I get it. It’s about writing sensational, provocative headlines and posting photos guaranteed to stand out and get a laugh. I’ve got the same challenges with this blog.
But this Mashable story by Jason Abbruzzese takes a double cheap shot at broadcast radio, first with a degrading headline, and then with a photo from the 1940’s depicting people listening to radio like they did when F.D.R. was in the White House. James Cridland would call it “lazy.” He’s nice and more proper than me. I call it “lame,” and let’s add in “demeaning” and “unwarranted.”
And ironically, the story is ultimately a left-handed compliment to radio, acknowledging that in spite of it being “old” and “boring,” it is the one to beat. Abbruzzese looks at an app called 60db that use bite-sized on-demand content – like hundreds of other apps before it. 60db launched last September, and is already pivoting to try to find its sweet spot.
Interestingly, this same theme – that radio is king and everyone else covets its audience, its reach, its simplicity, and its position in the daily fabric of millions of people’s lives – came up in a statement by Sirius/XM CEO Jim Meyer on an investor call. While Meyer claimed satellite radio “dominates in-car listening today” (it doesn’t), he continues to admit SiriusXM’s “primary competitor” is broadcast radio, a medium his listeners tune to “for local weather, local sports, local news.”
True that, but he left out personalities, social acknowledgment, habitual listening, emotional brand connection, and of course, the other key benefit of broadcast radio that SiriusXM cannot compete against: IT’S FREE.
So, now that I’ve cooled off over the Mashable story, I’ve come up with a replacement image for the “old time radio” photos so many snarky writers opt for. How about running the Nielsen graphic below, depicting the total weekly reach of various sources in a solar system worth of media and entertainment sources and platforms.
Yes, I’ve drawn the aura around radio…and for good reason. And if SiriusXM was on this chart, it’s estimated 51.6 million audience (from the “advertise with us” page from its website) is less than a quarter of AM/FM radio’s mass – not a major planet. If 60db was plotted in the media solar system, it would barely be the size of your average asteroid.
Does broadcast radio have challenges and issues, amid all the disruption? Without a doubt, and virtually everyone in the business acknowledges that. We talk about many of those issues in this blog in the belief that radio can and needs to do better in order to effectively compete.
But old, boring, and living in a sepia-toned living room?
Not even close.
Mashable, you’re better than this.
Jacobs Media has consistently walked the walk in the digital space, providing insights and guidance through its well-read national Techsurveys.
In 2008, jacapps was launched - a mobile apps company that has designed and built more than 1,300 apps for both the Apple and Android platforms. In 2013, the DASH Conference was created - a mashup of radio and automotive, designed to foster better understanding of the "connected car" and its impact.
Along with providing the creative and intellectual direction for the company, Fred consults many of Jacobs Media's commercial and public radio clients, in addition to media brands looking to thrive in the rapidly changing tech environment.
Fred was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in 2018.
- Why Radio Needs To Stop Chasing The Puck - November 21, 2024
- Great Radio – In The Niche Of Time? - November 20, 2024
- “Be My 9th Caller Right Now And Win A Free Slurpee!” - November 19, 2024
Well-stated, Fred. Enough is enough with the old stereotyping.,,,and it’s time that we as an industry stand tall and stop cowering. Who would not be proud of reaching 9 out of 10 Americans each week??
Appreciate that, Biv. It’s simply unwarranted and unnecessary – and it’ getting old.
Way to go, Fred! Thank you!
Nice! I about stood and cheered at YOUR graphic!
It reminds me of the old “Watch out, McDonald’s” campaign Jack in the Box used to run. I’ve never been a fan of “attack the leader” ads. To me, it’s just you acknowledging your weaker position–a “back-handed compliment”of sorts, as you said.
In the end, there’s a reason neither McDonald’s, nor anyone else, has yet to make a “Watch out, Jack in the Box” spot. Jack can only hope maybe someday somebody will.
Radio’s leadership position in overall reach and regularity is an enviable position, and that’s why everyone from Beats Music to Pandora to SiriusXM is gunning for #1. Now radio just has to do a better job communicating that story. Thanks, Dave.
I loved your response to the article–especially the Nielsen graphic!
Many thanks, Mike. Appreciate you reading our blog.
Bravo Fred… I always laugh when the hipster take on radio comes out and it completely misses the mark… millennials absolutely love radio! What they don’t need is another app or another media that they have to pay for. They love the localism, the engagement and the music discovery. It must drive the tech authors nuts that the radio growth is mirroring population growth and that media fragmentation has a bigger impact on new media than it does traditional media because the audience base is so much smaller.
I think you’re spot-on. As hard as it is to admit, radio’s viability despite all the competitive noise is still enviable. As noted in the post, compliments are almost always made with resignation. Thanks for the comment.
Great to hear (read) this info. Thanks, FJ.
Bradley Jay
#jaytalking
WBZ
https://boston.cbslocal.com/show/jay-talking/
Appreciate it, Bradley.
It seems these days we have to examine everything we see/hear/read and sift through the material to see whose agenda we’re learning. Everyone trying to overtake broadcast radio is going to show radio’s liabilities. It’s going to be hard however, to “trump” (sorry) radio’s good points. Local, engaging, free, convenient. We just need to cover our bases in radio and keep up the battle. We do, however, have to realize it IS a battle. I think we will.
And as Andrew Curran points out in another comment in this string, a little PR wouldn’t hurt either. Thanks for commenting, Dave.
Radio *is* a content business… talk, music, specialist programming is all content regardless of the platform being terrestrial, sat, streaming/on-demand/podcasting, etc. I think it’s a mistake to identify “radio” as just “AM and FM services” because it’s much more. The people at iHeartRadio get it… radio, festivals, concerts, special features (aka: content). Gotta love content driven apps though… they provide great input ideas for radio broadcasters 🙂
Darren, thanks for the comment. The “radio” label has been a thing for a long time, and you’re correct that iHeartMedia has done a strong job of going well beyond its broadcast roots.
Serious question. Whose job is to be actively working to get media placements in prominent mainstream outlets telling radio’s compelling story and highlighting our Can’t Miss Moments? The recent placement in USA Today for Ludacris reading Llama, Llama on Power 106 is great, but stories like that are few and far between. PR placements in business publications that reach ad buyers telling radio’s story seem to be in even shorter supply. Again, is this up to individual stations, the large groups, Nielsen, the RAB? The industry would benefit from an ongoing and coordinated PR strategy. That of course costs money and agreement on measurable placement goals.
Serious answer: PR has been a problem for the radio industry for decades, and has not been adequately addressed. It is easier when you’re just marketing a single brand (Pandora, SiriusXM), but we’re both talking about managing press relations for an entire industry. It’s been a need for some time now, exacerbated by the tech revolution. Good comment and observation, Andrew.
The demise of local media beat writers at most newspapers hasn’t helped either. That was low hanging PR fruit that radio could count on without putting forth much effort.
Fortunately, radio has an amazing story to tell that transcends reach.
As transistor radios have disappeared from homes and work places in recent decades, not to mention store shelves, it’s increasingly difficult for the reach talking point to not be met with some healthy skepticism.
If you mention to someone outside of radio that the avg. person interacts with their phone about 150 times per day, not only is it true, more importantly it’s immediately believable.
When you tell that same person that 90% of Americans listen to the radio each week, although it’s also true, they scratch their head, wondering how that’s still possible.
That illustrates the need for additional talking points that resonate immediately and capture radio’s vitality.
You’re correct. The average person could not possible fathom north of 90% cume radio every week. It’s an unusual set of circumstances that positive data like this is thought to be unbelievable, more fodder to support a major public relations effort. Thanks, Andrew.
Posted in FB & Twitter immediately after reading.
The Headline buries the lead.
Another mis-guided attempt to assume that ‘traditional or terrestrial’ radio will be pushed aside by emerging technologies or content-driven apps. The sustainability of Radio as we know it has endured decades of onslaught by everything from 8 tracks, CD’s, Satellite radio, digital everything etc. Radio has evolved by embracing new technologies and adapting. The goal remains on the programming side to entertain and inform. On the advertiser level to partner with for a mutual ROI.
And the story isn’t just 90%+ – it’s how radio has adapted its content and distribution with streaming, podcasts, apps, and yes, Alexa. Thanks, Joe.
Good discussion. After reading the Mashable piece I think we’re mostly reacting to the headline. We’re defensive. The article is from a tech writer simply informing about a new, possibly different audio app. As some one above has pointed out, we’re not in the radio business, we’re in the audio content business. It’s about the audience, more than the delivery system. Build it (great content) and they will come. Abbruzzese is a decent writer, who probably had someone else slap the headline, and photo in place. To answer part of the PR question, Brad Kelly, Pres of Nielsen Audio is taking that seriously. He’s reaching out to Fortune 1000s that are already customers of Nielsen to tell the radio reach story. Keep the stories coming Fred! Good stuff.
Tim, thanks for the comment. I am definitely (over?)) reacting to the headline and the photo. And to your point, it is likely a headline writer who came up with the idea. Realizing all too well, radio has its problems, here’s an app that has already had to retrench, less than a year after its release and the writer is giving them lots of positive ink. It helps to be a company with .com in the name. Radio, on the other hand, rarely gets any slack. It’s a disrespect issue, and radio deserves better. Appreciate you reading our blog and engaging in the conversation.
There is clearly a big disparity between some people’s perception of radio’s reach and the reality of it. There are two ways to go about changing that perception – one is to go at it with facts (sadly a less and less effective strategy these days, “…itz awwwl fake newwwwwwz!”) and the other is to figure out why perception and reality are so misaligned and work on the perception part.
I think parallel tracks are the best way forward. For better or worse, streaming, apps, podcasts and the rest apparently haven’t moved the perception needle. I’ve ranted in the past about radio “telling its story better” is a well intentioned path to hell. Maybe its time to change radio’s story rather than retell it once again, but this time with feeling.
I remain shocked at how (with some exceptions) radio has applied less and less time, talent and money to pleasing its audience, but for the most part still does. Those people who think no one listens anymore obviously still do themselves, but think they’re alone. There has to be a different way to remind them of that.
Bob, I agree that radio’s efforts (mostly paltry) haven’t been the least bit successful. It might help if stations (and the companies that own them) did more than tell Wall Street about their digital progress. Building apps and offering streams – and then hoping that more people tune in the broadcast signal – is a counter-intuitive way to go about this. The radio industry is rife with imperfections – a lack of commitment, focus, and resources – but it has still made enormous progress. And as you point out, the habit piece is very important. Most people are still listening. Thanks for the comment.
You might have opened Pandora’s box with your Wall Street comment, but IMO the less contact radio has with Wall Street the better. Radio really isn’t well suited to the expectations of Wall Street and trying to meet, or explain why they aren’t/can’t rarely plays well there.
Radio would be better off as a private industry, where its investors accept the nature of the business and don’t expect it to conform to a set of rules that for the most part, hold its economic progress back.
I think a case could be made for that, Bob, especially in the areas of investment, experimentation, innovation. Seems like the tech companies always get a great deal of running room. Thanks, Bob.
Agreed. Radio is strong. The big publicly traded radio companies, on the other hand, all appear to be struggling. And, frankly, radio would probably be even stronger if the stations owned by those big public companies were privately held instead of owned by companies that are drowning in debt as their stock valuations head for penny stock territory.
For that matter, I think those big publicly traded companies are probably dragging down the overall perception of the radio business. How can the perception of an industry be positive when the business news about the industry is how long it will take for the two largest radio companies to end up defaulting on their debt?
Tom, the debate over private vs. public companies in radio is a long-standing one with good arguments on both sides. That financial headlines have been dominated in recent years by two large debt-ridden companies is unfortunate and takes the focus off companies that are enjoying financial success. Again, it’s a function of messaging and public relations, areas where the radio industry is notoriously weak. Thanks for the comment.
Love reading all your blogs, and this one, especially, made me physically jump up and do my “can I get an Amen” dance! Often I mention the “free” in my shows. (Who doesn’t love something that fills you up and is emotionally satisfying, yet completely cash, calorie and fat free!). Not many things except radio can offer such treats!
Judi, radio has a lot going for it. As Matt Hanlon notes in this thread, its technology was way ahead of its time. Our inability to tell that story is one of radio’s biggest deficits. Thanks for the positive comment!
Again, well said, Fred. I have said for ten years or more radio is doing a lousy job of telling its story. Go to read what some old timers (many of whome no longer work in the business) say on Facebook and other social media sites and you would instantly get the impression that no company is making money, no station has any listeners (because ratings, they say, are controlled by the industry and are basically BS), and that every company programs the same way. Radio is its worst enemy.
There are many angry, disillusioned ex-radio warriors who were dealt a tough hand or simply struggled to adapt to the changes – both in technology and the way stations are run. It’s still a great business, but it’s different from the one many got into decades ago. Thanks for the comment, Kevin.