Category Archives: Radio

Five hours a week listening to radio

Posted on by

“Online users spend as much time surfing the web as they do watching TV, and they spend far more time at it than they spend with other media, says a new study from Jupiter Research. The report was based on a survey of just under 3,000 regular online users, defined as people who go online at least once a month from home, work or school. It found that on average online users are now spending about 14 hours a week surfing the internet, which is equal to the amount of time that they spend watching TV. By comparison, on average each week they spend one hour reading magazines, two hours perusing newspapers and five hours tuning into the radio. In fact, they spend more time online than they do with all those other media combined.” [Heidi Dawley, Media Life]

Sounds like 30 minutes of radio listening (on average) on the way to and from work each weekday. Compared to a couple of hours online every day.

Music on an iPod

Posted on by

“When one out of five of everyone you know is listening to music on a portable device packed with hundreds or thousands of songs, commercial-free, what can your station bring them that they can’t self-program better?”

— Mark Ramsey quoting a national study by American Media Services

End of music research?

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey asks: What’s the point of music research when every listener personalizes his or her music to his or her own tastes? And where’s your NON-music content, Mr. Broadcaster?

He also wants to drop the term “streaming” in favor of “Internet radio.” My only problem with that is where that leaves us verb-wise. Now I typically write/say: We’ll stream the governor’s speech at 7:00 p.m. If what we’re doing here is “Internet radio,” do I say we’ll “broadcast” the speech? It certainly is not a broadcast.

I’m becoming a fan of Mark’s blog. He seems to really know the radio business and has a firm grasp of new media.

Do you want to buy a new radio?

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey offers some insight into what’s happening (and is likely to happen) as terrestrial radio rolls out the HD channels (frequencies?).

“It couldn’t be clearer that HD will be a new battlefield where the intent of the broadcaster will be to draw the blood of their competitors. We will try to eat our young. As you evaluate this list as a listener, ask yourself the big question: do you want to buy a new radio?”

Seems like broadcasters have a lot riding on listeners adopting HD. I suppose it’s possible they’ll put some really good formats on the new channels but I’d have to hear it before I’d pop for a new receiver. And I can’t (easily) hear the new stuff …until I buy a new receiver.

Google-izing radio advertising: Day Two

Posted on by

More on Google’s foray into the world of radio advertising from RAIN’s Kurt Hanson, including quotes and links to The New York Times and the WSJ Online.

“The key to it is that Google is potentiallty bringing 400,000 new advertisers (their AdWords clients) to the radio medium. These new advertisers will (A) fill up unsold inventory and (B) eventually add increased demand for avails. Increased demand, of course, will inevitably drive up prices. That’s how supply-and-demand works.”

I’m still waiting for someone to explain what –if anything– that’s going to mean for barter arrangments with radio stations. Are we looking at a future where every avail can be sold?

Apparantly the dMarc software can automatically send advertisements right into radio station’s traffic ystems, bypassing the largely manual process currently used in the radio industry. Anybody have any first-hand experience with dMarc? Know a station that uses it? I’d love to know more about it.

Google buys dMarc Broadcasting

Posted on by

As a barter radio network, part of our pitch to prospective affiliates has been: Instead of letting your unsold commercial inventory “go to waste,” give them to us in exchange for some top-notch news and sports to enhance your station’s programming. Win-win.

So Google buys dMarc Brodcasting, a radio advertising firm whose technology allows national advertisers to buy unsold station inventory, and automatically inserts those commercials into the stations’ unsold slots.

In the online world, Google AdWords enables advertisers to find the lowest-possible rates publishers will take, and helps publishers find the highest-paying spots. This technology could greatly enhance the process of national ad buys — making it more efficient on both ends. [Analysis by RAIN]

Big Question: Will barter networks like ours someday (soon) have to compete for this inventory? Will station managers put his unsold avails in a big Google basket rather than barter them for programming? That might not be the question at all. I don’t pretend to understand what’s happening here. And there has always been rep outfits that promised to sell a station’s unsold avails, but most stations wisely steered clear of hese guys. Be interesting to see where Google heads with this technology.

Talkin’ bout my g-g-generation

Posted on by

Bonneville International says it is launching a major initiative to recruit new talent to create radio news content that appeals to young listeners. Bonneville says it is out to recruit on-air talent, reporters, producers, production personnel, and website developers for its new initiative.

“The company’s new venture will seek to deliver a product that entertains, provides needed depth that currently might be found only on some public-radio stations, and provides news through the perspective of Generations X and Y,” Bonneville said in a statement.

My old friend Morris (one of the Lost News Boys) sent this along and it appears to have come from the Radio Business Report.

Does “needed depth currently found on some public-radio stations” appeal to those in Gen X and Y? I mean, do you cover different stories? Do you cover the same stories but with some hipper, younger presentation? Is it even possible to lure young web-heads back to the radio for their news?

And what if your best news trick is covering the state legislature and government news? Do we/can we fit into such a format?

The quick and the dead

Posted on by

“In the very near future, there are only going to be two types of media people: those who can reliably work and publish (or broadcast) incredibly fast, and those … who can’t.” — Simon Dumenco on AdAge.com. (Spotted on too many blogs to credit.)

The point of Mr. Dumenco’s article seems to be that blogging ain’t no thang. Won’t argue that. But his final point (above) got me thinking about the talented men and women who work in our newsrooms. They can whack out a story pretty quickly. But many of them are still stuck in the old radio news cycle. Some stories for morning drive. Some more for midday. And still some more for afternoon drive. Do the Amish have newsrooms?

Why, I once asked, don’t we just post stories (for the public and our affiliates) as soon as we have them ready? While no one actually says the words, the mindset is clearly that it isn’t news until a reporter reports it. So it’s okay to ration out the news. If we give it all to them now, they’ll just gobble it whole and then we’ll have to go get some more for the next newscast.

Once upon a time –in a small market galaxy far, far away– I hoarded stories for days when I covered for our vacationing new guy. NRE’s (News Ready to Eat). Honestly, I understand. And it begs The Big Question of news organizations like ours: Are we in the “network” business…or the “news” business. I honestly don’t know the answer.

The difference between TV stations and newspapers

Posted on by

Terry Heaton on the Washington Post’s matter-of-fact streaming of the Alito confirmation hearing: “There is now officially no difference — online at least — between TV stations (and networks) and newspapers.” Is this equally true for radio stations and networks? If so, what might that mean?

Let’s say, for example, that a local newspaper in Anytown, Iowa, covers the very same news events as the local radio station. (Just for fun, let’s say they cover more events because they have more news people.) And they stick a little MP3 recorder in front of the newsmaker and immediately post a couple of paragraphs –including the sound file– to the newspaper website. Along with an image.

The remaining ‘defining difference’ between the newspaper and the local radio station is the method of delivering that news ‘content’ to the good people of Anytown (and the world). It’s still easier to turn on the radio and listen to the story (assuming I happened to tune in at the right moment) than to get in front of a computer to look/listen. Unless the ‘computer’ happens to be my Treo 700 mobile phone.

Thinking about all of this made me wonder about the definition of “radio station”: n: station for the production and transmission of radio broadcasts.

That’s just not gonna work anymore. We need a better definition, fast. I have not worked at a radio station for almost 22 years so I’m not qualified to come up with one. But it can no longer be about hardware (transmitters and towers). It has to be about people.

I think I’d be looking for smart, interesting (sometimes funny) people who live, work and play in the community your station serves; good writers; informed, well-read people who know how to do an interesting interview; people who know how to record/edit good, quality audio (video?).

If you stopped recruiting and hiring those people because it was no longer “cost-effective,” I suggest you find some, quick-like-a-bunny. But will they want to come work at the radio station if they can better use their talents and creativity on the local “newsaper” website?

Randy and Warren (and maybe Nate) are a lot closer to the world of terrestrial radio than I, so maybe they can help me answer a question I’ve been wondering about lately. How hard/easy is it in 2006 to find and recruit people to work at the local radio station? Where do the prospective hires come from? What are they looking for? What kind of skills do they have? Just click the comments link below.

Sports play-by-play good for music stations?

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey (Radio Marketing Nexus) doesn’t think so:

“I have never seen any perceptual research support the notion that adding play-by-play to a music station is good, on the whole, for that station’s non-sports listenership or image. If anything, I’ve seen cases where a music station ends up standing for one thing only: The sports franchise.”

The post above referenced pro football and I have no idea if Mark thinks the same thing about collegiate sports. But it seems like something our sports affiliate relations guys would know something about.