smays.com

Sports fan blogs (NPR Audio)

Interesting story on NPR this morning about a sports blog called The LoHud Yankees Blog. The blog seems to be a collaborative effort by Journal News beat writer Peter Abraham and a shit-load of fans. According to the NPR piece, a post can get as many as a thousand comments and readers will post to the blog form the stands, in the middle of a game.

I have a theory about blogs like this one. If the Yankees organization tried to create  such a successful blog, they couldn't. Wouldn't matter how much money they threw at it. There is some organic quality to really successful blogs like this one that is damned hard for big institutions to foster.

Smart companies will find and encourage and support efforts like this one. Is there a risk that someone will post something unflattering about the Yankees? Of course. But get a clue... they'll do that anyway.

Most of the pro leagues have some sort of dumb-ass policy regarding live-blogging of games by reporters so I'm a little curious how the Journal News is pulling this off. If Mr. Abraham or someone from the paper stumbles across this post, I'd love to know the answer. Could it be the Yankees are smart enough to know a really good thing when they see it?

We're gonna need a bigger dial

Mark Ramsey points us to this LA Times story about Chrysler's plans to offer wireless Internet in its 2009 models. Something we all knew was coming. As always, Mr. Ramsey asks the good questions. Here's one of them:

"What does it mean to be "radio" in a world where audio is fully integrated into an experience that includes video, text, interactivity, and personalization? The attraction to these services will not only be that they're supplemental to radio, but that they expand the definition of radio. And that expansion will benefit only those broadcasters and their partners smart enough to recognize that the advantage of a broadcast tower is non-existent in this context."

Or a satellite channel?

Radio for the blind and print-disabled

The Kansas Audio-Reader Network is "a reading and information service for blind, visually impaired, and print disabled individuals in Kansas and western Missouri. Services are offered free of charge to anyone in our listening area who is unable to read normal printed material."

Here's an example of the service they provide (about 6 min).
Download/Listen (5 min.MP3)

This would seem to be an invaluable service for those who cannot read a newspaper. I wonder what impact, if any, the Internet is having on services like this. I understand that not everyone has a computer and access to the web but that number is shrinking daily.

I assume the blind or visually impaired can have the text on any web page translated to spoken audio. While this would give the user more control over the information she consumes, it might be more... entertaining? ...to have a human read it aloud. Or why not have both.

UPDATE: Matt points us to similar service in Missouri.

This would seem to be an invaluable service for those who cannot read a newspaper. I wonder what impact, if any, the Internet is having on services like this. I understand that not everyone has a computer and access to the web but that number is shrinking daily.

I assume the blind or visually impaired can have the text on any web page translated to spoken audio. While this would give the user more control over the information she consumes, it might be more... entertaining? ...to have a human read it aloud. Or why not have both.

UPDATE: Matt points us to similar service in Missouri.

Why do radio station websites exist?

Mark Ramsey compares (contrasts?) radio websites to those of TV stations and newspapers. He concludes "consumers have more good reasons to visit one newspaper site than thirty radio station sites."

And poses The Big Question: "Why do we exist? What do we offer listeners that they can get nowhere else?"

A pretty good question for radio networks, too.

Next generation radio

Jerry Del Colliano shares a few ideas on "next generation radio" he'll be presenting to an interactive session for radio executives next month:

"My view is that terrestrial radio is now a destination entertainment medium for available listeners - older members of Gen X and the baby boomers."

"...there is no need to produce 24/7 programming online. ... But the radio station of the future may only provide three hours of programming a day – that’s right, a day – and deliver it on a cell phone or mobile device.

"Podcasting will be the new radio for Gen Y."

"The successful content provider in the future will have to unlock the genius of Steve Jobs in understanding a generation they are not in – and Jobs, arguably, knows Gen Y better than they know themselves."

"In the past, a radio station had to be on-air, all the time and doing the same format over and over again. But in the future, new media will require radio broadcasters who want to play in this arena to be many things for which it does not presently have skills."

If you're interested in where radio might be headed, I encourage you to read the full post. Companies that provide programming to radio stations -- like our company-- are sure to be affected by the same forces. Are we ready?

The results business

Mark Ramsey points to a survey of marketing professionals that shows growing pressure on accountability:

"86% of marketers say pressure has increased on them to account for results; no one said that the pressure has decreased. Moreover, 68% of organizations are measuring the quantifiable contribution of marketing to the bottom line.

Message to radio: You're no longer in the advertising business. You're in the results business. So which are you selling, advertising or results?"

I feel like I should have something to say about this... but I don't know what it would be.

"The next generation doesn't like radio."

Jerry Del Colliano is a professor at USC, broadcaster and program director and founder of Inside Radio. And a blogger:

"The next generation doesn't like radio. Not the stations. Not the concept. There's simply less need for it in their lives.

New technologies will not only replace radio among the next generation, they already have. And this generation is huge -- with as many Gen Y'ers as there are baby boomers.

Without the next generation the radio business will continue to hit the wall. Once the present economic downturn ends -- still a long way off -- there won't be enough new young listeners to help radio continue to grow. It becomes a losing proposition. More radio listeners die and fewer new radio listeners use traditional radio.

The next generation wants to stop, start, time-delay and delete its programming. This generation wants to mash it up -- have a say in what it sounds like or how it is used. They want to deliver it to each other -- share it -- at will. They want community (what we used to call local radio) through social networking online.

One of the hardest things for me to deal with in my years of working with the next generation is that they don't like radio and don't understand what I like about it. When I describe it, they say what I am describing is not what they hear on the radio.

We're an industry in denial that technology has changed the game. But only radio people have the power to adapt and create new content for a new generation and on the devices they use.

But to begin, we have to understand that more has changed than how to deliver radio programming. It's not about the technology. It's the sociology."

When I can safely speak to a young person (early teens), I ask them about radio and get pretty much the same responses as Professor Del Colliano. What's the joke... denial is not just a river in Egypt?

Right of the Dial (The Clear Channel Story)

I've been around radio most of my life. My dad was a radio guy. I became a radio guy. And I was doing affiliate relations for our radio networks when things started to change in the late 90's, when federal media ownership rules were relaxed and companies like Clear Channel started buying up hundreds of local stations.

Alec Foege has written a book --Right of the Dial-- that tells the Clear Channel story. According to the review in the New York Times, Foege tried to give the company the benefit of the doubt.

“I was not out to do a hatchet job,” he writes in the preface to “Right of the Dial,” “but rather to get to the bottom of a company that I suspected had gotten a raw deal as its bad publicity had snowballed.”

The reader need wait only three paragraphs before Foege renders his final verdict: “Having spent a lot of time talking to some of the company’s most prominent critics, as well as some of its most devout supporters, I have concluded that Clear Channel is indeed to blame for much of what it has been accused of.”

The Internet and iTunes and all the rest were going to have a big impact on radio, no matter what. But I have to wonder if local radio stations might not have been better prepared for the challenges if they hadn't been gutted and commoditized by the Clear Channel's.

Nawww.

[Thanks, Henry]

In search of radio's romance, longing and connection

From a speech by NAB President-CEO David Rehr at the National Association of Broadcasters Conference:

"Rehr then turned to radio, first talking about a widely reported BusinessWeek column by Jon Fine, headed "Requiem for Old-Time Radio." Though Fine believes radio isn't well-suited to moving its business model online, he wrote that he remembers radio with "ridiculous fondness" and recalled "huddling with it long past bedtime, the volume set low, hoping to hear something I loved."

"Rehr said, "Ladies and gentlemen, that is romance, that's longing, that is a connection. Listeners still want what they've always wanted. Technology hasn't changed that -- it has just changed the devices of delivery."

According to Mr. Fine, Mr. Rehr missed the point of his article:

"You don’t need to huddle with a radio long after dark to hear new music; you can form that romance or connection with a hundred other things."

Sirius-XM merger approved

"The companies have pledged that the combined firm will offer listeners more pricing options and greater choice and flexibility in the channel lineups they receive. If the deal is approved, the companies have said they would offer pricing plans ranging from $6.99 per month, for 50 channels offered by one service, up to $16.99 a month, where subscribers would keep their existing service plus choose channels offered by the other service." [AP]

I think I'm paying about $13 a month and listen to far fewer than 50 channels. I'd love to see an even lower price for 10 channels. Stay tuned.

PS: Are you still out there XM Ben? What does this mean for you?

Sharpen your writing skills with "Stopwatch Challenge"

Dan Rieck suggest we can sharpen our copywriting skills with what he calls the "Stopwatch Challenge." The exercise is basically writing a radio spot that can be spoken aloud in exactly 60 seconds.

Brings back fond memories of my radio days. For a dozen years, about half of my 10 hour days were spent on the air and the other half writing and producing radio commercials. Let's see... we'll call it 50 spots a week. 200 spots a  month. 2,400 spots a year. Let's round it down to 28,000 commercials.

We had to knock 'em out fast and get 'em on the air. And the client always gave you more stuff that you could fit in 30 or 60 seconds. So part of the challenge was boiling it down.

Sixty seconds is about 16 lines. But you have to spell out numbers (one-eight-hundred-five-five-five-sixty-four-hundred).

I've never considered myself a great writer. But writing radio spots was pretty good training for blogging. Or maybe any kind of writing. Fewer words always better than more words.

I often send emails with nothing but "see subject line" in the body. I try to put it all in the subject line. Try it on your next email.

And, yes, I know this post is longer than sixty seconds.

Radio owners waiting out "this Internet thing"

Gordon Borrell, writing in Inside Radio:

"As an advertising medium, the Internet is already larger than radio. It will approach $34 billion this year and is on a trajectory to overtake newspaper advertising within five years. In virtually all markets, the largest local Web site (typically run by a newspaper company) is now grossing more ad revenue than the largest radio station in that market. In some markets, the largest site is grossing more than the largest cluster of stations."

"Your radio reps have a bounty on their heads. We survey more than 3,000 local Web sites every year about their revenues, expenses, number of salespeople and other revenue-related topics. The ones with the greatest market share and revenue have an interesting characteristic in common: a star-performing “former radio rep” on the sales staff. The word has spread that radio salespeople know how to sell the Internet, and newspaper and TV Web site managers have been recruiting them left and right. Radio reps know how to cold-call, how to generate new business, and how to sell reach and frequency. That’s a perfect match for Internet sales."

More than half of Americans say they tend not to trust the press

That's one of the findings of a nationwide Harris Poll of 2,302 U.S. adults surveyed online between January 15 and 22, 2008 by Harris Interactive.

"Looking at the press in general, over half (54%) of Americans say they tend not to trust them, with only 30 percent tending to trust the press. Just under half (46%) of Americans say they do not trust television, while one-third (36%) do trust them. Somewhat surprisingly, Internet news and information sites do slightly better as a plurality of Americans (41%) trust them while just one-third (34%) tend not to trust them. And, radio tends to do best among Americans as 44 percent say they tend to trust it and one-third (32%) tend not to trust radio."

As for "trusting radio," are they referring to radio news or radio in a broader sense (talk shows, etc). And why does radio (and the net) earn higher trust than TV and newspapers?

BusinessWeek: Requium for Old-Time Radio

"...the local paper's Web site is almost always the dominant local online entity. Newspapers churn out tons of original content daily. Radio is built to a large degree on music it doesn't own and syndicated talk shows. Both are available in countless venues online, which means radio Web sites have less unique stuff to attract audiences. And stations aren't structured like newspapers. While their profit margins are much higher—try 40% and up—they also have much smaller news organizations and fewer bodies to create new content that can be slapped up online."

You can read the full article by Jon Fine at BusinessWeek.com

Imagine there's no tower, no transmitter, too

Once again, Mark Ramsey asks the right question:

"So the question your (radio) station must ask itself is this: What would we be and do if we didn't have a broadcast tower at all and only had a website? How would we build this thing?"

Apple wants to be your news and information station

From Apple Insider via Podcasting News: "An Apple patent reveals that the company is working on a podcast aggregator that would dynamically collect the news that you are interested in and deliver a personalized news podcast. In other words - Apple wants to be your news and information station.

The system would allow you to:

    * Subscribe to and personalize a podcast with software like iTunes;
    * Select news segments selected from a variety of categories; and
    * Automatically download the personalized podcast to your Apple TV, iPod or iPhone.

The custom news show could consist of a 5 minute segment from CNN on the day’s national news, a 5 minute segment from a local news station, and a 10 minute segment on sports highlights from ESPN.

Once you select the playlist of content that you’re interested in, Apple’s servers would request the latest podcast content from content creators, stitch the segments together and then deliver the personalized podcast to iTunes or other podcast software. As part of this process, Apple could insert targeted advertising dynamically."

Hmmm. A listener in the states served by our networks could include one of our 4 minute state newscasts, a three minutes sports report and a farm report. That "stitching segments together" part is what I find intriguing. Terry Heaton wrote about the "unbundling" of media. Is this a "re-bundling" of media?

If I were programming a local radio station, I'd be damned sure I had a killer local newscast/podcast up on iTunes.

Mark Ramsey: "Where is the innovation in radio?"

Mark thinks radio has lost its guts: "Where are the new formats? Where is the new talent? Why is Talk Radio pretty much the only form of radio that isn't music-intensive? Why are most Talkers late-middle-aged conservative white dudes? Our non-music format options are ridiculously thin - why?"

I've wondered the same thing. It's not uncommon for an owner to have five or six stations in a market, running some safe format on everyone of them. As Mr. Ramsey points out in his post, to try something innovative would require imagination, talent and guts. Short supply these days.

Tough Room

In last week's This American Life, host Ira Glass lived one of my fantasies. He sat in on an editorial meeting of The Onion, "where there's one laugh for every 100 jokes." Being funny is hard work. The segment runs 14 minutes.

Another segment featured Malcolm Gladwell, the best-selling author and famous journalist at the New Yorker magazine. He tells a great story about his first job in journalism.

Public radio and podcasting

Mark Ramsey points us to an interesting piece by "The Long Tail's" Chris Anderson on how his listening behavior to public radio has been transformed by podcasting.

"I realized that I don't really support my local affiliate. I love some of the shows it broadcasts and hate others. My attachments are to individual shows, not to a broadcast station. My engagement with public radio is at a more granular level than the affiliate.

Now that I get my radio via podcast, I don't have to take the bad shows with the good. I've got an a la carte menu, and I assemble my own schedule with what I want and when I want it.

But look at the arc of history here. The podcast model is getting cheaper and more ubiquitously available (who doesn't have a cellphone?), and it serves individual needs and taste better. Meanwhile the broadcast model, which is all about one-size-fits-all taste, is based on human labor costs and costly transmission equipment and is only getting more expensive. You can see how this story ends."

I've had the same guilty thoughts about my own listening habits. I like a lot of NPR programs but listen to them as podcasts. And I would be willing to pay for the best shows (This American Life, for example).

And my morning listening routine has improved with the purchase of a small speaker/doc for my iPod nano. Each evening iTunes downloads any new podcasts to which I'm subscribed, and syncs to the nano. In the morning I pop the nano into the speaker dock and listen to a perfectly customized line-up of progams.

Ten in a row!

Mark Ramsey shares some thoughts on a story in the Sunday Times of London about the growing number of Brits tuning in to personalized Internet "radio" every week (and tuning out traditional radio).

Sunday Times: "Personalised broadcasts of the future will probably have either advertising or a price tag attached, just as they do today. But once your radio knows exactly what you want to hear, the idea of a human DJ – however cheeky his banter – might start to sound a little dated."

Ramsey: "Over the long haul I fully expect the influence of music-oriented radio to diminish. Because music, my friends, is a commodity. Not only can anyone string together a playlist, but nobody can string together my favorite playlist better than I can."

"What it all adds up to is the gradual near-obsolescence of music radio, not in a blink, but by a slow and persistent siphoning of audience and attention and interest and advertisers. This process will take years to happen."

I read a lot of stories like this but very few on the impact of Internet "stations" on non-music formats. Are news-talk formats feeling any effect from the web? My radio pals can feel free to post an anonymous comment.

Nanotube Radio

Some researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory have constructed "a fully functional, fully integrated radio receiver, orders-of-magnitude smaller than any previous radio, from a single carbon nanotube. The single nanotube serves, at once, as all major components of a radio: antenna, tuner, amplifier, and demodulator."

"The nanotube radio's extremely small size could enable radical new applications such as radio controlled devices small enough to exist in the human bloodstream, or simply smaller, cheaper, and more efficient wireless devices such as cellular phones."

They've provided short videos of this little bugger playing Layla, Good Vibrations, and the Star Wars theme. [Thanks, Trish]

"Public Media"

Doc Searls says the Net makes radio and TV transmitters obsolete the moment high-enough-bandwidth wireless connectivity becomes ubiquitous.

"We’re one good UI away from the cell phone becoming a radio. (Thanks to the iPhone, it already serves as a TV.) And we’re one smart cell company away from radio- and TV-as-we-know-it from being replaced entirely -- or from moving up the next step of the evolutionary ladder. Public broadcasters know that. That’s one reason they now call themselves “public media”, a move that separates the category from its transport methods.

Will this someday be an issue for our networks? Radio Iowa. Wisconsin Radio Network. Nebraska Radio Network. Time will tell.

Make iPhone listen to radio, tell you what's playing

TUAW.COM: "You're riding in the car and a great song comes on the radio. You're dying to know what it is so you can go buy it ASAP but there's no satellite radio receiver to tell you what's playing. How can you find out what song it is? Whip out your iPhone, put it near the car speakers, and watch the screen. Poof! There's the song, artist, and album."

Okay. This could make me trade in my Tracfone. iPhoner Tom promises to try this out and let me know how it works.

"My phone gets a thousand radio stations"

Mark Ramsey (Hear 2.0) asks how long before mobile phones in the U.S. look like this Nokia phone available in Europe.

As I watched the video demo, I imagined listening to a Missouri Tiger "broadcast." Or an all-news channel from one of our state networks. Ramsey's headline says it all.

Merging radio and the web

One of our affiliate relations reps shared this story with me a few days ago and I'm posting it so I can find it later. And I might have some of the particulars wrong but they don't change the point of the story.

Small market radio station manager gets a call from a program syndicator, trying to clear a three hour Christmas special. The station manager doesn't want to commit that much time but likes the program and suggests they put the program on the station's website, clear the syndicator's commercials on the radio station and promote the special (online) on the air.

Hmmm.

Now, every program provider will tell you how important it is that the spots air inside the programming. They might have even sold that aspect to the advertisers. But when all is said and done (note that I did not say, "At the end of the day"), it's really about getting the spots on the air.

Is there some obvious synergy here? Could web-savvy radio stations take this approach to enrich their online offering and pull more local listeners (and advertisers) to their websites?

And while there are only 24 hours in the on-air programming clock, there are no limits online. A station could have a sports "channel," an ag channel, a home fix-up channel and on and on.

Yes, I see the limitation. For now, it's those 30 second radios spots that have value to the advertiser. The radio station still has to program a radio station the people want to listen to.

And all my "what if's" and "how about's" are predicated on the idea that radio stations must be more than "radio" stations. They've got to find a way to survive online. We all do.

If I had a little AM Daytimer (insert joke here), I might fill my air time with excerpts from a wide variety of programming (as local as I could afford to make it) on my website(s).

As for networks and syndicators that rely on getting their programs (commercials) on all those radio stations... their fortunes are tied to the radio stations. To paraphrase the old saw about land, God isn't making any more 30's and 60's. But He/She has an endless supply of web pages.

Covering the Iowa Caucuses

The Iowa Caucuses (Jan 3) is a big deal in the national political scheme of things. One of Learfield's news networks --Radio Iowa-- will cover it, just as we've done since the network began in 1987.

We'll provide two 4-minute reports each hour throughout the evening. These audio reports will be fed by satellite to affiliated radio stations throughout the state (and streamed live on our website). The radio stations will air some or all of these reports along with whatever other programming they are doing that night. This is the way networks like ours have operated since... well, since forever.

The editorial edge of state networks is our ability to focus on the "state" angle of the stories we cover. The Iowa Caucuses will be the big national story of the day (evening). Every news organization in the country will be covering the story, wall-to-wall.

So where's our niche? What do we provide that a listener can't get more of, faster somewhere else? Is our "target audience" people who can't be in front of their TV or computer that evening? We have to proceed on the assumption there will be people listening to their local radio stations that night and hearing our reports a couple of times an hour.

I'm not sure where I'm headed with this ramble. I'm just trying to understand how --and to what degree-- things are changing for news organizations like ours.

And whither the bloggers? Will they be live blogging the caucuses? Is that allowed? Not sure what that would add, since the news organizations (or the Associated Press) will have --I assume-- someone covering each of the caucus locations.

My friend (and Radio Iowa News Director) Kay Henderson has been living and breathing Iowa politics for the last year or so. She probably has the answers to most of these questions. Or at least some interesting insight. I suspect she's too busy to enlighten us, but watch the comments, just in case. She checks in here.

I think I've lost the thread of this ramble... I just know that I'm glad I'm no longer responsible for coming up with long and short term strategy for our networks.

We'll know how many radio stations are "clearing" our reports on Caucus night. We will NOT know how many people are listening to those reports. That's a question for the Magic Eight Ball. If I could ask one more, it would be how will all of this change four years from now?

Newspaper's Internet radio station streaming fire coverage

"The San Diego Union-Tribune's site SignOn San Diego offers a streaming Internet radio station, SignOn Radio. Today they've been supplying steady coverage of the fires, including phoned-in live reports from area residents and people following the story from other regions. News staff are manning the radio, taking calls. It seems like they're doing a pretty good job of applying journalistic judgment to both official information and call-ins." [E-Media Tidbits]

I'm listening to the SignOn Radio stream on iTunes. W is stumbling through a press conference. I think he actually said, "I'm from the federal government and we're here to help you."

They just broke for AP headlines. I keep looking at the MacBook to remind myself I'm listening to "radio" from a newspaper. Spooky. I remember boasting that only "radio" could really cover this kind of story.

Buy $1,000 in radio spots, get $2,000 back

TechCrunch wonders if Google's radio ad network --Google Audio-- is in trouble:

"Google is offering $2,000 to any advertiser who spends $1,000 on a Google Audio ad campaign. The $2,000 comes in the form of a credit on future ad campaigns, but part of it still comes out of Google’s pocket since it needs to pay the radio stations who will run the ads. It amounts to a “buy one, get two free” offer and is good through the end of the year.

If (Google) truly has a better way of buying and selling radio ads, advertisers and radio stations will quickly figure that out on their own. It is not a good sign when Google has to resort to paying customers to try out a new product."

Update 10/15/07: This from a reader (who prefers to remain anonymous) who works at a radio station that runs Google Audio ads:

"This week we ran on average 18 :60's a day for Google. They just fill in avails that are on our schedule, so many of them are in the evening between 6p-11p. Some hours may have a Google Ad in each stop set.

I don't see the checks but I've heard they range from $500-$2,000 a month. We do have the ability to block out any hours or programming we don't want their stuff in.

To me it would just seem to be up to the station owner/company is the money worth tying up the time with these filler type ads.  I've yet to hear an ad I thought specifically targets to our region or even state... and no real big name company's like Ford, GM, McDonald's, JC Penney, Target or anything."

Worst jobs for 21st century

From a Forbes story on job prospects over the next few decades:

"Another endangered species: journalists. Despite the proliferation of media outlets, newspapers, where the bulk of U.S. reporters work, will cut costs and jobs as the Internet replaces print. While current events will always need to be covered (we hope), the number of reporting positions is expected to grow by just 5% in the coming decade, the Labor Department says. Most jobs will be in small (read: low-paying) markets.

Radio announcers will have a tough time, too. Station consolidation, advances in technology and a barren landscape for new radio stations will contribute to a 5% reduction in employment for announcers by the middle of the next decade. Even satellite radio doesn't seem immune from the changes. The two major companies, XM and Sirius--which now have plans to merge--have regularly operated in the red."

The U. S. Department of Labor stats identified a few growth areas: Health care, education and financial services.

Rediscovering high school football

Cover story on Broadcasting & Cable looks at how some local TV stations are "rediscovering" high school football:

"Vital to high school football's rise in popularity is the fact that technology has finally reached a point where the typical teen, raised on YouTube, can easily upload video and share highlights from that night's game. Station managers say the interactive nature of new media -- whether it's user-generated video, scores or trash-talking -- is a critical component of their school content.

Hearst-Argyle Television has taken the interactive concept a step further, training students in seven markets to be “sideline reporters” for its social-networking platform High School Playbook. A total of 60 students shoot high-def cameras, edit and post their work on the Web site."

The good news --and the bad news-- is this is no longer the turf of any medium. I know TV, cable and newspapers are jumping in. I hope there are radio stations doing them same. How hard would it be?

Let's say there are 10 HS football teams within the range of my station's signal. I recruit and train 10 reporters (and 10 back-up's) on how to shoot/edit game highlights. They upload same to the station YouTube channel (sponsored, of course) and we promote like mad. Incentive? Maybe some pocket money. Best video of the season wins a video iPod (others get iPod Shuffles and iTunes gift cards).

Why I don't listen to talk radio

Mark Ramsey observes that broadcasters have given listeners the talk radio they want... but do a crappy job of giving them the non-music radio they might want:

"Wandering amidst the posters at NAB promoting radio's prime Talk properties, it's hard not to be struck by the fact that these talents are overwhelmingly Male, late-middle-aged, conservative, politically-charged white guys in suits. Sure, there are the exceptions, but for every Dave Ramsey there are a dozen Michael Savages."

Ramsey goes on to point out that younger folk are not listening to these guys. You think?

Newspapers doing radio (and TV)

I just listened an interview that Mark Ramsey did with a couple of guys from the San Diego Union-Tribune (runs 17 min). Twenty minutes ago I'd have described Ron James and Marc Balanky as newspapers guys. Now, I'll call them media guys.

And they're gearing up to do what we used to call radio (and, eventually, TV). A couple of things they said jumped out at me:

"We have a newsroom that works 24 hours a day" and "...we have more than 300 reporters."

I flashed on all the empty or near-empty radio newsrooms out there. These guys are serious as a heart attack and I'd be damned worried if I were "just" a radio station in that market. On the other hand, if you aren't already well down the road to being more than just a radio station, don't sweat it. Squeeze what you can from old Bossie and remember the good times.

CBS Radio is putting “60 Minutes” on iTunes

CBS Radio News is making the entire program available as an audio podcast free on iTunes, CBSNews.com and CBS Radio News affiliate websites.  An audio-only version of “60 Minutes” has been offered for radio syndication for years.  And some audio and video segments have been posted online.  But this is the first time the entire weekly show will be downloadable.  Executive producer Jeff Fager says the show is “perfect for this kind of audio podcasting because its relied on “solid storytelling, with or without the pictures.” [Inside Radio]

This American Life: Poker Pros

Driving back from the airport (returning from Las Vegas) on Sunday, we listened to Ira Glass' This American Life:

"Ira travels to Las Vegas for the World Series of Poker, gets hooked, and tries to figure out what it would mean if he ditched his job in radio to become a professional card player. What he learns: a professional gambler can suffer two heartbreaking losses back-to-back, costing him over $100,000, and moments later, at the casino bar, calculate the million-to-one odds of his unlikely losses...in his head." (26 minutes)

By all means, go to the This American Life website and listen to the program there. If --for whatever reason-- it's no longer available, you can download/listen here.

As always, this is brilliant story telling, but it's a must-listen for anyone that ever thought they'd like to play cards for a living.

"We're brands that have radio promotion"

Zena Burns, program director of Clear Channel's New York radio station cluster: "We’re no longer stations that have websites. We’re brands that have radio promotion." [Inside Radio]

HD Radio looking for iTunes hook

From INSIDE RADIO: "Polk Audio will announce the next generation of HD Radio tuners that will establish a direction connection between HD and iPods -- and in the process bring e-commerce to HD. In an alliance with Apple, Polk’s new I-Sonic ES2 HD Radio will include an iPod docking station that features a “tagging button” which will allow listeners to buy songs they hear on HD Radio stations via iTunes. The advancement requires HD stations to encode their signals and insiders say eight radio groups have committed to encoding."

I don't know. Maybe.

Blinks ad adlets

From latimes.com: "Miniature radio ads, spanning just a few seconds in length, are a hit in Hollywood, says market leader Clear Channel Communications Inc., which launched the spots known as blinks and adlets last year.

Homer Simpson's unmistakable "D'oh!" or "Woohoo!" followed by the familiar tagline "Tonight on Fox!" for example, has been a popular two-second ad -- known as a blink -- for Fox Broadcasting.

Unlike longer ads, which run during minutes-long commercial breaks, the blinks and adlets are slipped in between songs.

Clear Channel declined to disclose pricing, but one ad executive said five-second adlets typically fetch as much as 20% of 60-second ads, which cost about $800 in major markets, and two-second blinks cost 10%." [Thanks, Roger]

Mark Ramsey: "You're not in the 'radio' business anymore

Mr. Ramsey says the advertising industry is about to redefine radio's "category." According to a report by MediaVest, radio is now "audio":

"In a new report being circulated to clients, MediaVest has adopted the position that terrestrial broadcast radio should no longer be looked at as a discrete medium in communications plans, but as part of a greater array of audio media--including satellite, online, mobile and a variety of personal media device technologies, such as iPods, other MP3 players, and even television, which increasingly is being used as an audio-only medium."

"...radio should no longer be looked at as a discrete medium, but as part of a greater array of audio media."

Ouch.

I agree with Mr. Ramsey that a) this has been coming for a bit and b) it is an important shift that too many "broadcasters" still don't get. I encourage you to read the full post.

Internet radio to outstrip HD radio

eMarketer: "Internet radio will generate ad revenues of $19.7 billion in 2020, equal to those of terrestrial radio in 2006, according to a Bridge Ratings press release issued in August 2007. Bridge Ratings made the projections as part of a study comparing Internet radio adoption with HD radio. Bridge Ratings surveyed consumers ages 12 and older in June and July 2007."

"These aggressive forecasts for Internet radio could be threatened by the ongoing dispute between record companies and Internet broadcasters over performance royalties to labels and artists for music streamed over the Web."

"Bridge Ratings estimates that Internet radio will have 180 million listeners by 2020. Terrestrial radio will have 250 million listeners. But HD will have less than 10 million." [via RAIN]

20th anniversary of Radio Iowa

Radio Iowa is one of several state radio news networks owned by the company I work for. The first newscast went up "on the bird" on July 1, 1987. So the network is twenty years + 3 weeks old. I dug out the "start-up" file and took a little stroll down memory lane.

In the newsroom that first day: News Director Dennis Sutterer, O. Kay Henderson and Todd Kimm (Kay and Todd are still there, grinding out the news and sports). We leased two tiny rooms from an advertising agency in Des Moines. One for a studio...one for a very snug newsroom.

Planning for the network started in October of 1986. In February of 1987, we mailed our first packet of info to radio stations throughout the state:

"Radio Iowa will be Iowa's first full-service, satellite delivered state news network. Headquartered in Des Moines, Radio Iowa's three person news staff will cover the legislature and state government.

The enclosed packet includes brief descriptions of Radio Iowa programming; a schedule of feed times; affiliattion contract and clearance declaration; and a demo cassette."

There was more, but you get the idea.

In March of '87, Roger Gardner and I started in-station pitches. A few of the stops on that first swing: Bill Wells, KSO, Des Moines; Mark Mennick, WOC, Davenport; Kevin Kelly, WDBQ, Dubuque; Betty Baudler and Rich Fellingham, KASI, Ames; Larry Edwards, WMT, Cedar Rapids; Glenn Olsen, KQWC, Webster City; Mary Quass, KHAK, Cedar Rapids; John Carl, KCOB, Newton; Don Tool, KRNT, Des Moines.

I think we went on the air with 32 affiliates airing our reports.

I solemnly pledge to put a recorder in front of Kay and Todd for an oral history of the network (to date). Watch this space.

Back to land lines?

In 1981 our company began distributing our (news and ag) programs to radio stations via satellite. It was a big deal at the time because we were the first of the smaller, regional networks to "go satellite." Uplink hardware was damned expensive. Downlink hardware at the radio stations was pretty pricey, too. But much cheaper (in the long run) than all of those point-to-point land lines.

For many years, having a satellite distribution system was a competitive edge. You had to have some way of getting the programming to the radio stations (and their listeners). No FedEx in those days.

In a few weeks, football season will get underway and we'll be distributing play-by-play audio to affiliates of 35 collegiate sports radio networks around the country. Most of those via satellite. But for the first time, we'll use live web streaming to deliver audio to the affiliates of two of our networks (Maine and Montana State).

This is possible because of increased bandwidth; better audio encoding; and a growing acceptance of audio (and video) online. If all goes according to plan, listeners won't even be aware of how the audio gets from the stadium to their radios (or computers).

We could sort of see this coming but it was/is difficult to imagine a time when satellite distribution of audio and video could be replaced by the Internet (or even some Super Internet of the future). But it's getting easier.

So what's it all mean? It seems unlikely your "competitive edge" will be distribution. That's probably been true for some time now. Having the good content will always be important. But if you are not the only source for the content... or the best source for the content... (to be continued).

Traditional radio to pay for play?

I knew the music industry was trying to a) gouge serious dollars out of Internet radio stations or b) shut them down... but according to this article at BusinessWeek.com, the music industry is lobbying Congress to get so-called terrestrial radio to pay royalties just like its Web and satellite siblings.

If this gets legs, it could be a big deal. Can't believe the NAB will allow this.

Should we call it iHD?

Mark Ramsey wonders: "Apple moved more iPhones in three days than the radio industry has moved HD Radios in three years. Now, strictly speaking it's not fair to compare a tech phenomenon to the many that are not. Then again, very few tech gadgets have hundreds of millions of dollars of complimentary on-air support and the power of the radio industry behind them.

The consumer is speaking volumes with numbers like these. Are you listening to what he's telling you? Sure, HD Radio chips will be tiny and efficient enough to slip into mp3 players and mobile phones by 2008. But has anyone asked whether or not consumers will want them there?"

Internet passes radio as "most essential" media

INSIDE RADIO: "Less than one of five Americans (17%) say radio is their most important medium for information and entertainment. That’s down from 26% in 2002. What’s changing is obvious – the Internet is quickly becoming a turn-to medium. One-third of Americans say it’s now the most important — compared to 36% who pick TV. A big jump from 2002 when just 20% said the Web. A new Edison Media Research report also shows the Internet and TV have swapped places as the “most cool and exciting” media with 38% now picking the Web versus 35% for TV. Edison’s report also finds newspapers are most-often picked as the “least essential” medium by 35% of consumers. It’s followed by the Internet with 24%. Both radio and TV had the fewest mentions at 18%."

Radio: As good as it gets?

In a recent interview with Mark Ramsey (Hear 2.0), marketing smart-guy Seth Godin talked about his new book, The Dip, and how some of the ideas therein apply to the future of radio. The full interview is worth a listen but these two snippets (3 min) grabbed me by the microphone.

More images from early years of KBOA

I scanned another 70 prints this weekend and added them to the KBOA flickr set. Most of the scanning work is done but I got a bunch of pages that need to to be copied and pasted to the new site. The Canon scanner and iPhoto are making the work image work so much easier.

And I never tire of looking at these images from a by-gone era of radio. I'd love to ID the announcer in the photo below but every year that goes by makes it less likely. And the guy in Studio B, performing live... priceless.

I have more than 700 images on flickr now and think I'm on track to hit 1,000 by the end of the year. I'm trying not to upload crap, just to hit the number.

There is something strangely satisfying about getting images out of the closet and out on the net. I remember worrying that someone might "steal" my photos. Now I see that the only way to "save" these images is to put them out here.

When old radio dogs learn to use pics

A radio reporter uses photos and the web to enhance his reporting and the result is three different stories to experience: a radio story, an online story and a third story, the audio slideshow -- radio with pictures closely matched to enhance the audio.[PoynterOnline]

When every car has WiFi

Speaking of disruptive technologies...Seth Godin asks (and answers) the question: What happens to radio when ever car is WiFi? Part of a longer interview with Mark Ramsey.

Cueing records

I love this photograph of my father. It was taken in the control room (Studio A) of KBOA in Kennett, Missouri, probably around 1950.

Anyone that has ever "cued" a record recognizes that sense of touch and the delicate balance of the heavy tone-arm on the oh-so-easy-to-scratch record.

A skill (if you could call it that) that hasn't been needed for many years. I'm glad I didn't miss those final years of high-touch, hands-on radio.

We had one of the early automation systems (for our FM station) but it felt like telling someone how to make love to your girl friend.

And the thrill of having the program director walk into the studio while you were on the air and put the hot new single into "current" box. Is it as much fun to see the new single come into the rotation on a computer monitor?

Before I get carried away, allow me to say --for the record-- I don't miss using a grease pencil and splicing blog to edit tape. If I had to choose, I'd be th digital boy I have become.

Study: Web will be top news source within 5 years

According to a new Harris Interactive study, more people say the Web will be their primary news source than network news or cable news. While today 25% of respondents in the U.S. say they rely on network TV
news, the Web comes in at number 2 with 18%. But when asked what source
they will turn to in the future, those numbers flip and the Web moves
ahead of network TV news by 4%. [Lost Remote]