WHAT RADIO REALLY NEEDS Larry Stoler – RadioDailyNews Over the past several months, many articles have been written and surveys have been done regarding the state of radio in America. This concern has come up throughout radio's history except this time, the competition comes from different sources.
In the 1950's, the future of radio was in doubt as television became a part of the American culture. Network radio's future was threatened as the habits of the audience began to change.
In 1955, Monitor began on NBC radio. It was a weekend program which consisted of music and special features, reports and commentaries on a variety of subjects. It was created by then NBC President Sylvester L. "Pat" Weaver who also invented the Today and the Tonight show. Monitor was an immediate success. It ran for 20 years and to this day is credited as saving the radio network.
Radio has had other threats to its existence over the years. As inventions such as the Walkman entered our lives, many questioned whether traditional over the air broadcasting would survive and guess what, it did.
Today satellite radio has entered the landscape. Two companies, (XM and Sirius,) offer subscribers many channels full of all kinds of music much of which has been ignored by commercial and even non commercial radio in America.
Both satellite services have also begun to hire well known names such as Howard Stern and Opie and Anthony. XM has an 11 year agreement to broadcast major league baseball. Sirius has the NFL and there is more to come for both companies as the competition increases.
As a result of brilliant marketing through commercial free music channels and making people believe they are getting more diversity many are willing to pay monthly for something they got for free for years as long as they supported the station they listened to and the advertisers that were on the air.
Internet radio is listened to by more people than ever before. Despite the Recording Industry Association of America's successful attempt to demand that radio stations pay massive amounts of money for making their programming available online, the choices via the net increase and as such are available to a wider audience all over the world.
The examples I mentioned are only a few of the ever increasing sources people have for obtaining music and information at a faster rate every day.
How is the industry reacting? In my opinion, much time is being wasted by creating formats with ridiculous names such as Jack, Bob, Frank, Dave, and now Ben. They all say they are "playing what we want." Who is the “we” they keep referring to? Does the “we” mean only people that were contacted by a research firm or is it an example of imaging being done for the wrong reasons?
It's okay to offer a wide variety of music but if you don't know the artists and titles, what does it matter.
The formats are not being promoted with good sounding jocks or live remotes or audience involvement by phone or station websites. Instead you hear things like don't call the request line. We don't have one. You're just a listener. How is that going to help what you are after when building an audience? This approach is telling the listener that they are not worth anything and their opinion doesn't matter.
Another thing is that many stations tell you what they are not instead of what they are. Remember the days of no rock, no rap and no sleepy elevator music? That is what the station doesn't want to be. Now what is the station in question all about? What kind of music is emphasized every day? What will the audience hear when they tune in? I don't know.
Recently the industry launched a $28 million campaign to tell people through messages from many performers that they got their start and became famous as a result of radio. I think to the average person when they hear this they will think so what or who cares. it doesn't make people excited about this great medium.
So much of what is available on the AM and FM dial is "reality oriented." This is done through morning shows where they talk about reality TV or what the team has to do when they get off the air or gossip about who slept with who.
One of the things that got so many of us interested in radio were the announcers that made it larger than life and they were positive on the air. Much of what is permitted or accepted as the norm on the air would not have even been considered years ago.
When I turn on the radio I don't care about the problems someone in a morning team is having. One day I heard a couple of people talk about how they had to go home and mow the lawn. How does knowing that fact affect my life or anyone else's? It really doesn't. It's just another example of reality radio.
The demographic argument has become extremely niched. This became apparent to me recently while reading an interview with the program director of a station in New Jersey who decided to change the focus of a weekly oldies show. The show had been 70's based with a countdown from a specific year each week.
The decision was made to drop the concentration on the 70's and play requests from the 60's through the 80's.
In the article, it was stated that the core audience the station was after was 35 to 45 years. What's next? Maybe a format for people aged 25 to 26 that would be for adult women who sit on the right side of the front seat of the car.
The point is this. What happened to going after everybody? The purpose is to get the most people possible to listen to a station so more advertisers will buy time and the ad rates can increase.
I have also noticed a concentration on the 9 AM to 5 PM office audience. What happened to the rest of the broadcast day? I thought the belief was you were not supposed to pay attention to the radio when you are at work. I guess instead you have it on in the background just enough so you will be able to write down information about what you listened to in an Arbitron diary.
I attended a conference on what it takes to get music played on the air. One of the participants mentioned a station that does a "specialty show" on Sunday nights where rarely heard bands are featured.
One of the panellists said that it didn't matter on Sunday nights because people are watching television. It used to be that the industry cared about good content 24 hours a day. Now after seven o'clock the assumption is that everyone is on the Internet or watching TV or exploring other sources for entertainment. This is wrong. Stations might as well sign off at night based on that logic.
Those are just a few of the decisions and perceptions that have contributed to the way radio sounds today and why listeners are going to alternatives as mentioned earlier.
This is what I think needs to be done in order for things to change and ultimately make radio worth listening to again.
(1) Although music selection and the number of songs played is important remember it's what goes on between the songs that also matters. Make the station sound exciting around the clock. Stop the practice of voice-tracking from a different location. This does not make a station sound like it cares about the area it is supposed to serve.
Radio's biggest advantage and potential draw when done right is that it can be live and local. This concept needs to return to the air right away.
(2) Radio should be looked at as an escape from what the average person has to deal with every day. Make the morning shows sound positive and market them that way. Get away from inside jokes, discussions about reality TV shows, etc. Cut back on the reality approach and make it fun to tune in.
(3) Promote the station constantly through audience involvement on the phone, through the website, at live remotes and other appearances.
(4) Stop the $28 million campaign I mentioned earlier. In the end, it won't matter and people will forget about it.
(5) Pay attention to the entire broadcast day. Make a station sound as exciting at 10 PM as it would if the audience tuned in at 7 AM. Do everything necessary to get people to leave the radio on at night. It is just as important as during the day.
(6) Drop the Jack, Bob, Ben and other names that don't mean a thing. Use call letters and tell people what the station is all about.
What I have suggested takes a lot of work but the end result will be worth it. The listeners will talk in a positive way about radio. The ratings will increase, the sales people will be able to charge more for commercials and a good bottom line will result.
The idea is not to panic. Realize and accept the fact that Satellite Radio, the Internet, iPods and other ways to obtain music and information are hear to stay. They are not going away.
You can't "fight fire with fire." Realize radio's strengths and use them.
Radio is not dead but in order to insure the future growth of it, these suggestions and others should be considered and ultimately added to the overall sound and presentation. |