2009.05.31

Radio’s auto-obsolescence

If the statistics are to be believed, the 18-24 demographic is a dying market for radio stations. This information can be spun and used in a variety of ways; and it has been by private radio which claims that the loss of that market segment means a loss in revenue and the beginning of the end of radio.

I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit, more so this weekend while I spoke at and attended the Radio Without Boundaries Conference in Toronto. My theories are still in development so I’m treating this entry as a way to better understand my thoughts and possibly hear from others who have their own ideas.

Let’s open with a tour I recently had of the Rogers radio facility in Ottawa. Four radio stations broadcast from the building:

  • CHEZ 106 (Classic Rock)
  • KISS FM (Top 40/CHR)
  • Y105 (New Country)
  • OLDIES 1310 (Oldies)

The tour took place at 7pm so the radio station was empty — even the studios. Well, not all of the studios. CHEZ 106 had on-air talent that evening in order to take phone calls for their 10pm music face-off. The other three stations were voice tracked.

If you’re unfamiliar with voice tracking, think of it as an iTunes playlist on the radio. Earlier that afternoon someone sequenced some music and ads, recorded the voice interjections and programmed the whole night into a computer. The studios were empty because the computers were playing that program; like a robot. In fact, Oldies 1310 uses voice tracking for the entire day with the exception of the morning drive (probably 3 or 4 hours out of a 24 hour day).

Let’s consider what that means. Overnight time slots were historically reserved for rookies to develop their talent during the hours that listenership was down. If the talent became good, they were considered for other timeslots — evening, midday, afternoon drive and eventually the coveted morning drive. It was like the farm system in a baseball organization; you start in the minor leagues and eventually work your way up as a starter in the majors. Overnight voice tracking means radio stations no longer have a farm system to develop talent. Who will replace the pros?

More importantly, how do you appeal to the younger audience? How does a radio station cater to the 18-24 market with a Program Director and a jockeys that grew up wearing bell bottoms (or perhaps pastel colours and thin leather ties) when they first became a fashion craze? Research? Ratings?

As near as I can tell, the 18-24 market is listening to their iPods because they can program what they want to hear. Why?

  • They don’t have to hear the same songs every 90 minutes.
  • They can hear more than 200 songs.
  • They can use the shuffle mode and be surprised by which songs come up.
  • They don’t have to listen to long commercial breaks.
  • The person that’s programming their local station may not even live in the area so the programming decisions being made may not accurately reflect the interests of the area.

By picking formats that may be cost effective now, radio stations have established what I’ll call auto-obsolescence — as the people who grew up listening to radio when it was a significant player continue to… well… grow up, there’s very few people who will take their place as listeners. Radio isn’t going to die, it’ll just outgrow its purpose.

MAKE OLD NEW, AGAIN

I have this crazy idea. I don’t know if it would work. Certainly, some people I’ve shared it with think it’s too risky and wouldn’t be profitable. I’ll share it anyway.

What if one radio station in a particular metropolitan area replaced voice tracking with real people around the clock? What if that radio station expanded its playlist from 300 to 3000 (or more) songs? What if that radio station trusted its on-air talent enough to collaborate with programmers and make something fresh and exciting? What if that radio station thought of 18-24 year-olds as more than part of the CPM formula (to attract advertisers) and having a more important role at the station than just being interns that do the jobs nobody else wants to do?

I think those ideas could put personality back into radio. The novelty alone should make the radio station attractive to those who care about radio and intriguing to those who haven’t yet become interested in it. Advertisers might similarly be excited about being part of something out-of-the ordinary and might commit to be a part of the change.

The shift might buy the radio station six or twelve months of time to prove that this format could work. It could die miserably or it could eek out profit enough to continue. It could be wildly successful, marginalizing the competition and transforming radio in the process. It could put the soul back into private radio, something Paul Ingles claims was sucked out in full back in 1999.  Not that saving private radio is something people are lining up to do, though I do wonder if the death of private radio could have a cascading effect on all radio.

Public radio (which I love) suffers from different challenges and I’m still working on my thoughts about those. Thankfully, though, there appears to be a healthy group of 18-24 year-olds actively involved in public radio.

2009.05.30

Who needs a narrator anyway?

After being immersed in audio (and now video) production for the last four years, I’ve discovered that the greatest fun and flexibility in creative editing and storytelling is in playing with narration.  I’ve produced pieces in which the narrator played a key role in setting the context and guiding the listener/viewer through the story and others in which the narration has been implied.  I’ve also learned that there is a subtle and distinct difference between sound as a backdrop, sound as a character and sound as a narrator.

That’s why I grabbed a front row seat for Oh, Shut Up! Who needs a narrator anyway?, a session by Chris Brookes‘ at the Radio Without Boundaries conference.  Chris was connected by Skype from his home in Newfoundland (a family emergency kept him at home) and with the help of Paolo Pietropaolo at the conference, played clips of radio news coverage dating as far back as 1937 (the Hindenburg disaster) and 1939 (the King and Queen leaving by boat from Newfoundland), through to some very recent documentary programs which used a combination of sound and sparse narration.  We explored the role of narration in each clip, paying particular attention to how the narration makes the audience either a spectator or participant and how much authority the narrator assumes.  We also discussed some cases where the narration was gratuitous.

Like the Jens Jarisch session The Inner Sound of the Outer World at Third Coast, Chris’ session will have me exploring new possibilities in my production work.  Either that or I’ll be self-consciously stuck where I am.

2009.05.27

Twittering vs. Journalism

Kady O’Malley Twittered that she participated in a discussion about the “pros and cons of nearly-realtime journalism” on CBC Radio’s Ottawa Morning.   Unfortunately, the audio clip for the segment keeps timing out and I haven’t been to listen past the introductions.

The segment relates to the coverage of Ottawa Mayor Larry O’Brien’s criminal trial.  I’ve been following the trial closely and have noticed that there are three categories of online coverage by the media.

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER

Ottawa Citizen reporter Glen McGregor has been exercising his home-row key skills through his live “Twittering” of the trial.  His role as an online digital court reporter has meant he has to run two Twitter accounts (obrientrial and obrientrial2) as the flood updates sometimes violate a limit Twitter has set on the number of posts one can make in an hour on a single account; while one account recovers from the sanction, Glen jumps over to the other.  His 140-character or less updates are a mix of observations, paraphrased comments, verbatim quotes and the occasional humourous reflections (like who might play a particular witness in the movie-version of the trial).

BLOG UPDATES

The CBC‘s Cory O’Kelly and Alistair Steele took a few days to find their rhythm with their blog coverage of the trial.  Their posts range from extremely short (less than 200 words) to medium length and include factual accounts or light analysis of cross examination, testimony and procedure.  While the titles of their posts have become more attention-getting, there is still the occasional ”Up Next” and “Cory O’Kelly writes…” which weakly invite me to find out what’s going on.

The Ottawa Sun is also in on the action.  Susan Sherring and Derek Puddicombe have taken a more snappy approach to their blogging, using imagery and a little humour in largely one-sentence paragraphs — a digest style.

ONLINE JOURNALISM

Then there’s traditional and thoughtful journalism.  Most of the analysis and pure journalism is coming from the CBC which probably explains why Alistair and Cory haven’t been as thorough and regular in their blog.  Because they still have to file radio and television stories, and write reports for the CBC.ca, their focus is on their journalism background.

VERDICT

This is an exciting time for news junkies.  Glen feeds my need for immediacy and unfiltered facts from which I can develop my own assumptions and make my own judgements.  He’s truly doing it better than anyone else.  Alistair and Cory provide me with analysis and observations in a style I’m familiar with and that allows me to test my assumptions and judgements.  I feel like I’m in a better position to trust the media when I can get both the unfiltered details and the analysis on the same story.

Now, if the websites could only be overhauled for the user experience so that the information is easier to find, faster to navigate and that uses more contemporary ways of highlighting audio and video content!

© 2005 - 2010 Mark Blevis. Design by SnowyDay