Showing posts with label New York. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Interesting and Anecdotal

Being a native New Yorker (once a New Yorker, always a New Yorker) I enjoy reading the New York Radio Message Board. Today, someone started this thread:
In an MSNBC "Morning Joe" discussion focusing on Rush Limbaugh, NBC White House political director Chuck Todd yesterday dismissed the radio industry as a "dying medium." Noted Todd: "But, it’s that idea that Limbaugh... even the venue that he’s on, radio, not the internet - you know, it’s very ‘90s. It’s very backwards...[radio] is a dying medium and a backward-looking technology.
That prompted many responses including this one:
...you're right about teens not wanting to hear the announcer after the music stops... that's if they even listen to radio in the car. My teenage daughter constantly asks me to turn the radio off so she can better hear her iPod and concentrate on sending text messages over the cellphone. On one occasion, she heard some music on Radio 1045 out of Philly, and was surprised that they were playing music she liked. So now, she listens to both the iPod and the radio in the car.
I won't spend a great deal of time on Mr. Todd's comments regarding Rush. It seems he knows little about Limbaugh's performance and apparently doesn't realize that Rush is available two ways on-line--station streams and through his pay webcam service. Nuff said.

More interesting to me is the second comment--especially this: "...surprised that they were playing music she liked...she listens to both the iPod and the radio in the car". If there is one teen who thinks this there must be many more. To me this smells like a marketing and imaging issue. Duh! Among many other things, what has the radio industry virtually eliminated over the last decade? Image marketing!

I am not downplaying the seismic changes that have occurred; to the contrary, anyone who has read this blog knows how many posts I have written on the subject. Our young listener recruitment program has been abysmal and it is likely we have lost an entire generation of potential radio fans to alternative audio platforms. Is their any hope of capturing their attention?

As we quickly approach the end of the first decade of the 21st. century, if we want to attempt to change hearts and minds of those 15 to almost 30 years of age let's start with eliminating music recorded in the 70's, 80's, and the early 90's. They may like some of this music when playing Guitar Hero and in small doses at other times, but let's face the fact that this is NOT their music. We must better understand what they like and develop different ways to entertain them in between the songs.

We can't change what has already taken place, but I think it IS possible to generate some more passion for the medium. The music is just the beginning.

Do you have a strategy?

Monday, October 27, 2008

Arbitron vs. New York State

Thrown out!

According to the judge the states case raises "important state interests." In short, the AG's case alleges Arbitron is guilty of fraudulent and deceptive business practices and civil rights violations. [All Access posted the full text of the judges opinion here.]

In a release Arbitron SVP/Press & Investor Relations THOM MOCARSKY said, "Today's ruling does not impact ARBITRON's right to publish our PPM audience estimates in New York. We went to Federal Court seeking to protect our right to provide the radio industry with the up-to-date PPM audience estimates it needs. Following our efforts, the New York Attorney General chose not to seek a temporary restraining order adversely impacting our right to produce PPM estimates.

"Now that ARBITRON has commercialized the PPM service in NEW YORK and other key markets, we look forward to defending our interests. Broadcasters, agencies, and advertisers need continual PPM audience estimates if radio is to remain competitive in an increasingly complex and crowded media marketplace."

Fraud, deception, and civil rights violations? Let me be understated here. Really? What? Over the years Arbitron has gone out of its way to fairly (some might say more than fairly) appropriately represent minority listeners. What changed? Why now?

I'm the last person to give Arbitron a free pass. I'm not saying PPM is perfect. It seems to me that stating that the state has an important interest in radio ratings is troubling. Why?

It's fair game to challenge Arbitron on panel size, ethnic balance, and other key components relating to PPM. Aside from the lawyers there are no other guaranteed winners in this case and only serves to tarnish the already hurting radio industry even further.