Bongwater said:
Some of us lead less mundane lives.
AQH said:
I'll think of that line the next time you post some thing about what's going on in Vancouver radio or when you bring up some truly outer-space thing like what the blood type was of the overnight jock on KYYX on this date in 1983.
My pleasure. Things are ACTUALLY HAPPENING in Vancouver radio. And I'm not sure of all the blood types of KYYX jocks, but there was blood circulating in them and you knew it.
....
Bongwater said:
It's in spite of the now Jurassic focus research or whatever people are currently using, since you seem to be a better "expert" than me (oh, where would you be without Arbitron?) and unhumorously shoot-down any (yes, albeit half-witted) suggestion that COULD finally bring the miracle we've been praying for since 1996, then what the hell do YOU suggest for a brand new radio format that can finally reverse the tide?
AQH said:
Better thinking to start.
Cool! We're off to a flying start (finally!)
AQH said:
There has never been a time when the consumer has so much power and so many options. And not just about radio, look at the election for example. If you want to find out more about any of the candidates, all you have to do is Google voting records or whatever stuff you want to find out about them. Gone are the days we just wait for the voter pamphlets in the mailbox. You can order a pizza from your computer. Heck, you can even buy a car on-line now. This is the kind of stuff that Telecom 96 has zero effect on.
Ummmm......O...K.......
AQH said:
The fact of the matter is there are numerous alternatives to radio. Look at news/talk for example: we have the power to have information sent to us on a silver platter, when WE want it.. I can (and so can anyone reading this) have the headlines of the day from Perth, Australia or Edinburgh, Scotland or Santiago, Chile sent to me on my iPhone (or whatever device you have) when I want them. And yes, the same can be done for news from Seattle, all on-demand, when you want it. You don't have to listen to Hersholt or Yeend and wade through the spots for the information you seek.
Technology is also why magazine and newspaper circulation numbers are down. Go e-mail the folks at The Seattle Times and see how they've been doing lately (that is, if the layoffs they've done recently haven't given you an indication).
Now think about the multitude of options people have for music stations. Not just streamies from other parts of the world, but there are sites out there that you can customize the playlist down to the title. Not to mention the BitTorrents, Limewires, Gnutellas (to name a few) that are out there for radio listeners. And then there's the iPods too.
When you put it all together, there are THOUSANDS of other options out there for the consumer. To blame it solely on "The Man" is a cop-out and disingenuous.
OK, but blaming the very technology that allows us to have this nice conversation is the biggest cop out of all. The internet HAS changed everything and from what you just wrote, deep down inside, I think you got some festering issues with that. From the sound of it, it seems like you've just about given up all hope. Welcome to the club. The first beer's on me.
AQH said:
What do you do? If someone wants to cut me a big enough check, I'll be happy to go into detail. But for free, I'll tell you what NOT to do.
Stop thinking that the past is the answer.
Ummm....do you know many teenagers? Young adults in college? Where do they get their music? Who influences their music choices? With the exception of college/public alternative stations like KEXP, KGRG, KUGS and others, it's mostly the internet, Sirius XM, Music Choice, MTV's digital channels, etc. these days. Radio is an old people's medium to them and they started thinking that way by the end of the '90s. Radio today is, a whole decade later, now trying to play catch-up. But it's still a decade too late. And not very much has changed at all since 1998. You now have HD Radio. GREAT! Now USE IT! Make it WORTH SOMETHING! What? You mean corporate management won't let you because they've cut back on everything? Or because you've simply hit the wall and cannot think outside of the box of a way of fixing it? Well, don't blame the internet or the kids for that. And I'm not blaming the "The Man", I'm blaming the suck up industry lobbyists that created Telecom '96 and radio industry people stuck in patterns that don't relate to today's young listener. They are VERY demanding. Back in the day, we took whatever we could get. Today, they can be choosy mothers with the cornacopia of delivery methods we never even dreamed of back then.
AQH said:
Look at Detroit. In the emerging age of hybrids, they thought it would be a good idea to bring back the Camaro and Mustang. Now they're begging for government handouts to bail their sorry butts out.
The radio industry does not make cars. If it did, the streets would be choked with corpses. Because nothing is working right, right now. Second, when they started remaking Camaros and Mustangs, gas wasn't $4 a gallon. But the writing was on the wall. However, if they had the fortitude to make a hybrid muscle car, combining the best of today's technology with the panache of the classics, they'd be up to here in orders. Think about that.
AQH said:
That's why when I read this board and see things like "let's bring back Robin and Maynard" and "we need Pat O'Day back" or things of that ilk, it just makes me shake my head. Think about it; you're trying to counter the increasing amount of consumer options and technology here in the 21st century with things that were in radio's past up to 40 years ago. That just doesn't make any sense. Holding onto those kinds of security blankets adds to radio's pitiful image of not being innovators and continues to deliver a steady diet of regurgitation.
"Think about it;
you're trying to counter the increasing amount of consumer options and technology here in the 21st century with things that were in radio's past up to 40 years ago." "...continues to deliver a steady diet of regurgitation..."
And you mean to tell me the typical radio format basics today are anything NEW?? You really need to listen to airchecks from 1968 and airchecks from 2008 and you'll be in for a shock. The structure is exactly the same, only difference? The music isn't very exciting - happens when you hear the same songs a zillion times over. And the personality factor. Much of that is gone, thanks to voicetracking, needless cutbacks and downsizing. Face it, radio is ANYTHING but cutting edge now. And with "the increasing amount of consumer options and technology here in the 21st century", I don't exactly see a radio revolution happening right now.
Do the rest of you?
The trouble with radio is, let's be honest, the minds in charge DON'T want it to change. I guess that comes when you're using a 110 year old technology in a high-tech digital world. Change is really scary. But what's even scarier is what happens when you don't. But the writing on the wall with radio was written in 1998.
And yes, there WAS change back then. But in all the WRONG ways. You had locally beloved independent stations, (low rated maybe, but still beloved), that got bought up and destroyed by the corporate bigwigs. You had legendary and very popular personalities that were that were thrown out of the only careers they have ever known not because of low ratings, but to cut overall costs and trust me, when one corporation can own the entire commerical radio market in one city (think Bellingham, Mount Vernon and several others), finding a new gig across town is impossible now.
Long time listeners naturally got upset with this and thus the rise of satellite, LPFM, internet, those lovable Part 15 Bic lighters and even outright pirates. And as a result of losing the very things that endeared them to radio, they began going elsewhere.
Now you're telling me that radio is up and coming and out to capture a new generation of listeners? I have news for you: Most young people today weren't even raised with a radio playing in the house! They object to hearing the sound of DJs. They will not sit through a spot break. Because they are not used to them and there is no reason whatsoever to expect them to learn how.
Not when their music can be custom programmed by them, selected by them, WITHOUT hearing advertising or any kind of interruptions (which they HATE.) The alternative/grunge/Generation X people (whatever you call them) of the '90s are now parents themselves. They grew up disliking commercial radio for the most part and with all the radio alternatives (which is all many of them have ever known), it's no wonder we have so many young people now who are turned off by radio.
And one more thing, do you think it might be possible that if Telecom '96 never happened, radio today would be in much better shape and technologies such as satellite radio and internet radio would be far less popular than they are now (or as necessary?) I think so. And oh yeah, the iPod. Well, in the '80s, we had the Walkman and the radio industry didn't complain about them taking away listeners, did they? So all the blame still comes back to the radio stations.
My wife pointed something out I mentioned in another post: Why does radio insist on pandering to a generation that doesn't need it? The fact is, radio IS dying, killed by greed and corruption of the very system that kept it alive for a century beforehand. A NEW generation has grown up not trusting, liking or even in many cases, even LISTENING to the radio. They have the torch now, but it's not a 50,000 watt FM blowtorch signal that can barely even make it into Mount Vernon or much farther south of Olympia these days. It's a signal that can be heard around the world with ease, playing just what THEY want. Not just what JACK wants. So why disregard and discount radio's last few vanguards. You'll never make radio as popular as it was in 1982 again this way any more than you can by bringing back KYYX. But I'll say this much, at the rate things are going, you just may need those old KYYX listeners when you find out this strategy is backfiring disasterously. So I wouldn't be too quick to write off the Boomers just yet.
This new generation radio is after doesn't have as much money as you think and even if they did, as you know, they got other places to get the inside scoop on the where to go, the what to buy, etc. You need visuals to get their attention - they're used to it. Just aurally selling something is irritating to them. And I always felt their pain myself.
AQH said:
In closing, yes, there is some bad programming out there (some very good programming too, albeit in the minority). To just go in a blanket fashion to blame everything on "The Man" is just disingenuous and comes over more as a personal vendetta than a true display of today's radio reality.
I hope that answers your questions, Larry.
And I hope I shed some light on what is REALLY going on outside the office. I know the reality of today's radio because I LISTEN to it. And about half the people I know (and growing) DON'T. I see and understand their reasons. They expect things commercial radio cannot provide. So all in all, video didn't kill the radio star, it committed suicide.
