Interesting interview at:
http://s146481175.onlinehome.us/mp3s/index.shtml
go to 20070124 Marc Fisher phoner.

Last night Don and Mike interviewed Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher who has written a book about what is wrong with radio. This guy has interesting insight into the state of radio today.

Most of us who see some of the problems within the industry don't have the clout to make the decision makers aware. If we point out a short coming, we tend to get labeled as uninformed, bitter has been burnouts, troublemakers, disgruntled and so on.

Terrestrial radio CAN NOT compete with commercial free SAT RAD, or Joe Publix I-POD. The industry has to compete as a extention of the community or region. That meand giving people a reason to tune in. Not because the music is the best. It isn't. For every song I hear that I like, How many others listening dislike, or are tired of that same song? Thie answer is along with the music you need to create an impression that the listener will miss something if they aren't tuned in....

You do that in a variety of ways, but in most markets, 90 percent of the people are elsewhere, but the 10 percent that are with you make you #1.

Another 12 in a row with no jocks and repetitive sweepers won't get you there. Interesting, informative, entertaining, product between and in support of the music will. Interesting promotions, and high visability within the community will. Event going on? The station should be there. If it draws a crowd, the station should have a presence, either PRIMARY if represents the target demo, or SECONDARY if the target is out of the target or on the fringe. The idea is to get someone new to at least sample your product. Community active radio costs money that many market managers are unwilling or unable to spend.

Roger, you hit the nail right on the head once again. It's become a lost art however, with most of those coming on the scene in the past decade having no feel for what you describe and how well it works. As corporate management has become more "MBA" oriented with no experience starting at the street level, it can only get worse.

I often wonder if we'll ever see a time when radio is actually "reinvented" as it was in the Todd Storz era.

Hey...I'm learning.....I'll get there.

And the management I work with are radio people more than managers, in my opinion.

I guess I'm just slightly jaded because I've worked my way up in one company from basically the beginning.

As for a "rebirth," I think we will Deane...they just have to find a way to adapt. It will take time, of course....and plenty of change will happen. We've already seen it with some of the larger companies exchanging some of their holdings around. I think we will see a cyclical change eventually leading to the resurgence of ma and pa stations as the corporations are done homogenizing the business. I seriously think we are seeing the end of the homogenization and the beginning of the new "renaissance" of radio if you will.

I also wonder...as soon as the bigger companies lobbyists dwindle as interest dwindles...will we see a reconsideration of the 1996 telecommunications act?

I think there's a good chance we will.

Hey...at least we don't work in Telecom. That industry has gotten worse than radio...Qwest offers basically no job security and treats their employees horribly....and when they tell people their jobs are gone...it's usually someone's assistant from colorado coming and being rather unemotional about it.

I LOVE BUSINESS! *rolls eyes*

Copernicus, I enjoy your posts. There are few posters that are young, on their way up, and showing a serious interest in what's happening in radio like you do.

You mentioned the "ma and pa" era. There is no doubt in my mind that the innovation comes from independent ownership, not from the "biggies". It could and should be different than that. Most "biggies" own stations that are doing nothing in the market. I'd like to see those turned over (programming wise) to young programmers to experiment with and try new things.

That's what works in a creative medium. It's what works in Hollywood these days. The big studios are not the ones producing the hits, it's independents with the backing of big studios.

The Inventors Dilemma has hit radio just like every other industry that has consolidated.

One big problem with public companies is market expectations prevent them from making longer term investments. Without these, innovation is nearly impossible. The demand for the highest possible quarterly revenue, each and every quarter, strips the enterprise of it's ability to make decisions that are in its longer term interests.

Exactly right, Missing. That's what's wrong with much of corporate America.

With radio then, either we break it up and get some new forms, or we leave it and it devolves into a delivery system with a lotta "value adds" that have little to do with the core premise, or we get lucky and some really bright bulb manages to put a dollar figure on the future that makes enough sense for the majors to do it.

This station has the right idea:
http://kpig.com/info.html
I used to listen to them whenever I was in Santa Cruz. Now they also simulcast on frequencies in San Luis Obispo and San Francisco. The only thing that stinks is that in order to listen to their stream, you have to buy a RealPass.

This stream works:
http://kpig.com/kpig_128.m3u
http://kpig.com/kpig_24.m3u

Real Pass isn't necessary. It Dosen't always work in Windows Media Player, but it does with Jet Audio and Screamer.
See the links at:
http://h1.ripway.com/radio4usa

My nephew and the band he plays guitar in were featured recently on KPIG. The band is based out of Santa Cruz. They also had a web cam on during there segment. Love it when stations give local artists a chance to showcase their stuff.

Someone once asked if there was anyone at KGON under 60. My response was that age is a state of mind and if you don't mind it don't matter!

I think that these people over at KGON remember that music is supposed to be fun and entertaining and that it is all for the people who listen on a regular basis. IMHO they still try to do radio the way it is supposed to be done. Which is have fun at what you do and let that shine through the mic to the listeners! I don't give a rip about the age of the person on the air (young newbie or a seasoned veteran) just so long as it is live, real, and most of all entertains me! Also playing the music that I love is a bonus as well!

ROCK ON KGON

Maybe some of the thrown out vets should be brought on board to "teach" the youn'uns what they missed. If they never knew about it, then the "old" way seems NEW and inventive.....

There is more to being a PD than Selector skills, though reading the want ads would lead you to believe otherwise. Seems like morning show and PD go hand in hand, though being good at one doesn't mean you are equally adept at the other. A group might save a buck that way, but do they get a good PD? A mediocre PD and a Great morning show? Average both? Unless you see an emphasis in the programming side, you run a serious risk of underperforming your potential. Remember, the on air talent is as much a salesman as the account exec. One brings in the cash, but the other brings in the customers. No customers,(listeners) no cash. (advertisers)

Hey, you teach me Selector, and I will teach Mr. Young PD audience interaction, and connecting with the listener.....

win-win you learn something I learn something....

(no takers for that brilliant plan, I've shopped that idea. not so brilliant I guess.)

Why couldn't the PD program up what is required in the time slots by corporate and customers and let the Jocks build the remainder of the show around their personality? You know....this is what must be now you fill in the blanks in your timeslots! Unless the PD is extremely familiar on a personal level with the jock's how can he possibly pick the music that will let them shine? They would feel good about the show they are doing and make it their own. I would think that would be good radio.

And BTW......whatever happened to a good ol request and dedication line? It was great to dedicate a tune to your girl and have her tune in and here it on the air!

I dont know enough about the business to tell you what is wrong with radio, but the reason there is something wrong, is radio like most busineess are basically pyramid schemes, it depends on the audience continued growth.

40 years ago, if you left your house and wanted some entertainment, radio was about the only option available. Now you got satellite, Iods and their ilk, you got prortable dvd players, variouis video games etc.

Radio , at least the number of stations has expanded to be able to handle what was the anticipated listeening audience.

Management has now panicked because there isnt the anticipated number of dollars to share, so they have started cutting costs with little regard as to how it affecs quality.

Why not cut back on stations....especially those with crappy ratings and re-invest in those that are successful? More stations with less audience is not better than fewer stations with larger audiences. Those more quality programs will have loyal listeners and the revenues from sales should be at better margins as a result. Is there any sense to that cause I do not know internal radio workings but that just sounds right to me?

Cutback capacity? Now thats just Un American.

So....just throw an IPOD in the booth and leave it running on shuffle. Crap is still crap and if it stinks what is the point! Just shut it down or sell it and use the funds for more profitable ventures. That's just straight up business!

Thanks Vgis

There is another factor here.

Letting go of stations might serve the company better than holding onto them, if overall profit is the goal. However, this does put them into the hands of others, who then may actually compete.

For us, the listening public, this would be good, but would not be so good for the companies who empowered their new competetors.

That's unabashed speculation, but I can't imagine it not being a consideration when these things come under discussion. Heck, I would consider it!

So the weak station will drag the others down as cost cuts will undoubtably hit them because. Bad business. If you cannot keep up then get out of the way.....you don't deserve it!

IMHO

Yes, but think about it this way.

All of the majors hold a majority of the good signals. So if they hold onto them, they deny others the venue to compete realistically. They also remain in a position to capture returns on things like data transmissions.

Yah I get the business point you make but it is sad to keep something that is crap....still have to fund it....it currently is in the Red....cuts at better stations result and suck them down as well. Is this not a downhill spiral that can be prevented by cutting loose the dead weight? Pretty soon you will cut so deep that all you have left are all voice-tracked stations (No offense Chris) a good mix of voice track in the off peak hours but must have live in the am and afternoon periods....IMHO anyway! A complete station on voice track is......well IMHO crap! No names but you guys know which ones have AUTO the DJ running on a 24/7 schedule non-stop and they are, again IMHO...CRAP!

The bottom line is that they hang on to something physical and do not care about the human beings that they do not! Great people to work for when they could just let it go to someone who could make it work! Noooooo......much better to deny them that chance to keep those people gainfully employeed and feeding their families!

Yes I see and appreciate the point you make.

...it depends on the audience continued growth....

It depends on revenue growth. The downside is with the shareholder demanding steady and at times unrealistic returns, the emphasis switches from long term growth to short term performance. Projected lower than expected earnings, means that some clusters are forced into short term solutions to meet goals, (staff cuts). Format flips used to be designed to shake up a losing station, but the launches were accompinied by heave promotion, advertising and a staff ready to go..... now they slip in consultant based Joe/Jack/Alice/Bob/Charlie/Movin-Groovin-Snoozin, with little fanfare under staffed, under promoted and basically on the cheap. They don't go out and GRAB an audience, they say "here we are, come find us!" Most don't last because they only offer music, and no matter how good, it can't compete with other choices offered to a potential listener. It's more Grab what dollars you can, hit the numbers that corporate has set and keep the stock price moving up. You can not program to the stockmarket and be successful in your home market.

Yes, the good stations in the cluster keep the weaker ones running. Yes, the value is in the number of properties. A weak jockless niche programmed station has it's value as part of the group, and is far more valuable to The Corporation as part of the package. As was said, in other hands it competes for dollars, as part of the group it shares dollars. NO, dereg was NOT good for competition, but is good for book value. Sure radio can be more vibrant and viable but, it cost money that will chase off investors. Wallstreet likes capital investment in gadgetry, not people. Spending millions to automate is great... as long as the resultant job losses makes up for it in as little time as possible....

Communications as an industry is not like building cars. You can automate both, but autos are a physical product. Radio is a People product, When you cut the communicators out of radio you lessen the quality of the product. You see other sources taking people away from radio NOT because the companionship is better, but because radio can't compete on a tech level, and the industry has taken the warmth and companionship out of the industry. I keep saying if al radio wants to offer is MORE music, then other sources can deliver that better. when the listeners go elsewhere, so will the advertisers.......

Radio, concentrate on what you can provide that others can't. Companionship, information; keep your target informed, entertained and become a part of their life. Reinvigorate the communication aspect, or risk continued audience erosion.

ANY format will find some size audience. Now how do you build on that?

By getting in with the target audience on a personal level. Live Local and entertaining as all hell! SPONTANIOUS and not reading cue cards all of the time...or I guess you guys call them liners!

ANY format will find some size audience. Now how do you build on that?

Own all the stations that matter!

Then churn the formats about every 9-12 months, keep the overhead at rock bottom, then blame everything you can for any problems with growth.

Complete the trifecta by working hard for every concession you can out of law makers, because it's hard to make money providing a public service.

"because it's hard to make money providing a public service."

Broadcasting is no longer a public servant. It serves corporate interests.

One thing I think we did better in our biz in years past was control of stopset length.

Recently took a road trip and decided to pop in some old radio airchecks that I had not listened to for years. When the cassette ended, turned on the radio and immediately heard a seven minute stopset. My only thought: I wish I would have brought more airchecks with me.

Corporate America paid to much for buying out stations in the 90's. The suits felt they could maximize revenue and cut costs to justify the prices they were paying for the stations.

WRONG!!!!!

The government needs to reject all licenses send the corporations into bankruptcy and allow individuals to buy up to one station and one station only.

Then we can get the radio that use to be good.

So, you want 50 stations averaging a 2 share with nothing to back it up?

Roger said
now they slip in consultant based Joe/Jack/Alice/Bob/Charlie/Movin-Groovin-Snoozin, with little fanfare under staffed, under promoted and basically on the cheap. They don't go out and GRAB an audience, they say "here we are, come find us!" Most don't last because they only offer music, and no matter how good, it can't compete with other choices offered to a potential listener."

Hey Roger- That is why most of these jack, Charlie, stations are starting to add air talent RIGHT??? They have found that just playing music with no dj's won't last! Thats why most of these Charlie/ Jack stations are adding air talent to their stations around he country! You cant have a station with just music and NO JOCKS! It won't work, it will eventually die off and nobody will be listening.

50 stations with a two share would provide 100o's of more jobs, just no more 10 figure or 6 figure jobs.

What's wrong with lot's of people employeed with good 5 figure salaries! Damn that would make them middle class instead of at the poverty level!

Why would it be 50 stations with a 2 share?

Seems to me, we would end up with a distribution similar to the one we have now. Of course, this would be problematic for a significant number of stations.

I'm not sure we can equate corporate ownership with potential for larger market shares.

Can we? If so, why?

>>>Why would it be 50 stations with a 2 share?

50 stations with a 2-share (or less) sounds like LA. Now you just have to get enough radio dollars spent in Portland to create some gigs.

I don't understand why, without consolidation, you would project that all stations would have approximately the same size listenership (2 share spread among 50 stations). Please explain.

Alfredo is correct, that is it would not be an even playing field. Those stations that could afford to promote themselves would rise to the top of popularity, and more than likely ratings would reflect that.

Nationwide limits will never be reduced to a single license, that would be draconian. However, the nationwide groups even with reduced presence in any single market, would end up garnering a large share of ad monies that are bought by national buyers who have strong ties to these groups.

Individual owners would have to compete for a smaller chunk of the pie, especially in the bigger markets. This is the argument that is used against breaking up the 6,7, and 8 station per market licensees, that is, individual owners could not compete and would not be able to survive and hence "serve the public" which is kind of joke since no one is really serving the public anymore.

I used the word "averaging". Each of 50 stations would average a 2 share. In LA, it's 100 stations averaging a 1 share. If everyone could only own 1 station, the top stations would continue to thrive and everyone else would be in dire straits!

You mean they would have "Money for Nothin" and "Chicks for Free"?