Did the iPod kill local radio, or just its spirit?
Between MP3's and social networking pulling away vast listener minutes, and now local search and local social eating into their ad revenue, are the best days of local radio behind them? Is the "what's the point" attitude around innovation and evolution in this medium prevalent, isolated or warranted?
Tags: ipod, local, mp3, networking, radio, search, social
Views: 6
- Attachments:
-
-
wheel.jpg, 26 KB
-
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Knorpp on -
I think the lack of inventiveness in radio VASTLY predates the iPod. This is a medium where the last so-called innovation was the Morning Zoo format.
Having said this, radio's demise is greatly over-stated. It's funny. Now that I have like 30-some episodes of my show posted, it seems like we've discussed everything affecting the industry at least once and this is no exception. Episode 24 of The BeanCast had a discussion about a recent numbers suggesting radio is increasing listenership.
Radio is undoubtedly suffering from a complex that makes it terminally uncool. But the truth is that it remains the number one way for most Americans to get their music and news. And as such, is still a pretty good media buy.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Fanning on -
Can it innovate and take advantage of its localness (where it exists)? Or is the combination of other digital tools a path to growth, or at least a path to slow the pace of erosion.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin McIntosh on -
I think it's the fact that you have 2 or 3 main radio networks who own just about all the radio stations out there. They've gotten the music so formulaic (I live in Nashville and it's drivin' songwriters and artists nuts) and they're likely tryin' to do that with the talk stuff, too.
It's either, over-the-top good ol' boy (a little goes a long way) or just out and out insulting (Tom and Bob).
My favorite show is out of Charlotte-it's Bob and Sherri. Very witty in terms of the topic and just the everyday conversation. Great chemistry between the 2 as well as their co-producer Max and some other bit players on the show. You download daily podcasts for free.
No I don't work for them. Just a huge fan. I'm a freelance AD MAN.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Fanning on
-
So the corporation killed its spirit and the iPod arrived when it was already blue. I think Clear Channel was the first to cluster stations and led the way for the others to monopolize it to monotheology. It is hard to quantify the effect on loss of creativity, but its impact on the artist and songwriters, as well as listeners in no doubt real. The impact on small vendors and businesses that could work with a station, but don't have the scale to work with a "group" is another result. The Wal-Mart effect on local radio ...
The ownership footprint you mentioned is another impact of de and re regulation. In this case applying free market principles to public property. Local radio that has no local people at the station is the absurd result of effective lobbying. Lobbying that evidently only the groups were able to afford.
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Knorpp on
-
But again, while we may say we don't like homogenized radio, audience numbers speak pretty loudly that the general population doesn't care. It's kind of like big box stores. We all cry, "Buy local" but still end up at the Target when we need that toy for a birthday party. The problem for radio is more making it appealing to ad buyers.
My own opinion is that radio needs to be working as hard on their online content as their broadcast stuff, much as the TVnets are doing. That way they can engage the audience at multiple points and sell package deals. It's not so much that they would be generating bigger numbers with their online content. (Again, numbers aren't the problem.) And yes I know the RIAA heavily restricts rebroadcast of music. But at least it would change things up a bit in a model that hasn't changed in too long, maybe stimulating some interest among strategists and buyers.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Fanning on
-
The general population didn't care when all they knew were black phones and three television networks. Audience numbers in that era supported overwhelming acceptance. Granted there is more local radio variety today, but the options in most markets are limited and as you pointed out "vastly" uncreative. So would creativity return if it were more appealing to ad buyers ... the hay days of 20x multiples and crazy ad rates may have been its least creative.
I agree 100% with your online content position and believe radio and local TV need to do more to enhance local voices and extend their business models to include local everything digital: auctions, classifieds, search, social etal ... they are waiting around for Google to take it all because, in Radio's case, they have lost the spirit to compete with anything except the station or group across the street.
-
Permalink Reply by Martin Montorfano on
-
it's amzing to think that we live in the most powerful country the world has ever known (yes, still) but that radio wherever you go is just downright awful. The formats are just so formulaic. The radio that I knew growing up on Long Island, where I kept a little note pad by my clock radio to jot down stuff I liked, is long dead and buried.
For anybody who lives in the Baltimore Annapolis area, you realize how lucky you are to have a station like WRNR.
I could never imagine driving across country without XM or Sirius.
-
Permalink Reply by Cris Allen on -
Local radio killed itself when it decided it was big enough to turn its back on everything that revitalized it when it first became obsolete almost sixty years ago. Lowry Mays said that he wasn't in the radio business, he was in the advertising business, but McLendon and Storz knew that the medium had amazing power to attract willing buyers for their customers if they took advantage of radio's unique qualities. As just another medium, it's doomed to drown in the I-Pod shuffle.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Fanning on
-
Lowery Mays advanced the crusade of crushing radio's spirit long before the iPod was prototyped. RE: "we're not in the radio business, we're in the advertising business" ... when you get dressed for other people, you lose your own sense of style!
-
Permalink Reply by Marc Bennett on -
A longtime respected radio station in my area (Milwaukee) recently changed to a "no on-air personality" format with a focus on what they called "IPod radio". It was very abrupt and not even the personalities knew it was coming. They play a huge variety of songs from the 60s to now, meaning that you can listen to "Son of a Preacher Man" and Chumbawumba in the same half hour (this actually happened). Their tag is "What will they play next?"
It's definitely a desperate attempt to draw more listeners and even they don't know how long its going to go. But i saw this thread and couldn't help but think of the reactive strategies in radio these days.
http://www.celticsuite206.com
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Fanning on
-
I think the "no on-air personality" payroll was the motivational factor rather than an ode to creativity or an attempt to draw an audience. And this is the point about losing its spirit ... how can a medium that has the power of local intimacy create it without any local voices?
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Knorpp on
-
I find this last post so funny, considering Podcasts are growing in popularity largely based on talk and personality. ;-)
Another knee-jerk response to a misunderstood problem.
Groups
-
Ads of the World
559 members
-
Non-Traditional & Altern…
407 members
-
Creative Directors Club
403 members
-
Copywriter Group
231 members
-
Social Marketing Group
191 members
Birthdays
Badge
© 2012 Created by Steve Hall.
