When is a huge viral social network not cool (and therefore in danger of getting a really bad virus -- the kind that makes users sick and leave)? How about when a start-up company is sold to a media giant for hundreds of millions of dollars. The suits take over. Monetize becomes the operable goal. Could that be the case with MySpace which just announced that audio files now submitted by members are now being screened against 10 million tracks loaded in Gracenote's data bank? Universal artists will be excluded from the site. The other labels are not far behind as they are working on a similar deal with MySpace. Universal had been vocal about potentially suing MySpace and Google for copyright infringement. Here's the problem. As much as we all love digital rights management and can make a moral, ethical and financial argument to defend it, the next generation doesn't like DRM. And unfortunately for the mega media giants like Google and News Corp that are buying these franchises they are nothing without the next generation. I can say this with every confidence -- DRM will never fly. Save the arguments. Save the money you'll spend on litigation. In the end, Gen Y has taken charge and they will produce their own content without it -- watch for that. They'll hack around it. They will resist attempts to shove DRM down their throats even if they have to pick up and socialize elsewhere. And it's a big Internet. They'll be plenty of "elsewheres". So I expect that now that the big media consolidators are taking over they're going to try to nip this DRM thing in the bud once and for all. But DRM is a deal breaker. Ten years from today DRM will be a thing of the past. In five years, well, you get the point. Fight for DRM and you'll lose your market.
Vulture Capitalists Are Circling
There are a lot of fine people in radio who are watching the collapse of the Clear Channel empire as long overdue. Within a month, we may know the fate of the empire which includes 1,150 radio stations. The end won't be pretty -- unless you are a Mays family member. They'll be just fine. Maybe come away with a private radio company -- a spin off. Perhaps the sale of the outdoor division. In any case the vultures are circling the carcass as real vultures do when they spot something dying. Who would have thought? Well, I did and I said so when I owned Inside Radio. Took a lot of criticism for my position that deregulation and the consolidation it created was not good for radio. I didn't see the iPod coming -- let's be real. Nor did any of us see the disenfranchising of the next generation vis-a-vis radio. That didn't help. Good always comes from bad so if consolidation didn't sit well with you, consider these premonitions of the future as the number one radio chain is in play. Many of their stations will be sold. That's a good thing -- maybe - if it puts them in the hands of smaller buyers who want to operate the stations for the long haul. But most of the Clear Channel properties may (I said may) be held by investors looking to -- what else? -- build them up to sell them off for a bigger profit. After all, that's what venture capital does. But this time they may have a rude awakening. Radio is no longer a growth business -- sorry to say. At best, it's paddling water to stay even. Station prices may not appreciate as venture capitalists project. After all, Wall Street is lined with bad financial decisions made by investment banks. Other groups will sell some properties as well and smaller owners are the likely buyer (everyone is smaller than Clear Channel). In the end Clear Channel has to live with its legacy that on departing from the dominant platform it aspired to, it did not leave the industry we all love any better off. For that, let's hope the money they're about to make on the way out the door is worth it.
This Makes The CD Officially Dead
Gen Y knows the CD isn't what it used to be. Record stores most certainly know it. The previously unimaginable growth of iPods and iTunes should have been a warning sign. Now, you can believe it. A Record exec has said the words -- "the CD as it is right now is dead". Okay, EMI Music Chairman and Chief Executive Alain Levy couched his language a bit -- maybe the way politicians in our country do just before an election saying one thing and meaning another. But it's out there -- he said it and can't take it back -- the CD is dead. In the interest of full disclosure Levy went on to say, "You're not going to offer your mother-in-law iTunes downloads for Christmas". And he is right -- dead right. You're going to buy her an iPod first and then give her iTunes vouchers for Christmas. Ever the optimist for a record executive, Levy thinks that labels need to be more innovative to sell physical content. So he's vowing that as of next year EMI will not release CDs without additional content. If you're wondering as I do why labels continue to hang their future onto something that is "dead" -- quote, unquote -- its because CD sales accounted for more than 70% of total music sales in the first half of this year. Digital sales only 11%. But digital sales are growing and CD sales are -- well, slowly dying. I understand how hard it is to bite the bullet -- I spent a career in the broadcasting business and they may be biting it, but its not the bullet they're biting right now with similar defensive policies. Change is painful. But resisting change is never possible. So, congratulations to EMI for saying what so many people already know about the future of the CD. Now, go work a deal withYouTube like the other majors have done and shakeup your brain trust with lots of hungry Gen Y'ers and develop the next thing mothers-in-law will want to own.
The Pandora Effect
Pandora founder Tim Westergren appeared at USC yesterday as part of the Thornton School's "Hot Topics" program. Westergren is an easily likeable guy who appears to be very sincere and has a quality I love -- he's a good listener. Students, industry people and faculty got a glimpse of the next radio -- the one that gives listeners unprecedented choice in their music and the one that could elevate musicians to a status most can only dream of presently. Pandora is radio -- online radio that matches 400 identifiable qualities of tunes to the tastes of users, but the word radio has become so negative among many of the next generation that the search is on for a better description. Nonetheless Pandora which will soon count its four millionth registered user is on track to proliferate and only one year in existence. Here's the significance as I see it. Traditional media is always so afraid of every new technology and new competitor. As my friend Rick Cummings (Emmis President) says even the 8-track worried us back in the day. Radio survived then and probably will continue to survive challenges like cellphone use and iPods. The truth is -- and record labels should take note as well -- all usage of media helps all media. That's where a major disconnect exists between the emerging digital, interactive type and the nervous, fearful record business, radio industry, TV and publishing. All use makes everyone's franchises healthier. No need to be fearful. In fact, be fearless. Try bold ideas, do not shrink from the future as radio and the record business is doing currently. So online Pandora could partner with online radio station sites and do themselves a favor by driving listeners to their sites. Special portals could be set for terrestrial radio stations in the Pandora setting and share revenue with this new force in customizable radio. Interactive, online competitors to traditional media are not going away. And neither are traditional media. But if major changes in the approach to competition do not result both segments will not realize their ultimate goals. So ironically, in this way, new media is married to old and vice versa. Think about the exciting possibilities from that perspective.
Payback Time For The Consolidators
Clear Channel owns 1,150 radio stations and apparently can't seem to produce a stock price over $30 these days. That is until it announced intentions to pursue other options (like going private or selling assets). Not exactly a vote of confidence. And they're not alone, the other media companies are hurting (CBS Radio comes to mind. Notice they are selling not buying). My radio friends knew in 1996 that consolidation wasn't going to work. Yes, they heard that bigger is better and big companies can do better things for their audiences but they also knew that the consolidators' audience was about to become Wall Street not Main Street. Many lost their jobs or were neutered in their positions. Now media consolidation -- the house that Congress and the NAB built -- is in play. Big media conglomerates looking to get out -- get their money, keep some control, take parts private. Sounds like a retreat. This comeuppance is of little satisfaction to people who love the radio and music industries. While consolidators were fiddling, radio and records was burning. After all, the radio and record industries are joined at the hip. The damage has been done. New technology has arrived. A determined new generation has taken back their media with the help of technology and the Internet. But there is one last screwing to take place. Hedge funds -- the ones Rep. Barney Frank (D-Ma) is threatening to go after if the Democrats take back the House and he becomes chairman of the Finance Committee -- are hovering like vultures waiting to swoop down. Present ownership limits stand in the way of a total screwing, but there are ways around it -- limited partnerships and trusts. And of course, relaxing the ownership limits (NAB -- the fat cat's point person on this -- has already petitioned the FCC for changes that would allow looser limits and joint media ownership.) But, if the Democrats win Congress, the last media moguls standing have to get more creative. The consolidators are taking the last helicopter on the roof in a retreat that screams "we can't operate, we can't proliferate so we will liquidate". This is of little solace to people who really care about radio and records -- two co-dependent industries damaged by the misguided strategy that consolidation is good. They may be angry that their industry has been hijacked and that they have personally been harmed but what they should really wish for is that these precious assets wind up in the hands of people who really care about operating them -- small, local and regional companies who foster competition not suppress it. Now that's a winning formula for a comeback -- if it's not already too late.
Sports Is Next
It was unthinkable back in 1996 when the Telecommunications Act was enacted to usher in consolidation that radio would actually recede as an industry ten years later. No one would believe that TV, having survived cable competition, would be taken on by YouTube. Wasn't MTV high and mighty with youth? Who could have known even MTV would struggle with its online reason for being. Everyone seemed to know that newspapers were dying -- thirty years ago -- but why can't they see that online is today's news print and integrity covers a multitude of sins. Well, the unthinkable is going to happen again and it pains me to say it. Sports is going to be in trouble. Yes, football, basketball, baseball and hockey -- (well, hockey has always been in trouble except in Canada and with 18,000 season ticket holders in NHL franchise cities). The generation that has been redefining mass media shows signs that it may be doing the same for sports. The World Series that just ended -- the lowest ratings to date superseding last year's dubious distinction. What may be happening is that an interactive generation may have trouble sitting in seats as spectators. They may have trouble sitting period. This generation -- the one that wants to program its own music on iPods and produce its own video for YouTube -- wants to play not watch. Organized sports may always be around just as radio will likely be. But nobody says major league sports is going to be a growth business in ten years. What will be is gaming. If I'm the NFL, I'm going to set up football franchises for online players and manage the virtual competition. If they ignore the mounting evidence, they do so at their own peril. All the marketing geniuses in the world won't be able to stop a generation that has proven they will not side idly by on the sidelines.
Trouble for Facebook and MySpace
You could see this coming on the college campus -- as good an early warning system for the viability of social networks as anything. Now a recent Wall Street Journal article quotes Nielsen/NetRatings as showing both Facebook and MySpace lost visitors in September. The Journal says, "the number of unique U.S. visitors at MySpace fell 4% to 47.2 million from 49.2 million in August and the number of visitors to Facebook fell 12% to 7.8 million from 8.9 million." You remember MySpace. Rupert Murdock paid about $600 million for it last year. And Facebook is rumored to be worth about $1 billion -- plausible in this post-YouTube/Google world. To be fair there are some extenuating circumstances -- seasonal considerations, claims from MySpace that the deletion rate has not been increasing. Still this hickup is not growth and growth is what MySpace and Facebook were all about. If you've been following my posts, you know that I have come to believe from working with the next generation that they are very, very fickle. If you listen hard enough you can almost pick up the next trends early. What are they? Facebook has real trouble. Students are still addicted to it, but it seems to be losing the cool factor and students become grads and they leave college things behind -- things like Facebook. And new students have new ways to conduct social networking. Not good for Facebook. MySpace is, well -- too big and believe it or not too big could be its downfall eventually. Everything's fine now, it's just the future that's questionable. YouTube is hot right now and probably will remain hot through the 08 elections, but anyone can do video and nothing stands still with this generation. After all, Al Gore may have invented the Internet but Gen Y invented social networking. To this generation one year is like ten. Imagine how old the iPod is at 5 years (in Del Colliano time that makes it 25 years old!). You want to play with this generation? Be nimble and remember they are all about relationships.
92% Do What!
There's a Coleman Research study being touted to the radio industry currently that "on average, radio holds onto more that 92% of its lead-in audience during commercial breaks." Arbitron took out a full page ad in my favorite radio publication, Inside Radio and other trades "on behalf of the radio industry." Jon Coleman is an excellent researcher who has been studying radio for a long time. I mention this because if radio executives really believe this stat, they are indeed misguided and incapable of making sound decisions about the tough competition that has already stopped this growth industry dead in its tracks. Anyone alive and honest knows that 92% of listeners who start hearing a commercial break don't sit there and hang around until the end. You don't need research to know that. Even if they did which seems implausible, they don't listen. Isn't that the point? Remember those huge Howard Stern stop-sets? 92% of Howard's fans stayed tuned, right? Wrong. This whole concept is dangerous to radio. Just who do they think they are kidding? Radio has bigger problems than whether 92% of the audience perseveres during a commercial break -- like how to get the next generation to spend less time with YouTube, social networks, downloading music on their iPods -- you get the idea. Next they're going to tell us that High Definition Radio is going to save the industry. Or that consolidation isn't that bad. Or that less is more -- oops, sorry. Seriously, sometimes it appears that this industry that many of us truly love is in deep denial. In an industry that calls "Jack" its best example of a new format, I fear for radio people who don't understand that the 92% claim is as unbelievable as the promise of HD broadcasting. One way to get back to business and become a better competitor is to spend more time and effort remembering that radio is the best provider of content bar none and any time the consolidators want to invest in programming, research and innovation they can do work that matters. Fix the programming. Get into the mobile content business. And get your head out of your -- well, needless research. Shorter commercial breaks -- at least 50% of your audience will go for it. Better commercials. Talk to WBEB owner Jerry Lee, he's doing it with inexpensive Internet-based research. Knowledgeable djs. More new music. Here's a better statistic -- how about 92% of radio decision makers getting back to basics.
Clear Channel: Mission Accomplished
One can't help but think of George Bush's premature "Mission Accomplished" photo op before the Iraq war was over when one thinks of Clear Channel. Clear Channel yesterday announced intentions to evaluate "strategic alternatives to enhance shareholder value" just before it retained Goldman Sachs as a financial advisor. Translated for the common folk: Clear Channel may be considering a private buyout that would put the Mays family back in total control. In fact Clear Channel never accomplished its mission. It can't seem to get the stock price above $30 a share even with the industry's largest platform of radio stations. A lot of investment bankers got rich on the upside. The Mays' made some money and many good employees were let go or driven off by the experiment in consolidation that has failed. What's worse is that radio is no longer a growth business. And that all public radio companies looking to go forward may fall prey to hedge fund money. But that's another scary story for another time. "Less is More" hasn't worked. Only low share prices not more benefit to listeners or advertisers. When the biggest consolidator can't run its radio stations and make it a growth business you can see why going private has to be considered. Randy Michaels built Clear Channel. It wouldn't own the strong properties it does if Michaels hadn't been shrewd enough to understand and implement the acquisition of the right faciltiies. And when Clear Channel and Michaels had a falling out about four years ago, Michaels was apparently sent to the Internet office in some capacity. Little was heard from him. In fact, Clear Channel should have turned Michaels loose on Internet issues and it would no doubt dominate there today. With the NAB asking the FCC to loosen ownership rules again, what will it take for dominant companies to learn their lessons. Radio is local. Virtual jocks are virtually useless. Economies of scale impress investors (maybe) for three months, but investments in programming, research and people deliver the best dividends. Less is never more to advertisers. More for less, maybe, but more for more is how a leader grows a business. Now with the next generation tuned out and technology passing radio by would be a good time for other responsible companies who want to save radio -- at least for a while -- to go to school on Clear Channel. Their missions are only beginning.
The Apple Phone No One Wants
Rumors continue that Apple is secretly at work on a new mobile phone that will enable users to download music on the fly. This would involve Apple partnering with a mobile operator -- unlikely, since Apple would not retain the control it likes over their products and marketing. Apple could buy phone time and become a Mobile Virtual Network Operator (MVNO), but this option involves a lot of initial expense and management. The more important question is: do consumers want an Apple iPhone? Do they want a device that is both an iPod (a real one not a ROKR) and a mobile phone? My sense is that curiosity is spilt 50/50. Some like the idea of an all-in-one device and an equal number (at least from non-scientific polls of USC students) want to keep their phone and their music separated. And where does WiFi come into the mix? TMobile is marketing a WiFi enabled phone even though WiFi is not ready for prime time. Down the road? Maybe. Back to Apple. It is hard to believe that they don't have their development teams working on an IPhone prototype, but whether it ever makes it to market is a good question. Only .2% of cellphone users in this country as of July ever downloaded music directly to their mobile phones according to Media Metrics. Surprisingly low even when you factor in the lack of download-capable phones especially ones capable of storing iTunes. Apple CEO Steve Jobs will have to come up with the killer device if he is to succeed in this tricky space always remembering that what you don't do is frequently as important as what you decide to do.
New Tool Makes Everything iPod Compatible
That is until founder Jon Lech Johansen is sued into oblivion by Apple. Johansen's new tool will make it possible for labels and other digital music copyright owners to sell iPod compatible music and consumers will not have to use Apple's iTunes store. It's like Apple's FairPlay DRM and it fools your iPod into playing the song. The repercussions are great for the record industry if Johansen's Doubletwist company survives the almost certain litigation. Labels can implement the variable pricing scheme that Apple CEO Stephen Jobs is stubbornly preventing. Of course labels should be careful what they wish for because Jobs may be saving them from themselves. There is a fine line between the lure of stealing and buying and that line appears to stop at 99 cents per download. Another potential plus is that this work-around could widen the legally downloadable music available in more genres. Real Harmony has done something similar to this, but never before have labels been able to bypass Apple and get around the iTunes business model. The way I see it, either way you lose. Jobs is right about 99 cents a download. Gen Y'ers want it lower -- not higher and they have little interest in variable pricing. They know what the labels are trying to do to them. This is one case where less democracy might be better. Apple has it right. The labels will get it wrong. Anything that helps the labels get it wrong, well -- doesn't help today's music business.
YouTube Could Encourage Litigators To Cut Out the Middleman (Them!)
Don't worry about parent company Google getting sued. There is some speculation that under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act YouTube may be able to have the litigator bypass them and let the user collect a lawsuit. How can this be? The law doesn't protect users who access copyrighted content. Google may find it expedient to turn over info on who is illegally posting video clips as self-protection. According to Online Media Daily precedent exists. Journalist Robert Tur who is suing for copyright infringement was encouraged by YouTube's attorney to pursue litigation against the person who posted video clips of his coverage of the 1992 LA riots. The attorney said it was his client's (YouTube) policy to provide owners with user identification after receiving a subpoena. So there you have it. Another reason to procede carefully in the brave new world of interactive media. Just as students and young adults will soon learn that posting playful or accurately honest information about themselves online can hurt them years from now career-wise, using the exciting new technology of the day -- albeit illegally -- could land you in a clip-load of trouble.
NAB Selling Out Radio (Again) on Consolidation
The National Association of Broadcasters is at it again. The group that helped tuck in legislation to enable radio consolidation in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 is now urging the FCC to allow further consolidation. Cross-ownership, a loosening of the limits. It argues that radio needs to be more competitive with other platforms and more consolidation is how they can do it. But broadcasting's own trade association is only finishing what it started -- the demise of localism and pandering to evil empires of consolidators answering to Wall Street not Main Street. And radio broadcasters sit idly by while their lobby group acts in the interest of a few while harming the foundation of radio -- the small, local radio companies. This is why I say again and again that it's not the iPod that is killing radio. Not even the Internet. They are factors, but the real enemy is traditional media -- in this case radio itself. Where's the outrage? Why don't broadcasters reign their lobby group in and take radio back? Some believe -- and I concur -- that the NAB's deft lobbying to get enabling legislation passed to commence consolidation in 1996 may have been the single most destructive act of all. The Benedict Arnold's of radio driving the innovators out of the business and leaving the confused consolidators who can't seem to make the radio industry a growth business even with their present monopoly. Ask Wall Street. Investors have cooled on radio because it is no longer a growth business. Trying to relax the ownership rules further may in their fantasy make radio hot again -- until investors figure out that less competition not only hurts the audience, it eventually hurts the companies that have a proven record of not being able to run what they currently own.
Caution: Gen Y Makes Sharp Turns
I'd like to share some insights I've gained from my Gen Y students at USC. Their generation wants what they want when they want it (who don't know that, as they say in Philly). But when they get what they want, they may not want it for long. Can you say instant messaging? It's so on it's way out. While texting is hot now, even my Gen Y'ers can't guarantee that it has a place in their lifestyle much longer down the line. Facebook -- the college social network has peaked. MySpace could be on thin ice if Rupert Murdoch's News Corp makes it too much a business. And while YouTube has never been hotter -- well, you get the point. This has all sorts of implications. In the past if a radio station developed a format that worked, it could expect to ride their success for years to come and maybe even adapt and adjust to keep it alive (top 40 to oldies). TV has had generations of viewers since the 50's loyally switching their sets on and off when the networks and stations offered their shows. No more. DVRs and Internet competition have factored in. No guarantee TV will be TV in five years. NBC is scaring me. In fact, the TV powers are hell bent to bust into the online video business and it seems like they don't really have a plan. They just don't want to be late to the party. What I'm saying is that the party doesn't last as long any more. And that if lesson one is to understand the new rules of engagement to attract the next generation then rule two is to factor in planned obsolescence. The party is over shortly after it starts and the deft media companies will have to commit to 24/7 planning, testing and implementation of new ideas or they in fact will be passe.
Latte Lessons From Starbucks to Tower Records
When Tower Records finally ran out of steam and closed its doors it made me think of how unthinkable it was that such a large record store could go belly up. Maybe one store. Maybe a chain, but even though Tower Records was the chain that closed its doors forever everyone knows all record stores are in big trouble. Big trouble because the majority of the next generation loves the convenience of the virtual record store and because, frankly, record stores have lost their reason for being. Contrast that to Starbucks -- perhaps the prototypical remnant of the genre -- and you see a glimpse of the future. Starbucks -- the coffee company -- sold 800,000 copies of Ray Charles' "Genius Loves Company" alone. When Starbucks either partners with labels or sells existing product, the sales go up -- sometimes way up. Next for Starbucks -- books, movies and even better, producing movies. What's in their coffee that makes them so creative and what hemlock were record store owners taking that made them forget that they marched into the turn of the century with -- well, only records -- CDs -- upon which to continue a once prosperous business. That's one lesson: fail to grow with the imagination, technology and potential of a new generation and you become history as record stores are finding out. Leave your creativity in the past and your future will be bankruptcy. Creative bankruptcy comes before financial bankruptcy. Radio, records, publishing and television -- are you paying attention?
New Media Needs Old Media
Do you want a utility -- say, a mobile telephone company -- creating the content that is on your future mobile device? Do you think they have what it takes to produce compelling content or should they just stick to efficient and economical delivery of content? With technology becoming the leading edge for everything Internet or mobile, one would think utilities are qualified to be the creative force that markets mobile media. Not so fast. They've failed miserably. The greatest provider of content on the face of this earth is still traditional media. They act like they forget this as they wade into the unfamiliar and uncharted turf of the Internet and a demanding, new generation. Yet it remains true. Radio produces content in real time 24 hours a day on 12,000 plus radio stations. Television and production companies create high quality video programs to meet the almost unquenchable thirst of today's consumer. Newspapers have never been in jeopardy of losing their ability to provide content in the written word -- just the foresight to get beyond the printed broad sheet. What we have here is the failure to innovate. Content creation is not natural to utilities and technology companies. Embracing new technology does not come easy to traditional media. Both have to realize their limitations. And both would be wise to recognize their upsides. Even Apple Computer is an old school company that has adapted to technology. Not satisfied to be a computer company like Dell or Toshiba. The Internet revolution needs the old school and the old school media companies need to rethink their content for a new generation. This is a problem. Both have failed to do so to date and both will fail to realize their full potential if they don't do so in the future.
Unsocial Networks
The dark side of social networking -- media's future, past or simply a dalliance -- is starting to rear its ugly head. Aleksey Vaynor, a Yale student is the latest victim of "video gotcha". His resume, letter and, yes -- video -- was somehow leaked allegedly by UBS (remember their slogan "You and Us"?) to staff and then YouTube. The video according to a New York Times article was "...staged to look like a job interview, is spliced with shots of Mr. Vayner lifting weights and ballroom dancing and has him spouting Zen-like inspirational messages." It's not the first negative result from the growing presence of viral networks nor will it be the last. Students have been warned to be careful of what they post on Facebook and MySpace and soon there will be legal ramifications beyond the prickly issue of rights management that was feared to be the underlying thing that could undo Google's recent purchase of YouTube and social networks. No. This could undo social networking. The repercussions of unauthorized videos winding up in the public eye potentially hurting someone. Young people are only beginning to grapple with the unthinkable -- that they could become the unwitting victims of their own words, their own actions (caught of video) and their own candor. Who would have thought? Wasn't DRM the dark side of the moon? Corporate media should keep its eye on this one. UBS has a black eye -- maybe a lawsuit. Traditional media companies rushing into interactive media with wallets wide open beware. Nothing is a category killer more than infecting your viral network. My advice: spend more time on protecting the integrity of your "community" and less time on monetizing this new growth category or else the ads will be worthless and you'll see an already fickle Gen Y market beat it for something else -- something safer. After all, predators in real or virtual society are getting to be a problem.
Must See TV -- Not NBC, YouTube
NBC Universal's plan -- the so-called "NBCU 2.0" -- is a frightening reminder to traditional media of what's coming. NBC plans to cut staff, stop producing expensive drama shows for the 8 pm slot, consolidate its operations and switch resources to digital media. The plan: cut costs and invest more in digital media opportunities where it expects its digital revenues to surpass $1 billion by 2009. But the house that Jack (Welsh) built has taken a hit from a few 22 year olds who were just screwing around in their garage -- not working on a car, but building YouTube. YouTube is fast becoming the new television. But traditional media has a hard time learning when bad things happen to them. Look at radio -- the consolidators still don't know which end is up. Look at the record labels -- still suing (their customers) after all these years. The plain truth is that television (and for that matter radio -- and films, yes!) will be producing shorter content delivered to mobile devices which may be enjoyed on handheld screens or bluetoothed to larger screens. Within five years a one hour drama may be old school (if any network still produces them). Because the busy, multi-tasking, restless next generation wants control of their media and is giving traditional media companies a preview of how it's going to be. YouTube is fast becoming the new gold standard. And in the two weeks since Google "overpaid" for YouTube you can start to see what a bargain it's going to be.
I Invented WiFi -- Really!
My first program director job was working for a wild man named John Tenaglia in Philadelphia at a General Cinema radio station with a signal you could only hear in a helicopter or so it seemed. The call letters were WIFI (92.5 FM). I say I invented WiFi because I pulled the plug on our Drake-Chenault automation "Hit Parade" to introduce live "Stereo Hits". Worked with some great people like Bill Figenshu and Mike Anderson, now publisher of STL Media. Lee Abrams also tangled with Johnny T in his career and we all survived and I guess were better off for it. Back then WIFI was an early adopter top 40 station in an age when all the listeners were listening to AM radios. It's hard to believe looking back on it. Wasn't FM better? Of course, but few knew it. Cars still didn't have FM radios as standard equipment (for my USC students reading this, I'm not that old, radio was just that behind the times). So nothing has changed. Radio is still behind the times. And now the new "WiFi" really threatens to clean some clocks. Once universal "WiFi" is in place the next generation -- the one terresterial radio turned off before they turned to the Internet -- will be able to carry their Internet with them on mobile devices. Radio will find it hard put to compete with the wide variety of Internet Radio stations delivered through universal "WiFi". (Ironically, Philadelphia recently took the lead on making "WiFi" available within the city limits. "WiFi" must be a Philly thing all around). It makes me wonder, what can radio do to save itself from this lethal blow. I am convinced that smart radio operators will move to transform themselves into new age content providers (we have programs such as Music Media Solutions Lab at USC to help). To be blunt -- if radio operators don't get into the content business -- the mobile content business -- the entire industry will be like an AM station not back in the day when AM was king, but today when AM is when you go to Starbucks -- at least to the next generation. Poor signal or not my jocks and I always thought our WIFI in Philly was a killer. This "WiFi" will really be a killer and you won't need a helicopter to receive it.
Gen Y Did What Eliot Spitzer Couldn't
Even a politically ambitious New York Attorney General, Eliot Spitzer, couldn't stop payola. Congress has never been able to. Radio never wanted to. And record labels still in their heart of hearts believe it's just the price of doing business. So the latest news that CBS has settled its problem with Spitzer in exchange for a $2 million charitable donation while admitting to payola practices should appear to be another nail in the coffin of this "dreaded disease". Clear Channel, Emmis and Cox are among the major groups to be subpoenaed as part of Spitzer's jihad. Entercom is fighting Spitzer but hasn't had much success so far. So what does it all mean? Payola still exists. People in radio know this. It's not the same as it used to be. But it would be hard for an honest radio person to put his or her hand on a bible and swear that labels can no longer influence airplay. I know...I know -- no trips, credit cards, money or overt offering of drug payments. And the consolidators who invented their own kind of "legal payola" by selling access to their program directors in return for slightly earlier "add" reports than the music trades published was always a joke. Now no one is laughing because the joke is on radio and records. Increasingly payola doesn't matter any more, because radio airplay matters less and less each day. The next generation uses peer-to-peer filing sharing, social networking, legal and illegal downloading and other Internet-related means to bring democracy to the music business. Radio is less of a force and will continue to decline. So there -- Gen Y has found a way to do what lawmakers couldn't, self-regulation wouldn't, consolidators shouldn't and Eliot Spitzer cannot -- stop the influence of payola. An assist goes to record labels and radio for incorrectly assuming that they would always be America's hit makers when the Internet generation had something else in mind.
Radio's Loss of Young Listeners May Be Unstoppable
Larry Rosin, a great guy and excellent researcher, was quoted in the New York Times recently as saying radio's unwillingness to target listeners in the 12-24 year old demographic instead of the money demo 25-54 is contributing to a significant drop in listening. Rosin's Edison Research indicates that listening hours have dropped about 21% among 18-24 year olds in the last ten years. Other mitigating circumstances are cited including the usual culprits -- the Internet, mobile devices, video games, movies, television, instant messages, portable music players and music downloading. What's significant -- and what the radio industry must grapple with -- is it's inability and/or unwillingness to accept the fact that (and it pains me to say it) they have done as much damage to radio as their new age competition may have done to radio. Radio must change. From Gen Y's point of view it has virtually no cache. It's often a disappointment. For a medium that is free and heard virtually everywhere obsessing on HD sub channels and other silly issues is a deal breaker with the next generation. Radio owners should be obsessing over creating programming. Where are the creative minds who can do this? I think many of them are still working in radio but neutered by consolidation. Big media barons acting badly, cutting budgets, pandering to their new Wall Street oriented owners. They've forgotten their roots. So let this radio guy remind them: think local not national. Personality not voice tracks. Young blood with new ideas not clones of old formats. Entertaining and informing not demanding broadcast efficiencies. Research and gut not re-purposing formats from the past 20 years. Read Lee Abrams' blog -- he, as I do, loves radio, but he seems to share my belief that for some self-destructive reason radio can't get beyond the "utopia" it wished for -- consolidation. And, as the saying goes, "be careful what you wish for".
Record Labels Doing Smart Things
Warner led the other record labels excepting EMI in working deals with Google's YouTube. And they did it the smart way by negotiating a stake in Google's new acquisition. In return the labels get a collective $50 million worth of equity, a system for helping control digital rights and a pioneering position in a hot property that means a lot to the music industry. Now this is more like it. Better than suing consumers through RIAA. Better than sitting on the sidelines while technology passes them by. The record label of the future has to do more of this. More pioneering. More entrepreneurship. As bitter a pill as it is to swallow that the CD is not likely to be the workhorse of record company revenue going forward, it is time to move on. I find Warner particularly suited to adapt to a changing industry. CEO Tom Whalley and his digital music ace Robin Bechtel have been working on the grassroots level to bring about change that corporate Warner has recognized.Make no mistake it is hard for old-line labels to become new age Internet operators overnight. That said, the potential is virtually limitless if they begin to direct their thinking to cooperating with the inevitable. No good can be done to fight the technology-related advances of the next generation. They have earned their criticism for acting like prehistoric media companies all too many times. But their investment in Google YouTube is not one of them. Let's see more.
Stop Illegal Downloading -- Sell t-shirts
I've been thinking that record labels are really taking it on the chin because of the next generation and their ubiquitous tool -- the Internet. How do you stop illegal downloading? Is it even worth stopping it? Better yet, how do the record labels get in on this revolution instead of being on the outside looking in. One thing that hasn't become virtual (yet) is merchandise. To my knowledge no one has invented a virtual t-shirt. Notice I am being careful to say -- yet. Well, it's not likely. This is my way of asking -- doesn't the record industry have the next generation by their -- computers and mobile phones -- if they become better merchandising rather than better litigators? It makes sense, but sense doesn't seem to appear in a lot of the music businesses' strategy these days. You can't blame them. Their copyrighted material is being compromised. Their used to defining the terms (i.e., we've got new technology here on a CD, now go out and replace your vinyl while we get rich again on our catalog which is costing us nothing). I really believe record labels must transform themselves into major mass marketers not just CD pressers who happen to sell t-shirts and caps. I'm not sure the present brain trust gets this, but the next generation will because until a virtual t-shirt is the norm, it seems the record labels will have their customers by the -- shall we say, the neck.
Let The Lawsuits Begin (And Fail)
Universal threatened it and now they've done it. They are suing Grouper.com and Bolt.com for allegedly building traffic by encouraging users to share music videos without their permission. Note Google, which just purchased YouTube, was not included because they worked out a deal. Universal seeks compensation. It cites Mariah Carey's video "Shake It Off" as drawing 50,000 viewers on Grouper alone. Let me understand this. The major labels are hurting. The Internet because of illegal and legal downloading has cut into CD sales. Massive lawsuits from RIAA have not been able to stop the decline. So it makes sense that when the record business has a problem turn it over to the lawyers and sue. But it doesn't make good business sense. This is not to say that Universal and the other labels do not have a right to protect their copyrighted material. Simply put: in the end, it doesn't work and isn't likely to work. Perhaps a better use of time, money and lawyers would be to figure out ways to compete with piracy rather than try to stop it because no matter how successful litigious labels may have been in the past, this Internet thing is not like the past. By the way, that's 50,000 Mariah Carey downloads on Grouper! Put aside that Sony recently purchased Grouper (hint, hint) and keep in mind that the music industry continues to spiral (oops, they did it again). Go figure a way to sell those 50,000 Mariah Carey fans t-shirts -- or something -- because labels are not going to sue themselves into more profit.
Mobile is the New Radio
My dear friends in the radio business to a great extent see themselves in the 24-hour news, information and entertainment business. That is going to have to stop. Technology is at work. The TiVo and its clones allow viewers to take from TV instead of waiting for TV to give. Consumers like the control they are getting over their television entertainment. Radio has been awesome at being there for listeners since it was invented, but being there is not going to be enough in the mobile future. I see mobile radio "stations" (if I can call them that) as shorter form offerings. Maybe 30 minutes worth of programming that mobile users can retrieve when they want it. Or ten minutes worth of two minute segments -- jokes? Who knows? The possibilities are endless. The point being that if radio broadcasters want to be the content providers of the mobile future they are going to have to -- forgive me, here -- forget how to be broadcasters and learn how to be content suppliers. Embrace the technology. Help develop it. Push it. Program and innovate. Find new ways to monetize it and run separate, well-funded companies to grow the mobile field just as they have admirably grown the radio business all these years. Failure to do so leaves hungry utility companies as content suppliers. And if that doesn't worry you, it should. After all, a second ranked computer company with only 3% of the market invented and marketed the one device (ipod) that was a category killer for CDs. And then built the incredibly simple and intuitive iTunes that became the category killer for radio's monopoly over hit-making. Terrestrial radio owners should seriously consider what may happen if they fail to become mobile content suppliers -- as contradictory as it is to how they now operate -- before Verizon and their competitors figure it out first.
The Real Genius of Steve Jobs
The Steve Jobs interview in Newsweek has a not-so-hidden lesson for Microsoft regarding its new Zune competitor to iPod. Jobs says, "I've seen the demonstrations on the Internet about how you can find another person using a Zune and give them a song they can play three times. It takes forever. By the time you've gone through all that, the girl's got up and left! You're much better off to take one of your earbuds out and put it in her ear. Then you're connected with about two feet of headphone cable." Something tells me he's right (other than my USC students). So how is the Zune so different and better than the iPod? Why is it going to succeed where others including the mighty Sony have failed? Nothing is worse than doing something that doesn't need to be done even if you do it well. Jobs could have saved Microsoft a lot of money. The betting is Zune may be a Thanksgiving turkey. But if you're in radio, television, satellite, mobile or even a start up Internet venture take heed. That Baby Boomer Jobs is such a Gen Y'er. How is it that he and Apple have a proven record of knowing their market so well that they rarely make a mistake. I think the answer is that he does things well and does them simply. Well and simply. Lessons from the Zenmaster whose iPod device forced the record and radio industry out of the music and broadcasting business as we know it.
The Chances of Stern Succeeding on the Internet
I always liked Howard Stern. Thought the move to Sirius Satellite was brilliant. Not because they paid him $500 million plus stock incentives. That too. Because radio was declining and satellite was the new frontier. Now Sirius is launching a new non-satellite satellite service on the Internet for $12.95 a month. No need to buy the radio. October 25 and 26th are freebie preview days. Sirius also has 74 other channels on its Internet service, but they're going to go to the dance with the guy that brung them -- Howard Stern. Makes sense. But think it through. Stern appeals to older listeners who currently constitute satellite's best chance at new subscribers. But the Internet -- although used by everyone -- is the growth organ of the young. And the young aren't drawn to Stern the way Xers and Boomers are. So if you're not buying any of this reasoning so far, consider that young consumers don't like to pay for anything. They want it free. They want it on demand. It's their birthright. I'm thinking Sirius would be better to develop youth oriented programming for the market they need but cannot hope to reach with old radio guys and fee-based services. And -- God forgive me for saying this -- consider commercials. If what I'm seeing with the next generation is valid, you don't have to look beyond the Internet to see that paid subscription models don't resonate with this future boom market. More on this in future posts. There, I've said it. Commercials. No fees. Blow the satellite market wide open.
Digital Rights Management -- Isn't Gonna Happen
If I've learned anything working with the next generation at USC it is that DRM, the concept worth going to war over for the record industry and the RIAA is doomed to eventual failure. What I mean is that yes, the record labels succeed for now and stand in the way of the true digital revolution. But, they'll never win the long term battle. Every protection can be hacked. Standing in the way of true interoperability is like Custer's Last Stand. In the end the labels will die -- no matter how noble -- fighting for the old way of doing things. Here's what's worth considering: music made for distribution without DRM protection will proliferate. It is growing by leaps and bounds now because of social networking and sites that cater to music that can be used and transfered as the consumer sees fit. New bands and artists are already on the love train. And yes, there will be piracy, but there always is -- and was, even at record stores where shoplifters walked off with the greatest hits of all time. What's bigger than the RIAA? An entire generation that demands the ability to use and transfer the music it enjoys as they see fit. And what's more -- as incredible as it may seem -- they will still pay for music that is fairly priced and offered conveniently for their enjoyment. Just as Sony found out when it tried to encode CDs to protect them from copying (and had to back down), the music industry will discover that when the market expects full use of the music they own, the market will prevail -- even if the big four labels kill themselves trying to prevent it.
Old Media, Meet The Real Enemy
Sometimes you wonder how radio has been able to buy up everything allowable by law and still come away with a declining business model. Must be that damn iPod, right? You wonder how the mighty TV business can be kicked in the butt by a few 22-year old "kids" who while screwing around invented YouTube. That leads me to the question is traditional media in trouble because of all this new technology and a new hard to tie down generation of interactive monsters? Or are they to blame for their own mess? I'm thinking the old model doesn't work. Take a look. New Internet start ups actually hire people -- lots of people -- sometimes when they aren't even making money. Radio stations cut their staffs. TV stations eliminate their newsrooms. And, local news is their bread and butter. Chalk one up for new media. Traditional media sucks up to Wall Street because, well, they have to. That's the game. Vibrant interactive growth businesses answer to themselves, their peers, their users. New media thrives on innovation. No idea is off the table. The old school adds duties to their existing creative and marketing people's job descriptions and expects them to innovate (but not too much). The Internet is about democracy. Traditional media is about mediocrity. It doesn't have to be. Even non-interactive media can be a growth industry again, but not with their present play book. Look to the young entrepreneurs who are kicking their butts. Disney-ABC says "we understand piracy now as a business model". Now, that kind of thinking is going to even make investors happy. It's the attitude of traditional media that is killing it. Not Gen Y. Not technology.
Oops, They Did It Again!
So Citadel is in the process of buying ABC Radio in a complicated deal only a lawyer or financial wiz like Citadel CEO Farid Suleman could love. The deal has been languishing in lawyers offices for almost a year and now comes the word that ABC is cutting costs in anticipation of the closing. Do these folks not get it? ABC was a once great group of radio stations that Disney lost the will to operate. You don't "uninvest" in your product to grow it. You invest in it. So now the winning formula for running radio stations (I am being sarcastic here) is cut costs. Duh! Where has that gotten radio since 1996 when the Telecommunications Act that started this fire was passed? It will make Wall Street happy and after all isn't Wall Street the new radio? Not. I spend a lot of time with the next generation in my work at USC. Believe it, the next generation is so over radio. And if you're a media mogul don't blame the iPod or the lack of HD radio. Sadly, as man who loves this business I must add that the same people who presided over the demise of their industry while they were expanding it are doing it again -- investing in Wall Street not Main Street. All the financial analysts on Wall Street can't dress this pig up for the next generation and without the next generation radio is, well -- yesterday's news.
The Anti-Clear Channel Factor
That's Saul Levine, the owner of "K-Mozart" in LA who has resisted (apparently easily) the fat cat money of large radio consolidators. He refuses to sell his station because he loves classical music and wants to keep it on the air. Now Levine has a deal to operate KKJZ (88.1) for licensee Cal State Long Beach and "nervous nellies" think he's going to water down the classic jazz format with smooth jazz. He says not. And what more do you need from an anti-consolidation hero but his word. The likes of these owners who really, really love radio is rarer than an uncooked steak at a Texas barbecue. Jee Lee, owner of WBEB-FM, Philadelphia is another example of a rich man who could have easily been over $100 million richer if he decided to take "conglomerate retirement" and sell his baby. He didn't, and won't and isn't going to ever unless he drops dead on the job (which I hope he doesn't). So much about radio these days is embarrassing. Etched in my mind is when I first hit the airwaves as a young announcer (for Jerry Lee, by the way). He and Dave Kurtz, the now deceased co-owner of the station, loved radio like I don't see the suits of Wall Street love it. And that's why radio was exciting. Why it was hip. Why it was a growth business and why those high compliments are hard to say about most of today's radio owners. At a memorable dinner at the Four Seasons in Philadelphia before I moved west and gave up cheese steaks and soft pretzels, Jerry Lee told me something I will never forget. He said, I look for ways to spend money on my station. On research. And he does. And he wins. Heroes of radio are hard to find. The villain is not the iPod. Not the Internet. Not Gen Y. It's radio owners who sold their soul to Wall Street and now are getting ready for the screwing of their life.
Google Gets The Last Giggle
Does $1.6 billion buy Google a raft of lawsuits over content rights or a massive new frontier upon which to continue building its empire. What do you think? How could someone not take the risk and could you think of anyone better than the deep pocket folks at Google? I like this move. You'll notice that Google is moving as swiftly as it did in buying YouTube to resolve outstanding potential lawsuits. Universal comes to mind. They're now on board. There's no doubt YouTube is a beacon for legal trouble over unprotected content, but the difference may be that Google recognizes this, is taking action and will have to consider such suits as the cost of the acquisition. MySpace is now crawling into bed after parent company News Corp lost its bid for YouTube. And can you imagine what would have happened if an old media company like Viacom won the bidding war. So, I'm over the potential risks. Not a naysayer. I think this move gives gravitas to the video clip segment of interactive media. It's the new television. Google will be looked to as a developer of not just advertising possibilities (that, too), but also content beyond what YouTube's young founders began with. Will Google be careful to keep YouTube's simplicity? It must. And, some how if I am Yahoo! right now I am also celebrating because that massive giant will benefit just by Google being in the video market. On the Del Colliano Richter scale of 1 to 10 (1 being the purchase of a radio station for 13 times and 10 being New Corp's acquisition of MySpace), Google's purchase of YouTube is an 8.I've Added "Must Read" Links
Thanks for your comments and time spent reading Inside Music Media. Although we're still in "beta" mode, I am encouraged by the number of people who appreciate straight talk and insight when reading about the music-related media. And we haven't promoted the blog much so feel free to spread the word if you like it. Starting today, if you scroll down the right hand column, you'll find the first "Must Read" links to people and publications I read and consider essential. I won't burden you with anything that I don't highly regard. We report, you decide. Did I say that? I take it back. Nonetheless, to start, you'll enjoy reading my friend John Parikhal who has always been light years ahead of the broadcasting industry. Had they heeded his advice more, perhaps they would be in on the Internet boom instead of on the sidelines. Lee Abrams' blog is amazing because rarely can those interested in music media get such open, honest and sometimes raw insights from a legend of radio programming and pioneer of satellite radio. And, Mark Cuban's blog -- what can I say? A lot of people think Mark is just the eccentric billionaire who owns the Dallas Mavericks and gets fined a lot by the NBA for mouthing off, but Mark is also a straight-shooting, intuitive predictor of music industry and Internet trends. When he blogs, I listen so you may want to try his site. More to come. Please contact me at jdelcolliano@earthlink.net or delcolli@usc.edu with comments and suggestions.
Privacy -- Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid
My mother never had a credit card. Thought it outrageous that cable could charge for TV. I'll wager that very few people other than the Social Security Administration had a line on her personal information. The next generation doesn't have the same kind of privacy. Future employers can check them out on Facebook, MySpace and yes, through emails and IMs they wrote even in their unguarded moments. This begs the question how digital do you want to be? How transparent can you afford to be? The Foley page scandal in Washington proves again that anyone who thinks he or she can keep their digital communications private and protected would be wrong. Even IMs can be retrieved. The IMs that indicted Congressman Foley for making inappropriate advances to teenage Congressional pages came via AOL software. Laying your life out in public day after day may not drive you back to telephones and snail mail, but the many repercussions of such openness may make you want to reorder your priorities. Any electronic, digital communication must be benign and sound benign. Big brother can track where you surf the web. Maybe the web should be for harmless communication and never for anything that you might not say in front of 100 people. We're entering an age when the fabulous developments on the Internet should give us pause to ask -- are we using the Internet or is the Internet using us.
The Record Store Is Dead (Or Is It?)
Tower Records finally succumbed to the losses that music downloading wrought. A liquidator came in and bought the entire chain for under $170 million. A sell off is underway and 3,000 employees are headed to unemployment. What a long demise! Just as traditional media is hanging on to its traditional business models, record stores are reminding us what happens when we ignore the future. The record store began to die when Gen Yers figured out how to share music, steal music or buy music online. And what did record stores do? Remain the same. Few changes. And Tower won't be the only record store to bite the dust. When music was "product" or as label's call it "units" then record stores were the ideal place to stock and sell vinyl and later CDs. But when music became the driving force behind Internet entertainment then "product" became irrelevant. There may always be people who want to own the tangible versions of albums, but there won't always be record stores to sell them. But there will be social networks -- the old fashion kind -- where you buy coffee and linger. That's called Starbucks and it may very well become the record store of the future along with a latte and muffin.
Radio Should Compete With YouTube
So, Google is reportedly offering YouTube $1.6 billion to buy it. Yahoo is said to be eying Facebook. Rupert Murdock previously stole MySpace and many big media conglomerates are seemingly tripping over themselves to avoid the "humiliation" Viacom CEO Sumner Redstone said he felt when Murdock swooped in and stole MySpace from him. I agree with Mark Cuban. YouTube is potentially the legal professions' best friend. The lawsuits over copyright infringement will start flying when YouTube is awash with big media money. Universal is already talking like an early litigator. My point about radio is that its time for radio to have pictures. Join together as a consortium not individual companies and build an industry-wide platform that -- and this is important -- manages digital copyrights. Software is coming. The intent is what is a prerequisite. The YouTube platform is broken before it gets sold. But the idea of video on the fly is major. Add mobility and DRM and it's a great, legal business for someone. How about the sorry radio industry, still trying to hang on to what they've got. Picture a future in pictures, video -- add music, invite consumer participation, create video places and do it legally.
Fast Fowarding Online Commercials
Traditional television networks are beginning to discover the joys of streaming video preceded by a forced-view commercial. Disney CFO Tom Staggs has been quoted as saying that he's impressed with the online stats -- where viewers have to watch the ads. No fast-forwarding allowed. He says 87% of the viewers who downloaded ABC.com shows can even recall the sponsors name -- that is nearly double that of TV. Is this a love affair in the making? Yes and no. The networks have been fighting TiVo and DVRs to no avail. Now, if this is any indication, they may learn to love streaming and the revenue they can derive from its associated advertising. Finally, the advertisers can't say that the commercials are not being watched. But wait a minute! This is the Internet. This is the land of the free and home of the hackers who eventually can and probably will find a way for online viewers to bypass those forced-view online ads that precede free content. We in the technology dependent entertainment business often are reminded to cooperate with the inevitable. So if Gen Y might (or will) find a work-around to allow fast forwarding of online video ads than shouldn't the media establishment find a way to allow DVR users to also fast foward content but not skip commercials? Or better yet, how about making compelling commercials viewers online and in the living room actually want to see.
Media Stirs The Violence
Fox News was having a discussion midday today about what could cause the violence in our society especially against children. There are two major contributing factors in my view. One is the willingness of the media to pander to the lack of civility in some human beings and their eagerness to drive society to the limit -- in sex scenes, language, acts of violence that are not needed dramatically to provide context and the dumbing down of news to pictures and outrageous stories. The music industry is also to blame because it doesn't just exercise its rights via hip-hop and rap lyrics but is the driving force in pushing language, disrespect for women and intolerance to the legally allowable limit. This pains me as a radio and television man and a print publisher. Couple this with the breakdown of the American family and you can talk until you're blue in the face about which one came first the chicken or the egg. The answer is no censorship. Nor is it government town meetings and blue-ribbon committees. It's not politicians doing more pandering to society's fears that we have created a monster and it is us. Look to responsibility and self control to change things. Just because we are allowed to show violence and "dis" women and showcase sexual intimacy as never before doesn't mean the media should. Try self-control. Try creativity. Try restraint. Try considering whether the act (violence, sexual or even language) is necessary in context. Either than or look no further to the country we have become stirred by the increasingly irresponsible media to explain our violence, intolerant ways.
Radio Can't Stop Hawking Fewer Commercials
On a cab ride from LAX to my home in LA last Sunday I couldn't believe how loud the radio was. But after all, it was radio and as an ex-program director I was fascinated with why this driver who spoke minimal English was blasting KBIG. Heard Usher then a segue to Madonna singing "Borderline". Like an ex-Marine there is no such thing as an ex-program director so I could always second-guess the programming. But that wasn't what lit my fire. Working with Gen Y students as I do at USC I couldn't believe the jock -- a typical "puker" -- was selling "fewer commercials" to his listeners. Who is radio kidding? Go back to school. Any school -- in your city or town. You'll learn very quickly that the next generation of radio listeners -- and I contend, the present listeners radio still has -- don't believe radio when it says fewer commercials. It makes no sense to keep saying things listeners are not likely to believe true or not. Why can't someone in power mandate the following: no more meaningless promises; no more djs imitating djs; no more tired formatics. Start there. Come up with some new ideas. Add knowledgeable jocks and more new music and your station will be on rehab.
Satellite Programming to the Wrong Audience
A well-respected radio man and friend hit the nail right on the head today when he told me that the problem with satellite radio is that its market is older adults willing and able to pay monthly subscription fees yet both Sirius and XM continue to make their best efforts in music programming aimed at the young -- the very audience that doesn't subscribe in great numbers. He adds, not only that, some of the music stations aimed at their subscriber base aren't adequate. For example, oldies. Where is the quintessential WCBS-FM since Joel Hollander took the legendary, moneymaking oldies station off the air in New York in favor of "Jack"? On the Internet -- as a mere shadow of its former self. Why not lure WCBS-FM architect Joe McCoy into rebuilding WCBS-FM under a different name with the personalities and style he fully understands. The disconnect comes when satellite operators can't read the writing on the wall. A recent Bridge Ratings survey showed that some 50% of satellite subscribers who subscribed as part of their new car purchase said they were not -- not -- considering renewal. That's an awful 50% churn rate! And that's not good. So satellite operators may want to invest their assets in creating outstanding programming -- and lots of it -- aimed at their paid subscribers not the young listeners who are enamoured of the Internet right now. XM is doing this with Oprah & Friends -- the highest quality talk channel on satellite or terrestrial radio. And Sirius has turned its fate around by spending $500 million on employing Howard Stern, a personality proven to please listeners the ages of their actual subscribers. Simple, but apparently not simple enough for satellite operators to get it.
Radio To Go
Some of my students have expressed a desire to subscribe to content that could be produced by terrestrial radio operators. My friends in the radio industry, please take note. They envision a system that would allow them to plug in their iPods and download podcasts of highly specialized material -- about 15 minutes in length. They would tolerate a commercial sponsor. Might even enjoy plugging in at a Starbucks as an alternative to downloading the content on their computers before leaving for work or school. Might even pay a small fee for the content along with a latte. The kinds of content they might like: sports news, soap opera updates, the latest music (royalties permitting) just released, comedy bits from terrestrial radio morning shows either as separate content or bits from the radio show -- maybe both. This strikes me as a potential hit for broadcasters who have struggled with how to get in with Generation Y. But proceed cautiously. Radio's hidden advantage is that it is the greatest producer of audio content on this planet. But know your market. This generation wants what it wants and is very eclectic in its tastes -- musical and otherwise. Don't make radio to go an extension of your stations. Make it separate, but use your ample programming and production skills. Possibilities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)