Why work in radio anymore?

[SirRoxalot]

If "an amateur can entertain as much as a professional", then why aren't those shows hitting the top of the ratings, and why are they hosted by professionals instead of amateurs.

American Idol is consistently the most popular show on TV. Most of the variations, as well as the reality shows, are also extremely popular. They're hosted by professionals just to provide consistency from week to week. But the hosts are clearly not the stars. I think radio hosts could learn from TV hosts.

The American Idol tryout shows show us true amateurs. The ratings for those sure don't stack up to the "real" show. And, I think that you'd have a hard time arguing that most American Idol contestants are amateurs. Most of them have a lot of experience performing in front of crowds, and most have been paid for their efforts. They're also seriously prepped by professionals, and their growth as performers during the course of the show is obvious. Watching that growth is as much an attraction as the performances themselves.

It ain't as easy as it looks. If it was, everybody would be doing it.

It IS as easy as it looks, and that's why everyone IS doing it. Not everyone is succeeding, but that doesn't stop them from trying. Success isn't based on quality or ability, but rather building a fan base that supports what you do regardless of what that is.

Using that logic, you should be trading places with Ryan Seacrest any day now. Somehow, I doubt that he'd be willing to swap paychecks.

 

[TheBigA]

I think that you'd have a hard time arguing that most American Idol contestants are amateurs.

When Carrie Underwood won Idol four years ago, she'd never performed on a stage with a live band. She was a college junior, working as a waitress in a pizza parlour. She was a true amateur. Those contestants that have had some experience clearly have no advantage over the amateurs, because the show is fan voted. That is what makes this show a ratings powerhouse, not the level of experience in the performers.

Using that logic, you should be trading places with Ryan Seacrest any day now. Somehow, I doubt that he'd be willing to swap paychecks.

The fans like Ryan, and prove it every week. He's taken his fan base, created on Idol, and built a career around it. Many more radio people could easily do the same. But it would require a level of commitment most don't seem willing to make. But Ryan Seacrest is living proof that anyone can become a huge force in broadcasting without deep pipes or long resume.

 

[SirRoxalot]

What you're pointing out is that TALENT counts. People who have a talent, and are able to attract an audience, should be COMPENSATED for that ability. That's what makes them PROFESSIONALS.

Ryan Seacrest was in the right place at the right time to luck into an unexpectedly visible position. Remember his co-host in season one? Neither does anybody else. Was Ryan the best choice for the job, just the better of the two, or willing to take the cash & dash while overlooking questionable shenanigans by the show's producers?

Sometimes, "success" comes at a cost that people are unwilling to pay. It ain't always about the most money, or fame, or other trappings. Sometimes it's about being able to look at yourself in the mirror and be happy with who you are and what you've got.

 

[gr8oldies]

As far as I know Ryan Seacrest is compensated. I think though, you would prefer he work at union scale and be an employee of a single radio station. If he wasn't bringing in the jack, he wouldn't be every place he is. But, as usual, your ppoint seems to be that only employees or radio stations who punch time clocks should be considered "talent". Or any talent that develops anywhere else should become an employee rather than a business or brand of their own.

 

[TheBigA]

If someone has talent, REAL talent, and is able to attract an audience, then that talent should be able to transcend the medium, and he should be able to attract that same audience elsewhere. That's what Howard Stern did. If talent can attract an audience, then talent can attract advertisers. He doesn't need salesmen to do it. If talent can attract advertisers, then he should be to make his real money directly from the sponsor. So it doesn't matter if the station he works at flips formats or fires its staff. True talent is self-employed, he's an entrepeneur, and he creates jobs for others, not just himself. True talent is not an hourly job with benefits and a 2 week vacation. That's menial labor. True talent should have the courage to invest in himself, and create demand for what he does. There's not a lot of true talent in radio. They're mainly employees looking to get paid, looking to be told what to do, what words to say, what records to play, and what perks they can get. That's not talent.

I say this not to be critical, but to inspire talent to look beyond hourly work, look beyond the definitions that you see today, and look beyond the box others force you in. Then you will be rewarded greatly for what you do. Because there ARE great jobs in radio. IF you truely have talent. If not, then take the paycheck as long as you can. It's your only hope.

 

[elchupacabras]

There is no question about Seacrest's work ethic. He is a hard working individual. Talented? I think not. Ownership has pushed this type of vanilla "star" on the public to the point that nobody can recognize talent anymore. There is no other option, so the public accepts him, but by default. If you can read a liner card, kiss the higher up's posterior and be a warm body with a pretty face, BINGO! You've got a job!

Where's the personality these days? Where is the talent? I grew up with the idea that if you didn't have a personality nor the pipes, you'd better not even get close to the microphone. Seacrest is simply one of the worst things to have happened to the industry in a long time. Sure, the ratings are there, but on an artistic level, I think a singing vaudeville dog would score higher!

 

[SirRoxalot]

As far as I know Ryan Seacrest is compensated. I think though, you would prefer he work at union scale and be an employee of a single radio station. If he wasn't bringing in the jack, he wouldn't be every place he is. But, as usual, your ppoint seems to be that only employees or radio stations who punch time clocks should be considered "talent". Or any talent that develops anywhere else should become an employee rather than a business or brand of their own.

I don't know how you derived that interpretation out of anything that I've ever written, but that's so WRONG that it's laughable.

If anything, the consolidators are the ones who would prefer that everyone work for a lot less than union scale. They're the ones who put the most roadblocks in the way of an employee creating a business or a brand of their own. Restrictive formats prevent people from being creative. Restrictive contracts NEVER benefit the employees, and prevent people in many states from seeking to grow their career by moving to an employer that would value them more highly.

I have no problem with Ryan Seacrest and the success that he's achieved. He's obviously a bright, talented self-promoter.

 

[gr8oldies]

That's exactly what you have to do. Be a self promoter. It's easier than ever with the options that are available. Stop with the excuses that the "big bad bossman" won't let you. Go around him!

 

[SirRoxalot]

If you want to work in radio, it's pretty hard to ignore the consolidators these days. Look at the ownership of the major facilities in the top 100 markets.

Is it possible to overcome the obstacles? Maybe, but it's getting harder every day. There's a reason that most of the "stars" in radio have been in the business for 20 years or more. Their careers - and clout - were created before the consolidators gained so much control.

How many new "stars" have come on the scene in the last 10 years? I'm not talking about guys who were already successful and had the opportunity to reach multiple markets as a cost-saving device for the consolidators. I'm talking about radio people who grew into "stars", not stars from other media who ended up on the radio.

What we're seeing in the industry is a serious lack of opportunity. The exceptions are few and far between - and rarely located in a top 100 market.

 

[elchupacabras]

I
What we're seeing in the industry is a serious lack of opportunity. The exceptions are few and far between - and rarely located in a top 100 market.

Bull's eye!

 

[firepoint525]

Radio will become a lot like Survivor. Out of each class of "students," there will be only one "winner." And that winner won't necessarily be the best in his "class;" he will just be the one who "outwitted, outsmarted, and outlasted" all his competition.

I'm all for "if you don't succeed once, try, try again," but I'm also aware that life is short, so if after a couple of years, you aren't progressing in your career, then I would reassess my goals, and try something else. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results. Life is too short to keep chasing that "carrot on a stick" without any hope of ever catching it. It's great to have a dream and keep pursuing it, but true radio "superstardom" is reserved for only a select few. I would hate to see anyone spend their whole life trying to chase an unrealizable dream, when they might be more successful (not to mention happier, more contented, and less frustrated) in some entirely different, unrelated field. (I hope that that's enough cliches for one paragraph!)

 

[firepoint525]

What we're seeing in the industry is a serious lack of opportunity. The exceptions are few and far between - and rarely located in a top 100 market.

Bull's eye!

I hope that in the future, radio doesn't need as many djs as they once did. Because the "bullpen" (like, for example, 500-watt, daytime-only AM stations) is getting empty. Those stations still exist, but they are now hooked up to satellite broadcasting services, too. The need for live djs may dry up in the future, but I am wondering if that need will go away as fast as the talent pool of djs has been disappearing!

My first station (a 500-watt daytimer) was live in the early '90s when I worked for them, but I believe they have been on satellite ever since they returned to the air in 1997 after being dark for two years.

 

[TheBigA]

Ownership has pushed this type of vanilla "star" on the public to the point that nobody can recognize talent anymore. There is no other option, so the public accepts him, but by default.

That may have been true 30 years ago, but not any more. The public has millions of options. Having options is not a problem any more. In the old days, the public got whoever the station gave them. Not any more.

 

[TheBigA]

What we're seeing in the industry is a serious lack of opportunity. The exceptions are few and far between - and rarely located in a top 100 market.

You really don't understand anything that I've been saying, or what it takes to get a Top 100 job. There are lots of them, but you don't know what it takes to get one.

When there's an overabundance of applicants for a job, you need to have something that separates you from the pack. If you're just another application, it gets tossed in the pile.

Big jobs in any field are built around relationships. I learned that when I was in college. They're built around investing in oneself. Attending conferences, meeting PDs, becoming their friend on Facebook (that may sound silly, but it works), and coming up with a proposal to a station that they can't refuse. I'm not talking about filling out an online form. I'm talking about establishing a business relationship. That is what it takes if you want to be more than menial labor.

Consider Charles Gibson. He's leaving as anchor of World News Tonight. How would you apply for that job? Send a resume and cover letter to the President of ABC News? He gets thousands of those. Think that way for a bit, and maybe you'll understand what it takes. The real jobs require real applicants with real documented talent. Team players, not arguers. People focused around solving problems, not creating them. Think you can handle the pressure?

This ain't government work where you take a civil service exam. This is personal marketing. If you can't market yourself, you're not going to get a job.

 

[TheBigA]

If anything, the consolidators are the ones who would prefer that everyone work for a lot less than union scale. They're the ones who put the most roadblocks in the way of an employee creating a business or a brand of their own.

It's not a consolidator thing. How much is Craig Fox offering for DJs at his new country station in Syracuse?

No one wants to pay anyone more than they have to. That's the fact of life in any job, regardless of owner. Consolidators have access to more money, but they have to get something for it. Rush Limbaugh doesn't make union scale. Neither does Ryan Seacrest. And I can name a few dozen morning talents at CC stations that make six figure salaries.

BUT if you want to be more than a liner card reader, you have to PROVE you know what you're doing, and you have to present DOCUMENTATION that you have talent, you can deliver audience, and you will do things to attract revenue for your station and owner. That's the part people don't understand.

 

[SirRoxalot]

Liner card readers are created, not born. Nobody gets into radio with the intent of being a liner card reader. Most jocks would like to be more entertaining, but there's precious little opportunity with the strict formats in place today. There's very little training going on to make jocks better. It's very hard for young people to "PROVE you know what you're doing" and to "present DOCUMENTATION that you have talent" when you're threatened with termination every time you do something that's not strictly to format - and you see VERY talented people on the street in spite of an exemplary track record and ratings.

At this point, you don't necessarily have to be GOOD, you have to be CHEAP. You have to be willing to have contracts provisions ignored, benefits reduced, and overtime laws overlooked. That was once common in entry-level markets. Now it's common in EVERY market.

There are exceptions. There are 6-figure morning shows in a lot of markets. Some of them used to be 7-figure morning shows. Most morning shows are making a lot less money than they were a few years ago - and are being made scapegoats for firings in other dayparts, and for support personnel. In many cases, the morning show is the only local shift that listeners can relate to, that differentiates the station from the competition.

And, once again, you ignored a central question:

How many new "stars" have come on the scene in the last 10 years? I'm not talking about guys who were already successful and had the opportunity to reach multiple markets as a cost-saving device for the consolidators. I'm talking about radio people who grew into "stars", not stars from other media who ended up on the radio.

 

[TheBigA]

Liner card readers are created, not born. Nobody gets into radio with the intent of being a liner card reader. Most jocks would like to be more entertaining, but there's precious little opportunity with the strict formats in place today.

I think you're making excuses. There are few opportunities because when some people got the shot, they squandered the chance. The air signal is not the place to learn one's craft. You do that on your own dime, not on the public's. You want a sandbox? Go to the playground. The public airwaves are not a sandbox. At least not any more.

As I said yesterday, if talented people are on the street, it's because they lacked the ability to make things happen ON THEIR OWN. They lacked the connections with advertisers, and lacked the commitment of an audience who would support them wherever they went.

Regarding your "central question," when I see discussions about the great radio talent, I never see names of people who started after 1980. So to limit it to the last ten years ignores the fact that the age of the DJ ended almost 30 years ago. It ended because the big powerful AM stations, that could be heard in 10 states, went away, and radio became narrower and more local. That hurt the creation and development of true radio stars who could attract large audiences. Today, the ONLY way to do the same thing is to either have a syndicated show, or voicetrack for more than five stations. THEN you may reach the same number of people someone at a blowtorch AM did 40 years ago. But THAT's a significant problem, and the reason for it is the transfer from powerful AM stations to less powerful FM. That is why syndication and multiple station VT is the only way to attract and keep the kind of creative talent that radio had in the 60s. Why get a job for a single station in Buffalo when you can get your own syndicated TV show? When you have talent, that's the kind of choice you have.

 

[smedge2006]

Regarding your "central question," when I see discussions about the great radio talent, I never see names of people who started after 1980. So to limit it to the last ten years ignores the fact that the age of the DJ ended almost 30 years ago. It It ended because the big powerful AM stations, that could be heard in 10 states, went away, and radio became narrower and more local.

This explanation lies somewhere between oversimplification and outright falsehood. First of all, the majority of successful stations -- and most of the groundbreaking stations -- between 1955 and 1980 were NOT 50 kWers that reached ten states. Personality was hardly limited to those stations -- in fact, more of it around the country was found on the non-50 kwers, simply because there were more of them. Those stations are the ones that PUSHED the 50 kWers into the late 20th century DJ format. I suppose KLIF in Dallas, which barely covered its city of license on 1190 AM after dark, had nothing to do with personality. Not to mention Keener-13, WQAM, and all the other non 50 kilowatters that were narrow and local and yet had strong personality lineups. Remember, too, that during the "money dayparts" those stations were limited to their local markets and perhaps a few adjacent ones. They were ALL local and very limited, even the giants.

Secondly, I think there are a number of stars who developed when FM CHR's were hot in the 1980's -- Bubba the Love Sponge would be one example, Opie and Anthony another. Corporate meddling, some of it abutted by the FCC, interrupted their careers in their prime, not unlike the way Ted Williams' career was interrupted by World War Two. Since 1999, I would agree with Sir Roxalot -- it has been a hostile environment for launching new talent.

The public airwaves are not a sandbox. At least not any more

No, not a sandbox, but they are a desert.

It's very hard for young people to "PROVE you know what you're doing" and to "present DOCUMENTATION that you have talent" when you're threatened with termination every time you do something that's not strictly to format - and you see VERY talented people on the street in spite of an exemplary track record and ratings.

It's very sad when a talent coach (Tommy Kramer) has to write something like this to try to get management to back off:

Normally, my coaching tips are for air talents, but this one is primarily for music radio Program Directors, simply because I don’t want Air Talents to get in trouble with their bosses over something that I said. The old “it’s easier to get forgiveness than it is permission” thing isn’t really true in this day of Corporate Programming templates and marching orders from above. Now, all too often, “This is the way we do it,” good or bad, is the way of the world.

http://www.tommykramer.net/

It's easier to get forgiveness than permission is the first rule of good radio. Without it, radio is dead.

I guess radio is dead.

 

[gr8oldies]

What people are whining about now isn't much different that what people were whining about in 1975. "Waah, they make me read liner cards and they won't let me do produced bits between beautiful music songs". Does anyone seriously think Howard Stern EVER said "oh, Mr. Bossman, can I talk dirty on the radio? Please"? Stern (and I don't like him) butted heads with management every step of the way. It took Rush Limbaugh several hirings and firings to get to a place where he could develop the act that launched him to stardom. You don't always get to practice on the audience's ears. If you're doing soft A/C, why do you think you're going to be allowed to do long form comedy bits, stream of conciousness talk and pick your own playlist?

Have a talker in your cluster? Volunteer to do a couple hours on the weekend to develop your chops. Just one of many examples. Some of you think it's up to "the boss" to let you break format and do what you want, and it's never been that way. Sometimes what's funny to you isn't to your audience.

Basicall, take responsibility for your own career and stop thinking of it as "I go to work and a paycheck lands on my desk every two weeks". Radio stations aren't General Motors in 1972. Sorry, but "the big bad coroprate evil bossman is holding me back. If it wasn't for Farid I'd be a star" is bullcrap.

 

[TheBigA]

Personality was hardly limited to those stations -- in fact, more of it around the country was found on the non-50 kwers, simply because there were more of them.

I'm not going to argue that, but the fact is that 40 years later, the only names people recognize are the ones at the 50kwers. And as I've been saying, in the 1960s, if you wanted to hear rock music, the only place you could do it was on the radio. But the point is that it's not the 1960s any more. A lot of things changed between then and now, including the number of stations, and the role radio plays in people's lives. You guys throw around the words "talent" and "personality" as though everyone has it. They don't. The ones that do are smart enough to market it. The ones that don't take what they can get. And the ones that do have many more options for that talent than they had in the 60s. They can get TV shows and movie deals. They don't need to do 4 hours of original content every day. That's a lot of work. Ask Bill O'Reilly. He walked away from radio because it was too much work.

As for working today, it's easy to blame owners or the FCC, but some of the blame goes to the willingness on the part of the public to sue and write complaint letters, both to the FCC and to advertisers. The reason GMs are so skittish about talent going off the script is because it usually ends up costing them money. Imus cost CBS millions, and they couldn't sue him for any of their losses. Same with all the fines that Stern and Bubba got. Their owners had to pay the fines, and the talent paid nothing. Faced with that, it's a whole lot better to shut up and play the music. There are dozens of examples like that happening on the radio all the time. When it's your ass and your money at risk, you're a whole lot less willing to push the boundaries. Very few talent types are willing to take that personal risk.