Young Tommy Edison’s devoted mother … could not have known that a chance encounter with a street vendor in Cincinnati, where she had taken Tommy to attend an ELO concert, would spark a 70-year love affair with the golden, spreadable goodness that would spur her son to greatness.
David is blogging from a different place than you and I.
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.
Chris Anderson (The Long Tail guy) looks at why big companies should have public blogs. Among other reasons, they serve as a peer-to-peer product support channel for “alpha customers”, whose opinion can sway others.
Does Learfield (the company I work for) have “alpha customers?” Who would that be? Our university partners? Our advertisers? Our affiliated radio stations? I would argue that the correct answer is: D) All of the above.
Those charged with knowing and influencing “alpha customers,” whomever they might be…might argue that we are already doing a fine job of this. No argument here. But “deep in my heart, I do belive” we could do it even more effectively with some savvy blogging.
Which brings us to a DWR moment: Pushing your company or organization to blog before they are psychologically ready or have the will and talent to pull it off, is like showing motion pictures to the indigenous tribes of Borneo. They might cheer and make you Tribal Witch Doctor, or they might stab you to death with tiny little spears.
Anytime you see this little robot, you know you’re reading something that could get me –and you– in a lot of trouble.
From the Onion: “Seven-time Tour de France winner Lance Armstrong found his endurance stretched “almost to the breaking point” last Friday by a three-hour, 30-song concert presented by his fiancée, pop-folk singer Sheryl Crow.”
I’m posting this because a) I’m a fan and subscriber of the Onion and b) my friend/co-worker Bob took the time to forward. But it just isn’t up to the Onion’s high standards. Shit, I could have written that. Somebody must have been on deadline.
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.