If this photo of a minor league baseball park somewhere in America reminds you even a bit of your radio station’s website, you are not alone.
A new research study conducted by Storyblok among 6,000 online shoppers in the U.S. and Europe conducted this past November will have a familiar ring to it. All told, consumers abandon an average of five purchases each year because of lousy websites.
Do the math: companies are walking away from a lot of money, while losing out on brand impressions because their websites are – to put it nicely – suboptimal.
To put it not-so-nicely, because their websites suck.
And as you might guess from your own experience, most of us are increasingly judgmental when we happen upon a kludgy website. More than four in ten website visitors decide within 10 seconds whether they’ll stay or go; one-fifth make that call within 5 seconds. The margin for error is shrinking.
Interestingly, most business leaders know it, but they apparently do little to improve their websites’ navigability and clarity. Storyblok recently conducted another survey among 500 C-suiters. Astonishingly, they found nearly half (48%) had recently been embarrassed in front of a client or consumer because of their company’s lame website. Yahoo! calls this phenomenon “webarrassment.”
And what’s even more amazing is that nearly nine in ten (87%) of these same corporate honchos say their websites “meet all or most of their expectations.” In other words, they’re making money and delivering ROI despite an often shoddy user experience.
You have to wonder what a similar survey conducted among radio execs might reveal. Are they actually happy with what they’re getting out of their websites, assuming they agree on their goals? Or do they see room for improvement?
Oddly enough the minor league ballpark is violating many of the same rules radio station websites do. When you stare at the photo, do you see the name of the
team? Do you have any idea where you are? How’s the fan experience? Is there any important information being communicated to the visitor? If you look closely, you’ll see a sign that shows the speed of each pitch surrounded by ads for everything from hot dogs to sunscreen to tires.
Interestingly, I spotted 18 marketing messages in the photo – the equivalent of a really bad radio station stopset. It is an assault on the senses. There are so many ads, you end up ignoring them all. That’s right – it’s a lousy deal for the sponsors, too.
Since joining our company in 2015, Seth Resler has written hundreds of articles about how to manage a radio station’s digital profile and assets under his “Connecting the Dots” banner. If I had to guess, I’d say his most frequent topic has been websites: goalsetting, design, do’s and don’t’s, usability testing, rotators, pop-ups, and everything in between. (You can access any or all of these resources free at ik9.5f7.myftpupload.com – just type “website” into the search box.)
Why does he write so much about websites, an afterthought for many stations and even the people who program them? Because for most stations, they represent the #1 engagement destination, besides listening, of course.
They may be far from great, but they are a top touchpoint for radio. And isn’t that enough of an incentive to make them better?
That may be changing as mobile becomes more utilized with each passing Techsurvey. (Techsurvey 2023 is now officially out of the field. We’ll soon have updated results for you.)
Still, as so many broadcast companies are frantically trying to make their digital assets more competitive and attractive, wouldn’t you think more effort, time, and resources would be funneled into websites? Radio researches its music, personalities, and contests. But its websites? They are almost always an afterthought.
Interestingly, many radio people – especially programmers – don’t give their websites much thought. Their social pages are more responsive and in the moment. And at many companies, making changes on the website is often an arduous, thankless process.
And yet, chances are, more consumers may be visiting your website and streaming your station than cuming your station over the air. Time, effort, research, and even some resources might actually increase engagement, interaction, and accomplishing your goals.
Do you know who else checks out radio station websites? Advertisers. Businesses you pitch for the first time go to your site to learn more about your station – the first impression the salesperson attempts to make can go out the window if the website is lacking or sub-par. Why would a business be confident in a station’s advertising program if their website is lame, has dated content, typos, and broken links?
It’s another case where eating your own dogfood is always a good idea. Test drive your website. How does it look and feel? Is your station – what it does and where you are – well identified and clear? Check out the nav bar labels? Do they make sense and take you to the content you desire?
How is the level of advertising? Is it excessive, distracting, confusing, or all of the above? What’s your “404 batting average? That’s what you see when there are dead links that take you to no content. (At least Spotify has a sense of humor about their mistakes.)
And then there’s usability testing, sitting a respondent in front of a laptop or desktop (or a mobile phone or tablet) and putting the website through its paces – finding key resources, asking about labels and what they mean, and gathering impressions. Mobile apps can be tested in the same way, a great opportunity to learn about what it’s actually like to use a station’s digital resources, rather than assuming (often incorrectly) that it’s “all good.”
So, if you feel a little website shamed, apologies. But the research (and your own personal experience) suggests even a minimal investment in making the website a more satisfying destination for your listeners would likely accomplish your goals – clicks, engagements, views, merch sales, streaming – quicker and more efficiently.
Why do so many radio station websites suck? They don’t have to.
It starts with focusing on the UX – the user experience – and making the obvious “repairs” from there. Historically, radio has often engaged in activities that are good for the company, rather than creating things and resources that suit the audience’s needs.
Like so many other dimensions, station websites are often reflections of what broadcasters want rather than what listeners want. A better, more attractive, and less cluttered website can accomplish both goals – increasing visits, lowering the “bounce rate,” encouraging more frequent email database signups, and delivering more of what radio and its fans want.
Consumers stop going back to websites that are frustrating to use – confusing, slow-loading, cluttered, and loaded with click bait. These sites may yield results in the short run. But sustainable media business models demand return engagement – just like the routine of listening to the radio.
When we annoy and rankle consumers, they eventually just stop showing up, site unseen.
For resources and guides to help you design, build, and improve your website, head to www.ik9.5f7.myftpupload.com, navigate to Resources, then Guides & Tools. Or go the “search” box on the site and type “websites.”
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.
- In 2024, The Forecast Calls For Pain - December 23, 2024
- Old Man, Take A Look At My Ratings - December 20, 2024
- In The World Of On-Demand Audio, How Do We Define Success? - December 19, 2024
Good stuff Fred. And, Seth’s most recent piece on engaging potential advertisers via the website is packed with great suggestions.
Much appreciated, Tim!
The iHeart’s, Cumulus’s, Audacy and lots of others have station websites that are all templates with no attention to SEO. They are often off-base, content-wise with the station’s format. Some of these companies are even trying to sell website and social media services to clients.
The Zimmer group out of Missouri seems to be the only one I’m aware of that has sales content on its website and has a social media presence dedicated to sales and marketing. Here’s an example. https://info.zimmercommunications.com/case-studies
Oh, those Zimmer’s. Smart people who understand the local vibe.
Wow, what a site! Somebody takes marketing and outreach to potential clients seriously. Too bad that’s the exception and not the norm.
Good post, thanx.
I just looked at the website for 2 stations owned by big national conglomerates. The content is really similar.
Latest article about J-Lo and links to out of market stations. Anything going on in your market? Promote your own product.
Maybe the folks at the Golden Arches are missing something; why not a link to the other place that cooks their burgers over a flame.
I don’t know whether fans “get” they’re looking at templated websites. Maybe it’s more obvious when its two of their stations in the same market. Some sites, as you suggest, are pretty much devoid of local content and just carry celebrity news.
Some stations, though by no means all (I don’t have stats), have created and promoted their own app; and perhaps they think their website is of less importance for that reason. Of course, it’s not less important, because apps are limited in how much information they can convey effectively on the smaller screens that usually view them.
So the website remains important for many reasons, including all those you mentioned, Fred. Now a retiree, my role is primarily as a listener, albeit one arguably more passionate than most. Why do I go to a station’s site? I want to know more about the people, my friends, who make my favorite stations happen. And however I feel about the voices I’ve heard, too many of their websites do them a disservice; kind of like finally meeting someone you’ve heard about and then being unable to ignore the drool down their shirtfront. Webarrassing indeed.
My second disappointment is more peculiar to me, I suppose: It’s a rare station that provides pages or links informing the interested visitor of the station’s technical data (ERP, city of license, coverage area, chief engineer’s name etc). Plenty of times I have wanted to alert someone to a technical issue–good luck trying to know whom to tell via the website. Not long ago I wanted to ask one why the HD signal they ID’d at the top of the hour wasn’t transmitting. I had to go to their Facebook page to ask, and they replied it was an equipment failure to be remedied in a couple of months. (Which it was.) It’s like the station doesn’t consider genuine listener interaction worthy of their attention. Not the way to treat a friend.
John, I have run into the same scenario. I’m listening to a client station, realize it’s not broadcasting in HD or only in one channel, and I have to notify the station of the snafu. You’d like to believe someone on their end is listening, not just the consultant.