WSJ References Austin to Tout Value of Local Radio

[david]

November 17 WSJ uses Austin to tout the value of local radio:

Opinion | Local Radio Helped Make Me at Home in Texas

In the streaming age, local stations are an underappreciated part of a community.

www.wsj.com

Terrestrial radio is one of the last refuges for local ads, which don’t play on streaming services, national podcasts or satellite stations. I’d much rather listen to a fast-talking ad for Austin’s new Major League Soccer team or a middle-aged host extolling the virtues of pumpkin-spice-flavored Bud Light Seltzer than have podcast hosts berate me to sign up for ZipRecruiter or blow $1,000 on a Casper mattress. And you’ll never win free concert tickets for being the ninth caller to Spotify.
Notices about grand openings, hot deals and new attractions let listeners feel the motion of the local economy. The booming voices clamoring to give you big money at trade-in provide strong evidence for supply shortages and inflation. And the constant chatter about home prices proves the market is hot—so hot that some realtors have broadcast ad budgets.
The morning traffic report tells commuters to avoid jams and also makes me feel a little proud when I recognize the street names.
The opinion piece focuses on KVET and laments how the Pew Research Center found the percentage of Americans (over 12) who listened to AM or FM radio in any given week fell to 83% in 2020 from 89% in 2019. The author feel this is a shame as fiddling with the tuning dial is a good way to root yourself in your community and uses Austin references to make the point:
Local radio offers bits of news about municipal life and elections that those who don’t subscribe to a local newspaper may not know. It connects audiences to the seasonal calendar of a place. In Austin, gripes about the summer heat and full parking lots at local swimming pools give way to chatter about University of Texas football and the annual Austin City Limits music festival.

 

[BamaTX]

Terrestrial radio is one of the last refuges for local ads, which don’t play on streaming services,

I don't know who wrote that article, but this is absolutely false. I've heard regional ads on Spotify in the Houston area. Streaming services may not have a local sales team like most radio stations do, but that doesn't mean ad buyers have to buy national ads. Streaming services have the capability to geo-fence their services to specific areas if a client desires.

The author feel this is a shame as fiddling with the tuning dial is a good way to root yourself in your community and uses Austin references to make the point:

The author doesn't seem to realize that voice tracking is a thing. The station he used as an example (KVET) has on-air talent being piped in from other cities such as Corpus Christi and Colorado.

This feels more like a nostalgia hit piece for a guy who misses Austin rather than radio.

 

[Ryan Williams]

If this had been about KOKE or Sun or KUTX the whole premise of the article would have rung a lot more true to me.

KVET is not a great example of “local radio”, although there are certainly far worse illustrations.

 

[b-turner]

Might I contend the point you are missing is the writer is being served in their mind with a nice dose of local radio they cannot get from any other source. It doesn't matter if it's voice tracked, Voice tracked can be local. The station I work for is partly voice tracked out of Austin. You'd likely never be able to tell that. In fact, let's get real: typical radio listeners have no clue what voice tracking is and we wouldn't either if we were not in the business.

 

[Ryan Williams]

Might I contend the point you are missing is the writer is being served in their mind with a nice dose of local radio they cannot get from any other source. It doesn't matter if it's voice tracked, Voice tracked can be local. The station I work for is partly voice tracked out of Austin. You'd likely never be able to tell that. In fact, let's get real: typical radio listeners have no clue what voice tracking is and we wouldn't either if we were not in the business.

Those are all very fair points.

 

[stan]

Even more interesting would be to know the demographics for radio listeners between 18 and 34, and how far that percentage has fallen. Its a fraction of the 83% reported in the referenced article.

 

[davideduardo]

Even more interesting would be to know the demographics for radio listeners between 18 and 34, and how far that percentage has fallen. Its a fraction of the 83% reported in the referenced article.

Actually, that article is based on a methodology that does not match radio ratings in that it did not included "hearing" where the person interviewed actually listens to a station that someone else has selected and which is at a sufficient volume for it to be clearly heard.

Advertisers don't care whether a person who hears their ad selected the station it is broadcast on. They care about, and pay for, the number of people who heard their message.

All radio ratings have included listening to any radio station the listener is exposed to. Kids in mom's car. Car pool members. Uber passengers. Customers and employees in a store or coffee house. The radio the head mechanic puts on in the shop or the one the foreman selects on the loading dock.

The figures for 18-34 show a decline of radio usage compared to when there was no alternative other than an 8-Track, cassetted, CD or MP3 player. But the total figure for exposure, while a couple of percent (it varies by market, of course) below that of 25-54 or 35-64, it's not radically different.

Oh, the "demographics" of persons between 18 and 34 is "Persons 18-34".

 

[davideduardo]

The station I work for is partly voice tracked out of Austin. You'd likely never be able to tell that. In fact, let's get real: typical radio listeners have no clue what voice tracking is and we wouldn't either if we were not in the business.

True.

I had an AM and FM in a top 20 market back in the late 70's. They were totally voice tracked and automated except for the morning show. The market had three dozen stations in it. One of the ones I managed and programmed was #1 and the other was #2.

 

[truernb]

I'm curious what is an example of a market that has great local radio station for the demo 18 - 34, ?
on the urban end ( Howard University Radio Station ) figured it out a long time ago. Granted they have a captive audience look at there ratings year over year WHUR-FM

 

[BamaTX]

All radio ratings have included listening to any radio station the listener is exposed to. Kids in mom's car. Car pool members. Uber passengers. Customers and employees in a store or coffee house. The radio the head mechanic puts on in the shop or the one the foreman selects on the loading dock.

The figures for 18-34 show a decline of radio usage compared to when there was no alternative other than an 8-Track, cassetted, CD or MP3 player. But the total figure for exposure, while a couple of percent (it varies by market, of course) below that of 25-54 or 35-64, it's not radically different.

Considering repetition is a huge sales pitch in advertisement, this doesn't bode well for radio IMO. How can you confidently tell a client that a front desk receptionist who listens to KODA all day is just as valuable as his/her customers who are only exposed to KODA in the lobby for ~15 minutes? Sure, count them in your stats, but how valuable are those listeners if they only caught an advertisement once and won't be hearing KODA again the rest of the week/month?

Furthermore, if someone is exposed to something they don't care for, how can you guarantee that they are even paying attention to begin with? This is one of the issues I've always had with PPM. For example, I've been inside a few Uber/Lyfts where KBXX was on. If I had a PPM with me, I'd be considered a "listener". But what the PPM wouldn't tell you is that I can completely tune out the radio and become completely distracted with articles on my phone.

This idea of counting people who are exposed to radio at a coffee shop or at a store seems extremely shifty. It reminds me of our company's quarterly safety seminars. They don't care if you listen or not, just as long as you're present and accounted for (for insurance purposes). If our insurer ever wises up and begins handing out quizzes following each seminar, the entire room would fail miserably.

The point I'm trying to make is that the content you choose to listen to should not be treated the same as the content you're forcibly "exposed" to. Pretending like there is no difference between the two and selling the numbers as "one" just makes radio look like a snakeoil business.

 

[b-turner]

I understand your point but I think we are missing the actual purpose of advertising: producing results. When the investment versus return does not match the goal, no matter the ratings, you won't get a renewal. While the buy might be ratings oriented, the long term or successive buys come only when the results meet expectations.