• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

An interesting take on terestrial vs internet radio.

Webcaster. that is what the music royalty industry calls them
 
ok walters said:
Webcaster. that is what the music royalty industry calls them
:D I wish them good luck waiting for that to catch on!

"What are you listening to Bob? I'm listening to webcasting!"
 
ProducerGuy said:
Salty Dog said:
ok walters said:
Webcaster. that is what the music royalty industry calls them
:D I wish them good luck waiting for that to catch on!

"What are you listening to Bob? I'm listening to webcasting!"

Or a podcast. Either one. But not "Internet radio".
"Internet Radio" 36 million 400 thousand hits.
"Webcasting" 3 million 490 thousand hits. Give it time. It'll catch on.
 
ProducerGuy said:
Salty Dog said:
ok walters said:
Webcaster. that is what the music royalty industry calls them
:D I wish them good luck waiting for that to catch on!

"What are you listening to Bob? I'm listening to webcasting!"

Or a podcast. Either one. But not "Internet radio".

I'll stop calling it "internet radio" as soon as people quit "dialing" their phones. ;)
 
KeithE4 said:
ProducerGuy said:
Salty Dog said:
ok walters said:
Webcaster. that is what the music royalty industry calls them
:D I wish them good luck waiting for that to catch on!

"What are you listening to Bob? I'm listening to webcasting!"

Or a podcast. Either one. But not "Internet radio".

I'll stop calling it "internet radio" as soon as people quit "dialing" their phones. ;)

Oh, GOOD one! Internet radio, podcast, webcast, whatever you label it as, "it is what it is." You can put whipped cream on dog***t, and call it desert, but it's still dog***t with whipped cream on it.
 
Salty Dog said:
"Internet Radio" 36 million 400 thousand hits.
"Webcasting" 3 million 490 thousand hits. Give it time. It'll catch on.

So a bunch of people playing radio determines the English language now? Cell phones aren't cell phones anymore, either.
 
"Radio broadcast" "Internet webcast (on the World Wide Web)"

I would have to vote for webcast. So, then, would we have web studios and web stations if they don't simulcast a terrestrial broadcast? We could call our streaming software our "web transmitter".
 
Playing devils advocate..... Technically if you stream a webcast on your mobile phone, its coming to you via a tower, transmitter, and radio waves. Does this make it 'radio'?? I could here the sweepers now, "Broadcasting to you via 26000 towers nationwide, its _________.com radio"
 
Fieldtech1 said:
Playing devils advocate..... Technically if you stream a webcast on your mobile phone, its coming to you via a tower, transmitter, and radio waves. Does this make it 'radio'?? I could here the sweepers now, "Broadcasting to you via 26000 towers nationwide, its _________.com radio"

Radio is AM and FM. Not the Internet.
 
ProducerGuy said:
Radio is AM and FM. Not the Internet.

And definitely not those satellite impostors.
 
PTBoardOp94 said:
ProducerGuy said:
Radio is AM and FM. Not the Internet.

And definitely not those satellite impostors.

One thing I learned a long time ago: It's not what WE think it is. It's what the audience thinks it is. They define radio, not the other way around.
 
I think we all could agree, it is competition,,,some might say not much competition, some may say it could be a lot of competition in the future, but either way, its competition for listeners
 
musiconradio.com said:
This is 2013. Other than the physical medium that delivers the product, they are one and the same and have been for years.

Yes. I love the stories of former morning show hosts, and talent who left broadcast radio and only to return because online is better.

At least for the next few years, the scan button on the car radio will continue to rule.

Most music is still discovered on broadcast radio. Talk and sports too.

One and the same..no. In the future maybe.

The average listener sill enjoys old fashioned radio.

I don't want to take the time to hook up my car charger, connect to my dashboard, and hope I have a connection, and eat up my data plan and don't need a custom playlist every time I crank the engine.

When I can connect to the old WWW.com easily (and that day will come) then I will consider it one and the same.

Broadcast radio will need to adjust to the times. Yes, it will do it kicking and screaming, change (online) will bring new ideas.

All the old dudes (myself included) will give way to new ideas.
Maybe for older folks terrestrial radio is still the place to be, but for many under 40 and certainly just about everybody under 20 the "scan button" isn't even a part of their lexicon.

Walk into a high school or even a college campus and ask how many of the students listen to terrestrial radio (you could call it "regular radio", "the radio" whatever term you like) and watch as most of them either don't even know what that is or tell you "Why would I listen to that? They play the same five songs (and/or) have too many commercials". Radio is neither cool, nor hip to the younger generations and this is a problem this industry hasn't prepared itself to deal with properly.

Talk radio's demographics are aging, same for music stations. The money is getting tighter and the product is getting weaker. Give me some compelling reasons why anyone should/would listen to terrestrial radio these days? Local news? I have a smart phone. Weather? Same as above---smart phone.

As for hearing music first... yeah maybe that was the case 20 years ago, but these days people hear music first on youtube or p2p networks or generally somewhere other than radio. Also, "new" music in a very narrowcast format---which is what most stations are these days---isn't going to appeal to a 25 year old and that's why they go to discover new artists on some other medium (internet radio, satellite, peer-to-peer, youtube, etc).
 
KMGX said:
Maybe for older folks terrestrial radio is still the place to be, but for many under 40 and certainly just about everybody under 20 the "scan button" isn't even a part of their lexicon.

Walk into a high school or even a college campus and ask how many of the students listen to terrestrial radio (you could call it "regular radio", "the radio" whatever term you like) and watch as most of them either don't even know what that is or tell you "Why would I listen to that? They play the same five songs (and/or) have too many commercials". Radio is neither cool, nor hip to the younger generations and this is a problem this industry hasn't prepared itself to deal with properly.

Talk radio's demographics are aging, same for music stations. The money is getting tighter and the product is getting weaker. Give me some compelling reasons why anyone should/would listen to terrestrial radio these days? Local news? I have a smart phone. Weather? Same as above---smart phone.

As for hearing music first... yeah maybe that was the case 20 years ago, but these days people hear music first on youtube or p2p networks or generally somewhere other than radio. Also, "new" music in a very narrowcast format---which is what most stations are these days---isn't going to appeal to a 25 year old and that's why they go to discover new artists on some other medium (internet radio, satellite, peer-to-peer, youtube, etc).

What makes you think that it's just kids that are doing that? Us geezers, who radio doesn't care about, are doing the same thing. Terrestrial radio abandoned the baby-boom generation years ago. If I want to listen to jazz, blues, classic rock other than the same 100 songs over and over again, classic country, and other Sacred Sales Demo-unfriendly formats, I have to go online.

As far as I'm concerned, radio is for local sports and little else. And I'm no kid.
 
KeithE4 said:
KMGX said:
Maybe for older folks terrestrial radio is still the place to be, but for many under 40 and certainly just about everybody under 20 the "scan button" isn't even a part of their lexicon.

Walk into a high school or even a college campus and ask how many of the students listen to terrestrial radio (you could call it "regular radio", "the radio" whatever term you like) and watch as most of them either don't even know what that is or tell you "Why would I listen to that? They play the same five songs (and/or) have too many commercials". Radio is neither cool, nor hip to the younger generations and this is a problem this industry hasn't prepared itself to deal with properly.

Talk radio's demographics are aging, same for music stations. The money is getting tighter and the product is getting weaker. Give me some compelling reasons why anyone should/would listen to terrestrial radio these days? Local news? I have a smart phone. Weather? Same as above---smart phone.

As for hearing music first... yeah maybe that was the case 20 years ago, but these days people hear music first on youtube or p2p networks or generally somewhere other than radio. Also, "new" music in a very narrowcast format---which is what most stations are these days---isn't going to appeal to a 25 year old and that's why they go to discover new artists on some other medium (internet radio, satellite, peer-to-peer, youtube, etc).

What makes you think that it's just kids that are doing that? Us geezers, who radio doesn't care about, are doing the same thing. Terrestrial radio abandoned the baby-boom generation years ago. If I want to listen to jazz, blues, classic rock other than the same 100 songs over and over again, classic country, and other Sacred Sales Demo-unfriendly formats, I have to go online.

As far as I'm concerned, radio is for local sports and little else. And I'm no kid.

Radio or Baby Boomers (from Nashville, TN) with a live stream, too!

http://hippie945.com/

I'm 55 and I still enjoy some of the new music. I grew up listening to and working in Top 40 radio. I hear new songs I would look forward to playing if I were still in radio. I discovered a new British girl group the other day who hasn't been played in the states. Somehow I ended up on a Japanese YouTube site and there was their video. I went so far as to check Amazon for their CDs. Yeah, I'll buy them. Oh, the group is Stooshe.
 
KeithE4 said:
Us geezers, who radio doesn't care about, are doing the same thing. Terrestrial radio abandoned the baby-boom generation years ago.

Radio would be pleased to care about you. The more viable formats there are, the better chance there is to do well in one of them.

But any format with predominantly 55+ or 65+ listening... like oldies, jazz, smooth jazz, Black gospel, standards, etc., is not viable in most places... particularly where selling to agencies is key to being profitable.

It's the advertisers, not radio, that don't want to talk to you.
 
PTBoardOp94 said:
ProducerGuy said:
Radio is AM and FM. Not the Internet.

And definitely not those satellite impostors.

Point taken. Satellite radio is still radio.

The Internet still isn't. 99.999% of "Internet radio" is a bunch of people screaming into gaming headsets and pretending to be Howard Stern.

Here's the test. Apply for a real radio job and put your podcast on your demo or resume. See if you get the job.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom