What the hell is on the AM band that keeps people posting about.

[musichead1029]

The AM band is way too cluttered. It's too bad the FCC doesn't have the cajones to pull the plug on all the daytimers, token daytimers with night-light wattage, all Class C and D stations and any other station authorized since the Havana Treaty.

And what do you tell those operators? Sorry, but the investments you put into these properties are now worthless because we made an arbitrary decision?

Give the remaining stations more power and greater bandwidth. Require set manufactures to meet higher standards for AM receivers. And require AM stations be local and live in return for increased coverage.

I'd love to see better receivers and a clearer band, but mandating private sector behavior usually doesn't work out very well. If there was a market for better AM receivers, we'd have them already. With Digital Signal Processing, a good AM receiver could be affordable like the Tecsun PL-380, but there's no market for it. And mandating the programming of a dying technology will just kill it quicker and benefit no one. What would be considered 'local' on those new regional signals in the cleared out AM band? And outside of traffic, weather and the occasional relevant story affecting a portion of the region, listeners aren't interested in 'local,' which is why even locally-originated talk stations focus on regional and national issues. 'Local' isn't relevant to the vast majority of radio listeners.

Local issues can be addressed on websites, and a smart FM operator with a decent signal can brand his station as the place to go in the event of an emergency. From a technological viewpoint, using the AM band more efficiently is tempting. But reality precluded it from happening when it could have done some good. The time when a revamped AM band was necessary or would be beneficial has long since passed.

 

[MattParker]

@musichead: Investments put into properties often become worthless. Ask people who thought their home would be worth more than they paid for it. Those operators don't own the airwaves. They bought a license. They've been allowed to profit from it by selling time and by selling licenses as a commodity (which never should have been allowed in the first place).

Where did you get the idea people aren't interested in local? Because most radio stopped providing it to save a few bucks? Lack of local is why most people stopped listening. However, "local" in this context means a show produced at the station and heard only on that station. Not delivered by satellite.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

The one aspect of live and local talk that gives it appeal is if you want to call in you actually can get on the air without too much time or effort. Try calling into a national show, sit on the phone for an hour or two, before elRushbo or whomever, gives you 15 seconds to quickly spit out your comment before he/she talks over you, and all that's assuming you get past the call screener. Even if you don't want to call in yourself, it's still more interesting to hear callers comments so it just isn't the host ranting for an entire hour.

I agree with Musichead, you shouldn't mandate that stuff, including requiring local programming, even though I do like live and local talk, that still should be up to each station to make that call. The small time radio station has as much right to be on the air as the big boys. Both serve their respective communities and loyal listeners. The trick is for that small time station to make ends meet financially, but that's not the FCC's problem, as all the conservatives like to say, let the market decide.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

Lack of local is why most people stopped listening.

Most people don't even know that shows aren't local. Even fewer care. iPods and the Internet are the main things biting into radio listening time now.

What we on this board like aren't the same things that the average listener cares about. Talk radio is a bit different, since there is some interaction between the host and listeners, but music radio is on its last legs. The good news about that is that there will be more FM stations moving to various talk formats. Once the big syndicated shows are snapped up, there will be plenty of room for local talk.

 

[MattParker]

Lack of local is why most people stopped listening.

Most people don't even know that shows aren't local. Even fewer care. iPods and the Internet are the main things biting into radio listening time now.

What we on this board like aren't the same things that the average listener cares about. Talk radio is a bit different, since there is some interaction between the host and listeners, but music radio is on its last legs. The good news about that is that there will be more FM stations moving to various talk formats. Once the big syndicated shows are snapped up, there will be plenty of room for local talk.

I'd agree that what people here care about is not what listeners care about. And people here don't care about local, listeners do. People know a show is local when what's talked about is local.

"All politics is local" - Tip O'Neill

Broadcasters have gotten lazy, especially including talk show hosts. Even if a show is produced locally, they subscribe to some service and get their national talking points and national guests - the same ones every other "local" talk show has. Tea bag activists are not typical listeners either. Real people, especially those who have bought a home and pay local property taxes directly, care about local crime, local schools, local streets, local trash pick-up, whose local brother-in-law got what local contract and local events. These are issues that don't fit in the convenient liberal-conservative pigeon holes of which talk shows have grown so fond - but they affect people's quality of life and pocketbooks.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

Local people get into local political talk when money is involved or they are personally affected or inconvenienced, etc. People will talk about the schools when their district wants to raise the school property tax. They'll talk about crime when it's up. They'll talk about trash pick up when the city trash workers are out on strike. Until there's a scandal, no one knows or cares about who's brother in law got a local contract. There is a balance with local talk. You can go too far and be a real bore fest. In a major market like Philly, where there's always some scandal or problem the local thing may bring in listeners and callers. In a smaller place like Delaware, where there just isn't that much news on a day by day basis, too much focus on local would be a bore. Note, both Wilmington talk stations local hosts spend more time on national issues, because local stuff gets old pretty fast. Philly's Radio Times on WHYY-FM divides the show into two parts, one part local, the second part national.

It would be interesting to see the ratings day by day for when say WDEL's Al Messitti,, Rick Jensen, and WILM's John Watson, and Philly's Marty Moss-Kohan (sp) on WHYY-FM do national topics vs local topics. My guess is, unless it's a hot issue that's got folks worked up, the local issue shows pull in less listeners.

The big perk with local oriented talk is you can call in and voice an opinion unlike on the syndicated shows. You hear more divergent points of view on a locally produced talk show.

 

[MattParker]

Local people get into local political talk when money is involved or they are personally affected or inconvenienced, etc. People will talk about the schools when their district wants to raise the school property tax. They'll talk about crime when it's up. They'll talk about trash pick up when the city trash workers are out on strike. Until there's a scandal, no one knows or cares about who's brother in law got a local contract. There is a balance with local talk. You can go too far and be a real bore fest. In a major market like Philly, where there's always some scandal or problem the local thing may bring in listeners and callers. In a smaller place like Delaware, where there just isn't that much news on a day by day basis, too much focus on local would be a bore. Note, both Wilmington talk stations local hosts spend more time on national issues, because local stuff gets old pretty fast. Philly's Radio Times on WHYY-FM divides the show into two parts, one part local, the second part national.

It would be interesting to see the ratings day by day for when say WDEL's Al Messitti,, Rick Jensen, and WILM's John Watson, and Philly's Marty Moss-Kohan (sp) on WHYY-FM do national topics vs local topics. My guess is, unless it's a hot issue that's got folks worked up, the local issue shows pull in less listeners.

The big perk with local oriented talk is you can call in and voice an opinion unlike on the syndicated shows. You hear more divergent points of view on a locally produced talk show.

Once again, local means a locally produced show with a local host. It can deal with local issues. It can also deal with outside issues and offer a local perspective.

Most people (like 99 and 44/100%) don't call talk shows. One problem for local shows is you get the same old, same old people calling all the time to grind the same old, same old axes. Often hosts are so grateful to be getting calls, they let the usual suspects drone on way too long. But local shows also can mean local guests (and selective use of callers).

Again, in my proposal, I'm talking about Class A superstations covering several states (latter day versions of what WLW once was) originating in major markets. Stations like that can get a critical mass of potential callers and use them selectively. The purpose of talk radio is not to provide therapy for people who like to call radio stations.

 

[TheBigA]

Real people, especially those who have bought a home and pay local property taxes directly, care about local crime, local schools, local streets, local trash pick-up, whose local brother-in-law got what local contract and local events.

Sure they care about them. And sure they talk about them. But they don't make great topics for radio talk shows. And it's not like radio talk shows don't occasionally cover things like local crime or some local mayor getting stopped for DUI. The Jersey Guys love those "gotcha" moments on NJ101.5. But a lot of the rest of it simply doesn't inspire a lot of passion on the radio. And trash collection? Really? Do you really want to sit and listen to an hour on trash collection? After the first two minutes, I'd be changing the station. I can tell you that if it would really bring listeners in large numbers, talk show hosts would talk about local schools and local taxes all day. But it's simply not the panacea you seem to think it is.

 

[MattParker]

Sure they care about them. And sure they talk about them. But they don't make great topics for radio talk shows. And it's not like radio talk shows don't occasionally cover things like local crime or some local mayor getting stopped for DUI. The Jersey Guys love those "gotcha" moments on NJ101.5. But a lot of the rest of it simply doesn't inspire a lot of passion on the radio. And trash collection? Really? Do you really want to sit and listen to an hour on trash collection? After the first two minutes, I'd be changing the station. I can tell you that if it would really bring listeners in large numbers, talk show hosts would talk about local schools and local taxes all day. But it's simply not the panacea you seem to think it is.

Gee, it seems to work pretty well for the aforementioned NJ 101.5.

 

[TheBigA]

Gee, it seems to work pretty well for the aforementioned NJ 101.5.

Yep and pumping your own gas also works well in NJ.

People have tried to copy NJ101.5 in other markets, even hired some talent from the station, and it hasn't worked.

 

[MattParker]

Gee, it seems to work pretty well for the aforementioned NJ 101.5.

Yep and pumping your own gas also works well in NJ.

People have tried to copy NJ101.5 in other markets, even hired some talent from the station, and it hasn't worked.

Not true.

 

[musichead1029]

@musichead: Investments put into properties often become worthless. Ask people who thought their home would be worth more than they paid for it. Those operators don't own the airwaves. They bought a license. They've been allowed to profit from it by selling time and by selling licenses as a commodity (which never should have been allowed in the first place).

Apples and oranges. A home is valued by the private sector in response to a real world market, not the whim of an unelected government bureaucracy. In your view, operators have been "allowed to profit" as if they were handed a gold mine for free. I look at it as the government allocating a portion of the airwaves to someone who can make good use of it - a.k.a. attracting listeners. Without that operator, and his ability to attract an audience - to foster the use of the spectrum - the airwaves are useless. The operator's motivation to make good use of the airwaves is his potential profit. The government didn't guarantee that operator the profit, only a license to try and make it. Politically, the only way the government could pull those licenses is to offer a long sunset period and probably some kind of quid pro quo that you and I would have to pay for, and would likely not be in our best interests. And all of this for a band that doesn't have a lot of useful life left in it.

By the way, as catchy as the phrase has become, nobody "owns" the airwaves any more than we could own the sky. We merely make use of them. If anyone "owned" the airwaves, there'd be no Radio Moscow or Radio Marti.

Where did you get the idea people aren't interested in local? Because most radio stopped providing it to save a few bucks? Lack of local is why most people stopped listening. However, "local" in this context means a show produced at the station and heard only on that station. Not delivered by satellite.

I got the idea from the ratings. Replacing more expensive locally-produced programming with regionally or nationally generated shows hasn't had an appreciable impact on the ratings. Often the national shows are of better quality than could be produced locally. Morning radio had to be local, at least until Howard Stern came along. People happily listen to the national NPR feed all day with a few traffic and weather reports thrown in (the only local material of indisputable value to the listener). Radio has featured national programming since they were able to come to an agreement with Ma Bell in the 20s and 30s. It was forced to come up with different solutions when TV came in. But then regional Top 40 gave way to national playlists. Consultants from remote locales have chosen music playlists for stations for more than 35 years now. Ratings go up. Even when talk shows are locally produced, their subjects are regional or national. Yes, you can call in easier to a local show. That's good for the 3% of the audience that avails themselves of that opportunity. It doesn't make much difference to the other 97%.

Much local programming came about because the FCC mandated it, not because anyone particularly wanted to hear it. Top 40 stations found clever ways to hide or shift their news so that they were playing the nationally-consulted playlist music when other outlets were running their mandated newscasts - until they were eventually allowed to get rid of the newscasts that their listeners didn't tune in for. So-called "public-service" programming runs at 4AM. For a reason.

Many on these boards are indeed different from the average listener - the board denizens differentiate between local and national. Most listeners differentiate between relevant, entertaining and not. Where it comes from isn't so important to them.

 

[TheBigA]

People have tried to copy NJ101.5 in other markets, even hired some talent from the station, and it hasn't worked.

Not true.

Brooke & Roberta took their afternoon NJ101.5 talk show to another market and it bombed.

 

[Slinky]

People have tried to copy NJ101.5 in other markets, even hired some talent from the station, and it hasn't worked.

Not really.

The only failed stations I can think of that were at all similar to NJ101.5 took out key elements of NJ101.5's success- they weren't all local; they didn't have the same level of commitment to local news, weather, and traffic; and they focused too much on young males instead of duplicating NJ101.5''s broad-based appeal.

The reason we don't have any stations like NJ101.5 debuting today is the same reason we don't have new all-news stations. There's tremendous start-up costs and it may take years to make a profit. They are a long-term investment in a radio world that is dominated by the short-term.

 

[TheBigA]

The reason we don't have any stations like NJ101.5 debuting today is the same reason we don't have new all-news stations. There's tremendous start-up costs and it may take years to make a profit. They are a long-term investment in a radio world that is dominated by the short-term.

That's an incredible oversimplification. Any investment in radio is long term. There is no short term gain in radio ownership, and everyone knows that.

 

[imhomerjay]

Ah, but such oversimplification is the only way to get around the roadblocks presented by pesky factual matters.

 

[Slinky]

That's an incredible oversimplification. Any investment in radio is long term. There is no short term gain in radio ownership, and everyone knows that.

Then how else do you explain the lack of copycats for big-budget stations? Why, when NJ101.5 has been a market leader for years, is it still the only one of its kind? Why has there been no rush of FM News stations when WTOP is the #2 biller in the entire country?

Radio loves stations that have little short term risk (the Jack-FMs, the Gen X's, the mostly satellite FM talkers). How many stations are out there right now that are real "projects"? Stations that took a lot of start-up capital and are currently being built for the long-haul. I can't think of too many.

 

[TheBigA]

Then how else do you explain the lack of copycats for big-budget stations? Why, when NJ101.5 has been a market leader for years, is it still the only one of its kind? Why has there been no rush of FM News stations when WTOP is the #2 biller in the entire country?

First of all, I wouldn't call NJ 101.5 a "big budget station." Ask anyone who works there. They cut corners where they can. It certainly helps that they have a certain level of heritage, and no other NJ station has the reach they have. There's been no rush to FM news because in the markets where it's practical, there's already a heritage AM news station. But the fact is that you get no award for being the #2 or even the #1 biller. That's not the goal. As they say, it's not what you make but what you keep. It took WTOP over ten years to get to the point where they could afford their own in-house traffic and sports departments. Prior to this year, they used Metro. So even a heritage newser takes time to get to the point where they can own all their content.

Radio loves stations that have little short term risk (the Jack-FMs, the Gen X's, the mostly satellite FM talkers). How many stations are out there right now that are real "projects"?

This is hardly the best time to start something like that. Anyone will tell you that. But at the same time, I don't see too many stations starting low cost syndicated or satellite formats either. Jack is dead. So is Movin.' There's another thread on this board that says satellite talk is dead. The trend right now is firing the syndicated 7-midnight show and replacing it with local. That's what Entercom is doing. There's no growth in CC's Premium Choice. Ryan Seacrest has peaked with several recent drops. And CBS is still live and local in most markets. But I think we're in a temporary phase with music. I think the future will be in radio stations owning their own content, like WTOP, for multi-plaform use. That will mean that music on OTA radio will begin to disappear at some point.