Classic Hits on AM

DavidEduardo · Oct 21, 2014

ok walters said:
There is one major difference in the 10% of the population that is Hispanic and any other group of English speaking citizens, and it is the language. As a non-Spanish speaking person - like a vast majority of the population - I listen to several different formats at times. News, rock, country, oldies, sports - at some time all are on my radio. I will never listen to Spanish as I can't understand it at all. When only 10% of the population can even understand what is being said, it is a niche, regardless of its success in specific geographical areas like big cities.

Actually, at about 50,000,000 persons Hispanics are now close to 16% of the population.

While language seems to be a very "hard" barrier, it is no more of such than the cultural and nurture barriers that would prevent me from ever, ever listening to a classic rock or alternative station for more than a few minutes. Or the same barriers that would keep a very devoted Christian from listening to certain secular formats. And so on.

By your standard, nearly all formats are "niche formats" today when it is rare to find a major market station that gets over an 8 share and a 20 cume rating.

I would say that, in a very fragmented and stratified environment, the term "niche" has to be restricted to formats that have far more limited appeal than those in Spanish... formats like Jazz and Classical and others that are not found in many markets and when they do exist, get smallish shares.

Language is but one thing that divides people into taste groups.

Avid Listener · Oct 21, 2014

DavidEduardo said:
Actually, at about 50,000,000 persons Hispanics are now close to 16% of the population.

Given that the only requirement to be considered "Hispanic" is to claim to be Hispanic, how relevant is that number? And, how many of those "Hispanics" are assimilated, native-born, English speakings citizens for whom Spanish is the forgotten language of the "old country"? How many Hispanics in the US are people like Charlie Sheen compared with Hispanics who are "mules" who just crossed the border illegally with a kilo of cocaine strapped to their backs? If you're going to insist on precision in counting Hispanics, shouldn't you also use the same degree of precision in defining them?

TheFonz · Oct 21, 2014

Avid Listener said:
Given that the only requirement to be considered "Hispanic" is to claim to be Hispanic, how relevant is that number? And, how many of those "Hispanics" are assimilated, native-born, English speakings citizens for whom Spanish is the forgotten language of the "old country"? How many Hispanics in the US are people like Charlie Sheen compared with Hispanics who are "mules" who just crossed the border illegally with a kilo of cocaine strapped to their backs? If you're going to insist on precision in counting Hispanics, shouldn't you also use the same degree of precision in defining them?

Whoa. I'm going to enjoy THIS discussion......................

Tibbs4 · Oct 21, 2014

Geez Avid - should we then do the same breakdowns for Country and Urban? I feel a launch pad in someone's future. I can't even begin to fathom explaining this on here.

DavidEduardo · Oct 21, 2014

Avid Listener said:
Given that the only requirement to be considered "Hispanic" is to claim to be Hispanic, how relevant is that number? And, how many of those "Hispanics" are assimilated, native-born, English speakings citizens for whom Spanish is the forgotten language of the "old country"? How many Hispanics in the US are people like Charlie Sheen compared with Hispanics who are "mules" who just crossed the border illegally with a kilo of cocaine strapped to their backs? If you're going to insist on precision in counting Hispanics, shouldn't you also use the same degree of precision in defining them?

"Hispanic" is an invented term, never used to define a group of people prior to it's creation by the OMB / Census Bureau in time for the 1980 Census.

Since the Census is self administered, the term "Hispanic" is a matter of perception. It is a stand-alone "Yes / No" question.

Similarly, the requirement to be "African American / Black" or "Asian" or "Native American" is self-perception. Does a person who is predominantly Caucasian but a great grandparent who is Black self-identify as white or as Black? So the "Race" question is just as precise as the "Hispanic" question.

In fact, any question on the Census forms, either the long or the short one, can be relatively imprecise. On the income question, does the person who does not declare tips or underground economy earnings give their real income to the government's Census Bureau? Or does a person who did 2 years of college put down that they are a college grad to feel better?

We know a percentage of Hispanics are not Spanish speakers... generally somewhere after the third generation. We also know that many Hispanics who are not documented don't fill out the Census.

But we are talking about radio formats, and since Nielsen uses the Census data and the ACS updates to achieve proportionality in its sample, going by those figures is the best of several ways of looking at the very large Hispanic population in the US. Whatever the true size of the Hispanic population, it is definitely greater than 10%. And my correction of the OP was based on the idea that such sizable audience group was, in today's fragmented media world, a niche.

Avid Listener · Oct 21, 2014

Tibbs2 said:
Geez Avid - should we then do the same breakdowns for Country and Urban? I feel a launch pad in someone's future. I can't even begin to fathom explaining this on here.

No, we shouldn't. "Hispanic" is about the only market niche that is so ill-defined that I can think of. Country and Urban both appeal to people who like Country or Urban, same as Classic Rock and all the others. Besides, I was only asking for clarification from He Who Knows Everything because what he posted was vague and ambiguous, much like the definition of "Hispanic".

landtuna · Oct 21, 2014

Avid Listener said:
Linda Ronstadt is considered Hispanic.

By who? Her paternal family originated in Germany, immigrated to Sonora, Mexico spending several decades there eventually resettling in Tucson, AZ. Linda's genes certainly have Mexican ancestry but she was born in the USA of parents who themselves were born here. One of the reasons people may perceive her to be of Mexican or Hispanic heritage is the music she sings (along with most of her family) but that has little to do with her ancestry and more to do with the musical heritage of her family while living in Mexico.

Avid Listener · Oct 21, 2014

landtuna said:
By who? Her paternal family originated in Germany, immigrated to Sonora, Mexico spending several decades there eventually resettling in Tucson, AZ. Linda's genes certainly have Mexican ancestry but she was born in the USA of parents who themselves were born here. One of the reasons people may perceive her to be of Mexican or Hispanic heritage is the music she sings (along with most of her family) but that has little to do with her ancestry and more to do with the musical heritage of her family while living in Mexico.

By Ronstadt herself while promoting her album, "Canciones de Mi Padre", and at other times. She self-identifies as a Mexican-American. You are correct that she sings songs of Mexican / Hispanic heritage. She also won a Latin Grammy Lifetime Achievement award, the Trailblazer Award for Contribution to American Music from American Latino Media Arts, and three nominations from the Lo Nuestro Awards.

The thing is, a great many native-born American citizens self-identify as "Hispanic", regardless of how many generations ago their ancestors left a Spanish speaking country. I was just watching "Finding Your Roots with Henry Louis Gates, Jr" on TV an hour or so ago. One of his guests was chef Aaron Sanchez. It turns out that some of Sanchez's ancestors came from Basque country in Spain. His DNA test indicated around 2/3rds Spanish ancestry, almost 1/3 Native American, and some smattering of Africa and Pacific Islander. Nevertheless, despite being born in the USA, Sanchez proudly proclaims himself "Mexican American", even with mostly European ancestry.

Please note what I said above: "the only requirement to be considered 'Hispanic' is to claim to be Hispanic". Hell, I once won a chili cook-off while using a "Hispanicized" version of my real name.

DavidEduardo · Oct 22, 2014

Avid Listener said:
No, we shouldn't. "Hispanic" is about the only market niche that is so ill-defined that I can think of.

You opened the door, so....

"Hispanic" is not a format, it is a culture.

"Spanish" is not a format, it is a language.

Yet it is common to hear people calling Spanish language formats as "Hispanic" or "Spanish".

There are, in fact, as many potential formats in the Spanish language as there are in English... probably more.

Country and Urban both appeal to people who like Country or Urban, same as Classic Rock and all the others.

Regional Mexican appeals to people who like that kind of music. Same for Tropical or Contemporáneo or Bailanta or Vallenato... The subdivisions in Spanish language formats begin with the big, broad formats and work their way down to the true niche formats.

Besides, I was only asking for clarification from He Who Knows Everything because what he posted was vague and ambiguous, much like the definition of "Hispanic".

There is nothing vague about the definitions used by the Census. Each respondent is asked if they are "Hispanic" or not. People who feel that they are Hispanic or of Hispanic Heritage will say "yes". All others will say "no". And nobody will say that you are wrong as the Census form is generally self-administered within the family unit.

As to the "vague" term, practically everything on the Census form can be answered within a range and in many cases will be answered differently because a person wants to enhance their self esteem; an example is saying "high school graduate" when one actually dropped out.

All the "vagueness" simply illustrates why the Census should be done by statistical sampling using interviewers rather than sent blindly in the mail... but the Constitution seems to prohibit that.

DavidEduardo · Oct 22, 2014

landtuna said:
By who?

By everybody. Her heritage includes the use of Spanish, and her family came from Mexico. That's two reasons... strong ones... to consider her Hispanic.

Her paternal family originated in Germany, immigrated to Sonora, Mexico spending several decades there eventually resettling in Tucson, AZ. Linda's genes certainly have Mexican ancestry but she was born in the USA of parents who themselves were born here.

The Census Bureau considers a person to be Hispanic if their heritage is in any part Hispanic. Being born in the USA does not exclude one from being Hispanic or about 5 million Puerto Ricans would cease to be Hispanic.

One of the reasons people may perceive her to be of Mexican or Hispanic heritage is the music she sings (along with most of her family) but that has little to do with her ancestry and more to do with the musical heritage of her family while living in Mexico.

Neil Sedaka did all of his songs in Spanish, but nobody considers him Hispanic. Eydie Gorme sang for years with the Trío Los Panchos but nobody considers her to be Hispanic just because she sang in Spanish. The Rondstats became Hispanic due to acculturation... and the term "Hispanic" has to do with culture, not ethnicity nor race.

Another member of the same family, José Ronstadt, was an anchor on LA's Telemundo channel for more than a decade. I can't think of anyone more Hispanic than him...

ok walters · Oct 22, 2014

DavidEduardo said:
Actually, at about 50,000,000 persons Hispanics are now close to 16% of the population.

While language seems to be a very "hard" barrier, it is no more of such than the cultural and nurture barriers that would prevent me from ever, ever listening to a classic rock or alternative station for more than a few minutes. Or the same barriers that would keep a very devoted Christian from listening to certain secular formats. And so on.

By your standard, nearly all formats are "niche formats" today when it is rare to find a major market station that gets over an 8 share and a 20 cume rating.

I would say that, in a very fragmented and stratified environment, the term "niche" has to be restricted to formats that have far more limited appeal than those in Spanish... formats like Jazz and Classical and others that are not found in many markets and when they do exist, get smallish shares.

Language is but one thing that divides people into taste groups.

Okay fine - 16% Hispanic, so let's say 16% would be the total possible listener base as some non-Hispanics speak Spanish and some Hispanics don't. Then you add in that there are at least as many variations of Hispanic programming as there are in English, and now you really have a niche. 5 out 6 can't understand what you are saying, and then we divide the few that can understand into significantly different segments and now what do you have? A niche.

The Spanish formats also tend to do best in urban areas where the targeted population is most dense. You could put most English speaking formats almost anywhere, but as soon as you eliminate 5 out of every 6 people you restrict where the Spanish format will work. Polka music would do as well or better than Spanish language programming in many areas of this country due to that alone. Hispanic populations are high in urban areas, but are almost non-existent in many other areas.

It is true that few major market stations garner an 8 share, but what about the entire format not just one station? A major market may have several stations running the same format, so what is the formats share? And once again, leave the major markets where the most significant Hispanic populations are and what happens? A few formats dominate - in many markets one format has a 20+ share - and in some cases more than one format has a 20+ share.

Avid Listener · Oct 22, 2014

ok walters said:
There is one major difference in the 10% of the population that is Hispanic and any other group of English speaking citizens, and it is the language. As a non-Spanish speaking person - like a vast majority of the population - I listen to several different formats at times. News, rock, country, oldies, sports - at some time all are on my radio. I will never listen to Spanish as I can't understand it at all. When only 10% of the population can even understand what is being said, it is a niche, regardless of its success in specific geographical areas like big cities.

This is the most recent post that revived the issue of how many people are speaking Spanish. Ok Walters speculates that a tenth of the population can understand the Spanish language well enough that they could listen to radio programming that was in Spanish. That seems like a fair and accurate estimate, with an implied plus or minus tolerance that's close enough for rock & roll and the purposes of this discussion.

But, He Who Claims To Know All Things had to pick this nit:

DavidEduardo said:
Actually, at about 50,000,000 persons Hispanics are now close to 16% of the population.

The thing is, Mr. Gleason was referring to all people who self-identify as "Hispanic" on the US Census, not people who speak Spanish. His pedantic nitpicking wasn't about the guesstimate of how many people speak Spanish. He opened up a whole different can of worms.

None of this has anything to do with attempting to succeed by broadcasting a specific music format on AM radio, but then the next thread in here that gets more than 10 replies and stays strictly on-topic will be the first.

And before anyone picks that particular nit, read my tagline about hyperbole.

DavidEduardo · Oct 22, 2014

Avid Listener said:
"There is one major difference in the 10% of the population that is Hispanic and any other group... "

The thing is, Mr. Gleason was referring to all people who self-identify as "Hispanic" on the US Census, not people who speak Spanish. His pedantic nitpicking wasn't about the guesstimate of how many people speak Spanish. He opened up a whole different can of worms.

The original post did not reference "Spanish speaking" but "10% of the population that is Hispanic". Since approximately 16% of the population is Hispanic, the foundation for the argument substantially fails.

We have data on how many Hispanics use Spanish language media, and it comes from the cume figures of Spanish language radio and TV. The number is approximately 80% of all Hispanics.

We can go into discussions of how bilinguals use less Spanish language media than Spanish dominants, but the fact is that so much of the US Hispanic population is first and second generation that the language is nearly universally used, and we are able to rather accurately quantify it.

The only unmeasurable segment is the uncounted part of undocumented population, which may increase Hispanics to over 17% of the population; this segment is likely 100% Spanish dominant, and pushes the figures on Spanish usage even higher.

None of this has anything to do with attempting to succeed by broadcasting a specific music format on AM radio, but then the next thread in here that gets more than 10 replies and stays strictly on-topic will be the first.

In the context of AM music formats, the point I have made starts with the fact that AM had good music formats when the FCC mandated larger markets to cease simulcasting. FM won because FM offered more and better signals in all but a few markets; FM sounded better and had more variety. AM lost and by 1977 had the majority of all listening.

In some cases, Hispanic targeted formats end up on AM because no FM is available or FM does not make economic sense. Hispanics "settle" for this temporarily, but when given an FM option they leave AM even faster than the general population. My point is that AM, even for Spanish language music formats, can not succeed any longer. This is yet another bit of evidence that the issues for AM revolve around signal, noise levels and other factors, not programming.

And before anyone picks that particular nit, read my tagline about hyperbole.

You wrongly equate sarcasm with hyperbole. "Hyperbole" is a euphemism for lying. "Sarcasm" is the use of irony to mock or to show contempt. One is about tone, the other is simply fabrication.

DavidEduardo · Oct 22, 2014

ok walters said:
It is true that few major market stations garner an 8 share, but what about the entire format not just one station? A major market may have several stations running the same format, so what is the formats share? And once again, leave the major markets where the most significant Hispanic populations are and what happens? A few formats dominate - in many markets one format has a 20+ share - and in some cases more than one format has a 20+ share.

That's a valid point.

But even when you look at, let's say, CHR, and take the multi-CHR markets you still get relatively small shares. LA, for example, is under 8 shares.

Then we get into issues of how to combine formats. Is CHUrban part of CHR (based on playlist commonality, it isn't). Is Hot AC and WDUV / WFEZ all AC?

Using the strictest measures, there is no format that, based on share, is not rather niche. Even if we go to cume ratings, we still find that the biggest formats only reach, via multiple stations, perhaps a third of the audience nationally.

So it comes down to "what is a niche?". Where does a format cease being mass appeal and starts being niche? Is any format truly mass appeal today? And, then there is the spoiler question: in a niche world of 1000 cable channels does being niche or mass appeal even matter?

Avid Listener · Oct 22, 2014

DavidEduardo said:
The original post did not reference "Spanish speaking" but "10% of the population that is Hispanic". Since approximately 16% of the population is Hispanic, the foundation for the argument substantially fails.

Read the entire post.

landtuna · Oct 22, 2014

Avid Listener said:
By Ronstadt herself while promoting her album, "Canciones de Mi Padre", and at other times. She self-identifies as a Mexican-American. You are correct that she sings songs of Mexican / Hispanic heritage. She also won a Latin Grammy Lifetime Achievement award, the Trailblazer Award for Contribution to American Music from American Latino Media Arts, and three nominations from the Lo Nuestro Awards.

If you read anything written by Linda she identifies with Mexico, specifically Sonora (she calls herself a child of the Sonoran Desert, just like I do - a desert that spans two countries). But, by genealogy, I am not Hispanic and except for some of the music she likes to sing, neither is she.

Avid Listener said:
The thing is, a great many native-born American citizens self-identify as "Hispanic", regardless of how many generations ago their ancestors left a Spanish speaking country. I was just watching "Finding Your Roots with Henry Louis Gates, Jr" on TV an hour or so ago. One of his guests was chef Aaron Sanchez. It turns out that some of Sanchez's ancestors came from Basque country in Spain. His DNA test indicated around 2/3rds Spanish ancestry, almost 1/3 Native American, and some smattering of Africa and Pacific Islander. Nevertheless, despite being born in the USA, Sanchez proudly proclaims himself "Mexican American", even with mostly European ancestry.

I was born in the USA so I can claim to be a "Native American"? See how foolish this is getting (reading ahead to your next statement).

Avid Listener said:
Please note what I said above: "the only requirement to be considered 'Hispanic' is to claim to be Hispanic". Hell, I once won a chili cook-off while using a "Hispanicized" version of my real name.

Avid Listener · Oct 22, 2014

landtuna said:
But, by genealogy, I am not Hispanic and except for some of the music she likes to sing, neither is she.

As David and I both pointed out, on the only point we seemed to agree on, the only requirement for being "Hispanic" is to check the appropriate box on the US Census form. You don't need genealogy. You don't need DNA. You just have to claim to be Hispanic and voila, you are Hispanic.

landtuna · Oct 22, 2014

Avid Listener said:
As David and I both pointed out, on the only point we seemed to agree on, the only requirement for being "Hispanic" is to check the appropriate box on the US Census form. You don't need genealogy. You don't need DNA. You just have to claim to be Hispanic and voila, you are Hispanic.

Except that doesn't make it true. If it did I could claim to be Hispanic because I like Mariachi music and eat lots of Mexican food (at least the Americanized versions). Oh, and did I mention Dos Equis? A "Hispanic" person would seem to originate from the island of Hispaniola but it is used in a much broader term than that. We tend to classify everyone who speaks Spanish or came from a Spanish-speaking land as Hispanic and that is absolutely untrue. Consider Mexicans and Spanish. Spanish people are part of Europe. Mexicans are Central American Indians although some have roots in old Spain. We tend to think of them as one people but they are not. And as David has pointed out there are many other examples where this identification breaks down.

I will remember this next time I fill out my census form. What do I want to be? I never knew I had this choice!

DavidEduardo · Oct 22, 2014

landtuna said:
Except that doesn't make it true. If it did I could claim to be Hispanic because I like Mariachi music and eat lots of Mexican food (at least the Americanized versions). Oh, and did I mention Dos Equis?

"Hispanic" is a cultural denominator based on a heritage involving the use of the Spanish language. The Ronstadt family fully qualifies as, before coming to the US the family was fully assimilated into Mexican culture and language. Of course, having parents or grandparents who were citizens of a Spanish speaking country tends to validate one's heritage, and having Spanish spoken as the principal language in the home only confirms it.

A "Hispanic" person would seem to originate from the island of Hispaniola but it is used in a much broader term than that.

Nope. The term was created by our government based on an adaptation of "Hispania" which was the Roman's name for the part of the Iberian Peninsula which includes today's nation of Spain and where Castillian evolved.

(Of course, Hispaniola is also home to the nation of Haiti, where Kreyol is spoken so your point is even more inaccurate)

We tend to classify everyone who speaks Spanish or came from a Spanish-speaking land as Hispanic and that is absolutely untrue. Consider Mexicans and Spanish. Spanish people are part of Europe. Mexicans are Central American Indians although some have roots in old Spain. We tend to think of them as one people but they are not. And as David has pointed out there are many other examples where this identification breaks down.

That is a broad and inaccurate portrayal of the populations of those areas of Latin America. But it is also irrelevant, as "Hispanic" is not a race, nor is it even an ethnicity; it is a cultural group that has only in common the use now or in tits heritage the Spanish language.

That is why we have Hispanics with surnames like Fox, Slim, Menem, Hadad, Liberman, Fujimori, Schwartz, O'Higgins, Horvath and Gleason.

I will remember this next time I fill out my census form. What do I want to be? I never knew I had this choice!

You can also be whatever race you want to be or think you are, have whatever income you want and be whatever age you desire. The Census is self-administered, and there is little to no verification.

landtuna · Oct 22, 2014

I'm changing my name to Carlos Goldfarb.

Classic Hits on AM

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

Avid Listener

Guest

TheFonz

Tibbs4

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

Avid Listener

Guest

landtuna

Avid Listener

Guest

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

ok walters

Guest

Avid Listener

Guest

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

Avid Listener

Guest

landtuna

Avid Listener

Guest

landtuna

DavidEduardo

Moderator/Administrator

landtuna