Tag Archives: Mark Ramsey

Will we see “local” radio again?

Posted on by

So Clear Channel is going to sell 400+ radio stations. Will these stations become more local? Mark Ramsey says it depends on who buys the stations and the “models of success” they try to follow:

1. Quality local talent with local connection and high entertainment value
2. Quality syndicated talent with high entertainment value
3. Low cost or no talent – regardless of its source (i.e., nothing matters but the music)

He concludes his post with the question: “Of those, which do you think is the toughest to achieve? And which is the cheapest?”

When I started in radio (1972), a lot of radio stations were still trying for #1. Not all of the local talent was “quality” and I’m not sure how “entertaining” we were. But syndicated programs were still a few years away and most communties weren’t ready to let you get away with juke box-ing the station.

But I think Ramsey sums up the options accurately and we’d see more station owners try #1 if #2 and #3 weren’t such attactive (short-term) options.

Website: Expense or investment?

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey poses the following questions to broadcasters:

1. Is the purpose of your website just to put online what is already on the air, or is it something else?
2. Are we investing the necessary resources and talent in the development of our website, or are we having an intern update stuff in his spare time?
3. Are we giving people what they go to our station for in all its shapes and sizes on the web? Or are we offering one stream and a bunch of photos of our personalities?
4. If the content described in this article (Fast Company) can generate considerable traffic, can we convert that traffic to revenue? If so, why aren’t we investing for traffic instead of seeing our websites as expensive necessities?
5. If we keep crowing about how “local” our radio station is, exactly how does our website express that or service that?

Chicken LittleA couple of days ago, a broadcaster called me for advice on possible speakers/topics for an association meeting next spring. She wanted someone to come talk to them about “new media.” I asked her why?

“Uh, we need to figure out how to make some more money.” Or words to that effect.

I imagined thirsty villagers taking buckets and empty containers to a nearby well in hopes of finding water for their thirsty families.

I suggested that before you’d have anything to sell (to advertisers), you’d need to build an audience and that would take time and money. An investment.

“No, our owners won’t let us spend any money. We need to find some more money. That’s why we were thinking about the Internet.”

To completely exhaust the metaphor… if you don’t have the will or the resources to drill a new well… pray for rain.

More stations, same content

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey on the transitional nature of technology and what it means for broadcastsers: “In a shockingly short span of time – perhaps five to ten years – the Internet and/or other wireless-based audio entertainment and information channels will be widely distributed substitutes for radio as we know it today. And your content will either be there or it will not be. … If you think all you need is a website and some podcasts and a frequent listener club, you’re wrong.”

How to ruin a podcast

Posted on by

Mark Ramsey points to a classic example of MSM cluelessness (CBS in this instance). His post makes me uncomfortable because our networks produce a lot of programs (newscasts and sports reports) that are comprised of 3 minutes of programming and one minute of commercial.

What if we were only podcasting that program. Would listeners swallow that? I’m thinking not.

Back in the dark old days, when one of our networks was oversold, we’d just jam in more spots and ask stations to air programs that had more commercial content than programming. Shudder.

Mark sums it up nicely:

“In our zeal to monetize our online content, remember that podcasts are downloaded and played voluntarily. It’s because we like you and want more of you. Yes, we’ll tolerate advertising in podcasts – but not 30 out of 90 seconds!”

What new Arbitron rules mean for radio stations

Posted on by

“When listening is defined as broader than “radio” alone, then you are no longer in the “radio business.” You’re in the business of audio entertainment and information, regardless of distribution channel. That little home-grown Internet radio station from Zimbabwe is now your competitor. When “Listening” is defined according to things that do not require a radio, you are no longer in the “radio business.” Get it?” — Mark Ramsey