Something Special In The Air

Here's another reminder of what's around the corner.
No, that's not a new player on your laptop computer screen but the command center from the new media center upcoming from Mercedes Benz. Still at least a few more years away but that time will go very quick.

While the announcement of these systems is nothing new--in addition to MB, Chrysler and BMW have already released systems--what is noteworthy is how fast the technology is advancing.

Engadget had this article of the MB system:

Mercedes-Benz has already toyed around a bit with some internet-connected in-car systems, but it looks to really be going all out with its new myCOMMAND system, which it's now showing off at the Los Angeles Auto Show. Among other things, it would constantly pull various traffic information off the internet and take it into account for route selection, as well as give you access to internet radio stations, let you make VoIP phone calls, and even give you a browser that'll let you " surf the internet in the accustomed way." Mercedes is also promising that the entire system will be completely intuitive, with most of the primary functions controlled with a single rotary pushbutton, and two secondary buttons provided for things like menu operation. Of course, it's all still very much a demo at this point, and Mercedes itself says it'll be least a "few more years" before it actually winds up in a production vehicle.

Interesting that there is no mention of AM and FM radio. While I don't think it won't be included, it's a sign of the times that it is not viewed as MOST important. HD Radio...ahhhhh

So back to the title of this post. SOMETHING SPECIAL IN THE AIR. We better do it. And now.

AM on FM - More Evidence

As the spring 12+ ratings roll out I tend to glance over the numbers in the trades. I seem to gravitate to the markets that I have been involved with--which over the years has been more than sixty. So when the Providence, RI numbers rolled out I was taken aback to see WHJJ-AM so far behind WPRO-AM. PRO-AM was at the top of the ratings, #1, and 'HJJ down at 14th.

History: WHJJ-AM was a station that Bill Hess (now VP Programming at Air America) and I resurrected some years ago from mostly paid programming to respectability with compelling local shows and a top notch news department. [I think even the PRO-AM guys would admit that WHJJ was a strong competitor back then.] Success came 25-54, besting PRO more than a few times. Never could overcome the power of the Red Sox, however!

So what's driving Pro to the top of the ratings? --Something that has not happened since Salty Brine was the morning man. F-M baby!!! It should be the next big thing...for AM News-Talk stations. And in some markets in might be the only thing to save them.

Markets like Washington, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Indianapolis and others have had success migrating their heritage AM stations to FM, sometimes as in the case of Providence--an AM/FM simulcast, or simply launching the format on FM like has been done in Boston and here in Minneapolis. Of course, public radio has been broadcasting, news, talk and information for years on FM. And in many markets very successfully.

Over the next number of years we will see every market with a N/T station on FM. I think there's room for more spoken word formats on FM--lots more. And it will happen. Maybe not out of desire, but necessity. In most markets the AM band is a road less traveled and much older than FM (and that's aging too). This trend is not likely to change.

There will be more hybrids--music and talk formats mashed up together. Talk shows that play music and music shows that talk. In many ways this philosophy flies in the face of current thinking and is opposite of what a research tool such as a format finder might indicate. Remember, people can only adequately react to what they know and it's simply unrealistic to expect an average person to be able to imagine, "what if" when it comes to something they have never heard. Additionally, how people say they behave isn't always a mirror image of what they actually do when nobody is watching.

If you are operating a station that is the fifth or sixth station "hyper-focused" on targeting women 35-44 or men 30-39 and achieving so-so results the day will come when your best option might just be to reinvent, create and succeed with something you never imagined could be. It takes guts and vision. That is for sure.

There in no hugely successful business person I know of that has not has his/her share of failures. I like to say, "if you haven't failed you wouldn't recognize success."

Technology Is Forcing Change

May 10th, 1982 was the date that technology forced change...

26 years ago the technology was FM radio and it was an AM radio station forced to change. That station was WABC in New York. Music on AM was dieing and moving over to FM.

WABC's ratings had seen better days but it was still a big deal. Just like people all over the New York area I remember stopping whatever I was doing to tune in to hear the change. I had moved on (working in radio) and was listening to other stations; but this was the station that I grew up with--the station that I have credited more than a few times as being my inspiration that made me want to go into radio.

Here's a WCBS-TV news report from that day. The report says a lot.



Even back in the "dark ages," 1982, technology was a problem...

• There's a whole lot of media out there, wired and wireless--it's getting tougher and tougher to compete
• AM stereo launching to better compete with FM. AM what?
• More stations, more choices, no giants. How quant.
  

Maybe a little slow to make the right moves, but AM did get it right. Interesting that AM's savior was human voices--you know the long list of talk radio stars that made that happen.

The music died on AM when the public had free and easy access to FM. Will the music die on FM when the public has free and easy access to music on ~~insert new medium here~~? I think you know what my answer would be. I will leave it at that.

Please give some thought to history since it has a nasty habit of repeating itself.

***photo credit: from a wonderful website called Forgotten NY

Politics-A-Plenty

Two items have caught my attention.

First from R&R's website-posted this Monday evening:

musicFirst Fires On NAB For Fees

By Jeffrey Yorke

As some 500 local broadcasters collect in the nation’s capital for the NAB’s annual three-day State Leadership Conference in a swanky hotel adjacent to the FCC’s headquarters, musicFirst has welcomed the visitors with a poke in the eye -- or, as the broadcasters see it, a poke in the pocket -- by launching a three-day advertising campaign in a Capitol Hill newspaper that calls for performance fees to be levied on radio.

The lobby for recording artists, musicians and record labels doesn’t see this as an attack but a method of achieving balance. “It’s a fundamental fairness issue,” musicFirst spokesman Marty Machowsky tells R&R, noting that AM and FM broadcasters earn $16 billion annually in advertising revenue and pay nothing for the music they broadcast. “There is no question in our minds that music promotes radio. What we are seeking, and what is in place in most nations, is fair performance rights. No more, no less.” Machowsky adds that not only are performance rights fees in place throughout the world, but also in the U.S. for Sirius and XM, Internet radio, cable radio “and every other format where music is aired for profit.”

While Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) has introduced a bill calling for the initiation of fees, there’s not been a groundswell of support nor has there been much real talk against it. Washington is focused on a presidential campaign and other pressing matters. While the NAB wants to the performers' and artists' pleas to get lost in the shuffle, musicFirst hopes to draw attention to their campaign and embarrass the out-of-towners. It’s running a full-page advertisement in Capitol Hill’s influential Roll Call newspaper that shows a sidewalk musician with a few bucks tossed into his open guitar case and the bold headline, “He Just Made More Money Than Any Recording Artist On The Radio.”

“Radio’s refusal to pay artists and musicians a fair performance royalty is indefensible; so they have apparently stopped trying to defend it, choosing instead to hide behind other business issues facing the music industry,” Machowsky tells R&R. “It’s time for the NAB and corporate radio to answer the tough questions about their refusal to pay artists and musicians,” said Doyle Bartlett, executive director of the musicFirst Coalition in a statement released by the group on Monday. “AM and FM music radio stations earn $16 billion each year in advertising revenue. But not a single penny goes to the artists and musicians whose creativity, whose heart, whose soul and whose passion bring to life the music that listeners tune in to hear.

“There are many questions that the NAB and corporate radio lobbyists cannot possibly answer with a clear conscience. How can you justify taking someone’s intellectual property and making $16 billion in annual advertising revenue off that property without compensating the creators and owners of the property? This runs against all basic notions of fairness and respect. You might expect this in places like Iran, North Korea and China, where there also is no performance right on radio, but not in the United States. “Why do you deserve a competitive advantage in the music marketplace? Artists and musicians are paid when their music is broadcast on satellite radio, Internet radio and digital music services delivered through satellite and cable television.”

And, in a particularly clear attempt to cause fissure inside the NAB, Bartlett asked, “Which of your leaders is right: David Rehr, president of the NAB, or W. Russell Withers, head of the Withers Broadcasting Group and chairman of the NAB Radio Board? Mr. Rehr calls paying artists for their work product a 'performance tax.' Really, the loophole in copyright law he is trying to salvage is merely an elaborate payment-avoidance scheme. On the other hand, when Mr. Withers was questioned before the Senate Commerce Committee during a hearing last year, he said, 'I disagree with "performance tax." It’s a performance fee.' What is wrong with paying a fee for product that makes you money?”

Mary Wilson, the longest member of Motown wondergroup the Supremes, last week canvassed Capitol Hill, and more artists are expected to meet with representatives this week. MusicFirst declined to unveil its visiting artists list but acknowledged they will be there.

The NAB quickly responded with a volley of its own on Monday (Feb. 25), saying that it understands that the RIAA and musicFirst “will parade a handful of artists through Congress this week in support of legislation that would result in as much as a $7 billion annual tax on local radio stations” and that it would defend itself. "We welcome the debate over which side has been more 'fair' to artists -- radio stations or RIAA-member companies,” NAB executive VP Dennis Wharton said. “America's hometown radio stations expose and promote musicians to 232 million listeners every week. Contrast that with decades-long exploitation of artists by foreign-owned record labels, demonstrated just this month in a $6 million lawsuit against Universal Music Group for 'cheating' artists like Count Basie and Benny Goodman out of royalties."

And then Cramer is back with a biting commentary on the role Congress and the NAB has played in trying to block the XM/Sirius merger--for more than 12 minutes tonight on CNBC's Mad Money.

On the one hand Congress appears to want to "help" terrestrial radio with its opposition to the SatRad merger, but on the other hand Congress seems to be perfectly content, to at least consider, what amounts to levying a music use tax on the radio business.

If both, the merger and the artist royalties, were to go through which would have a more detrimental effect on the radio business?

From my vantage point I believe that a freshly minted music tax could endanger music radio as we know it. Already weakened by a growing pull vs. push consumer mindset, one can only believe that radio (terrestrial and satellite) will have an even more difficult time competing in the future. Now, maybe that is the natural order of things. I would like to think that if we, the experts in audio entertainment for more than 80 years, can figure out new and creative ways to entertain listeners, including music programming, it might not be as severe. It seems to me that XM and Sirius are in the same boat as their terrestrial cousins.

I might be in the minority when I say let XM and Sirius merge. Right now, FM and AM radio is competing against two aggressive satellite radio companies. With the merger approved it will be just one and in theoretical terms that should be good for terrestrial radio-only one competitor vs. two.

All this competition is only the beginning. We have only begun to see the roll-out of personal audio devices, mobile and auto streaming, and technologies yet to be invented. I am not alone when I say content, content, content across multiple platforms--available anytime and anywhere.

At the end of the day these two pending issues will come down to politics. Who in Washington has the loudest voice AND the most money dedicated to the "education" of our lawmakers.

The Fight For The Dashboard

The first in-car radio was in a 1936 Buick; ever since then the radio has held a prominent spot in dashboards. Later came the addition of 8 tracks, cassettes, CD's, cell phones, XM and Sirius, and rear seat video systems. Just a few short years ago, an input jack was added to many car models so the consumer could plug in their iPod or other mp3 player.

What does the future hold for dashboard entertainment? For terrestrial radio this is the billion dollar question given the huge percentage of radio listening that takes place in the car. Reuters has a story that suggests the dashboard of the future will be less about built-ins and more about plug-ins.

"The car of the future will have the necessary chargers, iPod mounts, and ports for navigation and even the Internet, rather than a factory-installed all-in-one system".

Does that mean that radio will still have a prominent place right there in the middle of the dash or will the car of the future simply feature ports, an amp, a flat screen and speakers spread through the car? The long-term answer to that question is unclear. I would guess the standard radio featuring AM, FM, and more and more, Satellite Radio will be included in the dash for quite some time to come.

"...the car industry can no longer hope to compete with consumer electronics' aggressive product cycles".

"Their best chance is to offer connectivity for the many gadgets on the market, pleasing customers who expect to be able to use the same devices they use at home and on the street".

Let's assume that things go along this path and instead of hard wiring new technologies into cars the automakers instead offer consumers the chance to plug in practically any device they choose; how long before Apple, Blackberry, and Nokia become the auto entertainment standard?

Ultimately, this will expedite how fast new technology goes from home and handheld right into the car. So, if you can do it on your handheld, you will be able to do it while you commute to and from work in your car. As long as it's convenient and easy broad consumer acceptance will come.

So while it makes sense to think the standard radio will be in the dashboard for a long time to come, the questions we all need to be asking are: will anybody want to turn it on and will radio's content be available on that device that will be attached to the dash?

Read the entire story here.