All this Clear Channel talk of more 'national programming' got me thinking (dangerous stuff)...

Much like the recent national news-talk-info thread, what about creating a national music station -- or several in different formats.

Take the basics that made major market music radio great (but these days too expensive), and do it for the nation: Hit music, compelling personalities, limited commercial breaks, first-rate production and promotion.. then put it not on one LA or NY station, but on 50 to 100 stations across the country.

The economy of scale means you can put real jocks with real shows around the clock. Not just a morning show followed by people reading liners all day and night. And no voice tracking!!!

To badly paraphrase Hank Azaria in The Birdcage, celebrate its nationalness. On a CHR station, headquarter it in LA and make it the 'go-to' audio destination for breaking celebrity and music news. Put the country station in Nashville, the hip-hop station in New York. But you could have individual shows based in other cities, each making use of its location.

Travel the individual shows to the big markets that clear the 'station.'

No generic satellite service formatics like recorded call letter liners followed by the live host. Establish the name of the 'station,' and build the imagine around that in each market. The only local reference is the legal ID at the top. Otherwise, it's known by the national name.

If big companies are abandoning local in deed, why not go all the way? Discuss...

I am stunned that this has not already happened.

If you can syndicate talk 24 hours a day, why not syndicate music 24 hours a day.

...why not syndicate music 24 hours a day.....

What do you sell to cover the cost?

What would be the difference between what you are talking about and all those Music of your life stations...
Hell, Phil Hendrie can spin a few tunes, do his schtick, and BAM multi formatic. PH W/O tunes on a talker, with tunes and his show plays on a National AC.....

Not sure National music radio would be any more successful than MOYLs... there would be a piece of the pie, but would people tune in just for the strength of the celebrity? Would you need a celebrity, or just a strong local talent gone national? Freedom to entertain or stick to the formatics? If it's all about the music, then what benefit to pay 6 John Tesh alikes, might as well stick with the VTs with an occasional local mention rather than Generic Artist liners and audio clips of artist talking about a particular tour or song. A good local jock can spend the time to down load various interviews and take clips from them.

Another aspect..

What flies in LA might not fly in Buffalo and vice-versa....

The risk is you could see the result would be audience indifference. Would someone like Ellen D. Gennerous be able to bring her TV audience with her? Would she be worth what she would cost? Whoopie was a bust. How about give Robin Williams a 4 hour slot and 20 million?

I think solid local talents gone national would be affordable, but mediocre over the long haul, and CELEBRITIES would cost too much for the return.... didn't work on Sat rad...

It still comes down to what numbers the LOCAL affiliate pulls. Would a steady 2.5 be good enough? Only within a cluster. As a stand alone, a NATIONAL STATION in a local market would still have to rely on national spots to crack the nut. Local advertisers would still need to see the numbers to want to spend their dollars.

Would it work? Probably NOT for the return it would produce, and I think you could bring a better return station by station Live and Local.

If you want to take a throw away stick in a 7 station cluster and do National music format, LIVE FROM NY/NASHVILLE/LA the result would be probably no better than VTs and segue serenade...

just my opinion

I am sure it will indeed come to pass, I just don't think the result will meet Corporate Expectations

Roger, you're certainly right about that corporate expectation. I think that a live national format could do much better than VT/generic MOYL-style formats -- but it would take a lot of effort. And sometimes I think that's the bigger drawback than money. Certainly there are programmers, producers and talent willing to give their all for such a shot, but corporate courage is in short supply these days.

Rich,

You haven't been offered any Kool-Aid from radio group heads recently,have you?

Don't like the idea of "national" radio... Of course, anything resembling the "regional" hits you could pick out of the 60s is gone, too, largely due to modern technology. To me, "live and local" still wins...

Having said that, note the success of Tom Kent and his evening shows. He's good. And it sounds like Tom's syndicator is cranking up to do the same with Charlie Tuna. I was hooked on Charlie's syndicated show that KSKD used to run back in the 70s...

Mark: You're absolutely right on live and local. My point is: If we're going down this road, I hope somebody does it well and maybe embraces the 'nationalness' as a way to stand out from the generic satellite and VT formats.
Radio: The individual packets of no-sugar lemonade mix are the greatest inventions ever.
Actually, I've been bugging Fox that the time is right for a national news/talk morning show. But probably not for me. I already have a pretty good gig.

If you're talking about doing a national show that sounds local, you might be interested in this.

I don't know if you guys are familiar with a company called "Dial Global," used to be called "Waitt Radio" before they were bought out by Dial Global.

Their concept is to have a computer system in each local station with all the recorded elements in it. Music, spots, promos, everything but News and the live jock. The automation system is called Storq...like the bird.

They have live jocks on four different formats. Each jock has about 3 to 5 stations and does a four hour shift during which he does nothing but record breaks and then sends them down the internet directly into each station's automation system using local call letters, etc. They do up to 5 local breaks on each station an hour.

On the listening end, each station sounds like the jock is local, because each day and/or several times a day, new local information is emailed by the local staff to the Dial Global jocks.

Friends of mine who are using the system say they can get new information to the on-air guy/gal in a matter of moments.

I have heard two of these stations, and if I didn't know what was going on behind the scenes I would swear the jocks were live and local.

This has been going on now for three years, mostly in smaller markets, and mostly on a barter basis for two minutes per hour.

> I hope somebody does it well and maybe embraces the 'nationalness' as a way to stand out from the
> generic satellite and VT formats.

I agree with you in this idea. The key, I think, is to create something that sounds like a quality product, rather than something that sounds like something that a floundering station put on in hopes of cutting costs. The other key to success, of course, is: promote, promote, promote! I think that this could work; it has been done successfully in other countries.

The idea of plugging Ellen or Ryan or any other "celebrity" into such a format misses the whole point. It's a cheap and easy corporate shortcut, substituting name recognition for talent and effort. Radio in the era you recall created its own celebrities. Being a compelling radio entertainer within the confines of a music format requires a skill set different from those involved in stand-up comedy or TV hosting.

Plugging in a Ryan Seacrest guarantees immediate familiarity, but the content is very ordinary. Radio once thrived on great content created by people you'd never heard of elsewhere. If you want to do radio that's "national and proud of it," find people who do great radio, and we'll learn their names soon enough!

Could Ryan be capable of doing great radio? We'll never know. From where he is now, it's just some easy money on the side. It would be the same for any other Hollywood or TV celeb. Great radio needs more.

I'm reminded of Broadcast Architecture's attempt to clone its success with Ramsey Lewis's pretty-decent Smooth Jazz morning show. They created a bunch of "shows" hosted by musicians. Most are awful. To listeners who love that format, hearing musicians reading off cards may be impressive at first, but in the end it's about as compelling as listening to disc jockies play the sax and guitar.

A whole different talent.

As if right on cue! Westwood One is replacing Bill O'Reilly with Fred Thompson, and says this in its release (from allaccess.com):

"'Of all the radio talkers out there, how many can say they’ve debated in the Senate; campaigned for President of the UNITED STATES; had a successful TV career on LAW AND ORDER and shared the screen with MORGAN FREEMAN, BRUCE WILLIS, ROBERT DE NIRO and SISSY SPACEK?' said EVP/News & Talk Programming BART TESSLER. 'THOMPSON is as unique as they come and that will make for exceptional radio.'"

That seems like a recipe for a Ryan Seacrest show, only without any women 18-34.

Since we're asking rhetorical questions, "Of all the Senators out there, how many have ever been top-5 in Arbitron?" It's a non-sequitur. So why is it relevant when turned around?

Fred's qualifications impress WWI execs enough to sell 125 stations on committing to the launch, but have little to do with great radio. Success in a network talk show will take a level of commitment and hard work Thompson seemed unwilling to bring to his Presidential campaign.

Who was Rush Limbaugh before talk radio? Sean Hannity? Rush was a washed-up DJ in music formats; Hannity worked construction and as a house painter. They both work really hard on prep, and have shown long-term dedication to the medium.

This will be interesting to watch. Does it take more than already being famous to succeed in radio? WWI is apparently betting, "no."

"They both work really hard on prep, and have shown long-term dedication to the medium."

They both have staff work really hard on prep, and have shown long-term dedication to the money.

i was the music director at the Unistar/Westwood One/Dial Global satellite network formats divison out of Hollywood and valencia California and that is exactly what we did, national 24/7 music across 7-10 formats, the most succesful being the AM Only/Adult Standards Format PD, Chick Watkins, heard at one point on nearly 300 local stations, with the average listener having no idea we were coming out of the SoCal area, we were on in of the top 20 markets and even went to #1 in Las vegas,before they took it local and are now like the 3rd or 4th rated station in the market, it's a good mix of music,not sure if or where they're streaming, but this style of programming, ( not sure where or who started it, before Unistar) has been on satellite since at least the mid-80's if not earlier. DG recently merged formats with the Jones Radio Network, so not sure of new formats numbers of either stations nation wide or audience size...

"They both have staff work really hard on prep, and have shown long-term dedication to the money."

All the national shows have behind-the-scenes help, but if you think either of these guys doesn't work hard, you'd be mistaken.

My point is, the way to resuscitate radio is not to have movie stars "slum it," but for radio to find radio stars. Maybe if your stock gets low enough you decide you're running out of time.

...Chick Watkins, heard at one point on nearly 300 local stations....

My formative teen years were spent listening to Chick on WGAR in Cleveland along with John Lannigan, Emperor Joe, and Chuck Collier....

When I moved out to WA and Found Chick on KIXI It was nice to hear the familiar voice, but it definitely WASN'T like the old days... more linercard like and disappointing to find it WASN'T local.....

Lanningan and Collier are still in Cleveland radio...

Thanks for the memories Bob... Loved Chick even if it was "CHICK LITE"