Poster's cred--just wondering?

[RoddyFreeman]

After pondering on that statement, it began to gnaw away at me. I grew up when the main attraction of radio was hearing the new songs that were coming out. I can remember when we'd actually make a point of turning off the TV and turning the radio on at 9:00 PM when the local Top 40 Station would play three brand new records and we could phone in and "vote" on them. On Friday, they'd play the four winners from Monday through Thursday, and we'd get to vote on the weekly winner and it might end up in the Top 40. One of the most common topics in the school cafeteria was "did you hear the new song by ___?"

A few points;

1. I think your definition of new music is different than Craig's.  Radio stations still play new music when they feel the songs played have a great chance of becoming a hit.  Just like in the old days when the Beatles or Supremes came out with a great new song, radio stations today play new songs by Taylor Swift, Jason Derulo and Katy Perry in CHR; by Darius Rucker and Sugarland in Country; by Monica and Drake in Hip Hop.  It's no different at all from how radio has always been.

When Craig says "new," I think he means artists who are unknown or have a different sound than what's popular, songs that would not do well in an auditorium test; or in other words, deep-cut-type songs.  This is no different than it ever was.

2. Just because we now have iPods, Internet radio and other ways to get music, people are still people.  By that I mean that humans still like to hear familiar music.  All the technology in the world is not going to change that.  Those who happen to be more interested in different types of music now have ways of getting that, but that's a minority of listeners.

3. You said top 40 stations used to go deep with the artists they played in the 60's.  Top-40 radio has always played a very small list of songs.  When WABC in NY was #1, it was playing the top 25 over and over.  The difference, and what you're confusing, is that in those days, there were very few formats.  Therefore, most people who liked mass music listened to top 40, and top-40 stations played the Beatles and the Supremes along with Frank Sinatra and Al Hirt.  So they played more types of music because so many different types made the top 40.  However, they still played the same 40 songs over and over and over.  In that regard, it was no different than today.  Top-40 stations just had a much greater mix of demographics than the format now has due to the proliferation of music formats on today's radio.  But there was no difference in the programming philosophy of having a tight playlist.

[TheBigA]

I don't think adults are as eager for keeping up with the most current fads as we teenagers were, but I think it's wrong to assume that adults don't like hearing new songs that are very similar to songs that they already like.

And I think that's the secret behind the consistent success of the country format.  Country radio plays, on average, about 22% currents.  They break new songs and new artists, moreso than other adult formats.  Country today appeals to classic rock fans.  That's why country radio embraced All Summer Long by Kid Rock, and why Hootie has a new career at country radio.  Country radio has the widest age diversity of any format, with a 20 year old on one edge of the spectrum, and a guy who's nearly 60 (George Strait) at the other.  The same artists offer two completely different approaches to country, one traditional and the other pop.  They all market their music well, they come up with great tour packages and bring their music directly to the people, and they interact with their fans on a personal level.  This is why country music is kicking the butts of other formats.

[fortt3]

Whatever happened to restaurants with REAL FOOD?  What ever happened to radio stations with REAL PROGRAMMING?

OK, total digression of the thread from the OP's topic, not that there's anything wrong with that.

As to the poster's cred subject, I've never made any claims that I know as much about today's radio business as most of you folks. Two years of experience  from over 35 years ago is meaningless. But I like to read folks' opinions and chip in sometimes, with comments & observations I know some of you think are somewhat lame (not too many I hope), but hey, free country and all that and I thank those of you that read em' anyway.

So with that out of the way, moving to real food and real programming:
1) Two suggestions, Waffle House and O'Charley's - for the most part, they don't heat up something frozen. I'm not sure about the chili at WH, but it's good anyway.
2) "Real" programming is subjective, but I gather you mean, live and local and audience-driven. The closest thing I know of reminds me of the old Jim & John "Merry Go Round" from the late 70's and Bobby Harper & Kathy Fischmann's morning show, and that is WDUN's Bill and Joel show.
     A couple of sentences in a article by Richard Hyatt after Columbus's Chris Brannon passed away come to mind:
    Chris Brannon’s voice made little girls swoon. He was on their radio every night, playing the big boss hits from the big boss charts while the teenyboppers did their homework or gossiped on the telephone.
    Old-time rock ‘n’ roll wasn’t a bunch of old records on the shelf. It was AM radio and spinning the wax were disk jockeys like Brannon. They thought they were stars and for a moment they were, sending out gushy requests to anxious listeners who stayed close to the radio until he played their favorite record.

Neal Boortz, love him or hate him, was much better when he was more local. Local subjects didn't necessarily have a libertarian/conservative vs. liberal POV - they tend to be more along the lines of what makes more sense, who is directly/indirectly affected, in a good way or bad way, and by how much.  He was more entertaining with local and state issues. Ocassionally, he would pull a practical joke on listeners.

And if anyone wants to know, my real name, since I don't think Byron Dobbs or Allen Wodall would give a hoot, is Tom Fort.

[Talk_Dude]

1. I think your definition of new music is different than Craig's.  Radio stations still play new music when they feel the songs played have a great chance of becoming a hit.  Just like in the old days when the Beatles or Supremes came out with a great new song, radio stations today play new songs by Taylor Swift, Jason Derulo and Katy Perry in CHR; by Darius Rucker and Sugarland in Country; by Monica and Drake in Hip Hop.  It's no different at all from how radio has always been.

I didn't expressly say so, but I was thinking of all stations who play any sort of "vintage" music format, such as oldies, classic rock, moyl, etc.

2. Just because we now have iPods, Internet radio and other ways to get music, people are still people.  By that I mean that humans still like to hear familiar music.  All the technology in the world is not going to change that.  Those who happen to be more interested in different types of music now have ways of getting that, but that's a minority of listeners.

Anyone who says "more interested in different types of music" clearly doesn't get what I'm talking about. A different "type" of music would be a totally different genre of music, like saying a classic rock station would do better if it also played polkas. (OK, hyperbole mode was on for that last sentence.)  

That's where the lack of understanding about music betrays too many PD's. "Familiar" music doesn't mean "only the same few songs". People who know the "hits" of a any classic rock artist would find much of their other album cuts "familiar". Hell, I slipped a Rutles song into a Beatles mix tape, and many people who heard it thought it sounded "familiar". But you radio guys keep talking about being "interested in different types of music" when we listeners are talking about wanting the same type of music we really and truly love, just new songs that sound as good as the songs we already know.

Since I've started popping CD's into my dashboard instead of mix tapes, I've been discovering that albums that contained some of my favorite radio hits also contain other songs that sound familiar yet new. I like them. I liked Paradise by the Dashboard Light, but other cuts on the album Bat Out of Hell were just as good. Listeners who liked "Piano Man" before it was overplayed to death would find "Worse Comes to Worst" and "Stop in Nevada" to be "familiar but new". Of course, "If I Only Had the Words (To Tell You)" is a real downer, and wouldn't fly, but that's why a good PD needs to be able to do more than just read printouts and test reports.

That same reasoning applies to classic R&B, country, and every other vintage music format.

3. You said top 40 stations used to go deep with the artists they played in the 60's.  Top-40 radio has always played a very small list of songs.  When WABC in NY was #1, it was playing the top 25 over and over.  The difference, and what you're confusing, is that in those days, there were very few formats.  Therefore, most people who liked mass music listened to top 40, and top-40 stations played the Beatles and the Supremes along with Frank Sinatra and Al Hirt.  So they played more types of music because so many different types made the top 40.  However, they still played the same 40 songs over and over and over.  In that regard, it was no different than today.  Top-40 stations just had a much greater mix of demographics than the format now has due to the proliferation of music formats on today's radio.  But there was no difference in the programming philosophy of having a tight playlist.

No, I never said that Top 40 stations "used to go deep with the artists they played in the 60's". Of course Top 40 stations never went "deep". The deepest cut possible for a Top 40 station was a "B" side. I was saying that stations that play "vintage music formats" should go deeper with the artists they currently play.

But you raise an issue that proves my point. In the 60's, since each station competed with every other station because there was no multi-station ownership, each station did try to be all things to all people. But when FM became more popular, and albums started outselling 45's, the format rules changed to reflect the change in the times. To some PD who was stuck in 1965 like a fossilized bug in amber, the new and different things that his counterparts on FM were doing with AOR must have struck him as stupid. I wonder how many Top 40 PD's of the 1960's couldn't manage to hang on past the 1970's because they couldn't make the transition to a new paradigm. I'd guess the same number as the ones from the late 1940's who couldn't accept that radio was changing in the 1950's from broadcasting scripted programs and live music performances from their studios to jukeboxes.

[Kabrich]

For those of you who know how to read, and who can extrapolate the lessons from one industry and apply them to another, you need to read this book. It describes in great detail how General Motors went to the verge of bankruptcy and had to be bailed out by the government (meaning our tax dollars!). The biggest single cause of GM's collapse was that everyone in a position of authority, and the only people who were listened to when they had ideas or suggestions were "experienced" automotive professionals, who had been making the same mistakes over and over for decades.

Really bad example.

Over $1500 of the price of every car goes to pay Retired Union workers healthcare. Management could not cut their "5,000 song playlist". Bankruptcy allowed that.

Goodbye Hummer, Pontiac and the others. Goodbye "5,000 song playlist"

And now numbers look great - an IPO scheduled for November 18th and just like most of the Financial Sector Bailout from 2008, the Government (our tax dollars) will actually be returned with a profit.

I've been following the back and forth here over the last few years with interest and would love to have input, or argument--whatever--on the idea of creating some kind of "experience badge" for posters.  I'm torn on this myself, but wonder if there's a need to know, somehow, if what's being written is being written by people who have real, full time experience in the radio industry?  And, is that important (it may NOT be in this context, but I really don't know).

Don't waste your time. Radio-Info.com wants page views for advertising, not a professional exchange. Sad but true.

[craig_ashwood]

Some more thoughts here, based on all this discussion (which has been great, really--thoughtful and smart--compare THIS board to any of the other city boards and they don't hold a candle).

I appreciate and agree with both Roddy Freeman and Randy Kabrich and in truth, would love to be wrong about it, but I really don't think so.  Why?  Radio is the ultimate marketing challenge, and good PDs are the ultimate marketing gurus.  If you don't like the product, you punch away.  It's a fast, no-repercussions choice.  So, set aside thoughts about playlists, or music, or anything else, and consider:

The Law Of Focus:. Brands stand for something "famous" in the consumer's mind, and are easily, quickly defined by the consumer. Everything you do as a brand needs to reinforce that "famous" focus.  Veer off at your own peril.  Domino's Pizza, Volvo, Mercedes, and now UPS--these are examples of companies that have got away from what made them "famous".  Domino's gave up on the "30 minutes or less delivery" promise and promptly went from #1 to #3 or #4, Volvo owned "safety" as a concept but started producing convertibles (they're safe? Really?).  Mercedes used to stand for high end luxury--not anymore, with $30k "entry level" C class cars.  And, UPS is now trumpeting "logistics".  The average person couldn't define "logistics" if you paid them.  And "logistics" is a process feature, not a consumer benefit.

Brand names stand for important things--mostly, image, and consumer benefit.  If you as a brand blur your image or benefit, you DIE.

And, there's only so many brand names people can handle: a fave "party game" I've played (not really in parties, but in conference presentations, for example) is to challenge an individual to name 5 brands of toothpaste...5 of car rental companies....5 of toilet paper brands.  They NEVER can...they slow down, demonstrably, at the third, and cannot go beyond that number as a rule.  Try it yourself and you'll see.  The point is, people have a specific idea of leading brands inside a given category in their minds, and can't name those that don't lead.  Radio lesson: be the leader in your category.  And if you can't be the category leader, create a new category!  Not the leading rock station?  Be the leading classic rock station.

The Law Of Sacrifice: lose by offering too much.  A smorgasbord of features blurs focus (see above).  Not to beat to death the fast food discussion above, but: Fridays used to have a menu that was about the size of the Manhattan phone book.  You could get EVERYTHING there.  Sounds good?  Compare and contrast with the Houston's chain, which NEVER advertises, never offers coupons, never does promotions, and has a standing waiting line there from the time they open.  Their menu?  One page.  About 20 items totally.  But prepared and delivered PERFECTLY.  And, Talk-Dude, your example of McDonald's Filet O' Fish?  Ask any McDonalds owner/operator where their sales are: Big Macs or Filet O' Fish.  Point is, the HITS matter; Big Macs are the HITS and Filet O'Fish are the lunar rotation fills.  And Houston's wins because they offer a limited range of high quality items consistently, non-stop.

These two things inform my thinking about radio.  I didn't used to understand them, but now that I do, I embrace them whole-heartedly.  I'm sure some will disagree, and that's fine.  But I think it's demonstrable that if you don't apply at least something associated with these two items, you're going to have trouble establishing what your radio station stands for, with both audience and potential clients.