What's It Going To Take...?

[pave]

Radio’s Live & Local ‘Hail Mary’
Once again, the beast raises her scabrous and mucous-oozing head. Even so, radio managers and programmers are treating her like she was wearing heels, stockings and flaming lipstick. Like sirens of old – luring unsuspecting sailors to their dooms – this one also calls out with promises of pleasure and redemption. Her name: “Livenlocal”.

Radio managers and programmers are, it seems, constantly on the lookout for cheap, readily available, “plug-and-play” options to address the question: “How is it we suck so much?” I am here to assure diligent readers that “live & local” is not one of those desirable options. Implementation is near impossible to execute, and charging ahead only adds significant expenses to the station. Proceeding arbitrarily is actually the forerunner of a station’s public detonation – right in front of everybody.

Then, there is all the collateral damage to lives and careers that comes with completely debilitating an already-crippled station. But, as history does provide the evidence, this is not a matter of any real consequence to the ownership, anyway.

Pundits, station ownership and programmers describe “live & local” as a means to rectifying the lack of interest in a station that audiences easily and often demonstrate. By inserting live & local elements, they also reveal a lack of understanding of what the implementation of the strategy would actually cause.

Because of a horrible lack of training about how, specifically, to communicate to a broadcast audience, most of the thousands of new, poor devils will be told to “Go get ‘em tiger!” Then they will be given a set of innocuous, masturbatory station branding statements and promos; they will be told to include a reference to a local location, event, or person in each of their 3 or 4 innocuous, hourly stop-sets. Next, they will be locked in the control room and told if they screw up, the consequences will be severe. Plus, all of this will be foisted on an audience at just above minimum wage.

Meanwhile, audiences, for a while, will tolerate this truckload of newbie announcers being dumped on their radio lawns. They will very quickly recognize this new group of posers is not made up of finely processed fertilizer, but that they are more of a steaming, stinking load of fresh manure, The audience will not like it.

Further, there is another element that broadcasters have yet to even consider. And, if they have, they have concluded the issue to be of no particular import, anyway. Implementing an arbitrary “live & local” approach is utterly insulting to an audience!

Management presumes audiences will continue to accept having their interests, intelligence and capacities to understand language at multiple levels of consciousness discounted. This is a clearly obvious demonstration of ignorance, callousness and disregard for the very people who, ultimately, pay the station’s bills.

Meanwhile, the contemplation of going more “live & local” is on the table without any regard for the status quo, that being, the horrendous state of the majority of talent that has been and is on the air currently – many for years.

I understand there are a few – very few – talents on the air who rank as genuine “Personalities”. These are the folks whose combination of wit, intelligence, mastery of vocal performances and delivery make them so entirely unique and incredibly valuable. There are some others who are pleasant to the ear and can demonstrate they have a “personality”. After that, it’s all about the announcer-drones – those poor sods who may be innately intelligent, imaginative and eager, but who are, nevertheless, trapped on the radio. They operate under the boot of radio programming dogma - without the skills, without the knowledge and without access to the training. They also operate without permission to make any attempts at becoming superior communicators and performers.

Further, how does a thoroughly uneducated management group go about finding this new batch of talent? Yuk-Yuks? - so they can hire a guy who has spent 5 years putting together a 45-minute set? The local dry cleaners where the counter girl is kind of witty and smart? It might boil down to that, but good luck and thanks for comin’ out.

The last 20 or so years of corporate radio executing its own version of a “scorched earth” policy within their own outfits has resulted in fewer Big Talents on the air. More importantly, though, corporate radio has turned into cinders those fertile fields where new talent can begin to learn and develop. I still am obliged to minimize this situation, as even then, back in the day, most talent was coming up uneducated. Some, however, did develop some chops, and did demonstrate some style.

Now, here is the ironic about management’s lack of understanding of this issue.
This “live & local” strategy is not the priority on which radio needs to concentrate.
The priority and greatest improvement needs are in the remnants of The Creative Departments. – home of white flags and rubber chickens.)

The worst possible examples of broadcast advertising will be found emanating from studios at radio stations everywhere - where principles of slave labor still apply. Add to those the pressures, lack of light, water and air and crushing deadlines to accomplish the impossible. There are limited (and limiting) resources for the people who have yet to be educated and trained and assisted in generating listenable and influential ads. Better, nevertheless, to serve the advertisers and audience that do exist before screwing it up entirely by tossing even more incompetent talent into the mix.

Pro football player, Doug Flutie, was an up-the-street neighbor of mine out in Calgary. His successful, touchdown toss for Boston College against the Miami Hurricanes was the most famous “Hail Mary” pass of all time. It was a one-time-only event. Radio cannot replicate that because of the extreme lack of knowledgeable and skilled quarterbacks.

[pave]

Superbowl Lessons, and An Offer
A few years ago, I was presenting a series of ads to an auto dealer. The spots were of a “branding” nature, were to run over a longer period and were humorous. (I work “funny” ‘cause “funny” works.) The regular suspects were gathered – dealer principal, sales managers and a few other associates. The spots were playing; the folks behind the dealer were stifling guffaws when the dealer snorted, “Don’t make me want to buy a car!”

As I wasn’t ready for that one, my brain was instantly sucked into a black hole. Even though the pitch and my expectations of human nature had been lowered on the spot, I said what I had to say. “These spots”, I explained, “are designed for influencing the audience into accepting this single dealership as an approachable, safe, reasonable and desirable place to buy a vehicle or have work done. Direct response ads, I continued, are for you to drop your pants and give up any worthwhile margins while spending money on advertising that tells everybody how all the dealership really has is price.”

Meanwhile, the state of local dealership advertising has hardly changed in decades – including those amateur dealer principals embarrassing themselves and frightening their own children by going on the radio (or TV) and behaving like a deeply disturbed inmate who had freshly busted out of the institution. Rank, amateur dealers soiling themselves and their personal reputations on the air. Nasty business, that.

Further, I am delighted with all those ad agencies that made the distinction about what strategy the Superbowl TV advertisers were going to be applying. Seems all the major agencies have finally been able to convince their clients to go down this magnificent road. The ads used 90% of their time to generate emotions in the audience before introducing the product, service or brand. That’s all with multi-million dollar production costs and the millions more to run the ads…once! These spots were representations of spectacular advertising. Magic!

So, who doesn’t understand what? Who is responsible?

Let’s stay with the environment of the local auto dealerships that use radio. Indeed, it could be argued the responsibility of the dealers to understand the workings of the media they buy is reasonable. Is this fair? Of course not! Dealers principal expect their media associates to be as knowledgeable at their business as are the dealers at theirs.

But, since the medium (radio) has had little clue as to how, specifically, their own medium is impacting on an audience, it is the ownership and management of the station(s) who must bare the greater responsibility. But, to my knowledge, they haven’t been doing anything about this situation at all.

The (above), I realize, is a spectacular charge and an equally magnificent challenge to radio. And I take no delight in making it. (Doing so is a terrific strategy for pissing people off, after all.) Unfortunately and so far, the challenge has still gone unheeded. Plus, mine is not the only voice calling for significant improvements in the creative departments and in programming staffs.

Radio is running straight ahead in top gear and with the hammer down. What radio can’t see is the 12-foot thick concrete wall laid across the road - not all that far away. This wall is broadened and solidified every time radio generates commercials that are only content-based, that are authoritarian in presentation, that are bereft of any emotional appeal and that arrogantly presume a connection with each, single audience member has been made.

I have been accused, from time to time, of withholding alternate, more effective strategies. It’s not true, but I am unwilling to give away the whole farm.

Since I have a series of radio commercials for auto dealerships ready for market, I am willing to provide a sneak preview to any interested parties. I will provide, by mp3, the first 6 (copyrighted) demo cuts of a 13-spot package – designed for a 13-week run. (There are 13 more in the can to make a 26-cut total.)

I will also include a 5-pager that demonstrates the contemporary realities of radio advertising. The document also addresses relative costs of producing such a series and the benefits of applying a longer-term strategy for the benefit of the advertiser. – and the station! The functions of applying this approach and this strategy are also addressed.

The benefit to a radio station is in being able to present the package – with or without an extra invoice – as a marvelous opportunity to do some powerful, longer-term radio advertising. As managers will appreciate, the cost of the package can become an insignificant factor.

All recorded materials are copyrighted and may not be reproduced in any fashion.

A simple request for the preview to my email (below) will get my quick attention. Might be educational - and fun! Profitable, too.

Superbowl Lessons, and An Offer

A few years ago, I was presenting a series of ads to an auto dealer. The spots were of a “branding” nature, were to run over a longer period and were humorous. (I work “funny” ‘cause “funny” works.) The regular suspects were gathered – dealer principal, sales managers and a few other associates. The spots were playing; the folks behind the dealer were stifling guffaws when the dealer snorted, “Don’t make me want to buy a car!”

As I wasn’t ready for that one, my brain was instantly sucked into a black hole. Even though the pitch and my expectations of human nature had been lowered on the spot, I said what I had to say. “These spots”, I explained, “are designed for influencing the audience into accepting this single dealership as an approachable, safe, reasonable and desirable place to buy a vehicle or have work done. Direct response ads, I continued, are for you to drop your pants and give up any worthwhile margins while spending money on advertising that tells everybody how all the dealership really has is price.”

Meanwhile, the state of local dealership advertising has hardly changed in decades – including those amateur dealer principals embarrassing themselves and frightening their own children by going on the radio (or TV) and behaving like a deeply disturbed inmate who had freshly busted out of the institution. Rank, amateur dealers soiling themselves and their personal reputations on the air. Nasty business, that.

Meanwhile, I am delighted with all those ad agencies that made the distinction about what strategy the Superbowl TV advertisers were going to be applying. Seems all the major agencies have finally been able to convince their clients to go down this magnificent road. The ads used 90% of their time to generate emotions in the audience before introducing the product, service or brand. That’s all with multi-million dollar production costs and the millions more to run the ads…once! These spots were representations of spectacular advertising. Magic!

So, who doesn’t understand what? Who is responsible?

Let’s stay with the environment of the local auto dealerships that use radio. Indeed, it could be argued the responsibility of the dealers to understand the workings of the media they buy is reasonable. Is this fair? Of course not! Dealers principal expect their media associates to be as knowledgeable at their business as are the dealers at theirs.

But, since the medium (radio) has had little clue as to how, specifically, their own medium is impacting on an audience, it is the ownership and management of the station(s) who must bare the greater responsibility. But, to my knowledge, they haven’t been doing anything about this situation at all.

The (above), I realize, is a spectacular charge and an equally magnificent challenge to radio. And I take no delight in making it. (Doing so is a terrific strategy for pissing people off, after all.) Unfortunately and so far, the challenge has still gone unheeded. Plus, mine is not the only voice calling for significant improvements in the creative departments and in programming staffs.

Radio is running straight ahead in top gear and with the hammer down. What radio can’t see is the 12-foot thick concrete wall laid across the road - not all that far away. This wall is broadened and solidified every time radio generates commercials that are only content-based, that are authoritarian in presentation, that are bereft of any emotional appeal and that arrogantly presume a connection with each, single audience member has been made.

I have been accused, from time to time, of withholding alternate, more effective strategies. It’s not true, but I am unwilling to give away the whole farm.

Since I have a series of radio commercials for auto dealerships ready for market, I am willing to provide a sneak preview to any interested parties. I will provide, by mp3, the first 6 (copyrighted) demo cuts of a 13-spot package – designed for a 13-week run.

I will also include a 5-pager that demonstrates the contemporary realities of radio advertising. The document also addresses relative costs of producing such a series and the benefits of applying a longer-term strategy for the benefit of the advertiser. – and the station! The functions of applying this approach and this strategy are also addressed.

The benefit to a radio station is in being able to present the package – with or without an extra invoice – as a marvelous opportunity to do some powerful, longer-term radio advertising. As managers will appreciate, the cost of the package can become an insignificant factor.

All recorded materials are copyrighted and may not be reproduced in any fashion.

A simple request for the preview to my email: info@voicetalentguy.com will get my quick attention. Might be educational - and fun! Profitable, too.

[pave]

Super Spots
My thanks to those who requested a demo of the first 6 cuts (of 26) of the ads produced specifically for auto dealerships. Some recipients would have freaked out because of the lack of “content” – the products, the deals, the financing options etc. It can be argued that auto retailers’ “deals” are, pretty much, all same-same, particularly to an unmotivated, so-far-disinterested radio audience.

Those demos and explanation pages are available to anyone who requests them from me at: info@voicetalentguy.com

I have mentioned this before. So significant is the proposition that it is important it be repeated – and often. Radio stations and auto dealerships have been in (unconscious) collusion since well before the Chevy Corvair had too light a front end.

Radio stations continue to be more than satisfied to produce, by the tens of thousands, “yell & sell, buy or die, deal or squeal and bend & spend” ads. These commercials represent no more than an uninvited attack on the senses and integrity of a radio audience. They do little to expand the credibility of the dealership, as well.

“But,” say some, “those ads work!” To some degree, that is quite true. Radio can do “magic”. However, that tends to be the case only when the dealers are also dropping their pants on price. Any consideration of ROI becomes quite “iffy” in the process.

What radio stations and dealerships have been refusing to contemplate is the issue of: “What more is possible?” This is the position at which most participants could arrive by asking themselves the question: “Is my radio advertising a ‘necessary expense’ or a ‘strategic investment’?”

To be terse, here is what a series of radio commercials for auto dealerships needs to do before those spots can achieve the potential of having significant and ongoing influence on a radio audience:
1. Gain and maintain the attention of the audience.
2. Continuously develop and maintain a desired emotional response in the audience.
3. Introduce, with the service, product or brand, a request for a reasonable behavior on which the audience can follow through.
4. Accomplish the real work of influencing-through-emotions - exposing an audience to these messages frequently and – continuously.

The alternate challenge to the advertiser is to supply an offer of product or service so outstanding that the offer alone would develop powerful audience emotional responses. Such offers are extremely rare and usually include slashed margins, anyway. Radio stations have always provided such “direct response” ads. When such spectacular content is not available, which is almost always, another, more effective strategy is necessary, but hardly ever available.

As to the dealer’s interests: Over time, an audience’s perception of a dealership can be transformed from the accepted, standard and pervasive one of it (the dealership) being an automotive palace where hard-closing vultures are perched up in their nests in the rafters. These heartless, evolved predators are expected to swoop down at any time to grind and embarrass a (possible) buyer in front of his family, sell him something he doesn’t want and load him up with options and extras about which he had no awareness. Grim perception. Real. Forever.

Dealerships are also widely considered as places where mechanical service charges will be overblown and where unnecessary parts and services will be foisted on unaware and defenseless customers. Even at those dealerships where none of theses distasteful practices apply – those are still the prevailing, public perceptions.

What is required is the implementation of the kinds of spots that qualify as “branding” ads. Decades ago, this form of advertising carried the label of “institutional” and were about as valued and welcome as a herd of rattle snakes at a barn dance.

Since our understanding of electronic advertising has made a few leaps over the decades, let’s consider what our ongoing series of radio ads is attempting to accomplish.
• Persuade the audience the dealership is not a dangerous place.
• Demonstrate to the audience the leaders at the dealership have a sense of humor – even allowing some fun to be poked at themselves – and at their own expense.
• Confirm the dealership understands and acknowledges any fears an audience might have about coming in.
• Proves the dealership is willing to invest a little to provide some fun for its customers – current and future.
• Generate commercials for the dealership that will be the only ones on the radio that listeners will lean in to turn up the volume and pay attention.
• Be nuanced enough to make each spot interesting for the whole week.
• Prepare perspective customers to be comfortable in coming in to the dealership – massaging them over time, expertly and consistently.
• Generate in the audience a hope that, maybe, this dealership can be approached without apprehension or fear.
• Over the run, the dealers can generate a “feel good” connection with potential customers. Dealer can expect folks who have been loyal to a different maker to be dropping by.
(Anncr): “These are… the Super Spots!”

[pave]

Radio’s 3-Way Toxic Relationships
There are no acceptable explanations. Radio has formed and retains toxic relationships with two other parties – advertisers and audiences. Thousands of times a day, radio produces “direct response” ads – spots that challenge audiences with gross demands for behavior and more content than can be retained. Advertisers and audiences tolerate it all.

As corporate radio has gutted the on-air and creative staffs from their stations – also causing smaller outfits to get into lock-step or perish, only the easiest-to-produce and least influential advertising is being presented. This practice has been around for so long that I would venture to say that most radio participants may have no memory of when things were any different. (To be fair, things were not that much different.) The point being made here is that radio has made no significant improvements in the areas of on-air and commercial presentation in decades.

It comes as no surprise to any readers of this piece that those same spots make up the most innocuous and irritating bilge being produced for radio. They are everywhere. They have no home. They affect and spoil radio stations every time they go to air. They burn audiences down. They perform for the advertisers at a minimalist level and at high costs – given the ROI. But, few are talkin’.

Certainly, there are folks on both the radio-side and in the advertising community who cry out for ads that are “out of the box” or are “rising above the clutter” and are also more effective. Unfortunately those materials are generally unavailable at a local level and too costly when bought from agencies. The most important part is that when they are made available, they are held to be extremely questionable as to their abilities to influence an audience enough to make the investment valuable. Again, few are talkin’.

Although an interesting and laudable position, seeking for outstanding spots has drawbacks. One of them is in the assumption that radio-folk and/or advertisers would know an outstanding spot if they heard one. Like the car dealer I mentioned earlier, a response of “These commercials don’t make me want to buy a car!” while ridiculous at so many levels is also not an unreasonable response, particularly when the dealer has no idea how radio works and what is required to influence an audience. I mean, the guy is a car dealer! He’s no media guru. And it’s unlikely he is dealing with one from the local station.

In the case of the demo car dealer spots I am offering to anyone who requests them at info@voicetalentguy.com - these spots are operating at a number of conscious and unconscious levels. They depend on frequency and longer-term runs to impact properly. Of course, it is important that radio-folk get that. My confidence is low.

Another thing is that, when presented with such a campaign/series, radio folks tend to panic – partially because of the spots themselves, but more from the realization that this kind of radio advertising is so very difficult to replicate. What happens if an advertiser becomes insistent on just such approaches? The station rep is then well and truly pooched. She knows there is nothing in her satchel that even comes close to “out-of-the-box” or “above the clutter”. As a third party listening to this observation of radio’s status quo, one could reasonably wonder why the folks who make such decisions aren’t up on morality charges – never mind indictments of gross business mismanagement.

I am reminded of Dr. Joseph Lister, the surgeon who introduced new principles of cleanliness that transformed surgical practice in the late 1800s. We take it for granted that a surgeon will guard a patient's safety by using aseptic methods. But this was not always the case, and until Lister introduced sterile surgery, a patient could undergo a procedure successfully only to die from a postoperative infection known as ‘ward fever’.

Before his objections and declarations about surgical sterility, doctors would move from one patient and dive in, wrist deep, to the next – a sort of “meatball surgery”. His colleagues discounted him incessantly.

Radio is in a position where all it can do today is a form of “meatball production”. Audience members and some advertisers, for the most part, survive the exploitation and meager services. Others do not. Both the best interests of the clients and the audiences are being ignored. As in Dr. Lister’s case, his colleagues had little time for, or interest in, his extraordinary claims. Based on behaviors, radio has no interest in anything other than what they already produce.

Plus, as mentioned elsewhere, local radio stations are in no position to deliver anything other than meatball production – low quality meatballs at that, already past their “best-before” dates. Fortunately, for now, both audiences and advertisers are having no effect on these radio practices.

The 3-way toxicity of our current state is, indeed, being ignored. There is another possibility and, to my mind, it is actually the most prevalent. I believe radio station managers are completely unaware of the significance of this situation. Those few who may be aware, however, are at a loss or restricted from doing anything else.

Do audiences really get “the best selection, the best service and the best prices in town” from an advertiser? Do advertisers really believe it when their radio rep claims “…and these commercials will be remembered.”…? Do reps really/I] believe it when they say it? Do radio station managers [I]really believe they are operating with the best interests of audiences and advertisers in mind?

Even as I appreciate the requests for the demos of my own examples, I will say I am under-whelmed by the response. This lack of interest only solidifies my case. And that’s another example of the toxic relationships. “Improvement” is a good thing. Really.

[pave]

Radio’s ‘Box’ Dilemma
Out here where the busses don’t run, I can’t imagine the stressors and limitations under which station managers must operate - and be expected to perform. Given multi-media competition, other stations, the lack of enough creative and on-air talent, budgetary restraints and refereeing dust-ups in the hallways, running a chain of “Wishy-Washy” laundries becomes a viable option.

And yet, there are elements of radio that have been and continue to be ignored – not because they have been discarded, so much, but because they have yet to be identified, accepted and implemented!

As everyone who reads these pieces already knows: Radio will not invest a dime in R&D unless it has to do with sales trainings – maybe. I am reminded of Mike Myer’s character who says, “If it’s no Scottish, it’s crap!” Radio stations take a similar position when they insist, “If it’s no produced in-house, it’s crap.” Unfortunately, the reverse is more accurate: “If it’s produced in-house, it’s likely crap.” Harsh, indeed, But who is going to provide a reasoned argument?

Outstanding personalities that can draw and hold significant audience accepted – rare though they are – radio has yet to pay any attention to the fundamentals required for everybody else including on-air and commercial production personnel to be effective through this electronic medium.

Less so now, but over the years, we (radio) have been able to accomplish a great deal with enthusiasm alone. That, and a significant lack of audio competition had made things somewhat easier through the years. Yet, the medium continues to slip as a preferred advertising and enter/infotainment resource – for known and some still unknown reasons.

As painful to contemplate as it may be, I still expect no argument when I insist that radio has to re-tool! By that, I mean with NEW tools and only some of the old ones. As a career-long radio guy with specialized education and multiple successes, I am embarrassed to reveal I actually participate in an industry that refuses to upgrade in its prime directive, that being: To communicate effectively.

In earlier pieces, I offered some demos of one of my series of auto dealer spots. These spots have been generated with radio fundamentals completely in mind and with the elements to massage audiences for the benefits of the dealership. They also include elements consistent with the findings of modern neuroscience – very special and amazingly powerful when applied. The requests to hear them could have, so far, been piled in a teacup. This lack of interests says a great deal about the desires of station management to influence audiences on behalf of advertisers. Even so, they are still available for monitoring (and discussion) by requesting them from me at http://www.voicetalentguy.com

Still, I am obliged to recognize the factors and limitations under which most managers are forced to operate.

Commercial music-radio is famous for providing pomp and circumstance, particularly when the horn it is blowing is being tooted for its own benefit. But we (radio) seem to forget that most of that is still - just noise. That kind of “noise” does little to create credibility with an audience. Some managers would call this bleating “quality programming and advertising content”, but even insiders are beginning to recognize that the same ol’-same ol’ is not producing satisfactory results.

I have always speculated that, because of radio traditions and radio dogma, the leadership has never really considered that the medium is operating and producing results that are only a fraction of what is possible, available - and necessary. Nothing is being done to improve the quality of on-air personnel or the generation of more dynamic commercials. So, it might be fair to surmise that managers believe that what it is today is all it ever can be – an extraordinarily uninformed and self-defeating assumption.

Radio can be likened to an old sailing ship with a hull covered in barnacles. The bilge is over-filled with heavy, black water, which is pulling the vessel further below the waterline. The unholy stink is one of the consequences. Radio’s barnacles need to be scraped; the bilge has to be jettisoned and a new, modern set of sails wouldn’t hurt performance either.

All that, plus constant storms, breaking steering gear, cracking rudders, mutinous grumblings below decks and the lubberly performance of midshipmen means the ship’s officers have more on their hands than they can muster the energy to perform. Re-varnishing the topsides accomplishes nothing. The ideal time for coming about and making for a sheltered port is well past. Indeed, a re-fit is required. (“Arrghhh!”)

Pundits everywhere are encouraging radio managers to start “thinking out of the box”. Some of those pundits, like myself, are more strident about the bogged-down situation in which radio finds itself. The urging to “think out of the box” comes with the assumption that radio can identify the box-in-question (BIQ). They can’t identify the box. They can’t describe the box. Some may retaliate with bold statements that “There is no box!” They can be lead to the box. They can hear it. They can see it. They can feel it. Some can even articulate the shapes, forms and colors of the box. But, they still refuse to admit it exists! That it is a horrible position to maintain.

Weird, I know. But, there will likely be no congruent arguments forthcoming. And that’s from how many radio managers…? Indeed, the dilemma exists. If not self-generated, radio’s leadership desperately needs to be pushed, pulled, dragged, bullied or tricked into making some decisions. First order of business: Identify the box. Truth be told, I have no idea who in the leadership has the chops or the juice to do that.

[pave]

Won’t Look – Can’t See
Recognized as a pioneer in marketing and advertising, John Wanamaker of Philadelphia is regularly quoted as having said, “Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is, I don't know which half.” That seems to be the status quo for retailers today – a hundred years later. The principle still applies – even as it includes the new digital kid.

Meanwhile, as reported in Radio Ink recently: “iHeartMedia Chairman Bob Pittman told CNBC yesterday, ‘What's happened in radio is that it has done a very poor job of monetizing what they have.’ Pittman noted that radio does not need a new product to generate more revenue; it really needs to monetize the product better to generate more revenue.”

To my mind, that is a staggering and disturbing pronouncement. While better monetization is a worthwhile aspiration anyway, I have to assume Mr. Pittman had already made another assumption before declaring his position. The assumption: Radio has arrived at a place where it is as good and effective as it ever has been – and will likely ever be!

Radio then, in the minds of major leadership groups, must have peaked some time ago – leaving no more need or room for improvement. Further, if that were the case, it would be no surprise that radio can then be treated as a commodity – no different from wheat or iron ore. Indeed, at corporate levels, radio stations are described as “properties” – no different from a pile of pork bellies - that can be bought and sold with no consideration for any other factors except short-term profits.

However, there still is Mr. Pittman’s following, presumptive, statement in which he declares, “Radio does not need a new product to generate more revenue.” (I admit to wondering if the guys refuse all outside input and only listen to each other in their sealed, hyper-oxygenated environments.)

This is extremely unfortunate. From out here, I submit, it is obvious that radio is gasping and wheezing - clinging to the stair banister rails for support – desperately in need of more and, most importantly, improved products and services. The problem is that few either notice this as the circumstance, or refuse to acknowledge it. Either way, immediate action is still required. After all, this is about audiences and advertisers, is it not?

So far, nobody in radio’s senior management has come out to counter the idea that programming is in dire straights, or that the creative departments - supposedly generating effective advertising - are in shambles, and are unable to consistently produce anything other than crude, irritating, “direct response” pap.

Given that John Wannamaker’s contention of a hundred years ago still seems to be holding up, one could surmise the field of advertising is being dragged along by an aged, broken down, horse.

Such is not the case! Audio/video advertising has made extraordinary leaps over the years. It is likewise for high-end print – glorious stuff. Some advertising agencies supply powerful radio ads, but only some of the time. Seems that local print and local radio own the hobbled horse. Even local agencies come with high production and operating costs, particularly when compared to the “freebies” from radio.

Radio, certainly, has been crippled by its own inability (and unwillingness) to put the time, effort and imagination into developing superior advertising products. Indeed, as all the decades-old clichés and radio stereotypes continue to prevail on the air everywhere, an assumption that radio is disinterested in the well being of its advertisers (and audiences) can easily be made. That radio has also taken its audiences and treated them like moronic chattel is a situation that also goes unchallenged. When a station abuses and slaps its audience around and sends them back into the wilderness with an insincere “Thanks for comin’ out!” - evidence enough has been provided.

Mr. Pittman’s most recent comments and the lack of argument for other, at least as important premises, suggests there is a severe reality-gap within radio that is rendering widely-held, radical and unsupported positions that have been around forever as actually being useful and secure.

Radio could improve majestically by taking steps to choose – not find - which half of the advertising total is working. It would be to the benefit of all concerned parties were radio to concentrate on generating only the good stuff. It is available.

Auto dealerships, for example, have been willing (sometimes not so much) partners with radio for decades in foisting horribly insulting and annoying commercials on audiences. Every dealership gets the same ads in rotation with other dealers. It’s all so predictable and mind numbing. “But, it works!” some will exclaim. Yes, radio works. TV works. Print works. Kijiji works. Bulletin boards in grocery stores and laundromats work. Maybe digital is working.

Radio, meanwhile, still enjoys advantages over other media. It is electronic, and as such, it does its best work on an audience’s emotional level. It is passive. People do not have to be exclusively involved as in print, TV or other electronic media. They can be engaged in other things and still have radio gaining influential access to their hearts and craniums. Safely, too! Perhaps this may be radio’s most important advantage.

Today, more and more, we hear the refrains of the “ROI chorus”. How much return for how many dollars? That is a reasonable request. And, as always, a question that can be addressed only after the ad campaign has been completed. My own 6 demos of the “Picker & Grinner” 13 and 26-cut auto dealership series are available on request at http://www.info@voicetalentguy.com

So there it is: Determine which half of the advertising budgets are being wasted – and supply the other half. However, first, ‘fess up to not generating the other half - the “good stuff”. This will take a purposeful consideration on the part of management. The alternative is not pleasant, and can be described by the title: “Won’t Look – Can’t See”.

[pave]

Boss Radio
For decades, the standard retinue of on-air and commercial phrases has included the likes of: “Do it today! Buy now! Come on down! Save 30 percent! Don’t miss it! Check us out online! Call now! Wait!” An impressive list of others exists. The on-air usage of this approach to audiences is pervasive and ubiquitous. Not only that - it’s everywhere!

Advertising agency-type weenies call those audio nuggets “calls to action”, and on surface, most would agree that seems like a more than acceptable bit of labeling. I mean, has anybody in a radio audience got up and complained. Advertisers like the approach – as if telling people what to do is agreeable to the audience’s cranial parts as well as a persuasive advertising methodology.

Just off the top – if any broadcaster can explain how ordering people around like they were one of the family’s K-9 chowder-hounds is a worthwhile exercise, I am willing to be corrected. Fair warning though: I have heard most of the justifications. The gem, however, is the one where a radio-type, when challenged, will say something along the lines of: “Our audiences are so stupid, we have to tell them what to do.” Others have justified the approach as necessary because “Getting them (the audience) to do stuff is like herding cats,”

I understand this authoritarian strategy has been around for like, forever. I also understand the masses have not risen up to storm the station’s location – insulted and indignant about being prodded like so many cattle being lead down the final chute - the cow-equivalent of The Green Mile.

Most broadcasters have never given this situation any thought at all. That would include owners, managers, the on-air and commercial types and the janitors who program the outfits. No surprise, this, as the majority of radio-folk also still think they are dealing in a one-to-one medium. That broadcasters can’t crack through to that reality may be a befuddlement to me for some time.

Meanwhile, there are a limited number of circumstances where someone can actually demand behaviors from someone else. I am thinking a cop could do it. A boss can do it. My mom could do it – for a while. Some in the guv’ment might pull it off. A spouse probably has the best chance of all.

A fair question, then, would be: If nobody is complaining, why even make an issue of it?
While the dynamic reasons go a little deeper, I could start with the suggestion that telling people what to do on the radio is not only impolite, it is rude, bullying, insulting and does nothing to either gain rapport with them or make the speaker any more credible or personable. People spending time in the joint are constantly being told what to do. And, if they don’t – there are consequences. One might be forgiven for thinking that those revelations alone would be enough for radio to consider other approaches. But, this is radio, after all – where habits and dogma rule.

As to deeper rationale:
Language, especially when delivered through an electronic medium, is processed, first, by our unconscious minds. Individuals are unconsciously grinding up what has been presented on an ongoing basis, and making every attempt to derive meaning from what has been heard. But, and this is important – any meaning a person generates is strictly subjective. Their ”meaning” may have little or nothing to do with the intentions of the speaker.

Since being told what to do over the radio is a pretty innocuous piece of business, the unconscious doesn’t even bother to present that material to the consciousness. Thus, minimal complaints are brought forward. But, over time, a resistance is building – to such a degree that the unconscious begins to reject the spoken material altogether. Still, listeners do complain about how much they hate the spots and can only come up with generalizations about why – if the topic ever comes up.

Since we are also listeners ourselves, we already know we talk back to the radio on semi-regular occasions. Our retorts hardly ever show us at our emotional or articulate bests, either. I have, however, been known to shout out “Consider my shorts as a source of fine dining, you dolt!” Mostly though, I get rude & crude, especially in the car.

Language and its nuances are hardly ever considered as important by the vast majority of radio’s presenters – both on-air and out of the spot departments. In fact, most of the language presented on the radio can be described as base and brutal – the lowest forms of human communication. Attaching all those ridiculous “demands for behavior” only provides more perfect opportunities for audience members to become indifferent to those communications or to reject them altogether.

While radio management is scrambling to squeeze more money from its advertisers, it seems to hardly ever occur to them that an upgrading in the services they are providing might be the real responsibility.

Radio is very fortunate that audience members don’t have the capacity to reach through the speakers, wrap their hands around the presenters and throttle the livin’ bejezus out of these arrogant mutts.

“Boss Radio”, some years ago, was an interesting positioning moniker, especially given the precision and intensity of the presentations of the format. But in this context (contemporary music radio), nobody, and I mean: not one person on the air holds such a position that they can claim authority over anybody in the audience. Yet, radio still operates as if ordering us around is a useful, appealing and successful strategy. Radio is not my boss – or anyone else’s.

[jon]

“Boss Radio”, some years ago, was an interesting positioning moniker, especially given the precision and intensity of the presentations of the format. But in this context (contemporary music radio), nobody, and I mean: not one person on the air holds such a position that they can claim authority over anybody in the audience. Yet, radio still operates as if ordering us around is a useful, appealing and successful strategy. Radio is not my boss – or anyone else’s.

I was in Junior High when the "Boss" word joined my peers' vocabulary. It meant Fabulous, akin to Groovy.

My experience with Boss Radio in its first few years sweeping North America was that the selling, be it Promotion or Ads delivered by "The Boss Jocks" was Enthusiastic. You weren't being yelled at. They were just so excited about whatever they were talking about that they were yelling about it. As a fourteen year old, the message of the ad/promo was "Wouldn't this be fun?"

I'm sure that I wasn't alone in this. I would be hard pressed to think of anyone in my age group at that time who did not bristle at being ordered to do something in a yell. That was what becoming a teenager was all about: resisting authority.

All that said, I don't disagree with your point. Or even that Radio folks who did not live through the early Boss Radio years as a teenager may be misinterpreting it today half a century away.

[Jim Walters]

Boss Radio

“Boss Radio”, some years ago, was an interesting positioning moniker, especially given the precision and intensity of the presentations of the format. But in this context (contemporary music radio), nobody, and I mean: not one person on the air holds such a position that they can claim authority over anybody in the audience. Yet, radio still operates as if ordering us around is a useful, appealing and successful strategy. Radio is not my boss – or anyone else’s.

The Boss Radio term began in San Francisco at KYA where Bill Drake was the PD. KYA was known as The Boss Of The Bay. It was their way saying they were the leader. They were #1. They were the Boss!
They weren't trying to be anybody's personal boss, or telling anyone how to live their life.

When Drake moved on to the RKO chain, the Boss name came with him and he adapted it.

In 1965, you may recall stuff that was "In" was "Boss" or "Bitchin'" , maybe even "Groovy" or "Mint".

Boss Radio just had kind of a nice ring to it. Could you imagine Mint Hitbounds, or call me now on The Bitchin' Line?

[pave]

The Sensory Deprivation Medium
Clear skies on a blistering, Africa-hot, summer afternoon – a perfect time for another six-hour remote at one of the local appliance stores. That the turntables and mic stand were squashed into a tilted, rickety corner of one of the front display windows guaranteed another sweltering shift of natural and panic sweat. Plus, melting in public can be such a gripping learning experience.

Two hours into the remote, the sun was angled such that it could beat down on me with cruel intention - and no remorse. There was no escaping it, either. For two reasons. 1. This was in the day when we threw the mic open after every record, and we had to get ready for the next stop-set. Unlike today’s endless music sweeps and long, grinding spot clusters, there was hardly enough time to leave for a quick whiz, never mind an invigorating rub and a dip in the cool pool. 2. The slightest movement, like getting up from the chair, would shake the turntables and the needle would start skipping and scratching its way across the 45 like a Thompson’s gazelle pronking over the veldt. Potting down and grabbing the tone arm to drop the needle back on the record was the only alternative. Not pro.

We were required to dress for remotes back then – white shirt and tie and, I must say, a pretty spiffy, light tan, camel hair sports jacket with the station’s calls stitched into the breast pocket. No jeans. There were some conversations about length of hair, but the station PD reluctantly backed off as the times, after all, were a’ changin’. Soft “Beatle boots” were in vogue by then and quite acceptable. (This was well before the platform shoes of the “Disco Scare of the ‘70’s” took their crippling toll.)

Between squinting because of the intense, direct sunlight and the irritating rivulets of sweat burning my eyes, reading “live” spots became a serious challenge. Indeed, I was soaked through to my shorts. I don’t believe anyone heard me squish. Plus, I was constantly worried that the record I had slip-cued previously had already jumped the groove.

Meanwhile, as this was an appliance store, the station’s sales rep, the GSM, PD and store management were clustered in front of the fan display – all of the devices operating at full blast – drinking old black coffees that had the odor of ancient cooking grease and was poured into plastic cups. Still, everybody was getting along famously. I was knocking back the same oil-slicked swill that had to be stirred in a frenzy because of the powdered, chunky creamer. I perched the cup precariously on the board right beside my ashtray. To be sure, it was a pleased and jovial clutch as the all-day remote was pulling in some serious shoppers. There were “atta boys” and “wayta go’s” all around, and that included for me.

Exhausted and, by then, somewhat gamey, I finally made it to 6 PM and signed off. I packed up the logs, copy binder and the case of ‘45’s; bid my farewells and thanks to the client and, casually and confidently, strolled up the few blocks to the station. Even under those less than ideal circumstances, it was still a thrill to be on the radio – talkin’ nasty and playin’ the hits.

So. Unless it was pointed out, it is highly unlikely that any readers would notice the previous (absolutely true) story was cobbled together with attention being paid to the sensory elements that are available in experience and in the language. I suspect that somebody has already said, “English is too special a language to waste.” Radio, however, hasn’t heard the news, seen the writing on the wall, felt the impact, picked up on the odors in the air (or on the air), or tasted the fruits of extra attention.

People experience the external world through their senses. We see. We hear. We touch. We smell the environments. We taste. We also have representations of all the senses in our internal experiences. And we process pure, so-called “digital” information. When we speak, we tend to limit those representations in our speech. But, when we do offer sensory representations, we are likely to depend on one sensory expression as a primary modality. Some of us talk about visuals more than any others. Some refer to “feelings” almost exclusively. A few others favor auditory examples in their speech patterns. The reason they do that is because that is exactly how they are experiencing their world.

Obviously, radio, unlike different media, has only one output modality – sound. Yet, even with that (seemingly) limiting circumstance, we still have the potential to engage in our listeners all of the sensory modalities. Unfortunately, this potential has never been expressed or exploited. “Theatre-of-the-mind” is just an expression that AE’s use to impress clients. It is hardly ever demonstrated.

I urge any broadcaster reading this piece to monitor their own outfits and determine how little of these sensory modalities are being expressed on the air and in the commercial content.

Radio has been ignoring all of the available communicative aspects that would make of it an incredibly powerful, informative, entertaining and influential advertising medium. It has been doing so for decades. The irony lies in the fact that: By improving the communicative elements, radio will be doing itself, its audiences and its advertisers a tremendous service. Win/Win/Win.

Alas, radio continues to limit itself and the results advertisers might otherwise enjoy by making of itself a sensory deprivation medium. Radio does this by relying – almost exclusively – on pure content-information. When people are deprived of their senses, they tend to go inside themselves – for a while. After longer periods, they go ape-snake nuts. Has radio already arrived at that state? Audiences, if they are expected to participate, must be reached at levels to which they can relate. The sensory modalities are one of those categories.

[pave]

Business In A Bubble
As more local advertisers shred their budgets by making major shifts to “digital”, radio finds itself with mealy, milquetoast justifications/excuses for those advertisers to stay with their stations. Fortunately for radio, these advertisers are messaging their digital spaces with what? Print ads! Meanwhile, radio – ever-ready to exploit an opportunity - insists on continuing to fill its audio spaces with what? Print ads!

When given the opportunity to learn the distinctions involved in presenting in different media, I would have thought radio operators would have, by now, jumped at the chance to adjust their on-air and commercial presentations with those distinctions in mind. I would have been mistaken. No. I am mistaken.

Digital “analytics”, practically, are only the dimes being thrown around like they were manhole covers. The numbers provided are no more than a report on how many people may or may not be ignoring the ads. Radio, then, still has a window to first, perform and secondly, to use the traffic and sales results generated for the advertiser.

I suspect that, some day, advertisers, particularly local retailers, are going to realize that spending on digital is like owning a fairly large boat – a hole in the water into which large dollars are thrown. This is unlikely to happen in a time frame that radio will exploit. That is, unless radio comes to the same realization about its own presentations.

Radio-folks - with ownership, management and programmers included - have taken their own medium totally for granted, and for as long as there has been commercial radio. It is no secret within the business that nothing about programming or commercial production has been improved-on or revitalized in any significant ways. To the contrary, radio has suppressed the on-air components over the years and, likewise, strangled the creative departments into producing the most base, banal and crude elements of communication. And they still make claims that this flotsam is “advertising”. Nobody would dare to attempt to mount a cogent defense on this issue.

Radio insiders – mostly the staffs – have always accused their organizations of running spots as if radio was no more than the “newspaper-of-the-air”. That was decades ago. It is the same today. I would be reluctant to share that piece of information with anyone in a different field, never mind audience members or advertisers. The embarrassment might be crippling. Plus, announcers are still dropping amphetamines in order to cram one more piece of information into a :30. That is, if the engineer can’t do a time compression on the spot that doesn’t make the presenters sound like rutting lemmings. This is madness-in-action, by the way.

Since most of commercial radio today is corporately structured, we now are overwhelmed by what comes out the south end of a northbound cow. The corporate biggies, after all, are not cowboys. They are bi’ness men doin’ bi’ness. However, recently, bi’ness has not been so good. Sales is still everything and the quality of what is being provided to audiences and advertisers is hardly worth a sniff around the back rooms.

Since most of the ownership and senior management of contemporary radio have no idea what it takes to be superior broadcast communicators, and since that topic has nothing to do with direct, immediate sales, it is unlikely these matters will ever be addressed.

Perhaps, when a panicked “Hail Mary” is necessary, a few individuals might snort around for some desperately needed options and solutions. Solicitations to the cosmos, however, might be arriving too late or be utterly ineffective to be of any value, anyway. (The cosmos is funny that way.)

The claim that radio is going to have to make a number of significant changes if it is to re-claim any former glory or take itself to new, extraordinary successes goes unchallenged. Yet, the task remains. Those who have access to golden parachutes are unlikely motivated to get involved in such a process. Those who don’t will only get to enjoy the view on the way down – momentarily. This is not to suggest that terra-radio is doomed. But, I do suspect there is going to be a lot more carnage in the interim.

I had a short, brusque exchange a week ago with an anonymous (alleged) cluster-owner who had arrived at a position known as ‘premature closure”. This state is usually accompanied by a sincere, but annoying and arrogant certainty. When I am wearing my H/R-hat, I can deal with such a situation, but only on a one-to-one, face-to-face basis. The guy left the impression that everything was fine and that he could handle anything that came up. (I asked him for the address of his cluster so that I could send sympathy cards to his staff. None was forthcoming.)

Radio has developed its own form of schema – a subjectively-applied model of the world that organizes categories of information. In a way, radio has its own unique and shared reality. This model does not include the necessity for the improvement of programming or commercial production. Another way to describe this (possibly unique-to-radio) phenomena would be as similar to being enclosed in a sealed bubble – unaffected by any outside elements or influences.

Even as senior radio management scrambles to drive business with better closing techniques, re-branding when the brand doesn’t exist, throwing out wild claims of 14 and 20 percent ROI factors, trashing other media and cutting back on its own performers, the evidence is clear and unequivocal: Radio is a business in a bubble. Change is not inevitable, but it is required. Effective solutions are available – outside of the bubble. But the bubble has to be eliminated, first. While semi-safe and semi-comfortable, the “bubble” is still an extremely toxic and debilitating environment.

[pave]

The Premiere Medium
There are few, if any, radio managers, particularly those trapped in some monolithic corporate structure, who have not found their energies and life forces being drained away. Their superiors have no qualms about sucking the marrow from the bones of their underlings – even as they, too, struggle with the glaring inequities they are obliged to foist on their minions. Most local management suffers with an unspoken desperation.

I didn’t just make that up. Rather, it is a report on the attitudes of so many managers with whom I have had direct or indirect contact. Nor is this a new phenomena; it has been around for decades. It just gets more pervasive, is all. Those who have an appreciation for, first, the absolute need for their outfits to get upgraded in the programming and commercial production departments, also lament they have no mandate to take any unwarranted action that could influence their positions in their markets. Fortunately, the guys down the street are wearing similar chains and restraints.

I have been taken to task more recently for insisting radio, generally, is in a pathetic state. But, even as I have been continuously providing strategies, techniques and methodologies as solutions for what ails the communicative aspects of contemporary radio, my detractors keep insisting that I am, so to speak, a “nasty and negative Nancy”. The irony lies in that I have never been challenged on the content of what I have been providing. This is bizarre - mostly because the readers of these pieces are usually quite well placed, intelligent and have had years of experience in the business.

I am satisfied that radio is the premier medium - not because of what it used to be or for what it is today. Radio, to me, is the premiere medium because of what it could be! My reference, then, is about unrealized potential. I am compelled to reiterate: Radio has a long way to go before it can claim the position of “the premiere medium”. For that to happen, a significant number of internal approaches will have to be adopted into the mix of the on-air communications. The irony is that, when these principles are presented, an overwhelming number of radio practitioners will reject them out of hand – without any serious consideration, never mind a reasonable trial run.

I would hope the vast majority of operators have, by now, reluctantly accepted there will be no technology – no gizmo – coming down the pike that is going to save the medium from a noticeable slide. Even considering the influence of other media, most of the damage, I submit, has been self-inflicted. Much of that wreckage has been caused by organizations that have few clues about the dynamics under which radio operates – and, it could also be said, the innate, natural components under which radio is governed.

Meanwhile, radio can be “the premiere medium” for a number of reasons – some innate to the medium and others because of opportunities that are available to communicate much more effectively, and with a great deal more appeal.

Relative to other media, the production of commercial content is less expensive to provide. The term “shoestring” comes to mind. Unfortunately, local radio has gone into the “scraping the bottom of the barrel-mode and been supplying such shoddy copy and performances for so long (decades) that even “free” comes off as a bit of a rip. Still, there’s gold in them thar hills. To exploit that, radio is going to have to invest in some picks, shovels and pans, and then, learn how to use them.

As a partial refresher: Radio’s model-of communication is flawed – fundamentally.

Radio continues to be presented as if it were a direct medium. That’s what allows the disastrous “one-to-one” presupposition to dominate radio’s philosophy – through programming and commercial production. Radio, because of our inability to target a single, unknown individual without challenging others who are (obviously) listening, sets itself up for ongoing communicative failures. Radio is an indirect medium. To exploit that fact, radio will be required to make significant adjustments to its communicative approaches.

A radio station, including any speaker on the air, has no authority over anyone in the audience. Yet we continue to make [/I]demands for behaviors[/I] as if we were operating in North Korea. (Penalties for non-compliance are non-existent.) This phenomenon could be beyond a reasonable person’s comprehension that such a practice even exists.

With rare exceptions, people on the air have been suppressed to a suffocating degree – so much so that anything they are allowed to say and the manner in which they tend to say it becomes no more than another annoyance (tune-out factor) to an audience. Any remnants of actual appeal have turned to dust years ago.

Speakers on the air, and through commercials, are completely ignoring the fact that audience members experience their world, or rather, their own “models-of-the-world”, through their senses, first, and derive some semblance of meaning from those factors after. Radio people are not purposely including those sensory references in their communications. Less, in this context, is not more. I point out: Talent has been systematically shut down because of a history of providing overwhelming “babble and incoherent gibberish”. Talent needs to be trained in the elements mentioned (above) and in many other more subtle but still powerful skills of the professional communicator.

Further, I have yet to meet anyone in radio who does not realize that something is seriously wrong - soiling the medium’s affect. But, they have also been unable to identify what it is, specifically, or how to correct it. I do sympathize with those many bright and alert managers who are allowed to attempt nothing in order to adapt to the serious threats to radio’s future prosperity. Radio - becoming the premiere medium - might have to wait.

[Mike Cleaver]

Local managers have no control over anything.
Everything comes from Toronto or wherever head office for the cluster-f**k is located.
I personally witnessed this at a Vancouver station where I worked.
I was in this persons office so often reporting on what was going on in the station, he finally threw up his hands and said "That's it, I'm outta here!"
His resignation was announced the next day and the next in the chain of "yes men" showed up shortly thereafter.
Orders come down from on high and must never be questioned, if you do, you too are soon unemployed.
Local managers and program directors and news directors all are in the same boat.
Follow instructions from on high to the letter or be gone.
The only thing that can save their hides is to show the buffoons at the top how they can cut costs even more than they've already been cut.
Suggestions from anyone below the Big Kahuna running the chain usually get shit canned and if by chance one is good, guess who takes the credit for it while the guy or gal who came up with it gets put on the list as "one to be watched," not for promotion but one who may threaten whomever is currently at the top of the dung pile.

[Tom Jeffries]

Michael speaketh the truth.

The Industry I loved, is washed up on the Beach and is starting to smell - d e a d.

"........Maroons, I am surrounded by Maroons........" Mr. B. Bunny 1956.

[Tape Splicer]

Tom; I wonder if the "necropsy" - when performed on the "beached dead whale" that is radio - will show it died of a lack of interest or insight for anything other then each not quite so mighty Canadian dollar that can be squeeeeeezed from each station in their cluster of stations. Listening to what is on the dial, be it AM or FM is not creative. 6, 10, or 20 song music sweeps with five minutes commercial breaks does not show creativity. But as was said above the radio of 30 or so years ago is not the radio of today.... RiP