What if a station played a more indivualized playlist?

[tall_guy1]

With more and more stations having a more homogenized sound across the country, what if played catchy sounding music that was their very own? For example, an alternative station could play something rogue wave-lake Michigan as a gold title or maybe something new that no one else is. Or an active/alt could play something like mae-anything or seven-sunny day real estate. Obviously there's some stations that benefit from a tried and true recipe (Chrs for example, but not always), but I think there's some room for underperforming stations to experiment, so long as they keep a certain number of songs (300-600), and people will get to know the songs being played. Have stations experimented that way before? For the most part I see stations playing it safe.

 

[davideduardo]

With more and more stations having a more homogenized sound across the country, what if played catchy sounding music that was their very own? For example, an alternative station could play something rogue wave-lake Michigan as a gold title or maybe something new that no one else is. Obviously there's some stations that benefit from a tried and true recipe (Chrs for example, but not always), but I think there's some room for underperforming stations to experiment, so long as they keep a certain number of songs (300-600), and people will get to know the songs being played. Have stations experimented that way before? For the most part I see stations playing it safe.

"Playing what listeners like" is not just "playing it safe". Stations use research to determine what to play, except for brand new songs that can't be researched. So whatever recurrents and gold a station plays in most larger and rated markets is determined by asking listeners how much they want to hear a song by radio or stream today.

The number of songs played in the library is determined by how many total songs "pass" the music test.

The reason why playlists are so similar across the country is that much of our exposure to music is national via TV, streams and other national media.

 

[TheBigA]

I think there's some room for underperforming stations to experiment, so long as they keep a certain number of songs (300-600), and people will get to know the songs being played. Have stations experimented that way before?

Those that do tend to remain underperforming. Let's just talk about music for a minute. Why do some bands become world famous and others remain limited playing in small clubs, traveling from show to show in a van. Is it because their music has a small but dedicated audience? If that's the case, and they can make enough money from that small & dedicated audience to pay their bills, then why do they need world domination? Why do they need that aggravation?

So now, back to radio, is it possible for radio to pay their bills with a small but dedicated audience? Some can if they keep their costs low. But if we're talking about radio stations that are owned by investment companies, they have to deliver higher profits every year or their stock drops. That's the reason why a lot of radio stations stick with familiar favorites. They operate with a different business model than those small bands driving around the country in a van, playing in small clubs.

 

[boombox4]

The biggest problem I see with individualized playlists on stations is that listeners already have that on even a more personal, individualized level, with the streaming services. So stations try to stick with the tried an true because they already know they're competing with Spotify and Pandora.

 

[gr8oldies]

Unlike folks who frequent a board like this, for most people "an individual playlist" isn't filled with obscure songs, it's about sounds for an activity or a mood. My workout playlist, my work playlist, etc etc.

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

Post after post seems to amount to a variation on “why aren’t stations catering to just me.”

The “homogenized” trope is quite tedious at this point. Think of an average listener. That’s not being insulting to say average. Do you think anyone really knows or cares one bit if the station they listen to in City X has a very similar playlist to City Y? No, and no. Nobody outside of a few outliers is comparing playlists, wondering why City Y’s station plays a few songs City X doesn’t, or has a somewhat different spin total, nor why universally recognized hits in any given format dominate the format….universally.

You don’t program your station to not sound like one in whatever other city. You do it as part of your plan to maximize revenues in your cluster in that city. Individual market level considerations may dictate the nuances, but if song A tests well in your format, play it. If song B doesn’t, don’t. You don’t do what your audience tells you not to do just to not sound like a station your audience doesn’t know nor care about.

 

[Kelly A]

A very successful program director once told me: 'It's simple really; play the hits researched in your market, don't allow air talent to veer from anything other than promoting the station.'

 

[PTBoardOp94]

But I think there's some room for underperforming stations to experiment, so long as they keep a certain number of songs (300-600), and people will get to know the songs being played. Have stations experimented that way before?

I think this happens more than you might realize. Perhaps the most common example is:
Broadcaster A has a successful AC station. Broadcaster B wishes to flip a station to AC to provide some competition. Just copying Broadcaster A won't work: no one is going to transition to the new competitor if they are the same.

So you'll often see a new entrant into the market intentionally try a different focus for the music library (years or avoiding certain subgenres like disco), or different style of jocks, or a talk-heavy/talk-light morning show to provide a differentiator from the incumbent.

And when a station finds itself in this kind of head-to-head competition, both competitors will often fine-tune over the course of months or years. This happened recently in New York with the launch of WXBX. Some other stations in the market increased their spins of the "throwback" music WXBX plays. The research didn't change overnight, but the competitive landscape did change.

 

[TheBigA]

I think there's some room for underperforming stations to experiment,

I think this happens more than you might realize.

Every time a radio station adds a new song to the playlist, they're taking a chance. Every time they play a debut song by a new artist, they're taking a chance. So there are risks being taken in radio every day. By the time listeners become familiar with a song or an artist, the experimentation time has already passed. In my case, I often will hear new songs several months before they're released to radio. So this idea that radio just does the safe thing ignores the reality.