At last week’s Worldwide Radio Summit, a word cloud diagram would have probably revealed that the most uttered word at the conference started with a “P.” Tim Westergren must have been grinning from ear to ear.
In multiple sessions, Pandora was a focal point of conversation as panelists debated exactly what this pure-play music service is all about, whether it is truly competitive with broadcast radio, and why or why not traditional brands should care about it.
On the one hand, Triton’s Mike Agovino came equipped with a chart showing that if Pandora were an L.A. radio station, it would be ranked #11 in the market.
On the other hand, Clear Channel’s Digital COO, Gerrit Meier, stated that “Pandora isn’t radio,” and there’s no danger that it will take “radio’s lunch money.” In fact, Meier referred to Pandora as a “feature” rather than a station.
Others noted that radio has personality and a local presence, while Pandora has neither of these. In fact, Pandora was referred to as being “anti-social.” And to support that theory, Cumulus COO, John Dickey, stated that it wasn’t Pandora (or Facebook) that kept Alabamans informed about their tragic weather last week – it was local radio.
In a later session, however, Pandora’s Les Hollander (last one on the right) refuted the “anti-social” statement, and extolled his product’s sales approach (three minutes of commercials an hour, and only :15s and :30s), while reminding the room that “if you have an Internet connection, you have radio.”
And on and on. So whether you think about Pandora as being a hot new competitor to radio like so many at the WWRS, or a different animal that is more of an Internet feature than a bona fide problem, it was most certainly THE hot topic at the conference.
To perhaps clear up the controversy about what Pandora is, I turned to “experts” of my own. In fact, I brought 18 of them with me – the “Goin’ Mobile” respondents from L.A., Baltimore, Cleveland, and Dallas that participated in our ethnographic project with Arbitron.
They are real people – smartphone owners, many of whom listen to Pandora on a regular basis right on their phones, sometimes at the expense of broadcast radio. They call it “Pandora Radio” in most cases, and their “P” word is all about “passion” for this pure-play channel. You can see Randall pictured here with his iPhone with Pandora holding down a hallowed master icon at the bottom right of his desktop.
All the charts, graphs, and analytics in the world won’t help radio understand what Pandora (and other Internet stations) is all about. The answers can be found by talking to people – real consumers – the ones who are happily talking about this radio station to friends, family members, and co-workers.
Now Pandora is entering the spoken word arena – and an area that broadcast radio has dabbled in – but never committed to: COMEDY. Pandora’s comedy offerings work the same way as their music service – personalized, on-demand comedy that you can get anywhere anytime. It’s going to be successful.
Later this month, we’ll have updated, trended information from Techsurvey 7 that will tell a different story than the ones heard in Los Angeles last week. As many readers of jacoBLOG know, we have been diligently tracking Pandora for several years in our national tech surveys, and have been vocal about our concerns about this pure-play’s ubiquitous presence in vehicles, gadgets, and other outlets.
Here’s an appetizer from Techsurvey 7 – Pandora’s numbers are trending up, its mobile usage continues to grow, and radio’s own P1s – the folks who join radio’s databases and email clubs – are pretty damn impressed with what they’re hearing.
Maybe instead of choosing the denial route about Pandora, broadcast radio operators ought to go to school about this brand and what it means to consumers. There are ways to counter-program Pandora, but traditional broadcasters will only develop strategies once it understands this service and what it does well – and not so well.
Instead of debating what Pandora is – and what it isn’t – isn’t it time to get serious about understanding what it does, what it means to consumers, and what it could be down the road?
What is radio?
If we define it as audio entertainment that can be heard wirelessly by millions of people, I’d like to offer a theory:
Pandora IS radio.
Tell me I’m wrong.
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.
- Is It Quittin’ Time For SiriusXM? - November 26, 2024
- Radio, It Oughta Be A Crime - November 25, 2024
- Baby, Please Don’t Go - November 22, 2024
Fred you are RIGHT. I believe that anything that stops someone from turning on the radio has to be considered competition. How many people plug their iPod into their car and hit “shuffle.” Many…and it’s increasing. Songs can be duplicated great content cannot. Air-personalities should see this TREMENDOUS opportunity and challenge themselves to come up with the best content. It will make them and their radio station that much more valuable.
Thanks for the comment, Danny. Yup, radio has inherent strengths & it goes beyond covering hurricanes and emergencies. The local personality is indeed the “secret sauce.
Appreciate you reading our blog.
Good post, Fred. As the technology becomes transparent (i.e., no tech skills whatsoever required) the battle defaults to pure preference, behavior is driven by in-the-moment choice. Is Pandora radio? Who cares. Listeners don’t care where their favorite music comes from only that it’s there when they want it. It’s not about radio or TV or dead tree print. Increasingly, it’s about creating that audio, video and/or text that consistently meets the needs and wants of the group formerly known as the audience. Radio is in a battle for attention, for a share of the time spent using audio and other media. Bottomline: All that’s important is what’s coming out of the speakers and on the screens, everything else is a footnote.
Fred…you are right on the money.
Radio needs to understand that it met Pandora halfway before they ever launched. 1993 radio and Pandora are very different. But fast forward to 2011 – when radio is programmed remotely by someone handling as many as 5 – 10 stations, the majority of dayparts are voicetracked and radio is much more like Pandora than its out of touch execs would like to believe.
How hard would it be for Pandora to start voicetracking local references and (through network alliances) offer live coverage of important events like the SE tornadoes?
Radio should try to anticipate where Pandora and its counterparts are going and get there first – after striking a deal with the music industry for a performance royalty that allows that product to make a respectable profit.
The clock is ticking…
Great points all, Dave. It feels a lot like the radio industry is watching a Pandora movie, rather than asking some key questions about its impact on the medium. We’ve got to get ahead of this thing. Thanks, as always, for taking the time and chiming in.
Thanks for the feedback, Bob. The “scalable” nature of many of today’s stations has clearly hurt the local quality in many situations. THanks again for reading and commenting.
Fred, it’s interesting to note Pandora was not created by music radio programming professionals but by a bunch of folks that didn’t know what they didn’t know. Same with YouTube – not created by our best and brightest TV programming execs. Nobody seems to like Pandora or YouTube except their respective listeners and viewers. We continue to hear from radio programmers that opine about how “lame” Pandora is and witness TV execs quick to dismiss YouTube as nothing but a home for stupid cat videos. The simple truth would seem audio and video are being reinvented by outsiders, the unqualified that are just too stupid to know any better. The architects of Pandora and YouTube didn’t drink the kool-aid that is our broadcast industry dogma and best practice.
Maurice Maeterlinck comes to mind here “At every crossroads on the path that leads to the future, tradition has placed 10,000 men to guard the past.”
Isn’t it like this in so many industries? The Kodak team was in denial about digital, defending film until it was too late. The book publishers railed against the Kindle. And so it goes.
That’s why all this conversation and debate about what Pandora is and what it isn’t is so meaningless when filtered through the lens of the consumer.
We continue to learn from our focus groups and ethnographic studies (thanks to Arbitron). If you listen to listeners, the truth comes pouring out.
Thanks, Dave.
Hi Fred –
I watched the opening of WWRS online and listened as the discussion quickly evolved into audience numbers and radio versus Pandora. It continues to be a short-coming of the leaders in our industry to be able to objectively evaluate the competitive challenges we face. You wouldn’t conclude that Pandora is not radio, that Pandora is not social or that Pandora is just a feature (so we have nothing to worry about as a business) if you put yourself in the shoes of the customer. If broadcasters obsessed over the listeners wants, needs and behavior they might have a better idea who the real challengers to our future are and what to do about it. The Internet guys obsess solely over the customer experience not over their business model. Silicon Valley continues to figure out the most effective ways to connect people one to one and with things they want anywhere at any time through digital platforms. Why doesn’t radio want to know what their customers are doing when not listening to the radio? But we tend to dismiss or marginalize what we don’t understand.
Fred, as you know better than most, when you watch young people you see the present and the future. They want to be connected and entertained (sometimes informed if it’s relevant to them) so they can share. Pandora has become their place for music. Why? It’s easy to use and besides finding songs they like…they discover stuff they can share with their friends. Discovery is social. They want to share what they find. For laughs they go to YouTube most and find more stuff they can share. As Hugh McLeod says these are social objects. Sharing is inherently social. If they are not sharing on their phone then they do it on Facebook.
It’s not useful spending time discussing why the competition (the Internet / Pandora) isn’t relevant to broadcasting but would be time well spent trying to understand why it is relevant to your customer!
Internet companies are disrupting our business relationships. Everyday traditional media is marginalized as just a middleman you’ll never need to deal with again. Radio keeps saying it has an advantage because it’s local. Not true. The Internet is winning because it’s personal. Relationships are not about local. Relationships are personal. Radio used to be really good at personal. It needs to be again…soon.
Great comment, Mike, and so glad you took the time to weigh in. It is truly a philosophical difference between traditional and new media. Both have their place on the entertainment menu, but radio will need to develop a better understanding of what it’s up against in order to adapt and thrive in this environment.
You have nailed many of the key issues, and I thank you for providing perspective. It would have been interesting to have seen you participate in that WWRS panel.