|
SayNoToIBOC
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: September 07, 2006, 05:57:47 AM » |
|
August 31, 2005
"It's Not Our Fault/Responsibilty/Job," Says Ibiquity Marketing
It's no secret that IBOC/HD radio has not exactly taken the general public by storm. Among terrestrial broadcasters, there is a sense of growing panic that IBOC/HD might never make it past the starting gate and even Ibiquity head honcho Bob Struble admits they need to do a better job selling IBOC/HD radios. But one of the disturbing things about Struble's comments was how he seemed to be placing the entire promotional/marketing burden for IBOC/HD on receiver manufacturers and broadcasters.
And that's still Ibiquity's position, judging by this Radio World interview with Don Kelly, Ibiquity's strategic marketing director. He makes it clear that Ibiquity is, as he puts it, a "technology company" and that it's up to others to figure out how to market IBOC/HD.
With such an attitude, IBOC/HD is destined to fail. End of discussion.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 24, 2005
When It Comes To IBOC/HD Radio, The Natives Are Getting Restless
Some remarkable stuff in the latest Radio World. Long a reliable, blindly enthusiastic supporter of IBOC/HD, Radio World is suddenly experiencing some moments of clear thinking, like this piece saying IBOC/HD is in danger of dying on the vine and will face competition from WiFi audio streaming and cell phone audio services. And Skip Pizzi raises an interesting question: will "multicasting" under FM IBOC/HD violate station ownership restrictions in a given market since each multicast is, in effect, a separate station?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 19, 2005
NAB Says Ibiquity Didn't Control IBOC/HD Rulemaking Process
Ya gotta just love the National Association of Broadcasters for bringing the spirit of Dada to otherwise technical discussions about IBOC/HD radio. Here's an example: the NAB says Ibiquity, developer of IBOC/HD, received no unfair competitive advantage as a result of the process that selected IBOC/HD as the U.S. standard for digital broadcasting.
Since NAB and many terrestrial broadcasters have bet the farm on IBOC/HD's success and have no Plan B in case it fails, some self-disingenuousness is to be expected on their part when it comes to IBOC/HD. But can they be as detached from objective reality as they sometimes seem??
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Relying On HD Is Like Waiting For A Popsicle To Melt Before Eating It"
And Steven Van Zandt, friend to both The Boss and Tony Soprano, asks about AM/FM radio: "When did the p*ssies take over?"
The only report about the 2005 Records & Radio Convention that you need to read is here. It actually makes several good points about the total lack of passion (in other words, "innovation") in the programming heard over terrestrial AM/FM stations and the mediocrity of broadcasting executives.
As I've observed before, the management at many AM/FM stations reminds me of the management at General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler; they have existed for so many years in a de facto oligopoly that they have simply forgotten how to innovate and compete. Their very first reaction to new competition from satellite radio, internet radio, etc., is to seek government restrictions against their new competitors----much like Ford, etc., tried to do with import quotas on Japanese cars----instead of getting serious about working harder and thinking more creatively to produce a better product.
Posted on June 29, 2005
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Does Terrestrial AM/FM Radio S*ck So Much?
One of the main drivers behind podcasting, internet audio streaming, satellite radio, and other alternative delivery platforms is that much terrestrial AM/FM radio programming is just lousy, and younger listeners have been the leaders in migrating to alternate delivery platforms.
Now we have some hard evidence of why some terrestrial stations sound so bad: they're playing music according to how much they're getting paid by record companies, not according to whether it's any good or whether listeners actually like it.
It's the same old "payola" racket, and Sony Music has been busted big-time. And I expect we're going to hear about some other companies----like Clear Channel----being caught up in this mess.
The New York Times has a great summary of the story (registration required to read this link, but registration is free). If you have a copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader on your PC, you can read some of Sony's internal e-mails and documents describing their "promotional" practices.
The FCC will also be receiving evidence uncovered in the investigation; will some licenses be on the line as a result?
This situation is an example of why alternatives to existing terrestrial AM/FM radio are needed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBOC/HD: Is It The New BetaMax Or Just The New Susan B. Anthony Dollar Coin?
"Just because it's invented doesn't mean you are going to get it distributed," says Radio Advertising in a piece about IBOC/HD radio. They also wonder how terrestrial radio will create compelling programming on "multicast" channels when most stations can't produce interesting programming on the single audio channel they now operate.
|
