K
KPLEXCOMPLEX
Guest
Re: songs
>
> Besides the slight umbridge taken at the pandering usage of
> "dude," I don't see any of your points as being relevant or
> correct.
Dude: I see yours as doublespeak and in denial.
>
> > The days of stations caring about listeners are over
> > it's the advertisers they cater to.
>
> You are aware that radio has been ad supported from the
> beginning? Why, oh why, do you think Westinghouse
> established KDKA? Did you know that Paley bought WCAU to cut
> his ad expenses for his Cigar company? Did Sarnoff build the
> red and Blue nets of NBC because he was altruistic and a
> real nice gent?
Thanks for the slightly abridged history,but you served up my point well.
>
> Radio is an ad medium. Poor Richard's Alamanc was an ad
> medium. Commercial media attracts users (readers, viewers,
> listeners) and offers access to them via advertising. This
> surprising fact has been in play for over 80 years.
>
> > Lowry said it himself in
> > more ways than one.
>
> Lowry would be lying were he not to say that. Radio makes
> money from advertisers, and makes none directly from
> listeners. The business of radio is selling ads and that is
> the reason why stations will do everything possible to be as
> appealing as they can to listeners.
They cater to advertisers solely and you know it,the listeners are being further and further ill served each week (and to paraphrase a line from you )" You know it.
>
> > So a station's management will skew to
> > what an advertiser seeks,and if some facts get lost along
> > the way,so what? If they can still make money selling the
> > spots,so be it.
>
> Advertisers seek sepcific consumer groups. A commercial
> station can not survive programming to unattractive groups.
> So station programming is determined based on its
> possibility in collecting lots of listeners in a salable
> demo. Once the target of a station is determined,
> programming is developed to deliver this demo. That means
> that every effort will be made to make the station
> appealing.
>
>
> > Research organizations are suported by stations who get
> > support from advertising.
>
> So? The research company is simply trying to find out what
> the listener interst is given a specific target or to
> provide data that will make the station more competitive.
> Research companies do not interface with advertisers. They
> study listener likes and dislikes so a station can do its
> best in reaching a specific group.
SO? Is that it? You missed that point. NO O B J E C T I V I T Y in research is conducted.
>
> > A daisy chain if there ever was
> > one. Some research organizations belong to a huge
> > corporations much like radio stations in major markets.
>
> The research companies that do programming studies come in
> two flavors. One is owned by the staiton group itself, and
> is a service department intended to deal specifically with a
> company's stations to improve them.
AND carry a greater weight than an outside researcher.
The other consists of
> mostly small, entrepreneurial companies like Coleman,
> Paragon, Pinnacle, Haarker, Parakhal, etc. who are
> specialized in radio research techniques, many having highly
specialized products that are radio-specific.
Who have had invested interests from stations, making them partial in some of their findings. Nothing like accuracy.
>
> > They
> > are very apolitical and do not want to lose a client
> > themselves by saying their pet station in a market is
> > reeking.
>
> A research company does not say a station is good or bad.
> The listeners do that.
Come again? If they say,you have low numbers in this particular demographic, format then a station is bad, and vice versa
A research company does not give
> opinions. It asks questions and tabulates the answers. The
> station decides what the results mean by interpretation.
Questions can be worded and have been to give a projected response. Again no objectivity.
>
> > Some research organizations have themselves been
> > invested into by media owners. No bias there,right?
>
> No. That is the ideal situation, since the reasearch company
> does not have to observe confidentiality about findings in
> other markets that may be from projects done for competitive
> companies or stations. An in house research company will be
> able to share other market findings openly, and have the
> opportunity to deal with sensitive confidential subjects.
Once again you missed the point. No shock there.
>
> > Individual stations need to conduct their own research,but
>
> > that would cost the research organizations money and they
> > can't have that,could they?
>
> Individual stations are, with nearly no exceptions, not
> qualified or trained or equiped to do local projects on
> their own. How many staitons have someone qualified to run a
> music test data set through SPSS to get a Pierson
> Correlation break into clusters? Huh
A name dropper huh? Funny how some stations used to ASCERTAIN the local community,without outside help. The corporate structure eliminated that,with their non-caring attitude towards a community of license.
> >
> > It's "Consultants" by the way.
>
> Consultants don't do reasearch. Consultants, in house or
> outside, are often brought in to make the best use of
> reserch, both in interpretation or implementation.
Consultants can and have misread results, will SPIN to make their analysis seem credible to a green GM or a non caring( of a particular station) Regional VP,even though the interpretation can and has been questionable by other who have no say,but have more knowledge in decision making.
>
> > I know you got in a hurry
> > with a need to reply to anyone who dares to disagree with
> > you. Consultants are spin doctors and can make disasterous
>
> > numbers look good.
>
> A good consultant is hired to make bad numbers improve. And
> to hold good ones even in the face of competiton.
Consultants Put the SPIN on things to make themselves appear to be credible.
>
> > It's all politics,removed from reality.
> > Get some rest.
>
> There is no politics at all involved.
Politics in government,you would be correct on a technicality.
Corporate politics,you are wrong.
>
> Today's #1 station in Dallas has a 5.7. In Spring of 2002,
> it had a 1.5. It did research to determine how to improve,
> and used in house consultants to interpret and implement
> together with the local programming staff.
We all know how arbitron has been very reliable and has come under increasing fire for the way they tabulate the findings. A station should do what it needs to do to improve with a LOCAL staff,not a large company ceo.
>
> As I said... no politics at all involved.
>As I said Politics plays a role with this.
You will dispute,fume,argue,and never will conceed any point presented in opposition. You are a master of SPIN. One day the rotation will slow to a crawl.
I know you're chomping at the bit to respond to this and others who have the audacity to point out you're wrong. You will continue to do so. I made my points,and they were made solidly, whether you agree or disagree. One day you should go back and work in a studio instead of at a desk with a computer,it might help you. I won't respond to you further,this thread has gone on enough.
>
> Besides the slight umbridge taken at the pandering usage of
> "dude," I don't see any of your points as being relevant or
> correct.
Dude: I see yours as doublespeak and in denial.
>
> > The days of stations caring about listeners are over
> > it's the advertisers they cater to.
>
> You are aware that radio has been ad supported from the
> beginning? Why, oh why, do you think Westinghouse
> established KDKA? Did you know that Paley bought WCAU to cut
> his ad expenses for his Cigar company? Did Sarnoff build the
> red and Blue nets of NBC because he was altruistic and a
> real nice gent?
Thanks for the slightly abridged history,but you served up my point well.
>
> Radio is an ad medium. Poor Richard's Alamanc was an ad
> medium. Commercial media attracts users (readers, viewers,
> listeners) and offers access to them via advertising. This
> surprising fact has been in play for over 80 years.
>
> > Lowry said it himself in
> > more ways than one.
>
> Lowry would be lying were he not to say that. Radio makes
> money from advertisers, and makes none directly from
> listeners. The business of radio is selling ads and that is
> the reason why stations will do everything possible to be as
> appealing as they can to listeners.
They cater to advertisers solely and you know it,the listeners are being further and further ill served each week (and to paraphrase a line from you )" You know it.
>
> > So a station's management will skew to
> > what an advertiser seeks,and if some facts get lost along
> > the way,so what? If they can still make money selling the
> > spots,so be it.
>
> Advertisers seek sepcific consumer groups. A commercial
> station can not survive programming to unattractive groups.
> So station programming is determined based on its
> possibility in collecting lots of listeners in a salable
> demo. Once the target of a station is determined,
> programming is developed to deliver this demo. That means
> that every effort will be made to make the station
> appealing.
>
>
> > Research organizations are suported by stations who get
> > support from advertising.
>
> So? The research company is simply trying to find out what
> the listener interst is given a specific target or to
> provide data that will make the station more competitive.
> Research companies do not interface with advertisers. They
> study listener likes and dislikes so a station can do its
> best in reaching a specific group.
SO? Is that it? You missed that point. NO O B J E C T I V I T Y in research is conducted.
>
> > A daisy chain if there ever was
> > one. Some research organizations belong to a huge
> > corporations much like radio stations in major markets.
>
> The research companies that do programming studies come in
> two flavors. One is owned by the staiton group itself, and
> is a service department intended to deal specifically with a
> company's stations to improve them.
AND carry a greater weight than an outside researcher.
The other consists of
> mostly small, entrepreneurial companies like Coleman,
> Paragon, Pinnacle, Haarker, Parakhal, etc. who are
> specialized in radio research techniques, many having highly
specialized products that are radio-specific.
Who have had invested interests from stations, making them partial in some of their findings. Nothing like accuracy.
>
> > They
> > are very apolitical and do not want to lose a client
> > themselves by saying their pet station in a market is
> > reeking.
>
> A research company does not say a station is good or bad.
> The listeners do that.
Come again? If they say,you have low numbers in this particular demographic, format then a station is bad, and vice versa
A research company does not give
> opinions. It asks questions and tabulates the answers. The
> station decides what the results mean by interpretation.
Questions can be worded and have been to give a projected response. Again no objectivity.
>
> > Some research organizations have themselves been
> > invested into by media owners. No bias there,right?
>
> No. That is the ideal situation, since the reasearch company
> does not have to observe confidentiality about findings in
> other markets that may be from projects done for competitive
> companies or stations. An in house research company will be
> able to share other market findings openly, and have the
> opportunity to deal with sensitive confidential subjects.
Once again you missed the point. No shock there.
>
> > Individual stations need to conduct their own research,but
>
> > that would cost the research organizations money and they
> > can't have that,could they?
>
> Individual stations are, with nearly no exceptions, not
> qualified or trained or equiped to do local projects on
> their own. How many staitons have someone qualified to run a
> music test data set through SPSS to get a Pierson
> Correlation break into clusters? Huh
A name dropper huh? Funny how some stations used to ASCERTAIN the local community,without outside help. The corporate structure eliminated that,with their non-caring attitude towards a community of license.
> >
> > It's "Consultants" by the way.
>
> Consultants don't do reasearch. Consultants, in house or
> outside, are often brought in to make the best use of
> reserch, both in interpretation or implementation.
Consultants can and have misread results, will SPIN to make their analysis seem credible to a green GM or a non caring( of a particular station) Regional VP,even though the interpretation can and has been questionable by other who have no say,but have more knowledge in decision making.
>
> > I know you got in a hurry
> > with a need to reply to anyone who dares to disagree with
> > you. Consultants are spin doctors and can make disasterous
>
> > numbers look good.
>
> A good consultant is hired to make bad numbers improve. And
> to hold good ones even in the face of competiton.
Consultants Put the SPIN on things to make themselves appear to be credible.
>
> > It's all politics,removed from reality.
> > Get some rest.
>
> There is no politics at all involved.
Politics in government,you would be correct on a technicality.
Corporate politics,you are wrong.
>
> Today's #1 station in Dallas has a 5.7. In Spring of 2002,
> it had a 1.5. It did research to determine how to improve,
> and used in house consultants to interpret and implement
> together with the local programming staff.
We all know how arbitron has been very reliable and has come under increasing fire for the way they tabulate the findings. A station should do what it needs to do to improve with a LOCAL staff,not a large company ceo.
>
> As I said... no politics at all involved.
>As I said Politics plays a role with this.
You will dispute,fume,argue,and never will conceed any point presented in opposition. You are a master of SPIN. One day the rotation will slow to a crawl.
I know you're chomping at the bit to respond to this and others who have the audacity to point out you're wrong. You will continue to do so. I made my points,and they were made solidly, whether you agree or disagree. One day you should go back and work in a studio instead of at a desk with a computer,it might help you. I won't respond to you further,this thread has gone on enough.
