The Record Labels Lost Their "Bullet"

I’ve long been saying that music will be free (or close to it) within the next ten years. I’ve been saying this for the past three years and I think I am going to be right.

Heck, music is free now for a huge number of people who see no problem stealing it from sites on the Internet. And it costs next to nothing right now if you buy music from iTunes for 99 cents a download.

The record labels are in a bad way. In their our parlance, they've lost their bullet. Upward growth is not likely. They are on the way to being a mid-chart industry.

The record industry spent its capital fighting the future and who wouldn’t? Theirs was such a great business.

You make a vinyl record, press it and sell it for far more money that it costs to manufacture it. Then, you make CDs on material that costs next to nothing to produce and mark it up to insane prices while at the same time forcing your customers to re-buy their entire album library.

It’s hard to feel sorry for record labels that have had it this good for so many years.

But now, they have it real bad. They’ve lost control of their market.

Apple has become their boss. When negotiations begin again between Apple and the labels within the next few months, Apple is in the drivers seat. They can dictate the terms and the record labels have very little they can do about it.

Once when Steve Jobs went to label executives asking for a chance to sell music for 99 cents, they thought he would help them stamp out the piracy that was running rampant in the music business at the time.

Piracy has gotten worse.

While it is true that iTunes sells a ton of music, it still represents a very small part of the record labels’ total revenue. You might think — these poor labels, they can’t get a break. Well, they made their own bad luck.

It’s true that they couldn't do anything about the Internet — the chief tool for swapping music, but they resisted it with all they had and now it appears they have lost. Insiders at some of the labels are very concerned about the viability of their companies in the long haul. Heck, in the short haul!

But there are ways the labels could survive or even thrive.

If, ISPs would come on board and agree to offer their customers a monthly subscription option, they could be rolling in dough again. But that is not likely to happen. ISPs would want an increasingly large piece of the pie and they would be in the driver’s seat. Plus you can bet there would be a lot of lawyers suing each other with so much money at stake.

In fact, subscription models which haven’t been all that popular with consumers to date still have lots of potential, but their success is based on the advent of universal WiFi. What good is having a subscription to every song ever made if you can only listen on your computer? And even if you accept that mobile delivery can be an option now, you’d have to increase the battery life of cell phones.

It just could be that help is on the way, but not in time for the four remaining major labels.

One way the four major labels have shot themselves in the foot is their inability to come up with the next thing beyond hip-hop. Hip-hop is arguably threadbare at this point. Is Nelly's "Tip Drill" the future of hip-hop? Decency and language issues aside, hip-hop has driven pop music sales for a long time.

Too little consideration has been given to the labels own failure to develop new hit genres. Is it because these hitmakers suddenly became deaf? No. Probably because they suddenly became consolidated and did what every other media company did — cut costs at the expense of the product.

Who is coming up with the next trend?

Not the labels. Look toward file-sharers and social networkers.

So as Apple gets ready to take it to the labels, it is heartening to know that while the labels couldn’t stop the technology that enables music piracy, they could have cooperated with new technology and even sharpened their skills in finding, arranging and marketing the next big thing.

Maybe it will take their demise to breathe life into the record business.

When I teach the music industry students who will be the moguls of the future, I often think that I might have a new age Sam Phillips in my presence. The music industry — particularly the record business — may have an encore when it gets smaller and not larger because small means they have to be focused on content and large means they focus on economies of scale.

Isn’t it Apple’s Steve Jobs who always says “think different”.

Well?

To email this post to a friend, click the email icon below

To receive my Tuesday post by email, subscribe below

The First Annual "Lowry" Awards

I thought it would be fun to announce the First Annual "Lowry" Awards for "Less Is More" in Music Media named after Lowry Mays, the man who almost singlehandedly created and molded one medium that has turned to gold and then to tin with investors taking it on the chin.

Here's a few categories (perhaps you have suggestions of your own):

Less Is More Executive of The Year
To The Executive Who Personifies Less
The nominees are:
-- John Hogan -- he's the heavy favorite because, well, he thought it up and is a constant reminder to all of us what "Less Is More" really means.
-- CBS CEO Les Moonves because his first name, although misspelled, is still "Les-" for thinking "less" and listening to Sumner Redstone "more".
-- Former CBS Radio President Joel Hollander for his determination to blow up capable revenue producing radio stations and replace them with less profitable ones -- what courage! See, he's less interested in furthering his career than he is in profits.
-- NBC News President Steve Capus for the great courage it must have taken to scuttle the Imus MSNBC morning simulcast when he had absolutely nothing to lose and for reminding us that he was speaking up for the NBC family of employees who wanted Imus dumped. Let's see what happens when these same "family" employees go to Capus with their next request. It's comforting to know he's listening.

Less, Lesser, Least Radio Format Of The Year Award
This award goes to the radio format that is letting it all slip away.
The nominees are:
-- All news for its ability to program 20 minutes of traffic, patter, garden reports and public service announcements along with 20 minutes of additional clutter called commercials leaving 20 minutes of news each hour. What a business model! It gives new meaning to the phrase: "give us 20 minutes, then give us another 20 minutes and then I'll give you the world for just 20 minutes". It's the 20/20/20 news format. Bill Drake, eat your heart out!
-- Oldies for its disappearing act. Radio suits know what is best. Baby boomer PDs are out of touch and should be retired, right? This nominee has an edge because it is really being programmed "less" which endears it to the membership of the academy that oversees the "Lowries".
-- Jack, the house that oldies built, by making way for this brainchild of CBS for its intuitive read of the listening public by touting "we play what we want" at the very same time desirable young listeners who were abandoning radio were saying, "we play what we want and it's not called a radio, it's an iPod".

More Or Less A Record Industry Award
For the best strategy of a less-than-healthy music industry.
The nominees are:
-- Three of the four major labels for the courage and bad judgment to publicly keep fighting the inevitability of DRM-free music when behind closed doors they are already making plans for the music business without DRM.
-- EMI for apparently forcing Apple's Steve Jobs into charging 30 cents more for DRM-free music on iTunes in order for listeners to get what they should have been getting for 99 cents a download -- better fidelity (but not much) and no digital music restrictions.
-- The four major labels for another year of not coming up with a new hit genre that could be a replacement for hip-hop thus enabling sales to continue to tank while they can still blame Gen Y and Steve Jobs. Brilliant!
-- The RIAA for -- well, do I have to say?

The Less Is Manure Award
This is for the worst overall idea in music media.
The nominees are:
-- Clear Channel for getting everyone's hopes up that they were going to scale back to 650 stations while unsuccessfully getting shareholders to accept a modest premium for their devalued investment. Guess the shareholders didn't buy Clear Channel's idea of "Less Is More" to buy back their stock.
-- Clear Channel (again) for shouting "FIRE" in a crowded room or should I say shouting "WE PLAY TOO MANY COMMERCIALS" to an industry filled with advertisers and agencies. Yes, they could have cut their commercial loads and not made a big deal out of it, but would they really be Clear Channel if they had opted to do it that way. This could be the nominee to beat.
-- Apple and Steve Jobs for trying to sell enhanced audio on iTunes (for 30 cents more per download at that) as High Res audio. Their kidding, right? If not, maybe this is your winner.
-- The major TV networks for wanting to be YouTube so badly they are pimping out their programming online and trying to keep their content away from YouTube. Who is actually doing TV programming while the major nets are off being YouTube? HBO? Yes, HBO.
-- Google for trying to convince down-on-their-luck radio companies that selling ads as a commodity over the net is the future of radio sales while at the same time saying they're buying only excess inventory. If radio keeps this up, soon everything will be excess inventory that only Google will be able to sell.
-- The mobile phone companies for their feeble attempt to get into the content business. Perhaps they should concentrate on offering a connection that doesn't drop out, first. Doesn't anyone want to be in the business they are in?

The Less Is More Writing Award
The nominees are:
-- Well, there is only one. It's me -- Jerry Del Colliano for writing only one story a day instead of five pages as I used to do in Inside Radio and now offering it for free instead of $450 a year adding new meaning to the saying "you get what you pay for".

Now you choose the winners -- or should I say losers.

Hope you've had fun and are not too bent out of shape. We poked fun at everyone including me. So if you're offended, please listen to the senior senator from Arizona, John McCain and "lighten up".

We're all in the music & media business. After all, we could have to work for a living. On a bad day, it's all still good.

To email this post to a friend, click the email icon below

To receive my Monday post by email, subscribe below

Weekend Reader

Managing Radio By Losing Money

Now we know just how bad things were getting at CBS Radio when Joel Hollander presided over it.

David Hinckley in The New York Daily News Monday reported the figures based on BIA statistics. It isn't pretty.

Hollander's ill-conceived attempt at radio programming called "Jack" ("We play what we want") was supposed to replace the aging oldies station WCBS-FM. It was a bold move Hollander thought was urgent, but I think it said "panic".

CBS-FM had, according to Hinckley's article, slipped from about $40 million per year a few years earlier to $23.9 million when the mid-year shift to "Jack" took place.

Hollander's strategy fizzled.

The first full year of "Jack" only did $16.1 million.

Of course, if numbers don't lie, then neither does traditional radio wisdom. I guess Hollander wasn't blaming his sales team for the decline at CBS-FM -- just the fact that it was an oldies station. Some programming changes to make the oldies station younger were forced on the PD during its decline. Lots of analysts forget this, but program directors know the many pressures legendary PD Joe McCoy had to fight off. Back in 2002, for example, CBS-FM was playing 70's oldies on Saturday night. That departure must have been a hit with the many loyal listeners that liked the general mix of music.

That may have made the brain trust feel better but not the listeners. Ditto for the deemise of the longtime Sunday night doo-wop show.

Who made these decisions?

I call this management by interference. CBS caused the decline, then pronounced its best work dead and brought in "Jack" which failed.

$40 million down to $23.9 million down to $16.1 million.

And if you're looking for ratings, "Jack" is weak there, too.

So what was Howard Stern worth to CBS Radio when they failed to keep him from joining his old mentor Mel Karmazin at Sirius?

Can you say $50.8 million for WXRK's billing in 2005?

A year later and without Stern, but with a format and call letter change WXRK's replacement, WFNY billed $18.7 million -- a 60% decline. Think the afternoon show caused it? Nah.

CBS Mismanagement had a year's notice on the Stern departure and now we know why CEO Les Moonves kept Stern on the air while Stern turned his CBS show into a giant promo for his satellite gig.

That's a year of promos for Stern on satellite -- free promos!

CBS had no replacement even though they had a year to protect their franchise. David Lee Roth wasn't the answer. Ask a program director.

CBS still has no Stern replacement. And as a programming friend of mine said, "no program director would call a station Free FM". With management meddling it reminds me of what the vaudeville singer Jimmy Durante used to say at least when it comes to programming radio -- "everybody's tryin' to get into the act".

It gets worse.

Through mismanaging their morning talent Don Imus on WFAN, yet another day of reckoning is coming.

WFAN is a top biller -- fourth in the market at around $50 million a year. The morning show is usually a large chunk of the revenue. CBS has its work cut out for it just to match the Imus numbers when it settles in on a permanent replacement.

Imus destructed a few weeks back but only after his employer encouraged and rewarded him for being edgy all these years. It was Imus' fault. It was his mouth. No one made him open it. But CBS created the situation and ultimately bailed on him (and the revenue) when the advertisers threatened to bolt.

They may leave anyway without Imus. But what's CBS to do -- manage its talent? Common!

CBS all-news WINS is second in the New York market at almost $60 million. You can't find fault with that, can you?

Well, some people can.

More than one able program director thinks commercials, promos and features is not an all-news station, but if you're new CBS President Dan Mason right now you're going to leave well enough alone.

Did I mention that WINS listeners are ancient? I guess news of the 70's on Saturday night wouldn't work, would it?

By the way, Clear Channel comes out looking the best in New York with its perennial top performer "Lite" WLTW adult contemporary format. It's cheaper to run. A money machine that tops the market with $65.6 million and the most listeners.

So there you have it, managing by losing money in New York city CBS-style.

But it's not just CBS. In radio markets all over the country mismanagement is helping to accelerate the decline of the medium, under siege by new technology and a next generation that radio let get away without much of a fight.

As long as radio executives are playing program director, sales staffs are being cut and promotional budgets are held hostage to pleasing the shareholders' need for an extra penny of profit each quarter expect to see more declines in radio revenue.

Can you see why I am not thrilled with Google's AdSense? When Clear Channel agreed to give up a percentage of its prime commercial inventory (not the unsold kind) for bid on the web, I said this isn't the answer. Find another Howard Stern and you could hire a bunch of vacuum cleaner salesmen to take orders.

You need a sound product before you have sound sales.

That always was, always is and always will be the mantra of successful and profitable radio.

Radio mangers playing PD should be left for weekends -- on their iPods.

Tomorrow: My first annual "Lowry" nominees for those who embody less is more in every facet of radio. To get it, insert your email address below.

Enter your email address

Then check for a FeedBurner email to confirm:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Thursday Reader

Another Black Eye For CBS Radio

What kind of welcome is this for Dan Mason as he takes over the helm at CBS Radio?

Free FM - WFNY, New York -- talkers JV and Elvis Duran conducted a prank call on-air directed at employees of a Chinese restaurant that included ethnic slurs and sexual slurs. The call was conducted and aired on April 5 and -- believe it or not -- was rebroadcast last Thursday.

They were finally suspended indefinitely without pay.

The Asian community is up in arms. They want their heads. Activist Vicki Shu Smolin told The New York Times "If they don't fire the D.J.'s it will be a double standard". The dreaded boycott of advertisers is planned.

I'm not going to repeat the insults here. You're free to choose whether you need to hear it on the link below.



Yes, it's CBS again.

CBS either hires the dumbest on-air talent or CBS hires the dumbest management or both. Look, Dan Mason is no fool, but he inherited this mess. He's trying to turn around the radio group not put fires out. I'm betting he'll make this situation right.

Still, what is it with the radio industry? I know it's trending downward but does it have to accelerate that decline?

Does the industry have to fight for its right to free speech based on boneheads? That gets old after Imus, Imus imitators, Rush Limbaugh, Neil Boortz, Michael Savage and numerous other serial offenders.

I thought CBS CEO Les Moonves no sooner got finished with his dramatic Imus mea culpa when now this happens.

Doesn't radio "talent" get it?

Are there no consequences for them when they go over the line? It would seem that way. CBS has not recovered from losing shock talker Howard Stern to Sirius Satellite Radio, then Imus. Are they playing defense in the name of slumping revenues?

Let me see if I can offer some unwanted advice.

How about empowering your program directors to hire the talent, ride herd on the talent and, yes, fire the talent if they go too far in offending the sensibilities of their communities.

And if the PDs don't?

Fire them.

This is not a new concept. It actually was the way it was before consolidation -- way before. There were consequences for dumb mistakes -- loss of your job. My friends in the radio industry can testify that we program directors had a healthy respect for -- hell, feared -- several things.

The FCC -- loss of license or a fine.

The boss -- loss of confidence or the job -- mine!

The future -- loss of reputation that might prevent us from being gainfully employed on the people's airwaves somewhere else.

So, tighten up while you still can 'cause you'll never be here again -- if you continue to cross over the line of good taste in the name of free speech or commerce.

I've said this all along.

This is a management issue -- not a First Amendment issue.

It's about competence and consequences for bad decisions.

Until radio gets off of this negative track of winning (ratings) through intimidation, it has no chance to be part of the digital future -- where the younger audience is migrating and where the future lives.

Personal note: My apologies to the eloquent reader who sent this to me regarding the spate of Imus stories recently:
"Ask yourself why YOU have done so many stories on Imus, when there are so many more deserving stories to cover in the media. So many less sensational stories. Rather than cover more pedestrian issues in the media, you choose to use your blog for an endless stream of negativity. Why? Because it provokes passion and reaction.

Take a page from your own blog. Leave the easy subjects like Imus and VA Tech alone and come up with more creative subjects. See if you can".
I have failed you again. I just feel that it's not the provocative nature of the morning abuse stories that interests me, it's the mismanagement angle. Forgive me for one more rant.
---
My First Annual Lowry Awards recognizing individuals and companies that embody the concept of Less if More is coming before the week is out and a separate post on managing radio by losing money is on tap for tomorrow. Sign up below to guarantee delivery (then check your email filter and be sure to confirm).

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Wednesday Reader

None Is More

You've got to hand it to Clear Channel. They never give up.

After years of touting "Less Is More" to the advertising community (or should we say to their shareholders), they've now come up with a another new idea.

None is More.

No commercials 24 hours a day.

KZPS, Dallas is running no 30's, no 60's -- not even tens.

No "blinks" -- another Clear Channel innovation.

They call their latest brainchild integration because one sponsor gets to buy the entire hour and gets a mention at the top of the hour then the djs give the sponsor about two minutes of casual mentions during the hour's music programming. Each advertiser owns their category. The New York Times described how this concept would work for Southwest Airlines -- one of KZPS' first sponsors:
"You know, the best way to get down to Austin for South by Southwest music festival is Southwest Airlines. They have tons of flights. It's the way I travel".
Wait just a minute here!

Let's take time out from making money to examine how Clear Channel is neutering the dj again (remember virtual voice tracking?) by reducing him or her to a pitchman who gives their own recommendations and probably doesn't even get paid for the endorsement.

Does anyone remember personalities?

Okay, forget personalities. How about just good "More Music" Drake-style jocks.

This stinks.

I guess Lowry Mays really meant it when he was quoted in the press as saying Clear Channel's job is to sell products because it sure as hell isn't going to be entertaining people -- not with this misguided idea.

The next generation has to be laughing out loud. Radio lost them during its obsession with consolidation and Wall Street. Surely, Clear Channel doesn't think going "no commercials" while still doing commercials and phonying up the programming is going to work.

Don't call me Surely -- as they say in Airplane.

Let me get this right.

No commercials. And yet commercials. If it wasn't Clear Channel I'd think this was double talk (ha ha).

Jocks who aren't running spots are pimping themselves out by dropping in mentions that are really tantamount to commercials and in the process probably not getting talent fees for their endorsements.

Call the union rep.

If you think this is all lunacy, then consider this.

In my work with the next generation at USC it has become apparent to me that Gen Y does not hate commercials. I was startled to discover this because even though I am a professor, I am a recovering radio guy which means we all know everything there is to know about the future radio listener. Except we'd be wrong.

They like commercials -- in moderation but they don't like what's in the commercials -- the stuff ad agencies think is funny or that spot by the tongue-tied son of the owner of the largest car dealer in your market.

And by like commercials I mean content that speaks to them.

And by moderation they tell me four or six spots an hour -- and get this -- one at a time not in clusters. They hate clusters. Bill Drake was right.

In other words None Is More is not necessary.

They'll listen to your commercials if you cut them back to six an hour (don't care if they are 30's, 60's or 10's) and if they are not nonsensical idiotic radio commercials.

So Clear Channel has done it again -- solved a problem that doesn't need solving.

What needs solving is what Cox and a few other terrestrial operators are doing -- cutting spot loads with plans to reduce them further, pressuring inventory so prices can come up and doing it all without a peep out of them.

Talk Is Cheap.

Actions Speak Louder Than Words.

One of these things is not like the other one.

So, don't get all excited. I'm betting the KZPS experiment is not going to work. They may tell us it's working, but you know.

Some nay sayers will say, "well, you just don't like Clear Channel and won't give None Is More a chance".

Not true.

I love Clear Channel. Without them I wouldn't have the ability to be teaching right now and speaking my mind without having to sell subscriptions.

None Is More is simply a bad idea.

Sorry.

--
My First Annual Lowry Awards recognizing individuals and companies who embody the concept of Less if More is coming this week. You've never seen awards like this before. Sign up below to guarantee delivery (then check your email filter and be sure to confirm).

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Is Imus The Only One Who Is Sorry?

Say what you want about Don Imus, but he apologized until he couldn't say it anymore and paid the price for his bonehead comments about the women of the Rutgers basketball team. He actually left the industry with his head up -- not down. He was plastered by the news media, competitors and the increasingly powerful minority groups who wanted his head.

They got it.

Now, where are they?

Augusta radio personality Austin Rhodes repeated the Imus slur last week. The NAACP is after him but he is still gainfully employed. Advertisers are still advertising.

Get a load what Rush Limbaugh got away with just last week:

"If this Virginia Tech shooter had an ideology, what do you think it was? This guy had to be a liberal. You start railing against the rich and all this other -- this guy's a liberal. He was turned into a liberal somewhere along the line. So it's a liberal that committed this act. Now, the drive-bys will read on a website that I'm attacking liberalism by comparing this guy to them. That's exactly what they do every day, ladies and gentlemen. I'm just pointing out a fact. I am making no extrapolation; I'm just pointing it out.

They try -- whenever -- I can tell you from the history of this program, starting way back in the early '90s, when there was any kind of an incident, crime or what-have-you that attracted national attention, in the early days of this program, the drive-by media went out and they tried to connect the perpetrator to this program. They did everything they could. In fact, it went so far as Bill Clinton blaming me for influencing Timothy McVeigh to blow up the (Oklahoma City federal) building.

These are the people sponsoring lies and distortion for the purposes of dividing this country and creating hatred. These are the people that invented this kind of tactic, if you will."
Nobody has the guts to go after Rush -- as my friend, John Parikhal observed.

Not insulting enough?

Last Wednesday Opie & Anthony did an on-air reading of a play written by Virginia Tech mass murderer Cho Seung-Hui and then posted it on the Internet. This all happened on CBS-owned WFNY-FM, New York. You know, that CBS. The one operated by Les Moonves and presided over by Sumner Redstone who he was sure would do the right thing on the Imus issue.

Does anyone at CBS listen unless or until the advertising boycott begins?

If Don Imus said this, he would have been hoisted to a strong branch of a steady tree with a noose around his neck:
"When history of this event is written, we will have 25 students standing meekly waiting for this guy to execute them. Waiting for what. The government to save them."

Well, Neal Boortz said it.

Boortz was trying to boost his ratings on more than 150 stations. Oh, and he added Pat Benatar's "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" going into the commercial break.

Or Michael Savage, the evicted MSNBC homophobic host, took the racial angle on his radio show:

"..the only reason (Cho) was walkin' the streets was because liberal scum have for 30 years handcuffed the police and the people of this country and made us hostages in their drama".

Is that offensive enough to the families of the Virginia Tech students who lost their lives?

And yet holding my nose and bending over a toilet to throw up my guts, I agree with freedom of speech advocate, the community radio owner Bill O'Shaughnessy who said, "Censorship which results from corporate timidity in the face of intimidation or coercion is just as dangerous as the stifling of creative and artistic expression by government fiat, decree, sanction or regulation."

So what to do?

Let's start with equal justice for all -- if one blow-hard talker can sound like a racist windbag on the air, why can't all of them?

Next, let's add in the impossible dream -- that broadcasters would exercise responsibility to be sensitive to our glorious right to freedom of speech and consider it with the needs and sensitivities of their communities.

Finally, does anyone but Mr. O'Shaughnessy stand up for both our individual rights of freedom as well as the media's fiduciary responsibilities to the people listening over the airwaves?

So play, run and replay all the offensive video you want.

Scare the hell out of advertisers with threats of boycotts. No advertiser ever did one thing to advance the cause of free speech.

But remember this.

If you're wondering why traditional media is in trouble, look no further than its inability to balance the public's two greatest needs.

If you're wondering why the next generation -- the one abandoning radio and chopping TV into video clips - is moving on, it's not just about new technology. It's about lame programming and pandering to anything that will gain them ratings in their time of need.

I'd just as soon side with the next generation on this one -- give me the Internet, get me WiFi so I can stream the world wherever I go. Let me click here and there for what I want to see, hear or read.

That kind of democracy will preserve free speech while deleting the likes of the pandering class -- talk radio hosts.

You've got it coming, radio.

You, too, TV.

You're going down with the ship. Mark my words.

---
If you'd like to read my thoughts on Clear Channel's new commercial-free radio station in Dallas and see the nominees for my First Annual Lowry Awards recognizing individuals and companies who embody the concept of Less if More -- both scheduled to run this week -- sign up below.


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


News Boos

News organizations are driving away the next generation.

The tragedy at Virginia Tech was only a few hours old – there was pandemonium, the bodies had not even been identified and what did our overly opportunistic news media give us?

A story of their own making – could the deaths have been prevented by Virginia Tech.

A casual viewer or listener might think that their favorite cable station or radio outlet was only trying to add perspective to the story.

But to me, they were actually following their instincts – to give the story legs.

Talk to young people about the coverage and they hold their noses when they respond.

Virginia Tech students interviewed on TV immediately after the incident were pushed with aggressive reporting on more than one outlet about whether their school could have done more to protect them given the time delay between the first shooting and the second. Most resisted going there.

A legitimate question, not a holy jihad, however.

And while some families of the victims were immediately calling for the ouster of the school president (another legitimate news angle), the audience saw that mass of humanity give him a standing ovation at the memorial ceremony.

I was on campus that day with my friend, the consultant Bill Tanner who was nice enough to work with a couple of my classes.

We followed the death toll and gory details with Bill’s Blackberry. When we walked into the first class the students already knew what happened even though events were just unfolding. They didn’t get their news from CNN or radio.

They have mobile devices, too.

Bill and I stayed updated along with the students through this class and another. Obviously, it was a story they had great interest in.

On the way from one class to another, we paused for a moment in front of a TV screen airing CNN. I said paused by the screen because we commented on the look of news instead of the substance.

Fox has blondes. CNN brunettes.

We moved along and stayed informed without traditional media.

Later the next day Bill sent me this audio – the intro to the CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite.

No lasers, no catchy phrases, no hype – the news.

Now castigate us if you want about returning to the 60’s. We’re not saying that.

When all-news stations are cluttered with garden reports instead of news (because garden reports can find sponsors) you’ve given the Internet another reason to exist.

To report the news for people who actually want the news.

And, when NBC had its 15 minutes of fame on this story as the murderer sent video in a package to them exclusively, NBC went right ahead and played the video over and over on the network and MSNBC.

Newspapers printed pictures of the gunman with pistols pointed at the camera on their front pages.

Few, if any, news outfits showed restraint.

True, this video is also legitimate news, but replaying it endlessly is not necessary. In fact, it gives the murderer his final goodbye wish but obviously doesn't allow the 32 victims their chance to say goodbye.

Which brings me back to the next generation.

My students revere NPR. The other day when I asked if they listened to radio, only three out of 52 students said yes. When I asked, “what about NPR or KCRW?” almost all hands went up. One student clarifying things by adding, “I didn’t know NPR was radio”.

In the world of the next generation, they can go to YouTube and see the killer (if they want to) and hear his rant. They also don’t have to. And they have the option of watching just once and not seeing it over and over again as TV likes to do. You could argue that they can turn off their TV's. Do you really want to argue that point with this generation?

In the world of the next generation, they seek the news and get several versions of stories they are interested in before most TV news junkies can get one or two looks at the story.

In the world of the next generation, they can exercise the responsibility that traditional news organizations are not exercising. They have control. They are defacto editors.

The next generation doesn’t have “Uncle Walter” but it also doesn’t have to put up with news from the left or news from the right. Seek and they shall find NPR, news online, blogs and mobile updates.

The next generation can teach traditional media a thing or two.

First, the facts – just the facts.

Second, the conspiracy theories and pseudo-investigative reporting can be accessed in the blogisphere not on almost everyone's hard news coverage.

Ironically, news shops are caught in the same bind as the employers of talkers like Don Imus – they need edgy, racy material to get ratings. If they go too far, they can always apologize and/or fire people.

But this time they’ve gone too far.

They’ve alienated the good sense of the viewing public not to mention the families of the Virginia Tech victims.

They’ve even become the story. CNN by mid-morning Thursday rolled out Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz to address the topic (The WaPost also had the gunman, weapons drawn, on its front page).

I get the sense that these are the last years of an indispensable traditional media – and with it, news coverage we have come to know as "breaking news". The only thing they are breaking is the standards and practices that served the TV news business so well during Edward R. Murrow's day and many decades after that.

But not now.

They’re lost. They’re injured and desperate for ratings and revenue.

But in the end, we can see a glimpse of the future where a new generation literally has access to everything in the world on the Internet and their mobile devices and they become the filters.

They can decide which trusted sources to find and blend the news for them. Drudge, MSNBC or Huffington Post, for example.

They can see it video graphically or skip it. They can hear it when they want to hear it. Read it when they want to read it. See it in action when they want video – all on one device. After all, the next generation wants what it wants when it wants it.

New technology enabled this brash new generation, but the mistakes of the establishment are what fuels the growth of the new news industry where everyone is the ultimate editor and no one has to put up with shoddy reporting without their permission.

Traditional news media is acting irresponsibly – as CBS and MSNBC were in employing and rewarding Don Imus. As those who would curtail freedom of speech are doing almost every chance they get.

Censorship is not necessary.

Freedom of expression should be valued.

It’s broadcasting in the public interest that this is all about or to put it into one word – responsibility.

If you would like these posts sent to your mailbox in the morning, enter your email address in the "email Subscriptions Box" in the right hand column then confirm via an email that will be sent to you by Feed Burner. It's Free. Cancel anytime.

Record Labels – Blinded By The Light

By Steve Meyer, Inside Music Media™ Contributor
"These people are not the enemy." - Wilco Manager, Tony Margherita.
Wilco's new album 'Blue Sky', not scheduled for release until May, is already being downloaded online (as have all their albums since 'Yankee, Hotel, Foxtrot') and their manager views it all rationally. He realizes that people online are not his adversaries and has said, " They want to participate. They're the backbone of what we all do."

Of course he's absolutely right.

He understands that what's happening online isn't going to stop and he also realizes how powerful an ally the Internet can be. Wilco fans are active music people and the Internet has created a whole new environment for them to discover new music then eventually buy it.

Despite the fact that Wilco's CD, 'Yankee Hotel Foxtrot' was leaked online and downloaded countless times, it sold more than 440,000 copies at retail -- more than double the group's sales on previous CDs.

It also created a legion of fans that wanted to see Wilco live when they toured, and based on comments I've read at various websites. Those that saw the group are now confirmed fans.

The result?

Now Wilco has a stronger touring base and that base grows with each subsequent release.

The major labels will argue Wilco is an exception. That the Internet has proliferated piracy via downloading/file-sharing, and that for every Wilco there are too many other acts being hurt. While that may or may not be true (and there is plenty of data to refute the labels' argument), the issue at hand is the Internet, and
its growing preference as a media of choice by millions.

At the same time,online file-sharing isn't going away despite all the lawsuits filed by the RIAA here and IFPI abroad.

All the lawsuits the industry and RIAA wage each month against a few hundred downloaders are becoming as meaningful as Don Quixote's attacking windmills. While Quixote was obsessed with chivalrous ideals, the labels are obsessed with keeping market shares from getting smaller. Because of his over zealous imagination, Quixote was blinded from reality and attacked windmills thinking they were enemy giants.

Maybe the RIAA and labels can learn something from Don. Don't get blinded by what you think is reality. The enemies aren't the people online looking for music or even downloading.

This is the new, and next, generation of music lovers. If you want them to ever get into the habit of buying music, create strategies to lure them into your fold instead of pushing them away.

If all the websites around the world offering free downloads could be eliminated tomorrow, it wouldn't stop people from burning multiple copies of
CDs.

If all the websites around the world offering free downloads could be eliminated tomorrow, it wouldn't change the fact that CD prices are still too high.

If all the websites around the world offering free downloads could be eliminated tomorrow, it wouldn't mean that all the money being spent on video games, DVDs, movies, and other recreational diversions would be redirected to improve retail music sales.

If the industry attacks these problems head on, one by one, it will do itself a greater service than all the lawsuits it could ever file.

I think everyone realizes the industry is not in good shape and not nearly as healthy as it should be. The business has changed forever. But there is no reason it can't be revitalized with new approaches and new ways of thinking. Unfortunately, as of this moment, the labels haven't developed new approaches or new ways of thinking.

What permeates the industry is fear.

Fear that the industry will cease to exist as technology marches forward. Those that think that way contribute to the industry's stagnation and will be responsible for its downfall.

Common sense has been defined as the quality of judgment necessary to know the simplest of truths. Nowadays, simple truths are sighted about as often as Osama Bin Laden.

Common sense should now dictate emphatically that it's time for the powers that be in the industry to wake up and smell the designer coffee that they are paying $3.00 or more for at Starbucks and drink while on their way to work wondering whether there will be a job for them at week's end.

Music is a powerful force in all our lives.

It really doesn't have any enemies.

It has power to bring people together, unite people of different races, countries, religions, and it can reach out to us on the most personal and emotional levels. The industry needs to remember that at all times and focus on the BIG picture, survival in the future.

Attacking "windmills" isn't the answer.

At least one band, Wilco, and their manager, have the courage to speak that simple truth.

Steve Meyer is one of the music industry's top professionals and publisher of the new media newsletter DISC & DAT.

If you would like these posts sent to your mailbox in the morning, enter your email address in the "email Subscriptions Box" in the right hand column then confirm via an email that will be sent to you by Feed Burner. It's Free. Cancel anytime.

Two Evil Empires

Clear Channel and Google are perfect together.

Clear Channel, the media giant that gave consolidation a bloody nose is teaming up with Google, the Internet monster that is aiming to give its competitors a bloody nose.

Forgive me, but this sounds like two evil empires working together to further their need to dominate the media business.

Clear Channel hasn't been able to convince its shareholders that they should pay a low ball price to get their approval to sell and go private, but it was able to announce a deal with kindred spirit Google to give up high quality radio inventory over the next three years -- all 30 second spots (60's and 10's come later) on about 675 stations -- the ones that will be retained if the shareholders say yes. That's a big win for Google the other company that has its eyes on domination.

These two conglomerates are starting to look alike.

Google may be flirting with antitrust action in its $3.1 billion purchase to acquire online ad server DoubleClick, another part of its take over the world strategy and a key player in the AdSense strategy.

Microsoft, no stranger to antitrust issues, is screaming bloody murder. Google already owns Dmarc, an enabling company to allow its plan to sell radio advertising to the great unwashed.

What a deal!

Businesses that don't already advertise on radio (wink, wink) go to Google and pick their radio markets and then click and pay. It's all so simple.

Now imagine a real radio salesperson -- you know, the kind that has a relationship with an advertiser -- walking in and saying, "how'd you like to buy some radio ads on my stations, but you can't choose which stations."

How fast would their sorry butts be shown the door.

Sounds like a concept that an Internet company would think up.

If so, why is a radio company -- Clear Channel -- going along with it?

My theory is that most radio companies see the handwriting on the wall. Like their brethren in the record business the vultures are circling overhead. These companies must be desperate to get revenue if they are selling prime inventory as a commodity and soft peddling the lack of relationships in the deal.

Easy come.

And you know what's next.

Easy go.

It is sad to see radio reduced to having to build a model that includes "no relationship" selling.

But these two giants deserve each other. Their eyes are bigger than their sense of responsibility. I don't want to sound cosmic like Shirley MacLaine here, but even hockey players shake hands after they knock each others teeth out. These Evil Empires are looking to put the hurt on traditional media companies and isn't Clear Channel a traditional media company?

Oh, well, maybe not.

I've heard of non-traditional revenue but this is ridiculous.

Let me spell it out.

Radio was a wonderful and abundant free cash flow business.

Who is buying that the Google radio advertisers are not the ones radio companies currently sell to? If Clear Channel could sell all its inventory without a sales force why am I kind of believing that they would?

So, enjoy as the two mega companies slice and dice their competitors and come up with half-cocked ideas for saving radio.

Radio should embrace technology.

Radio should be local.

Radio should be diverse.

Radio should sell advertising to people. Smart people who buy specific stations, not who play Russian Roulette among a handful of stations in each market.

And remember, if an advertiser can easily click and buy, then they can easily click and say, bye bye.

The Mess At CBS

Some of the brightest programming minds in the glory days of radio who were used and abused by consolidation could be having the last laugh right now about how they saw this embarrassing decline in radio coming.

But it's not funny.

The latest bump in what has become a rocky road for terrestrial radio is the decline of the morning show.

Morning shows can represent 40% or more of a stations total revenues. The morning show still makes the station.

So you would think with the stakes that high these Einsteins at consolidated radio would have a Plan B in case one of their franchise hosts (God forbid) died, left for the competition or even said a racial slur on the air.

They should, but they don't.

When Howard Stern left for Sirius he gave about a year's notice. CBS CEO Les Moonves didn't want to take him off the air although Stern was chomping at the bit to go to Sirius. Stern was the franchise for many of their stations and yet CBS Radio still couldn't come up with Plan B when Stern bolted for Sirius. Even today, CBS hasn't made up for the lost Stern revenue.

When Don Imus decided to end his career, his CBS-owned station WFAN, New York, didn't have a backup plan. Imagine that? A 66-year old morning host who tends to get controversial and no Plan B.

Did I mention that the morning show makes the payroll, makes the profit, makes the money that makes the consolidators beloved shareholders happy?

WCBS-FM, the legendary New York oldies station, was blown up leaving $30 plus million out there on the street and the replacement Jack ("We play what we want") format was put together in less than 30 days. New Yorkers remain unimpressed. Hopefully, new CBS Radio President Dan Mason brings back WCBS-FM as the beloved oldies station it was.

A CBS Chicago oldies station was put to sleep when headquarters decided that a 30-day wonder format could replace the billing.

CBS thought that Jack got off to a promising start in Los Angeles and the Hollander regime moved dangerously to install it elsewhere including on its New York flagship. Was this any way to run a radio group?

CBS has made a lot of mistakes and it is not alone. But CBS has been mismanaged, true. Still, other groups have no Plan B for the loss of key talent representing critical station revenue.

No minor league for bringing up new talent.

No backup plan in case things go seriously wrong as they tend to do from time to time.

You can blame consolidation and it's worth doing that because consolidation hasn't helped. How can you have a minor league to develop air talent for tomorrow's morning shows when you're busy bragging about the cost-savings of virtual voice tracking.

Existing talent has been mismanaged and over priced in some cases.

I always wondered why so many radio stations played music in the morning and didn't have a personality on the air. Now I know. Many of those stations never had a Plan A let alone a Plan B.

It's as if a baseball team put eight players on the field but didn't have a pitcher.

Remember, you can't blame iPods for this lack of vision. You can't blame satellite radio. They have no backup plan either. You can only blame the suits who are running today's consolidated radio groups.

With a future that includes the next generation that doesn't even like to listen to radio, to paraphrase the comedy team Laurel and Hardy, "this is a fine mess you've gotten us into, Lowry".

In fairness, if we've learned anything in the past two weeks it is that CBS is second to no one -- not even Clear Channel -- for mismanaging radio stations.

You'd think those on Capitol Hill concerned with the loss of local radio would take notice of the monster they have created -- an industry of two major players, both proven by shareholder value and other more subjective means -- not to be able to run competitive radio stations.

Say, I've got an idea.

Run the stations like their individual, locally operated and managed radio signals.

The suits can still play corporate big guy and fire managers and stuff. But how about letting 1,110 + radio stations run as separate individual stations? Programming decided in the mark. Decisions made by the professionals you employ at each station. You can reward them with bonuses if they do well or fire them if they don't meet your expectations. This way you can keep your firing skills well-honed.

How can I say this delicately to top radio executives?

Just take yourself out of the radio business and let your local management do everything. You can still go to conventions, corporate meetings and speak to analysts on Wall Street. That's your core competency.

Let the professionals run the stations.

How do I know it will work to be convinced that the present way doesn't work.

Scroll up and start reading this post again.



Viacom-Lately To Decency

So, Viacom Is Going To Stop Rappers, Thugs And Whores.

The mega media corporation that owns Black Entertainment Network (BET) and MTV is not likely to solve the problem that the Don Imus firing has focused attention on because Viacom is part of the problem.

Don't believe me?

Turn on BET and see how much respect woman -- Black women -- are not getting from rappers who wiggle, waggle and gaggle all over the screen all hours of the day.

CBS was spun off as a separate company from Viacom although CEO Sumner Redstone still controls it -- after all, when he revealed that CBS CEO Les Moonves was going to do the right thing in the Imus mess we all got the feeling Redstone told Moonves what the right thing was.

Imus was fired.

CBS joined MSNBC owner NBC Universal in claiming the high ground and I wanted to get seriously sick.

Is anyone buying this?

Imus was wrong -- there I've said it again and again and again, but do you ever get the feeling that Don Imus' "nappy headed ho" comment may do more for the rap music culture than all the community leaders, religious folk and do-gooders like NBC and CBS have done up to this moment. How ironic.

Watch BET -- the company Viacom spent $3 billion to buy.

"Back That (Ass) Thang Up" by DJ Jubilee ought to get your attention. It played on BET and now resides on YouTube. It had 79,277 views as of this writing. I'll bet anyone over 30 isn't watching. Betcha a lot of kids under 20 were watching when it was a hit.



Objectification of women. Bare naked ladies -- and I don't mean the group. Insulting lyrics. Demeaning gestures. Disrespectful portrayals of women and I'm just getting warmed up. Seriously, turn on BET and you'll see what artful dodgers CBS and NBC are in this post-Imus world.

Imus was an idiot. He said it and then put the noose around his own neck. CBS and NBC were happy to tighten it for him. But even those impressive young ladies of the Rutgers basketball team forgave Don Imus and so will the general public eventually. I'll bet when (I didn't say if) Imus returns in radio syndication, he'll be a hot ticket. He's serving his time right now. He'll be paroled by the public and he'll be back on the air.

The hypocrisy of media America is more troubling.

Imus was sorry.

CBS and NBC are not sorry because their motives and actions contradict their rhetoric.

They just act like they are talking about how they heard their employees and are just being responsive to their desires on the Imus matter. That's funny, when does a media conglomerate listen to its employees?

For NBC its all about not losing advertisers. Every conglomerate hates a boycott.

For CBS they're so sorry (I'm being sarcastic) they continue to impart the culture of rappers, thugs and whores to their vast audience while talking out of the other side of their mouth about how terrible Don Imus was and how great they are for firing him.

Well, you've taken a step. A first step.

Now fire yourselves.

You are the ones broadcasting this rot on the public airwaves.

You
are the ones who incite these talk show hosts to take it right up to the edge all the time and then fire them when the heats on.

You are the ones who can't be trusted to walk away from the rap culture that is responsible for all this disrespect aimed at Black women.

Jesse Jackson has been trying to fight the lyric, rap culture demon in the Black culture for a long time but he has had more luck in one week getting a 66-year old talk show host fired than he has had revving up a movement to change things for the better.

There is an impossible task ahead as long as media conglomerates spew this rap culture to the public. There are issues of freedom of speech which I will address in another post, but what ever happened to responsibility?

Just because rappers are free to say and do what they want in this country doesn't mean that the owners of BET can't decide to establish some rules of engagement. Watch how quickly the music changes if the media magnates decide to set some standards.

So, CBS Radio -- the company that can't seem to keep a morning show -- is paying the price for a knuckle-headed comment that also begged the question -- how do terms like nappy headed hos get into our vocabulary.

Go Google nappy headed hos.

Go to your favorite online music site and search for "nappy headed hos". Type in the demeaning comment of your choice and see what music comes up. You don't have enough hours to see how deep this problem goes.

CBS has been a bumbling company. The radio division is now ready for its new leader Dan Mason who has integrity and will clean that place up.

MSNBC is so wonderful. I know this because they told us so. Yet parent company NBC Universal lives in a glass house and its time for some housecleaning.

Who would have thought that old Don Imus would be the one to light a fire under a movement to show decency toward Black women when he opened his big mouth?

The Viacom-latelies in the media business are about to put on a clinic of spin doctoring and don't do as I do, do as I say.

The media moguls are the enemy.

And it may take Imus' second comeback to hold them up to the public scrutiny they hope they can elude but so richly deserve.

It ain't over until the Black lady stops gyrating her butt while a rapper sings about something other than whores.

---
New York Times columnist Frank Rich, who benefited from guesting on Imus In The Morning writes this piece in the Sunday Times -- Everybody Hates Don Imus

Imus -- Lessons Learned

Now that CBS has pulled the trigger and fired Don Imus, the story can fade out of the headlines and Anna Nicole Smith can return to its proper place in America's new flow.

It's over.

Now, the lessons:

First, about media companies and the "right thing":

Don't underestimate the power of spineless media and advertising executives who got caught in the controversy they helped to create. They're on your side one day and against you the next. I would have been more impressed if MSNBC was so outraged by Imus' remarks that they fired him on the spot. Same for CBS. Not days later when the heat was being turned up. Then perhaps they'd have some credibility when they talk about their own integrity and doing the right thing.

Lesson: The sooner you do the right thing, it's the right thing to do.

A lesson about apologizing:

When you make a mistake, admit it quickly and emphatically as Dale Carnegie used to say. Imus was slow in apologizing and equivocal in wiggling out of trouble (introducing the double standard with hip-hop artists).

No one apologized soon enough.

The apology should have happened within seconds of being utter by Imus on the air. If he had done so, NBC and CBS might have been able to stand by their man longer.

About special interest groups:

Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have always been forces to reckon with, but now they are superstar status. They got Imus fired and did it with surgical precision. Sharpton even got Imus to submit to his "courtroom" on his terms and frame the debate on the Sharpton radio show.

They were on the right side in the Imus case.

They were on the wrong side in the Duke rape case.

Lesson: even activist leaders can be wrong.

About freedom of speech:

One of my readers asked if the same thing would have happened if Imus was on satellite radio. I believe it would have assuming the satellite channel had enough listeners to be outraged. All it takes is one, but a million and a half is more damaging. Terrestrial radio has gotten itself in a pickle. Between the FCC, mismanagement by the media companies and an increase in power of activist groups, talk radio will be changing.

To quote Al Sharpton: "It is our feeling that this is only the beginning. We must have a broad discussion on what is permitted and not permitted in terms of the airwaves."

You asked for it!

Lesson: don't think for one minute that every radio talker is now intimidated and will watch what he or she says on the air. This is good if it prevents a repeat of the Rutgers slurs and bad if it inhibits free and diverse expression of thought.

About the next generation and Imus:

They could care less.

Imus, Stern and the others are great examples of what the next generation doesn't want to listen to on the radio. Most of my students think Imus was both right and wrong. Wrong in attacking the Rutgers women's basketball team and right that he was being held to a double standard. And they're damn glad they own iPods so they don't have to listen to attack radio.

About comebacks:

The entertainment business loves comebacks. Imus has had at least one after he left New York and returned to his Cleveland roots.

Imus is done, finished, through.

For now.

He'll be back.

Hey, Joel Hollander is out of work the same time Imus is. They go way back. Who knows, an Imus return by a syndication company other than Westwood One could make a lot of affiliates happy. But it's a long road back to the success Imus just squandered. He's going to pay for this with his career and reputation. He won't want it to end like this. The new Don Imus is only a few promos away -- in time.

Lesson: careers like life are like roller coasters. It's all about how you ride the ups and downs.

The future of radio:

I've been asked by reporters how does the Imus debacle affect the future of radio.

Well, it doesn't.

It affects CBS because it lost Howard Stern's morning advertising and hasn't fully replaced it even to this day -- now $15-20 million lost on WFAN. But think on the bright side: it gives CBS CEO Les Moonves something else to tell analysts about if he reports another bad quarter. MSNBC was seeing higher ratings for Imus In The Morning but it is not hurt financially.

The old listeners will be irked when they can't hear Imus, but that's it.

The advertisers -- well, they're here today and gone to someone else's show tomorrow.

What a mess.

What an embarrassment.

How unnecessary.

The next generation of listeners that doesn't really like attack radio shows is not being served by terrestrial radio. Imus doesn't matter to them. They're waiting for universal WiFi and constant Internet connectivity. WiFi capability is coming to some autos next year.

Activists are basking in their glory -- a swift, decisive victory for them,

NBC and CBS are spinning out of control for the PR high ground.

Consolidators are back to business as usual -- create controversy and help us sell advertising until you go too far and then we bail out.

The next generation continues to tune radio out as radio has tuned them out.

What we have here is a failure to communicate and we're all in the communication business.

How tragic, indeed.

To get the bad taste out of your mouth, read this article written by TV talk show host Dick Cavett -- Imus In The Hornet's Nest.

And Time -- The Imus Fallout -- Who Can Say What?

Imus -- Truth AND Consequences

NBC News pulled the plug on Don Imus' Imus In The Morning TV simulcast of his CBS radio show yesterday putting an end to our long national agony -- having to listen to sanctimonious and scared media companies and advertisers try to act like Mother Teresa.

NBC -- the same multimedia company that was even later than Imus in recognizing that it had a problem.

The same NBC that only a few days earlier issued a two week suspension of Imus' show as appropriate punishment. Now, NBC News President Steve Capus was trying to pass off NBC's concern for its internal family and reputation as the reason they fired Imus.

I saw Jesse Jackson on "Countdown With Keith Olbermann" on MSNBC last night and he didn't seem as impressed as Olbermann was with his boss, Capus. The Reverend Jackson rightfully took on the issue of lyrics in music, not hiring enough minorities and other things. Jackson said if a black person worked along with Imus on his show the remark may never have happened.

One of my readers blamed the advertisers:
"The REAL hypocrisy is from the advertisers. They're the ones who support his show, they're the ones who demand the ratings, and now they're the ones deserting him for bad publicity".
This situation has brought out the worst in the entire industry starting with Imus' insulting, hurtful and racially charged comments.

By the way, it seems people talking on this subject can't miss an opportunity to repeat the racial slurs over and over. We heard it. We got it. Just call them racial slurs instead of using Imus' comments to further your own agenda. Someone think of the women on the Rutgers basketball team. Your making them objects and not people.

But I'm thinking that the truth is hard to come by and the consequences are either in the hands of spineless media and advertising execs or the perpetrator himself. Neither should he acceptable.

So, it's time to play Truth AND Consequences.

Truth: Don Imus hurt those young women, Rutgers and the black community. He's apologizing like crazy, but advertisers and media execs are running for the shelter of their mother's little helper -- their spin doctors.

Consequenc: Let the women of the Rutgers basketball team decide Imus' fate. If Don Imus is truly sorry he knows there will be a price to pay. He's gone over the line before. He doesn't have an automatic right to get another chance. After he meets with the women, if they want his head, he should resign. If they are in the mood to forgive, he should be given another chance. The trouble with our society today is that we head for rehab when we've done a destructive act as if that solves everything. If Imus is really sorry, ask the women for forgiveness and abide by their wishes.

Truth: Imus is also right -- black rap artists get away with degrading women -- particularly black women and companies like Viacom's BET play the videos. They're not alone. My students tell me this Nelly video called Tip Drill is even played in the afternoon when kids are watching. Be warned: this video shows a lot of naked women and ends with a credit card getting swiped between the cheeks of a black woman's behind. And I'm linking to a less explicit version of the song! If you won't take my word for it, see how much of you can take. Imus is using this hypocrisy as a pseudo defense for his bad behavior and that is wrong. But he's right about the double standard.

Consequence: All you activists -- once you succeed at getting Imus fired at CBS Radio, ramp up your efforts to raise the consciousness of all people who would degrade women.

Truth: Free speech is at issue once again. Rev. Jackson says it's not about free speech -- it's about decent speech. But with the FCC rearing its ugly and useless head again and the outrage turning to how to prevent these incidents by in effect censoring artists and performers, be very afraid.

Consequence: We have to put up with a lot of things we don't like to live in a free society. The KKK gets permits to rally all over the country. What it represents is odious and yet they are permitted the right to speak. Spend more time holding the big money media magnates responsible. They are the problem. They employ and reward and encourage the type of behavior you see on TV, in music videos and on radio. They are the bosses. The buck stops with them. You don't need censorship. They need to be more responsible and not send mixed messages. When I started in radio, we (performers, programmers) were afraid of the FCC and were afraid of running afoul of our employers. Who is afraid of CBS or NBC?

Truth: There is a free pass for Rush Limbaugh and right wing talk show hosts. Limbaugh can call Barak Obama a "Hafrican American" and its business as usual. Ann Coulter can go on the very air Al Sharpton sees as sacred because it is regulated and can spew her venom about gays and others.

Consequence: While you're cleaning the house of Imus, take Limbaugh with you. You don't dare, do you? Radio in particular has seen better times. Yeah, yeah -- consolidation sucks. It hasn't helped. But what passes for radio talent these days is disgraceful. And I have news for you. Enjoy these "brilliant" talkers all you want, but the next generation -- the young people I teach and spend a lot of time with -- are not interested in them or in radio. My friend Walt Sabo and other good programmers have invented talk for modern stations and have done so responsibly. Radio -- find your way. Look to your roots and the proven talent who can elevate what you're putting on the air.

CBS has a lot at stake in this Imus mess. Westwood One needs the morning show to syndicate to stations. That's their business. The New York Times says Imus generates $20 million on CBS' WFAN in New York. I don't know if Les Moonves will cave to the pressure to fire Imus but he has more money on the line than MSNBC had. Didn't he lose a ton of money when Howard Stern bolted to satellite radio? Isn't CBS still not yet recovering from the Stern loss?

But these guys need to look in the mirror. They are the problem. They employ these edgy talkers. They are the ones who are talking out of both sides of their mouth.

This entire Imus mess sickens me and a lot of us who love this industry.

Have we sunk to the level of hurling racial slurs at impressive young women?

Have the media conglomerates lost control or are they dictating the conditions that allow a serial repeater like Imus to offend once again?

Can't we do better than this?

The Hypocrisy Surrounding Imus

Don Imus is the creation of radio management.

How do I know that?

There would be no Imus In The Morning if various radio executives and companies over the years did not hire him, fire him, promote him, syndicate him and pay him beyond his wildest dreams.

Imus is edgy and employers like edgy.

Until...

Well, until their creation goes over the edge.

Incidents like the one Imus had with the Rutgers basketball team (do I really need to repeat his racial slur here?) could only happen because his employers want him to be on the cutting edge. It's okay when Don Imus slices and dices a politician or a public figure. That's the stuff headlines -- and thus, ratings are made of.

But when he goes too far -- over the side -- then he'll have to swim for two weeks without a life vest until he's rescued once again.

And why do we all know Imus will be rescued?

Because his ratings are building steadily on MSNBC -- the simulcast of his WFAN, New York morning show. And CBS likes the revenue from Imus In The Morning. It's not uncommon for a morning radio show to account for a mountain of the station's revenue.

Oh, he's coming back alright. You can bet your share price on it.

And so are any advertisers who might defect while the heat in the kitchen is too hot for them. They'll just hide like advertisers do when things go wrong.

As good as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are -- and they're good at rallying public opinion -- corporate America is better at what they do. The suits apologize, make amends, punish, issue statements of outrage, pay ransom and then it's back to work.

When Imus does go back on the air, his ratings will probably be bigger and better. MSNBC's version of a radio morning show may have struck it rich. This never happened in Arthur Godfrey's day, did it? Even when he fired Julius LaRosa on the air!

The best organization I ever saw take a shock jock apart (and Imus is not a shock jock) is the animal rights group PETA. Bubba "The Original" Love Sponge when he worked for Clear Channel in Florida castrated a wild boar on the air. Pictures circulated on the Internet. You can't do those things.

So PETA castrated Clear Channel and by extension, their man, Bubba.

PETA mounted a boycott that made Clear Channel scream "Uncle" -- and I don't mean "Uncle Lowry". They had a website with advertisers they convinced to stop running commercials on the station. It hurt. Bubba returned to the air but eventually was shown the door.

The hypocrisy of holding Imus to one standard (which he no doubt failed) and others to a lesser standard bothers me. I'm not talking about the debate over whether rap singers can call a black woman a "ho" and get away with it. I'm talking about whether other talk show hosts can commit dastardly acts and get away with them.


Rush Limbaugh made fun of Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's disease by shaking and rattling on his program (pathetically shown on his website). It was Rush and Rush must not be denied so he was forgiven. And while I recognize the difference between racial slurs and insulting a Parkinson's patient, some radio big mouths elude the public outrage that eventually leads to boycotts.

Even Howard Stern hit the wall when he took on the memory of the Mexican singer Selena who died tragically at a young age. Stern was always able to insult blacks, gays -- you name it. But the boycott that surrounded the Selena incident brought him to his knees.

Here's how it works.

Boy meets girl. No, just kidding.

Outrageous Jock meets Consolidator.

Consolidator compensates Outrageous Jock and promotes the hell out of him or her as revenues rise and ratings increase.

Outrageous Jock gets even more outrageous -- gets headlines, press -- Consolidator loves it and makes more money. Outrageous Jock gets a raise.

Outrageous Jock in an attempt to please goes too far and causes a ruckus.

Outrageous Jock initially denies he or she did or said anything wrong and then recants a few days later (radio's version of going into rehab).

Special interest groups rally the troops. Threaten a boycott. Call for resignations.

Consolidator makes nice -- "punishes" Outrageous Jock and takes him or her off the air temporarily.

General public feasts on speculation that Outrageous Jock will be fired.

Outrageous Jock returns.

Advertisers slowly resume their schedules when the stink dies down.

Special interest groups move on to fight somewhere else another day (there's no shortage of causes).

No one is going to get fired when ratings are going up and billing is substantial otherwise some other scoundrel broadcaster will hire Outrageous Jock.

Money trumps social correctness.

Apologies are cheap.

Radio revenues are deep.

It's all hypocritical when it comes to the consolidators of radio.

I've got your solution right here.

In ice hockey when there is a brutality committed (intention to harm another player, etc), the offender is usually suspended for a long, long time. It hurts the player in his wallet and the team on general principles that has to compete without their player.

So, CBS and MSNBC, suspend Imus for three months without pay. Take the ratings hit. Don't fire him. Just feel the pain those girls on the Rutgers basketball team felt and the outrage of the black community where it hurts all of you the most -- in your wallet.

iPod Therefore I Win

Apple is touting its latest feat -- the sale of 100 million iPod devices.

And Apple has a lot to be proud of because this number two computer company has cleaned everyone's clocks in the five years or so that they have been on the market.

iPod just this week eclipsed the Walkman as the fastest growing music player. It took Sony 14 years to sell the same number of their cassette players with headphones.

Both the Walkman and iPod have changed the way people listen to music.

Walkman was the primitive iPod. It was analog in an analog world. Bulkier, but mobile back in the day. A Walkman was still small enough to carry around.

The iPod is digital in a digital age. It doesn't take a lot of brains to deduce that it was Walkman on steroids.

But think about it. Even with Apple's touch for high fashion design and master marketing skills, the iPod could have been just a smaller and prettier (and less successful) Walkman had it not been for two things:

The Internet.

And the major record labels.

The old boys at the original Napster can be proud that they and a lot of other rebels paved the way for iPod's success.

Had it not been for illegal downloading, Apple CEO Steve Jobs -- even with his hard-nose persuasion skills -- could not have sold the record labels his salvation plan to stop piracy. It was the labels fear of illegal downloading that helped Jobs convince them to make songs available to iPods on an a la carte basis for just 99 cents.

There's little doubt that they really regret it today for in the end Apple can take all of the credit for 100 million iPods sold but it was the record labels that created the monster by making iPod possible.

Now, the major record labels have lost control of Apple, Jobs and his iPod devices.

They can't strong-arm him into variable pricing although EMI got him to add 30 cents per download for DRM free tunes -- time will tell how brilliant this move was.

The labels can't return to selling albums because in enabling Apple (how can I put this delicately?) they destroyed the album as we know it.

And, they helped to create the "cherry picking" that consumers do when they buy from iTunes. Well, we over romanticize the album anyway. At best it's Sgt. Pepper's but usually it's buy one hit get the rest of the stiffs free. Good riddance to the album. Anyway, new "albums" are coming in the digital world -- not based on how many songs a disc can hold but how many tunes make an artistic statement.

What's sticking in the craw of the labels is that while their brick and mortar record stores were declining, they helped Apple build a bigger and potentially more powerful record store online.

If iPod is the car, iTunes is the gas station. Apple could be Exxon-Mobil!

Are the labels just stupid or did they really do all of this to themselves?

Well, lots of record execs feel that they did it to themselves. But they shouldn't be so negative. Every decision the labels made was by thinking defensively. Every decision Apple made was the result of thinking offensively.

You figure out which strategy usually works and which one does not.

Now, the labels are stuck with Jobs and his 100 million devices.

If many record execs were not already driven to drink, research tells us that the majority of these 100 million iPod owners are still first time buyers. My God, even Apple didn't know how big this thing would get.

They certainly are careful in babying their little moneymaking device.

Notice you won't find AM or FM radio on it -- very uncool.

No satellite radio -- what's satellite radio to an iPod user?

You've already no doubt noted the timing on the iPhone introduction as Apple swoops in and enters the mobile market with the number one music device just when the mobile operators are trying to expand their presence in the mobile music business.

And dare I say, wait until the time is right and Jobs makes the iPod a WiFi-enabled device. This juggernaut may never stop.

So, thank you record labels for becoming the bitch of a computer company.

Actually, you did a good thing and you can get in on all of this as soon as you stop fretting over the loss of your old business model. You still have time to do deals with Jobs -- although you've lost control and he will call the shots. Apple still needs you, but if you wait too much longer, you'll blow your chance.

So, call the RIAA and cancel the legal strategy. It isn't working anyway. Think different (sorry about that). Think big. Bold. Brave.

Come on in, the digital revenue is a moneymaker for Apple but not for you.

The Verdict on "Less Is More"

All of us have had a lot of fun with the Clear Channel commercial reduction initiative they dubbed "Less Is More". Ad agencies. Industry types.

Part of the reason we love to poke fun at LIM is that the name is so ridiculous. Few people believe less of anything is more than something. Maybe in golf where the lower the score the better you play or in weight loss. You get the idea.

But holding this radio industry up to ridicule with advertisers and agencies at a time when the radio industry has plenty of other reasons to be ridiculed is reason enough for some form of outrage.

Unless of course, Clear Channel was right.

Was it?

Does cutting commercial loads get you higher ratings?

One of my readers weighs in:
"The premise is that radio is too cluttered and it's chasing away an audience. The truth is that if product is compelling enough, tolerance for ads is higher. Uncompelling product yields a tolerance for commercials around zero. Most compelling product, i.e. number one in the ratings has been voted on by the LISTENERS as being the best, so clutter, on those stations, is not an issue. Taking inventory off that isn't a bother is ripping off investors.

The most telling aspect of it all is that Clear Channel took inventory off of all of its radio stations and the audience meter didn't move a blip. Light FM has the same level of listenership today as it did when it had 25% more inventory. From a business stand point, from any measured reasoning you'd like to talk about, taking that inventory off was just plain dumb".
Clear Channel has not been able to prove that cutting commercials leads to higher ratings so it begs the question -- if you can get away with a higher spot load and make more money (for your investors), shouldn't you run the higher spot load?

Another reader says:
"Supply and demand. When the supply goes down, you can raise the price. That's what they did, especially at the top rated stations.

The other aspect about Less is More dealt with 60s vs 30s. The longer spots were sold at a discount, but took up twice as much time as 30s. So they do shorter spots now.

If you study the stock price of CC before and after Less Is More, the stock is about $2 higher. So investors don't feel short-changed".
So, did Clear Channel succeed by driving ad rates higher?

I have no evidence that LIM was actually responsible for higher ad rates. It would make sense. Pressure the inventory. Create demand. But the smartest people in radio for years -- too many years -- have been trying to get radio stations to raise their rates. Back then radio was a bargain. Today, it's on the cusp of becoming a fire sale.

Now, don't get me wrong. Radio isn't going anywhere bad anytime soon, but it is not likely to become a growth business again without the next generation -- and even radio admits it blew it with Gen Y. They're lost to their iPods, computers and mobile phones and may never be recovered.

What's more, the next generation hates commercials.

They have attention deficit, remember? That's the knock on them that you hear over and over.
Well, if it is as widespread as older people think, then radio is in trouble for another reason.

And, did I mention they don't have to listen to radio anymore. They have many other mobile options with the killer app on the horizon -- Internet streaming via universal WiFi.

I mention all of this because in judging the efficacy of Clear Channel's brainchild "Less Is More", it isn't as black and white as whether the ratings went down or the billing went up.

It's more complicated. Much more complicated in my view before we can attempt to issue of a verdict.
  • Did "Less Is More" help drive the radio industry's rates up once the segment leader, Clear Channel, initiated it over its massive platform of stations? I say no. Radio rates still languish. There are many reasons -- some have little to do with spot loads -- but cutting inventory has not helped the segment.
  • Did ratings go up for Clear Channel and competitors forced to cut commercial loads? There is no evidence other than anecdotal. And, as my reader pointed out, fewer commercials on Clear Channel's "Lite" in New York didn't act as a boost to the ratings while simultaneously cutting income for that excellent market leader.
  • Did the radio industry suffer a black eye at the hands of LIM when agencies and advertisers felt strong-armed by moves to shuttle them to commercial lengths they may not have wanted?
  • Was it a stroke of genius to hang out a big sign saying, in effect, "Radio Plays Too Many Commercials" when lots of listeners already felt that way and any advertiser stuck in the middle of an 8-unit commercial cluster knews it already. Was it "mea culpa" or hubris -- "Watch Us Cut Clutter" while not saying "while we drive your rates up"?
  • Is anyone seriously watching the next generation on this issue? They don't love radio. Don't need radio. They need a mobile phone. The need the Internet. Was "Less Is More" aimed at this vocal group of Internet rebels because if it was -- they're not the ones listening.
The jury has returned its verdict in my court.

Guilty as charged on all counts. (Jury members you are free to go and sell your exit interviews to the tabloids).

Some of my program director friends agree that it was a good thing to cut commercials. Probably not a good thing to make a federal case out of it. But back then, Clear Channel was big and mighty. Not less powerful and vulnerable.

These PDs would tell you that radio already had an effective blueprint for how to handle clutter. It dates back to the 60's when stations were loaded with clutter and listeners were getting fed up. That's when Bill Drake came along and drew a "hot clock" on a napkin somewhere in LA to create eight units an hour (outside of morning drive) and one spot per stop set.

Presto...change-o...alacaazam!

Radio was saved from djs who ran at the mouth and sales managers who couldn't say no to dropping their rates to get some billing on their stations.

Greed. Pure greed almost killed radio when it was at the top of its game. Before Steve Jobs. Before the Internet. Before attention deficit.

And programmers saved radio from its fate then.

But now, any PD worth his or her salt could have designed a "hot clock" that would have made Clear Channel's "Less Is More" unnecessary.

And it would have been more effective.

Only one problem.

Clear Channel and the other major consolidators fired many of these PDs. They burdened the rest with increased work and responsibility for more stations while it duct taped their mouths shut.

The answer was there all the time.

It wasn't "Less Is More".

It was "Listen More".

Case closed.