Permit me to nag. There are signs of interest among radio guys--hits on this site, for one--in the two move-in FMs in Denver, whose "new" formats, "Martini on the Rockies" and "Sassy," are apparently, uh, "different" from anything on the air. (See my earlier post.)
If you're not in Denver, you can't hear them yet--not at this writing, anyway. No Web site. A dead giveaway that either 1) the Denver Radio Company guys couldn't run and chew gum simultaneously getting these two dark FMs back on the air after a year and a half, 2) they're afraid some other radio group will hear and steal their "unique" mix --as if they'd need to hear it to steal it-- or 3) they're in the sizeable minority of radio guys who still can't believe the Web is either necessary to their survival, or a threat, or both, yet. But that's another nag.
I know, guys, after all these years, shuffling categories and making up new niche names is all you know. But, read my lips: all imaginable musical niches are available on the Web, the birds, or the pods. You're only buying time, and not much of it. Every week a new smartphone signs on, along with new distribution systems that you aren't on. Where are the new, cool radios? Where are the really new, really local, radio services?
O.K., DRC, you're getting the radio guys' attention. Will you get enough Denverites to pull a 3.0, or two of them? What if the money's already spread too thin to support another 3.0 share, and all the new Web, satellite and phone choices?
Hint: start planning your next flip now.
Subscribe to my all-purpose feed via feedburner.com.
4 comments:
What most of you "techi" type folk don't get, is that the demo these type of stations reach, though hardly stupid, are not as tech savvy and actually are too busy in their lives to surf the web and do those things you say are so prevelant. Beyond that, many of those technologies are also "cost prohibitive". When you can still get radio for free, many won't slap down $300 for a receiver and pay a subscriber's fee of $10-12/month...at least not in the interim. Eventually that will change, as it has with TV, but that took 15+ years, we are in year 4-5 of this boom. I worked in Internet radio with a dot Bomb, and I have also worked for one of the big satellite providers, and though the content was phenomenal for our internet operation, the business model was poor and as they (though I tried to remind/tell them) forgot the portability and accessibility of the technology. Though that has also improved and changed, until the other forms or broadcasting are omnipresent and accessible to the lager massess, and cheap/free, Terrestrial Radio won't be going anywhere. In fact all these changes will actually (and have already) improved the medium, by forcing it to compete.
Thanks,
"Techi" -- Moi? Thanks for the assumption, or compliment, if you meant it to be one...I'm an old radio guy, venting my frustration with steel-tower radio's denial, which is only beginning to break up. I can't find much of anything to disagree with you about, Anon. Thanks for stopping by.
Not meant as a negative..."techi", but we forget how the medium is used, most average listeners are not as passionate, and couldn't tell you who owns what, or even care. Only that they want to here their favorite song or songs.
It doesn't mean they don't get disgruntled, but in the scheme of things, it is very low on their radar. And I have been hearing about the revolution with Ipod, Internet, satellite, etc...heard the same thing when they made "Walkmans". People listen to the radio for a connection, local usually. If that is good, many times the music/format is immaterial. So you have camps who want their song, or want the connection, or both. So if you don't disagree, why write an article that articualates the position that radio is doomed by the advent of these new technologies?
I guess I am confused by what your intent is...Is it to just lash out at the medium to grind an axe, or making the point that radio is obsolete?
The latter is wrong, as a vet of 17+ years with quality exposure/experience with Internet, Satellite, and terrestrial radio, that chage will take place, but not until a few things happen/change (read original post).
If the former, sorry. But it has happen to all of us at one point or another. You either get bitter or better.
Thanks for reading.
Again, thanks, Anon, for helping me think things through. Here's a little more on my intent:
I love local radio-station radio--the kind people want to connect with. And, I worry that radio guys are taking too long to come out of denial of the new audio and advertising choices that are attracting listeners and advertisers--systems with technologies that don't receive AMFM signals.
You're right, the sea change takes a while, and radio's got a little time to adjust before the new channels come close to radio's universal accessibility. Still, radio revenues are off even now because of the Web (if not because of Web radio), and listening is down some, and the trend is down. It's time to do something creative, and, as I said in the above piece, most radio guys are still shuffling formats. That'll work for a while, but someday soon it won't.
I don't see the point in temporizing about how things aren't as bad as some of us think, when all the indicators are flashing yellow. I've seen how denial can trip up otherwise good companies, who may still have cash flow, but now have fuzzy futures. I'm not as sure as you are that all these changes will force all tower radio guys to compete. Big and small companies are stumbling around in the half-light right now -- CBS, Emmis, for example.
Do I think radio's "obsolete?" No. I think a lot of radio station people are. I think radio people have been lowering listener expectations and playing too many commercials in a row for decades -- what radio station do young music freaks listen to for new bands and tunes? Where do you get your morning news? Radio itself isn't doomed -- somebody will come up with new uses for the dial positions. I do think a lot of radio station guys are doomed--especially those who think ideas come from focus groups.
Why write articles saying what I say? Good question. I'm not a consultant. I don't have a format idea to sell. I'm not looking for a radio job. No axes. Best answer I can come up with is: because it's how I feel, and because I can.
Thanks again for the friction.
Dave
Post a Comment