• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Why Is There Such Hostility Against JACK FM?

Re: Whoa big fella...

WOW! WOW! WOW! Incredible. EXCELLENT! Great post! You must be an old radio guy like me who knows that it's not supposed to rocket science to GET IT. Bad radio, bad concepts, bad execution are all parts of radio too. It's not negative, it's fact. Great, excellent post. In the words of a great man "I like the way you think".


> > - For the most part, radio people don't 'get' Jack.
>
> I'd like to know when this statement become the standard in
> defense lexicon. Has a loosing lawyer ever told the jury,
> "you didn't 'get' it so you found my client guilty...". You
> need evidence and proof.
>
> Likewise, if you you're a comedian and you tell a joke that
> people don't 'get', you're not a comedian. Guess what, the
> same holds true for broadcasting. There should be nothing
> to "get".
>
> As it stands right now, JACK is not revolutionary. It's a
> format change that has gained traction in some markets and
> none in others. We know from experience that successful
> format changes can usually be traced to: 1.) the marketing
> effort put forth and 2.) how the other stations in the
> market are serving the desired demo (ie NYC and Chicago have
> some great stations which need to be dealt with - L.A. not
> so much).
>
> Let's sit back and wait for some andetotal evidence - not
> Arbitron - to roll in that states JACK is connecting
> (selling out concerts, raising a bunch of money for charity,
> greatly increasing market cume, greatly increasing sales
> etc.) before making an entry into "The History of Radio"
> book.
>
> And until that day comes, I see it only as radio done on the
> cheap by the same people whom overpaid $10 billion for some
> sticks and now need to try to prove to their stockholders
> that they're actually alot smarter than that.
>
 
Obviously, there's alot of markets where people don't "get it". You're just the epitome of taste and greatness. "The music I like is better than the music you like". "The way I like to listen to it is better than the way you like to listen to it". What are we 12 years old.

What pompous arrogance!



> > Huh???...radio people created Jack.
>
> Oh, I don't disagree. My point is that there are a number
> of people in the business who just don't get the format.
> (Classic example is Cousin Brucie expounding on the loss of
> 'personality' radio in a TV interview he did shortly after
> inking his Sirius deal. If you read any of the anti-Jack
> over at McVay Media (http://www.mcvaymedia.com/) you'll find
> that even those in the business of consulting stations don't
> get it.)
>
 
Most consultants are bad for radio. True, true, true. Just look at where they've helped take radio in the last 15 years. Just because a radio station changes formats doesn't mean it's better or good. Lest we forget research and consultation goes into Jack.


> > > Is this just a case of people afraid of change and
> wanting
> >
> > > to naysay right out of the gate?
> >
> > Ahhh... finally... a chance to get it all off my chest :)
> >
> > Why do people dispise Jack? Some reasons below...
> >
> > - For the most part, radio people don't 'get' Jack. They
> > only want to believe the Kool-Aid their consultants are
> > feeding them. (If you don't believe it, read some of the
> > stuff from SOME consultants from time to time. They go as
>
> > far as calling stations that buy in to the Jack philosophy
>
> > 'Lemmings'.)
> >
>
> Great post! This particle paragraph caught my eye. I've been
> reading everything I can on JACK FM and I've read article
> after article. Most have been in favor of shaking up radio
> with this new format; others expound how radio is doomed and
> these are the end times.
>
> The reason this one paragraph garnered my attention was I
> read an article last night. The writer was upset about WCBS
> flipping to JACK FM and then he posted a consultant's
> thoughts. The consultant said Infinity should have had a
> massive countdown, with block parties and sendoffs for
> Cousin Brucie et al. Then they could have said that New York
> was going to be getting this great new station and for
> everyone to listen when the switch took place.
>
> Um, that's great.
>
> HELLO?! The minute JACK FM launched, the very second the
> block party wound down and the Beastie Boys blared across
> 101.1FM, WCBS's listeners would've left *ANYWAY*. So it
> wouldn't have mattered one way or the other how Infinity
> would've handled the format flip.
>
> Sorry if I got a bit rambly there; my point being:
> consultants make me laugh.
>
 
Re: Whoa big fella...

> WOW! WOW! WOW! Incredible. EXCELLENT! Great post! You must
> be an old radio guy like me who knows that it's not supposed
> to rocket science to GET IT. Bad radio, bad concepts, bad
> execution are all parts of radio too. It's not negative,
> it's fact. Great, excellent post. In the words of a great
> man "I like the way you think".

Oh, so now you love this guy cuz he agrees with you. Very cute. Also, its not fact. Its opinion!
>
>
> > > - For the most part, radio people don't 'get' Jack.
> >
> > I'd like to know when this statement become the standard
> in
> > defense lexicon. Has a loosing lawyer ever told the jury,
>
> > "you didn't 'get' it so you found my client guilty...".
> You
> > need evidence and proof.
> >
> > Likewise, if you you're a comedian and you tell a joke
> that
> > people don't 'get', you're not a comedian. Guess what,
> the
> > same holds true for broadcasting. There should be nothing
>
> > to "get".
> >
> > As it stands right now, JACK is not revolutionary. It's a
>
> > format change that has gained traction in some markets and
>
> > none in others. We know from experience that successful
> > format changes can usually be traced to: 1.) the marketing
>
> > effort put forth and 2.) how the other stations in the
> > market are serving the desired demo (ie NYC and Chicago
> have
> > some great stations which need to be dealt with - L.A. not
>
> > so much).
> >
> > Let's sit back and wait for some andetotal evidence - not
> > Arbitron - to roll in that states JACK is connecting
> > (selling out concerts, raising a bunch of money for
> charity,
> > greatly increasing market cume, greatly increasing sales
> > etc.) before making an entry into "The History of Radio"
> > book.
> >
> > And until that day comes, I see it only as radio done on
> the
> > cheap by the same people whom overpaid $10 billion for
> some
> > sticks and now need to try to prove to their stockholders
> > that they're actually alot smarter than that.
> >
>
<P ID="signature">______________
The Place for the Latest Happenings in Radio
www.freewebs.com/radiostuffandnews
This site has been updated! Check it out! Thanks
</P>
 
big fella

Doesn't matter that:

* the term "get it" is overused- so what?
* there IS something to "get" or understand or comprehend or however you
want to put it- and many don't.
* doesn'matter that you don't consider Jack "revolutionary"-- some do, some
don't. Moot point.
* radio station success are not measured by "anecdotal evidence"- station
success IS INDEED measured by Arbitron ratings and the subsequent revenue
* you think it's done "on the cheap"-- I'd bet few if any Jack-type stations are
realizing some big sudden black ink because, for now, they have no jocks.

BOTTOM LINE: it's working. Love it, hate it, don't "get it"--none of that matters because radio listeners seem to be enjoying it. That IS the whole idea, isn't it?


>
> I'd like to know when this statement become the standard in
> defense lexicon. Has a loosing lawyer ever told the jury,
> "you didn't 'get' it so you found my client guilty...". You
> need evidence and proof.
>
> Likewise, if you you're a comedian and you tell a joke that
> people don't 'get', you're not a comedian. Guess what, the
> same holds true for broadcasting. There should be nothing
> to "get".
>
> As it stands right now, JACK is not revolutionary. It's a
> format change that has gained traction in some markets and
> none in others. We know from experience that successful
> format changes can usually be traced to: 1.) the marketing
> effort put forth and 2.) how the other stations in the
> market are serving the desired demo (ie NYC and Chicago have
> some great stations which need to be dealt with - L.A. not
> so much).
>
> Let's sit back and wait for some andetotal evidence - not
> Arbitron - to roll in that states JACK is connecting
> (selling out concerts, raising a bunch of money for charity,
> greatly increasing market cume, greatly increasing sales
> etc.) before making an entry into "The History of Radio"
> book.
>
> And until that day comes, I see it only as radio done on the
> cheap by the same people whom overpaid $10 billion for some
> sticks and now need to try to prove to their stockholders
> that they're actually alot smarter than that.
>
 
fact vs. opinion

very true- I notice these guys always write as if their view of things is indeed fact when it's JUST OPINION.

It's like going to a museum and seeing a piece of art- some who look at it think it's wonderful, yet some who see the same piece think it's junk. Neither is right, neither is wrong. Only the person who buys that painting and hangs it in their home has an opinion that, in the end, counts.
>
> Oh, so now you love this guy cuz he agrees with you. Very
> cute. Also, its not fact. Its opinion!
 
thanks for confirming

that it takes one to know one.
>
> What pompous arrogance!
 
I just expect more…

…from people who claim to be in the field of communications.

Now, I readily admit I don’t “get” Einstein’s Theory of Relativity - E=mc2 - it’s simply beyond my grasp. But I’d bet you a donut, if I went to a Physics Bulletin Board, I’d be able to find someone who is able to explain it in terms that would satisfy a layman like myself.

The rest of your post has been discussed ad nausem so there’s no reason to go any further.
 
So according to you…

... ALL art is equal? Nighthawks is equal to Dogs Playing Poker? American Gothic is equal to Black Velvet Elvis?

Wrong.

It’s possible to discern Art from art. Just as it possible to discern Radio from radio. It’s that ability to appreciate and understand Art that separates us from our house pets. Captial “A” Art HAS to be made. Lower case “a” art is mass produced crap sold to entertain those house pets. And just because it’s happens to show up in a gallery somewhere, it’s doesn’t magically transform art to Art. It has to be validated by contemporaries who understand the art process and historians who have the luxury of hindsight. Claiming that others don’t “get” it isn’t a way of defending any work of art. Neither is counting sales - or in the case of radio - counting the number of listeners.

Simply put, in the case of art, it is my opinion that it is quite possible to formulate a right or wrong opinion.

I’ve got to run now. My cat is making wee-wee on Black Velvet Elvis.
 
Re: JACK FM?

> Awe, how cute. Another corporate geek to add to your train.

Considering that Cadillac Jack invented the original Internet stream of Jack FM as a response to corporate-run radio stations, that sure is off the mark...
 
Re: So according to you…

> ... ALL art is equal? Nighthawks is equal to Dogs Playing
> Poker? American Gothic is equal to Black Velvet Elvis?
>

Man, PLEASE just don't spoil Oldiescat's Christmas present from MusicloverII!

Oldiescat is the ultimate collector of Dog's Playing Poker art.

He like's the "variety" of the dogs but still polyester is the best material
they are made from. There are over 1,200 styles, so you never see the same two
very often.
 
Actually...

...I have a friend who collects Black Velvet Elvi’.

His home is literally littered with the stuff, black velvets, lamps, glow-in-the-dark, etc. At first he claimed it was for the camp value, but as it slowly started to take over his place, it became readily apparent there is a very fine line between kitsch and just plain weird.
 
according to you

That's all very culturally sophisticated sounding and all that, but claiming others don't get it means they refuse to open their minds up to something outside of their daily realm. Some people "get" the TV show "Lost", some don't-and that's perfectly OK. But to deny there's nothing to "get" is true arrogance.

Again- the listeners are buying into JACK. Whether you and I like it or agree on it or even "get it" doesn't matter.

JACK is working.



> Wrong.
>
> It’s possible to discern Art from art. Just as it possible
> to discern Radio from radio. It’s that ability to
> appreciate and understand Art that separates us from our
> house pets. Captial “A” Art HAS to be made. Lower case “a”
> art is mass produced crap sold to entertain those house
> pets. And just because it’s happens to show up in a gallery
> somewhere, it’s doesn’t magically transform art to Art. It
> has to be validated by contemporaries who understand the art
> process and historians who have the luxury of hindsight.
> Claiming that others don’t “get” it isn’t a way of defending
> any work of art. Neither is counting sales - or in the case
> of radio - counting the number of listeners.
>
> Simply put, in the case of art, it is my opinion that it is
> quite possible to formulate a right or wrong opinion.
>
> I’ve got to run now. My cat is making wee-wee on Black
> Velvet Elvis.
>
 
apologies

Sorry to burst your bubbles- no polyester and no Dogs Playing Poker.


>
> Man, PLEASE just don't spoil Oldiescat's Christmas present
> from MusicloverII!
>
> Oldiescat is the ultimate collector of Dog's Playing Poker art.
>
> He like's the "variety" of the dogs but still polyester is
> the best material they are made from. There are over 1,200 styles, so you
> never see the same two very often.
>
 
Re: apologies

> Sorry to burst your bubbles- no polyester and no Dogs
> Playing Poker.

What? Impossible. Does this mean you really don't
like the Jack format, then, because you have taste?
or something? :)
 
taste

None of my discussions about Jack have to do with personal likes or dislikes- I simply understand why the approach is working.

Let's also keep in mind that "taste" is such a subjective thing. We in radio often view our audience as Macy's shoppers when in reality a great many more frequent Target and Wal-Mart; they also enjoy TV shows and movies that might surprise us. The point is that we can do all this "movie critic" thrashing of Jack or any format and NONE OF IT affects the success or failure of Jack- only real-life radio listeners do. Heck, personally, I don't get how some AC stations get the ratings they get doing "wallpaper" background radio- or that rap stations appeal to non-ethnics. But my not "getting" that doesn't mean those are not choice stations for those to whom they're targeted- I also don't spend hours on radio boards calling them stupid, tasteless and crap just because they're not my cup of tea. So many spend hours taking cheap shots at JACK and calling it "bad radio" (just an opinion, but they present it as fact and try to puff it up because they're some faux programming legend or some nonsense)- that's really sad and funny at the same time because with very few exceptions, the Jack approach IS working and people ARE listening, in major numbers. They talk of Jack being "bad radio", when the truth is the only really "bad radio" is radio nobody listens to. Radio is radio and it is very subjective and really only in the eye of the beholder (the listner).

To most, they end up coming off as bitter-beer-face, grouchy naysayers who rip something for the sake of ripping it.


>
> What? Impossible. Does this mean you really don't
> like the Jack format, then, because you have taste?
> or something? :)
>
 
Re: taste

Well said. It's a mentality of there can only be one type of
car, it's can only be one color, it can never change, etc. Yet,
these anti-Jack comments are based on the music choices, not
the depth of the playlist variety. How can radio progress if
it stays the exact same? And that same is the same that the
same anti-Jack haters have been up in arms about for being to
vanilla and copycat. Then something even slightly different
comes along and it's either not different enough or it's not
well-formatted because it's all over the place and not flowing
and copycat enough. It all comes down to the fact that sometimes
--- no matter what you do --- a percentage of naysayers will
rip it apart just to make themselves feel bigger and better.

Again, what has made me wonder is why some people can't look
at Jack as a stepping stone to more diversity in programming,
formatting and playlists in the years ahead as progressive
radio programmers and music directors see there is a need
for unique formats in various markets. Where's the vision
of what can be? I'd be scared to have people making programming
decisions that are so restricted and unoriginal.

Funny how the corporate "suit-haters" are more stuffy than
the suits sometimes.
 
taste

Amen- ain't THAT the truth.
>
> Funny how the corporate "suit-haters" are more stuffy than
> the suits sometimes.
>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom