tale to sophisticated software that pays no attention and isn't confused.

So listeners may call a station's format one thing, programmers another, and advertising buyers yet another, but what really matters are all the numbers generated, and the software knows who's listening from Scarsdale, and who is listening in Harlem, what their income is, what their education level is, and the kinds of things they buy and the, likely, lifestyle they live. Its all in the numbers and the words don't really matter all that much anymore. So the stations can describe themselves any way they want the computers will still know better.

 

[davideduardo]

So all three stations claim to offer R&B, and on the Arbitron ratings list the two that also offer Hip Hop are listed only as "Urban" while the one that only offers "R&B" is listed as "Urban AC."

The Arbitron ratings "list" on this site or on other radio sites use each website's own terms. Arbitron lists WBLS as Urban Adult Contemporary, WQHT as Rhythmic Contemporary Hits and WWPR as Urban Contemporary. That is the descriptor each selected from the list Arbitron accepts.

The fact that industry boards such as this one and All Access give a variety of names to formats gives testimony to the fact that, for sales, a standardized description is needed so that media buyers can understand clearly what they are getting.

I also suspect that most of the major national advertising buys on these stations are done by agency time buyers using sophisticated software that works using all the numbers, and that the short format descriptions don't really mean that much in the final decision making. The computers are doing all with numbers and algorithms.

The general way buys are done is based on rankers (where the format name is prominent in the Arbitron software) and the ability of each station to meet the cost per point the agency desires based on negotiation with the station and its rep firm. At some point, value added propositions are considered, and these are very format-based- After those stages, the campaign is usually optimized for reach and frequency, where the goal is to reach as many different people in the demo at the desired frequency as is possible within the budget; format is quite important in insuring optimal r&f.

And those same computer crunched additional numbers are among the reasons why "Urban" formats aren't doing as well as they used to. Time buyers are working with more sophisticated raw data, and infinitely better crunching abilities and however the stations may try to "obfuscate" the realities with these confusing short descriptions, the PPM numbers tell the tale to sophisticated software that pays no attention and isn't confused.

That's just wrong. The problem with Urban based formats in New York and some other markets has been the fact that the PPM revealed the large amount of rounding up that was done in the diary by the major ethnic listeners. While the PPM discovered larger cumes for general market stations, the Black and Hispanic targeted stations could not grow cume by much, but saw vastly diminished time spent listening and fared poorly in the initial PPM results.

In some markets, the initial loss of share by Urban stations was corrected by fixing obvious lax programming techniques; the Radio One stations in Houston decided the problem was their own, worked on it and they are now both in the top 5 billing stations in the market.

In New York, fragmentation dropped African American targeted stations below the diary levels and billing suffered. It had nothing to do with education and income levels and everything to do with ratings.

So listeners may call a station's format one thing, programmers another, and advertising buyers yet another, but what really matters are all the numbers generated, and the software knows who's listening from Scarsdale, and who is listening in Harlem, what their income is, what their education level is, and the kinds of things they buy and the, likely, lifestyle they live.

We have had that kind of computerized data going back nearly two decades... geography, income, ethnicity, age, gender. In fact, I recall selling with Arbitron Information on Demand (AID) in 1982... more cumbersome and slower, but the data was there.

The fact is that most buys are based on rank in the advertiser's target demo and the price the advertiser wants to pay for each gross ratings point. And that has been the case for many decades.

Its all in the numbers and the words don't really matter all that much anymore. So the stations can describe themselves any way they want the computers will still know better.

Actually, since the PPM came on the scene, we have seen enormous compression... meaning tiny differences in rating between stations and many stations at the same level. For example, in NYC there may be 5 to 6 stations in the 0.4 to 0.6 rating range, 6 to 8 stations at the 0.3 rating level, and another 6 to 8 at the 0.2 level thus accounting for the top 18 to 20 stations in the market. With so little to differentiate between stations, having a good array of formats to guarantee good reach is a major buying concern, as are things like service and promotion from the station, good relationships with the sellers and other intangibles.

The more compression there is, the more things like format differentiation and service matter.

 

[TimeIsTight]

That's just wrong. The problem with Urban based formats in New York and some other markets has been the fact that the PPM revealed the large amount of rounding up that was done in the diary by the major ethnic listeners.

From everything I have read, I would certainly agree that previous diary "rounding" was initially the biggest cause for the sharp drop in Urban station ratings when PPM was first adopted.

But, what I meant by "among the problems" is that going forward the more data that is available and ground up in the buying software algorithms, the more data like income, education level, and zip code, which tells a whole story all by itself, will become increasingly important. Unfortunately, "Urban" stations can find themselves at a competitive disadvantage for advertising certain products and services when those extra data points are part of the decision-making process.

Going way back to the 1970s, I knew several top-level consumer product managers, who had started their careers as number crunching media buyers at the biggest, and best known, ad shops on Madison Avenue. That was in the days when they did their crunching on mechanical adding machines. Even then, their product marketing plans included lifestyle, income, education, area of residence, profession etc. along with target age demo.

There was a difference between a Chevy or Ford buyer, and somebody who bought Cadillacs, Lincolns and Chrysler Imperials and you bought different media to reach the right group. A typical Wal-mart shopper doesn't consume the same media as a typical Bloomingdales or Nordstrom's shopper. And so it is for a whole range of products and service throughout the economy.

On TV, the audience changes from show to show. In newspapers, there are tabloids to reach one end of the socio-economic scale and the prestigious broadsheets that reach the other. Magazines offer every market niche imaginable. And in radio the format offers clues, and the PPM data can offer a lot of specifics. And it is very necessary for radio to offer as much of this specific data as possible, since web ads can target specifically at certain zip codes, or other data points, with great efficiency. Audience target specificity is what is needed, and using broad and confusing umbrella terms for radio formats isn't helpful.

 

[davideduardo]

From everything I have read, I would certainly agree that previous diary "rounding" was initially the biggest cause for the sharp drop in Urban station ratings when PPM was first adopted.

The impact was caused as much by the lower potential cume ceiling as by the more realistic TSL information. When the always-talked-about phantom cume became visible via the PPM, general market stations had huge secondary cume growth. Stations whose potential audience was limited to 20% of the market, as with African American targeted stations in New York, did not benefit as much from this, and thus slipped in rank.

And it is very necessary for radio to offer as much of this specific data as possible, since web ads can target specifically at certain zip codes, or other data points, with great efficiency. Audience target specificity is what is needed, and using broad and confusing umbrella terms for radio formats isn't helpful.

As I said, agencies and, of course, stations, have had easy access in the Arbitron survey itself to data on geography, ethnicity, age, gender, income and education for a period going on two decades. Through services like Tapscan and Scarborough we have or have had data on things ranging from kind of sporting events attended to intent to buy a car soon.