Art Landing
Frequent Participant
WEll, they let private parties play DJ with their own playlist - why not with actual programs? The advantage to them would be that they ciould insert x minutes of commercials per hour just like Live 360.
-
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
Depends....there's not a whole lot of money to be made by online commercials. Tens of thousands of page-views translate to maybe a couple hundred bucks. You really need to aggregate a big number to make it work. It works for YouTube and Google. Not so much when you have a bunch of radio stations with a few listeners apiece. And as you said in your previous post, it takes a lot of time to produce actual programs.
Small Market Guy
Star Participant
Because picking a few songs isn't a big deal. When someone playing radio goes on their stream with a "program", it reflects on their product. All you have to do is go to Blogtalk and listen to some of the people who think they're doing "radio" to understand why Clear Channel wouldn't want their name associated with that.
Art Landing
Frequent Participant
I'm not acquainted with blogtalk - maybe I should drop by just to be informed - but your point is well taken. That is why I specified "screened and approved internet non-music stations." I was thinking in terms of screening out bigots, conspiracy wackos and informercials as opposed to bona fide internet stations such as are on Live 360. The screening consideration certainly would extend to what you're apparently referring to on blogtalk.
What we did on our Internet station would compare favorably to some of the programs on KHTS (Home town station) in Santa Clarita (hometownstation.com if you want to check it out). From 1998-2003 what is now KHTS was actually owned with different call letters by Clear Channel. The problem is that because we were internet only our audience penetration for our service srea wasn't equal to what KHTS does.
What we did on our Internet station would compare favorably to some of the programs on KHTS (Home town station) in Santa Clarita (hometownstation.com if you want to check it out). From 1998-2003 what is now KHTS was actually owned with different call letters by Clear Channel. The problem is that because we were internet only our audience penetration for our service srea wasn't equal to what KHTS does.
Small Market Guy
Star Participant
I'm not even talking about the wackos, which really is the majority of pretend talk shows, I'm just talking about the quality of the programming. There are a few people who have actually done real radio that make their shows to the same quality, but the majority of it is just a bunch of idiots yapping into gaming headsets and pretending they're doing big time radio.
I think there's a market for a streaming company that would sort through the garbage and find the good ones, but it isn't in Clear Channel's interest to do that.
I think there's a market for a streaming company that would sort through the garbage and find the good ones, but it isn't in Clear Channel's interest to do that.
Goat Rodeo Cowboy
Star Participant
WHO would get to be the screener? Who would compose the screening rules and hand them to the screener who would then in turn decide who is qualified to have a broadcast and who is not.
There was a time when I had confidence that we could hand the screening process to some individual, some company, and let them do the job. (It was an implied task of anyone or any company who became a broadcast licensee.) Today I am losing confidence that the American Civilization implants the genes and protein into the heads of citizens that would make them capable of such discernment.
Congress today is populated by members who would not have passed the screening test of 30 and 40 years ago.
O
ok walters
Guest
All well and good, but how is that different from enforcing the existing regulations which would cause the bad owner to cease operations due to fines and/or the inability to get the license renewed due to fines? It may also cause the bad owner to sell and get out, which in either case opens the station up to new ownership. One thing that there is no way of dealing with though - the facility is privately owned and AM stations are very costly to build from scratch, so unless the owner sells the facility, you are still going to have one less poorly run, interference causing AM station on the map. I would argue that one less poorly run station is a good thing in almost all cases, even in some rural areas where there are fewer stations.
O
ok walters
Guest
The other issue is how local are these poorly run AM stations in rural areas? No profit for years, so most of them are far from local and are running satellite programming. This issue has been discussed to death - one local station and all they do is run off of the bird almost all of the time. How big a loss is it if that is the case? If it can't survive, let it die, and maybe even hasten it's demise by just enforcing the existing regulations.
And don't even get me started on LMA's that are nowhere near legal.
And don't even get me started on LMA's that are nowhere near legal.
But as I said earlier, why would the FCC decrease the number of licensees, especially when it knows that no one would want this station if it went dark? That's why they turn their head in so many cases. Plus the fact that they're so short staffed in DC.
Goat Rodeo Cowboy
Star Participant
Careful how you assemble the fact at hand, and what conclusions you draw.
I worked for 15 different radio stations during my years of radio. Most of them didn't have a clue when it came to being creative and creating a product that was sellable. It was an era of "monkey see, monkey do". This is what everyone else in doing... it must be the thing to do!
Are AM stations in rural area failing because of their market, or are they failing because "monkey see, monkey do" management is copying their most favorite big-market station thinking this is what will make my station successful.
O
ok walters
Guest
Well, the FCC just announced a new commitment to saving the AM band. If the dead wood was cleared, a more successful station may be able to increase power and continue to be successful. Interference would decrease, night signals may improve - but not if the dying stations are left to linger. They will STA several times before they die on their own, which further delays any improvements for someone else, possibly to the point that they no longer make sense. Sad part about AM is that if the station has had a bad history (multiple formats, ownership changes, never profitable), it is unlikely that will change moving forward from 2014. Most people under 45 don't even know the AM band exists - AM only accounted for 18% of radio listening in 2012 and that number has been dropping for years. Where will the money come from if no one is listening? Why would forcing some stations silent just by enforcing the rules be a bad thing?
O
ok walters
Guest
I would say it is a mix, but most are poorly programmed and/or run on the cheap. A small rural AM that relies on outside programming is of little benefit to the local community, but live and local takes cash that most rural AMs just don't and won't ever have. Many of them have aging equipment and facilities as well - where is the money for improvements coming from if they are already hanging on by a thread?
The other issue is the above mentioned 18% of radio listening is on AM fact. If only 18% are now listening, and most of those are over 50, how would a small rural AM ever have enough listeners to successfully market the advertising?
So the small rural market and being on AM have combined to cut revenue to the point that live and local is not financially possible so the stations are not very local anymore in many cases. I can name hundreds if not thousands that are exactly this situation. So once they go silent a few times for anything other than an emergency, the writing is usually on the wall.
With no real specific proposals that they all agree on. It's like their "commitment" to increasing more minority ownership. It's an empty commitment.
They also said they want to "preserve" traditional radio. That means keeping all stations on the air regardless of whether or not they make money. And they also want to add another 600 FM stations to an already-crowded spectrum. What they say and what they do are two different things. What they do is bad for radio.
O
ok walters
Guest
How can a commitment to "preserve traditional radio" mean that all stations need to stay on whether they make money or not? It doesn't and that is impossible. While the FCC may be the owner of the license, a radio station is a business they have no control over the path that business owner takes. What good does keeping a losing satellite fed station on the air do for anyone? How is that "preserving" anything? Unless the FCC gets into regulating content sources the satellite feed will become the low cost source of choice.
GRC said he worked for many clueless owners in his time, and it is reasonable to think they are a cross sectional of small AM ownership. With dwindling listenership and an audience that is aging and not being replaced with new younger listeners, that is only going to get worse as time goes on.
All of this hand wringing over how to save the band is pretty funny when you consider history. Pay phones, drive in theaters, Fotomat kiosks, over the air TV, LPs, cassettes, and 8 track tapes were all phased out by newer, better options. AM radio will join that list one day and any effort to "preserve" it is just prolonging the inevitable. Clear the dead wood and let the ones that can survive last as long as they can on an uncluttered band.
I don't think the FCC even knows. That's what happens when you get politicians and lawyers involved. They say and do things with no practical knowledge. I see it every day.
Small Market Guy
Star Participant
It's more benefit than dead air.
Goat Rodeo Cowboy
Star Participant
On first read, you may think I am arguing with myself... but let me offer you another view of what I wrote, and what maybe I could had said in the first post.
When I moved on go Large Market radio I saw that there were some clueless large market people also. But, the amount of available dollars were sometimes their salvation in-spite of themselves. More so today than back then, rural market operators cannot afford to be clueless. They have to harvest the highest possible per centage of the available dollars, or they can't survive.
Here is how small market radio can be different today, and why we may have operators of stations who today DO have clues.
During the era of my small market days, women did not enjoy the kind of freedom they experience today. And small towns, particularly small towns were smothered in that era by social attitudes resulting from the church of that era. Women in the radio business then tended to be the wives and is some cases the daughters of established male station operators. When I took a look at the possibility of returning to the business ten years ago, I observe active, successful small market radio stations where a woman was the owner, or the manager, or the salesmanager. Career women take their careers seriously. And they come to the party WITH CLUES!
I remember what high school was like when I was a participant. Then I saw the changes in education when my children were students. Today I follow all the political bru-ha-ha over Common Core and other issues of the day. The people available to own and operate radio stations in small markets today have educations skills which can translate into "the cure for clueless-ness". A number of people are taking early retirement from big corporations where they have learned all the new management concepts that we had not heard of 40 and 50 years ago. Some of these folks take early retirement and pick a pleasant rural community where they might establish a winery, might operate a small newspaper, MIGHT OWN A RADIO STATION. Or the spouse may choose to own a radio station.
My proposal is that the FCC should do something to make the atmosphere of the world of small market radio a bit more structured, a bit more predictable, maybe a bit more demanding to keep the riff-raff out. If were 55 years old, sitting on a big severance package from some mega-corporation, and had a working knowledge of "management that recognizes clues" I would look at the small market radio today and probably say: I think I'll opt for a horse farm or a winery or maybe an antique shop down on the square. The current radio atmosphere is too wobbly, too shabby, too slanted to the needs and styles of the riff-raff.
Do you REALLY want to assign that role to the government? Don't you live in a red state?
But I understand your view. A lot of posts around these boards can't understand how the FCC could give licenses to such nin-com-poops. Owners aren't required to have college degrees, or experience in the industry. Otherwise, William Paley would never have been allowed to own stations. The FCC doesn't want to be in the judgment business. BTW I've spent time with some of the billionaire corporate owners, and their view of riff raff might be different from yours.
Small Market Guy
Star Participant
I hear so much about radio, especially AM radio, having a demo problem. Too many old white men. This is somewhat true.
I'm going to assume "keeping the riff-raff out" means the FCC should require licenses to sit behind a computer and run a board. This would pretty much assure that the only people working in radio would be old white men.
Too much of what we see on this and boards like this is a bunch of old timers wishing they were still in the business, regardless of what is actually best for said business. The average person these days doesn't even KNOW that stations are voice tracked. Talk listeners don't care that the content is off the bird. As long as it's interesting they'll listen. And like it or not, radio ad dollars can't support what radio used to be. There are exceptions, but for the most part a small market station is lucky to have one live daypart.
And finally, when it comes to licenses. They were required at one time because there was a certain amount of technical know how needed to keep a station on the air. This is no longer true. One part time engineer can keep an entire cluster running. Our engineer keeps 8 stations in two markets running very well.
Last edited:
Goat Rodeo Cowboy
Star Participant
Yes, I live in a RED state... one that has a recipe, a formula for a uniquely vibrant definition of RED state. Where is it written that people who live in red states are assumed to, and required to, be in lockstep with their "colorful" neighbors?
See comment below about riff-raff.
Picking up first on the very last line of the quote: There are STATION licenses and there are OPERATOR licenses. Operator licenses (engineering certificates?) are a thing of the past and from where I sit, are not a part of this conversation... even though I may have brought them in. STATION licenses had a much broader scope than just technical know-how.
You are confusing me with that crowd that maybe would like to have live people sitting at a console at every radio station. I was an early advocate of automation for radio. I can take you to the place about 40 miles from my hometown where I saw the very first one that I ever saw: A simple little beast by GATES called The NightWatch.
Virtually ALL radio stations, regardless of market size, are going to have to fill part of their day with what I call "inert material". Recorded music. Syndicated Talk or Sports. BUT: if small market radio doesn't include a reasonable amount of home grown, organic content, then radio has no practical or logical reason to exist in small markets.
The question every person who is ultimately responsible for a small market station has to ask: Is there any significant amount of programming content on my station that the listener can't get on the station in the neighboring smalll market, the station in the neighboring metro market, can't get on XM-Sirius? If not, either get to work, or offer up the license to transferred to someone who wears big-boy or big-girl britches.
You may be guilty of hit-and-miss reading. A couple of posts back I think I made it clear that one of the ingredients that can make small market radio lively and capable of surviving is the presence of can-do females in the 35 to 50 year age range. And I did not restrict that to WHITE women. So enough already with trying to stack me over in the corner with the group we label "angry old white males". I wasn't an 'angry old white man' back in my 20s when I was in the business... singing basically "the same gospel tunes about the place of radio in localness" that I do today. Maybe I was just old and angry and white long before my time.
- Status