Life in general, Music, Whatever

So Many Choices…

December 4, 2006

I try not to blog about the industry that I work in (’cause doing so can come back and bite you). However, I read an article about satellite radio (XM and Sirius) in the Sunday New York Times, and while the article wasn’t the usual “death of radio” narrative that has become common among those who miss the “good old days,” it was interesting to read how satellite is trying to pave a middle ground between the Internet and terrestrial or “regular” radio. 

What’s “middle way” XM and Sirius are paving?  Well, let’s start by looking at the what’s on both ends of this spectrum. On one end is the Internet and the problem with that beast, as most bloggers know, is that the Internet has so many sites available, that it’s tough to stand out in the crowded field. 

On the other end is our friend radio — which has a narrow playing field that’s confined to the AM or FM band. Commercial radio has the ongoing problem of making sure they have enough of a market share (i.e., listeners) so their advertisers can get sales results and keep buying commercial time.  This means radio programmers and owners tend to target a certain segment of the radio audience because they are seen as the “money maker” demo (i.e., demographic).  Stations compete to keep these listeners by programming a certain format that their market research tells them the “money maker” demo wants to hear.  

When it comes to music stations, many stations are playing it very safe by trimming their play lists to songs that “test well” with their target demographic. Tighter play lists means songs are going to repeat more during the programming day, and that means new artists (or even established ones) won’t be able to get their songs played on a station because station owners and programmers are afraid to take a chance on songs that might cause listeners to flip the dial. 

Trying to be in the middle of all this is satellite radio. What satellite is doing is hiring established music artists and giving them a radio show where they play whatever they want. Often times, they play their own music — which adds an extra dimension by doing the VH1 Storyteller thing and talking about how certain songs came about. The people that are heading up XM and Sirius are hoping that the “art of the DJ” will come back. But they aren’t hiring DJs to practice their art. Nope, they are hoping Eminem, Bob Dylan, and Snoop Dogg can bring that art back. 

I’m not a musician, but I’m learning to play a musical instrument. But that doesn’t make me qualified to headline a major concert. So, why do the folks in the satellite world think that musicians will make good jocks? Well, star power has a lot to with it. And as a business move, having a bunch of big stars on your channels spinning songs for an hour (where listeners have to pay to hear it) is better than having some no-name jock who might know how to mix a good set, but no one has heard of. Oddly enough, the satellite business model hasn’t worked for one of radio’s biggest stars (that would be Howard Stern), but it seems people like hearing what’s in Ludacris or Bob Dylan’s record collection.   

So…I’m curious: with all the choices we have these days (mp3 players, CD players, radio, satellite, the Internet, and even your old cassettes and LPs), what makes you want to flip to another medium to listen to music?  I’ll meet you in the comments section. :-) 

–PK 

You May Also Like

  1. Ml

    December 4, 2006 at 8:39 am

    I actually prefer just regular, DJ run, commericals played radio over all the other stuff. I haven’t gone over to the other side…maybe some day, but not today.

  2. Lalapunci

    December 4, 2006 at 8:45 am

    We had satillite radio in the car but I was too cheap ($40/month)to continue it. I don’t listen to AM unless it is on my clock radio for the morning KNBR Sports Radio(I’ve got an old one). FM radio plays either country or the newer music I am not familiar with. So, I guess it is CDs. They have a higher sound quality than MP3 or other compressed formats, and I get to listen to what I want to when I want to. I actually like the old LPs because of the analog sound. It is a more natural sound.

  3. Shelliza

    December 4, 2006 at 9:47 am

    Since you asked, I hate commercials on radio. Well, except for the weather and oh, TRAFFIC, I’d rather listen to just music. I still listen to my CDs in the car and good old FM, but my hubby just got XM for his truck.

  4. Gina

    December 4, 2006 at 10:09 am

    While I can’t say I am a huge fan of commercials, I don’t necessarily flip them off automatically. What reeealllly bugs me is DJ’s that talk FOREVER and rarely play music. This is especially true of the morning shows here in SoCal. I don’t mind hearing some good tidbits about whatever, but then PLAY SOME MUSIC! I shouldn’t have to be subjected to endless minutes of mindless (usually narcissistic) patter to hear one song played every forty five minutes. If I wanted to listen to talk radio, I would listen to talk radio.

    And truly Py, I am so sorry if somehow I am describing the format of your show. 🙁

    A station came on a year or so ago called “Jack Radio” which is a horribly commercialized venture claiming to be all avant-garde, but I will say that at least they PLAY MUSIC. So I listen to them.

    That being said, I prefer to listen to my Radio Nigel on the internet than to almst anything else! And since I am at home most of the time, it’s all good.

  5. Py Korry

    December 4, 2006 at 10:55 am

    No worries Gina! The station I work for tries to balance chat with music, traffic, and weather. It’s not a “Morning Zoo” type of thing.

    They were going to launch a Jack format here in the Bay Area, but another station beat them to it by doing essentially the same thing as Jack, but it’s called Max.

    Shelliza: Commercials can be annoying, but they try to keep the number of commercials to around 5 for a “stop set” (i.e., commercial break).

    And Ml: You’re what they call a “P 1” in the radio biz since you listen to the radio first and rarely go to other mediums.

  6. J

    December 4, 2006 at 11:44 am

    I like the radio, but not so much the commercials or the inane chatter of most morning shows. They all come off sounding like idiots to me, sooner or later. A good morning show is fine. 😉

    I kinda think a good DJ is hard to find these days, or at least hard to recognize, because they’re not allowed to play what they want or to figure out the mix for themselves. If they were, ala’ WKRP or something, then it would be really interesting to hear what the different folks might come up with.

  7. Cherry

    December 4, 2006 at 12:02 pm

    Py, as you know I am loyal to my morning idiot banter. I used to find them annoying and wanted music in the morning, but then I started to like the characters and now I’m stuck. 10+ years I’ve listened to them in the morning. I will even drive to work as op When they go on one of their extended commecial breaks (they save them up for the top of the hour), I usually switch over to you to see if you are giving me better traffic reports then that other show.
    And now I listen to NPR on the drive home. And if I don’t listen to NPR because the topic on at the time is not interesting, then I listen to podcasts of NPR shows that I’ve been saving.

    I’m pretty much all talk all the time now.

  8. lalunas

    December 4, 2006 at 1:11 pm

    Commericals, all though I still listen to radio 95% of the time while driving. I do not have any of the trendy stuff. So I guess I am old fashion…

  9. Py Korry

    December 4, 2006 at 3:21 pm

    I think when you take the “art” out of DJ-ing, all you have left is an announcer (or personality) to take the place of someone who would carefully choose the music (and the mix).

    Cherry: KQED (our SF NPR station) does huge numbers in the Bay Area. They’re usually the second or third most listened to station here. Why? Simply because their programming doesn’t insult your intelligence. Plus, their programs are so well produced that’s it’s very difficult to turn off the radio when driving home because of the long-form nature of the program. It doesn’t matter if it’s an interview on Forum, or a talk show like Talk of the Nation, they have a way of really hooking you with substance over flash.

    And Lalunas…Commercials have me reaching for the dial, too. 🙂

  10. Beenzzz (Bean)

    December 4, 2006 at 3:28 pm

    The radio is ok. Sometimes the morning shows get to be too much, but I still like listening to the radio!

  11. Bill V

    December 5, 2006 at 9:04 am

    Satellite is just using marketing to draw listeners. Do you really think P-Diddy designs his own clothes or David Bowie really listens to 97X when he’s in Omaha? (the bumper says he does!!) These are vanity channels, but mostly it’s a marketing thing. These names draw people to the product which is good, bad or in-between, but how much influence the celebrity has is debatable.

    Satellite is actually a haven for real DJs who have been pushed out of their industry and denied a forum to practice their craft. Thanks to Sirius I finally got a chance to hear Meg Griffin and Kid Leo (BTW, Howard Stern is a success – he can finally do what he wants without censorship and he’s getting a huge paycheck for it). I can actually listen to music I haven’t heard since my college days, new stuff I had only heard about and doo-wop or salsa or showtunes whenever I want – formats that aren’t even available in the top 25 market I live in.

    Satellite isn’t perfect. Many of these channels are “narrow-cast” – the same song will be hot on several different playlists at the same time. It’s not really growing the industry becuse it limits jobs and local flavor in radio. But the mega corporations have already done that. Clear Channel (and their ilk) control ad rates, programming, promotions, concert halls, and talent. Quality local radio is dead in most of the country.

    There is a cost, but it’s far from $40 a month. It’s much cheaper than buying dozens of CDs a month while trying to grow musically.

  12. Py Korry

    December 5, 2006 at 1:06 pm

    Bill V: I suppose with all the channels XM and Sirius are offering, there are some “regular” radio jocks on there, but for the most part, they are banking on “stars” to attract new subscribers.

    I’m not sure I agree with you on Stern and success. Sure, half the Sirius listeners enjoy Howard (that’s about 3 million people), but having him on Sirius isn’t attracting many new listeners these days. And his over-inflated projections of new subscribers to Sirius fell far short of what he was touting. 500,000 new subscribers is impressive for Sirius, but the top brass was hoping for millions of people.

    Personally, though, I agree that Stern has done well with his contract (so, in monetary terms, he’s successful). But XM has more subscribers and they are not shelling out $500 million for one act.

    As far as Clear Channel goes…I get the feeling they are going to unload more properties in the new year. When they do, their power in the radio and music industries may start to wane. Cross your fingers! 🙂

Comments are closed.