A crise presente da rádio é tambem a crise de um determinado modelo comercial. «Barnouw (1970) maintained that since radio's inception in the 1920s, the notion of using program content to expose audiences to embedded advertising messages has proven to be a winning business model.» (47); «From a business perspective, Alexander (1997) maintained that the primary goal of radio programming is to maximize the size of an audience targeted by advertisers and the only way to accomplish this goal is to satisfy the needs and wants of that audience. "Uses and gratifications" has long been a popular approach to understanding audience motivations for tuning to radio and television programming. The underlying presumption is that audiences are not passive nonjudgmental receivers of media but are, rather, active seekers of program content that will satisfy specific needs. From practical considerations, such as wanting information about traffic congestion, to more abstract psychological desires, such as relief from emotional stress, listening patterns are determined by each person's expectations of how well different media or programs will gratify their needs (Rubin & Perse, 1994)» (pag 48)

- «(...) among the several motivations for switching stations, avoiding commercials was ranked the highest»(48/49)

- «the dominant motivation for switching radio stations was the desire to avoid commercials or zapping. Tied to this behavior was the tendency to abandon a commercial break almost immediately-even when listening to a "favorite station." Again, these findings are consistent with Abernathy (1991) who found that the first commercial in a break had a better chance of being exposed than later commercials within a cluster.» (60) McDowell and Dick, 2003

CLEAR CHANNEL

$35.42 and only because their buyout price guarantees $36 or else, who knows what it would be worth today. Maybe $9-15? CCU was $91.75 on February 4th, 2000 and after that date the share price was never higher. This is the bellwether stock for radio -- the largest owner with 1,100 stations. No wonder the founding Mays family can't beat it to the door fast enough for one more paycheck. Their legacy may very well be that they single-handedly helped lead the radio industry into the doldrums through inept management and lack of vision.

CBS

$17.17 at closing on Friday. CBS was as high as $88.70 in winter, 2004 although it has paid dividends recently and has been reconfigured away from parent Viacom -- all factors that make it difficult to judge apples with apples. It also includes television -- another dying business with the next generation. CBS Radio President Joel Hollander didn't know what he was doing and when his successor, Dan Mason, showed up, he was smart enough to understand that CBS needed to program to the available radio audience and has tried to rebuild stations while corporate pressures forced him to make cutbacks -- not good.

COX RADIO

$9.95 and beginning to worry Wall Street. Cox stock had been in the $30 range in 1998 and never got higher. Cox President Bob Neil, like CBS' Mason is smart. But Neil is increasingly distracted with the holy jihad he is conducting against Arbitron's People Meter instead of keeping his eyes on his fries. Neil is also wise enough to cut spot loads -- a battle worth fighting publicly. Neil knows radio must tighten inventory and charge more. He should be leading on these issues and not conducting food fights with Arbitron over PPM.

SAGA

$5.62 at the bell Friday. Saga shareholders were no doubt happier in 2002 when its stock priced at $23. Since then it has never been higher. Downhill all the way. Saga chief Ed Christian never strayed from his plan to run a consolidated small market radio company and he deserves credit for that as analysts agree radio is somewhat healthier in smaller markets. Christian surprised at least one of his employees when he joined Cox's fight against Arbitron's People Meter -- some perceiving it as a personal crusade. Misguided to say the least -- as long as more important issues are on the table.

ENTERCOM

$5.18 Friday -- a far cry from $65.88 in Feb 4, 2000 then down you go. Shareholders must have had great faith in Entercom to value it with the big boys but it languishes today through lack of vision and ordinary operating strategies -- a big fall from grace by radio's preferred judgment standard -- shareholder value.

CUMULUS

$2.73 -- a $50 stock in 2002 and then steadily down. Another small market strategy that went awry. Even with the benefit of small market economics Cumulus is getting too close to becoming a $1 stock. This in spite of the fact that the Dickey's knew they needed to get out, but were not able to make a buyout happen in the current financial atmosphere.

EMMIS

$1.56 at the end of last week -- $56.56 in January, 2000 and then never above that high. CEO Jeff Smulyan runs an honest company with excellent assets (I'm speaking about the employees here). But he has a problem -- too much dependence on New York and LA which has been a roller coaster ride -- particularly down lately. Smulyan has tried several times to take the company private and has run into opposition. In my opinion, he was willing to overpay to go private. Guess shareholders aren't that smart. Selling at $19 sounds better to me than closing at $1.56. Nonetheless, even good people with a good leader can't muster more value than a buck and a half.

RADIO ONE

What a great name for this stock since it is worth around one dollar -- $1.05 on Friday. Radio One had worked its way up to $23.30 in May, 2002. The Liggins family has not been able to show vision that has been any better than their peers as this company flirts with being delisted.

CITADEL

83 cents -- you read that right -- 83 cents. Citadel was $22 ten years ago when the ABC merger wasn't even a glimmer in anyone's eye and Citadel has been declining ever since. Citadel is a particular disgrace as a public company because its shareholders see fit to compensate their CEO, Farid Suleman, at the $11 million a year level -- and they pay the taxes as part of his deal. This spits in the face of the Citadel employees who are working at a great disadvantage -- minus a leader who knows the way out of all this trouble. Suleman's accounting background leads him to default to cutting expenses and dismissing talented people rather than investing in a company that could have a digital future.

So, there you have just a few of the reasons the radio industry is in the toilet. There are more. Believe me, I didn't leave out any success stories -- at least from the stock price perspective, their own barometer for success.

Which brings me back to my original premise.

Radio is being run by a few inept people in very influential places.

But even if they are forcing talented managers, programmers, on-air people and sales executives to carry out their budgetary orders, well -- let me quote Eastwood's Gunny Highway here -- "Just because we're holding hands doesn't mean we'll be taking warm showers together until the wee hours of the morning".

COLLIANO, Jerry del, «Grading the Radio Groups » Inside Music Media, 14/07/08

[http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2008/07/grading-radio-groups.html]

A partir de um estudo divulgado recentemente, algumas conclusões:

- O mercado global de publicidade na rádio vale apenas 9 por cento do bolo (ligeiramente menos do que há quatro anos); Este nove por cento não correspondem às audiencias da rádio e ao seu impacto, havendo lugar a uma subavaliação do impacto da rádio (que, assim, está muito barata).

Também fica claro que uma hora a ouvir rádio é muito mais barata do que uma hora na televisão, na internet ou mesmo a ler o jornal:

«If the key to media exposure (and thus advertising effectiveness) is the time that people spend reading, watching, using or listening to the medium, says O’Reilly, how much do advertisers invest in reaching their audience?

• Every hour of TV viewing attracts advertisers to spend $40.1 million.
  
• For each hour of radio listenership, its only $19.3 million
  • 
    
  • And for the Internet advertisers only spend $65.4 million, over 50% more than TV
    
  • For newspapers, advertisers spend $316.3 million for every hour of newspaper reading»
  
  
• And for the Internet advertisers only spend $65.4 million, over 50% more than TV
  
• For newspapers, advertisers spend $316.3 million for every hour of newspaper reading»

O estudo completo aqui: http://www.wan-press.org/IMG/pdf/WAN_Savoy_Prese_on_25-01-06.pdf

O guru Al Ries acha que «Radio is a powerful medium with great selectivity at relatively low costs, but Radiado threatens the very existence of the medium. Too much is too much»: O problema, diz, é que a rádio tem excesso de publicidade. Por isso diz que «For every ad that radio stations used to run, it now seems like they run two. Radio, in my opinion, has become Radiado, an extra "ad" inserted at every possible point in the programming». E no seu dia a dia, «My favorite radio personality is Neal Boortz, a nationally syndicated talk-show host who broadcasts out of Atlanta on 171 stations. I listen to Boortz every morning during the commute to my office in Roswell. Yet at the top of the hour, I turn off my radio and don’t turn it back on until 8 minutes after the hour. Why? Because that’s radio’s black hole. Eight solid minutes of commercials, traffic, weather, news and more commercials. The second black hole occurs at the bottom of the hour, but it’s not quite as bad. I turn off my radio for only 6 minutes». Por isso conclui que «The biggest health problem in America today is obesity. The biggest advertising problem in America today is obesity, too»

fonte: «How Radio Is Becoming RadiADo», AL Ries, Advertising Age, 4/03/07 

Mark Ramsey já comentou: «(...) ask the deeper question: If radio featured significantly less advertising, would that keep listeners away from their CD’s and iPods and satellite radios and TV’s and video games? Indeed, would that make the radio industry a healthier one? Less is not more unless less is zero. Then less is called "subscription."»

«During the Q&A portion of the Cox earnings call on Tuesday, Cox Radio President/CEO Bob Neil said, “We continually fight to try and make advertisers understand what the value of our medium is. It's not unlike the fight that our media brothers and sisters go through all the time.
“We feel like, given the percentage of time we get from consumers we don't get our fair share on the advertising side. We think, given the amount of time people spend with us and our advertising share, we bring a good value to the table for local advertisers and we want to make sure that they realize that.”
«Neil continued, pointing out that “when 93% of the people are listening to radio on a weekly basis that’s a pretty powerful thing.
“Is fragmentation occurring? Sure it is. But it’s always occurred for radio. You (reporter covering the call) write about the iPod. Ten years ago your predecessor was writing about CDs and 20 years before that his predecessor was writing about 8-Tracks. It’s always something.
“The point is, this is a good business. It has a lot of people listening to it. It’s a viable advertising business. So rather than spending all your time finding out what’s wrong with it, it would be great if somebody would spend a little bit of time at least recognizing the positives that are there.
“The facts speak pretty well for our media, and if you’re in some of the other media it’s a lot worse right now, so I’ll take radio, thanks.”»

fonte: «Cox's Neil: I'll Take Radio», radio Ink, 1/03/07 

- Lee Abrams, director do canal satélite XM e conhecido programador dos EUA, afirmou no seu blogue a capacidade de resilência da rádio: «years ago, there was similar talk about when 8 Track, cassette and later CD players were integrated into cars. That same "radio is dead" talk. Radio is resilient. It was given it's last rites in 1955 when TV became mainstream»[1];

O modelo herdado /construido a partir da herança televisiva deixou a rádio sobreviver mas amarrou-a a um esquema de consumo secundário extremamente passivo. Por isso há apenas ouvintes (e não os que escutam)?

A rádio é o meio mais passivo de todos; de tal maneira passivo que não precisa de atenção, deixa que quem ouve faça outras coisas em primeiro lugar;

esta é a conveniência da rádio actual, dos ultimos 50 anos. Ora ouvir (usar) por conveniencia não é um bom atributo, um bom trunfo (é pouco...), quando a rádio, continuando a ser conveniente, tiver a concorrência de meios mais convenientesm, deixa de ser conveniente? É o que acontece no presente (e tenderá a acontecer no futuro). Quando houver terminais multimédia operados por voz no carro, quando os leitores de m+úsica já vierem com milhoes de musicas por um baixo preço, a rádio deixa de ser tão conveniente

3.0 A rádio tal como a conhecemos; ainda sem o impacto da net; no fundo, a rádio do passado e do presente; a rádio tem sido um sucesso, e um bom negócio; os sinais de crise que se acentuaram sempre estiveram latentes mas não teriam impacto; o sentimento bipolar; três fases: negação, confusão, adesão

3.1 Os sinais de crise que existiam antes do impacto da digitalização (não são os sinais da crise geração iPod): queda nas audiencias; queda nas receitas publicitárias, quena na cotação das bolsas, queixas relativamente à falta de variedade na oferta das progranações e na estagnação tecnológica; as ameaças que apareceram;

3.2 O optimismo; a negação; a historia não se repete [ESTE OPTIMISMO VAI SER UMA CONSTANTE,. UMA MARCA DESTA INDUSTRIA/ACTIVIDADE; APARECE SEMPRE QUE HÁ PROBLEMAS; SEMPRE QUE HÁ DIFICULDADES]

3.3 A net põe em causa a ideia de rádio (transição e hibridismo); os primeiros sinais; evoluir ou reinventar-se?

La radio ha pasado unos años desbordada por la innovación cnológjca y programática de la televisión y ha perdido audiencia por la entrega de la sociedad a ésta. Sin embargo, la adio ha resistido y se mantiene con vigor.» (CHerreros, 2007: 12)

«One of the many reasons radio has lost the next generation is that music stations are unremarkable. They are vanilla. Sound the same. Too repetitious. Too many commercials. Too phony. Not real» (Jerry del Colliano, Radio: Bob Dylan, Program Director, Inside Music Media, 27/06/08 http://insidemusicmedia.blogspot.com/2008/06/radio-bob-dylan-program-director.html) 

(justifica-se este optimismo? um optimismo que esquece as ameaças, apenas vê as oportunidades

«Hoy por hoy, la radio no es un medio obsoleto, todo lo contrario, es el medio más vivo y más inmediato e, incluso, tenemos la posibilidad de escuchar desde cualquier parte del mundo los programas más seguidos y las emisoras líderes del país que más nos lnterese, gracias a Internet» (Peñafiel, 2007: 36) 

A rádio que chega até à década de 90 do século passado é basicamente aquela que Lazarsfeld ajudou a idealizar e que Adorno criticou. Mudaram algumas coisas, como o local de escuta, que passou de casa para o carro, e perdeu-se a socialização dessa escuta (de acto colectivo passou a ser individual), mas a rádio é basicamente a mesma, a mesma industria cultural: mesmo a segmentação da oferta, última grande 'transformação' que marcou a rádio pós-televisão, pode ser vista como a evolução natural da procura - inevitável - de públicos mais adequados aos interesses dos anunciantes, que não se importam de gastar mais para ter menos publico, desde que esse público seja o certo (da mesma forma que, há que o reconhecer, essa segmentação da oferta também corresponderá a uma certa segmentação social e cultural ao nível dos mais variados interesses especializados- que a digitalização continua a potenciar, até chegar aos interesses individuais)

«Once I published this article in Radio & Records noting the difference in listening between college grads and non-college grads, I have been rightfully asked the following question: "Has it always been this way?" So I looked at the diary data from the sample of diarykeepers from our longstanding series of studies with Arbitron.

In 1998: Non-College Grads ages 25-54 listened to an average of 102 Quarter-Hours per week

College Grads ages 25-54 listened to an average of 86 Quarter-Hours per week

In 2008: Non-College Grads ages 25-54 listened to an average of 100 Quarter-Hours per week

College Grads ages 25-54 listened to an average of 70 Quarter-Hours per week

In addition, the portion of 25-54s that are College graduates increased from 33% of 25-54s to 41% of 25-54s.  What does this mean? That nearly all the 25-54 losses in TSL over the last decade are coming from college grads. The Non-grads are listening virtually the same amount.» Has Radio Lost the College Grads? Larry Rosin Edison Media research 10/06/08

O que mostra este estudo é que a queda nas audiências de rádio é genérica e não apenas na geração iPod; esta apenas radicaliza este afastamento (mas as queixas são genéricas e não específicas).

USADO «Perante esta realidade de múltiplas ofertas – juntando a crescente digitalização de milhões de canções, descarregadas legal ou ilegalmente em grandes quantidades, e a multiplicação de editoras que existem sobretudo na Internet (web-labels) – é possível concluir que o consumidor tem o controlo: 1) Os fãs deixaram de estar dependentes da rádio (ou de terem de comprar o disco) para contactarem com determinado artista; 2) Os fãs são cada vez mais interactivos: pedem, exigem, sugerem. Comunicam; 3) Uma canção vive e pode conseguir sucesso sem chegar à rádio. (...)  A rádio, habituada a fabricar os sucessos, confronta-se com uma nova realidade: ter de se associar a esses sucessos para não perder ouvintes – que provavelmente já os conhecem de outros acessos.» (Meneses, 2007: 5)

UMA RELAÇÂO PASSIVA E PERFEITA ENTRE RÁDIO E INDUSTRIA MUSICAL: «A decisão sobre a inclusão ou não nas listas de difusão era, aliás, um dos três grandes problemas colocados pelas rádios à indústria, juntamente com a formatação por estilos de música, que obriga a uma arrumação nem sempre pacífica, e a estratégia das editoras, que procura “vender o máximo de cópias do mínimo de produtos, o que, dada a expansão da rádio aos níveis local e mundial, permite concluir que o aumento do tempo de emissão se fez difundindo a mesma música” (Neves, 1999:74). Tirando estas excepções, indústria e rádios casaram durante décadas sem crises: de uma forma muito simples, as editoras davam a música às rádios, as rádios divulgavam-na. Tudo de borla, portanto, evitando com que as editoras gastassem muito em publicidade e as rádios tivessem de pagar pelos conteúdos que transmitiam (Neves, 1999:73). A construção de programas com base no top de vendas será provavelmente a representação máxima da relação passiva entre indústria e rádio» (Meneses, 2007: 7)

«Sin embargo el momento radiofónico actual es complejo como pocos en la historia del medio y requiere una abnegada e ingeniosa atención. Y si la circunstancia merece esmero, reflexión y vigilancia es porque la situación es mucho más peligrosa que la generada por la llegada de la televisión. Posiblemente este sea el conflicto más complejo de los vividos por la radio hasta el momento presente porque afecta a su propia raíz. A la radio y - no se olvide-, a los demás medios de comunicación" (Faus Belau in Martinéz- Costa, 2001: 16)

MARTINÉZ-COSTA, Maria (ed) (2001).Reiventar la radio. Pamplona: Ediciones

«Radio, shedding talent as fast as it loses audience, is rapidly becoming irrelevant to the younger generation»

fonte: FISHER, Mark, Weakening Signals Washington Post, 1/06/08

«Depressed by the rise of new technologies and their own fading place in the media landscape, neither those who own and run AM and FM radio stations nor even the new (but not new enough) satellite pay radio services are nurturing the kind of eccentric, iconoclastic voices that made radio so alluring from the 1950s into the '80s. Through those decades, when TV dominated American popular culture, radio was at once a mass medium and a clubhouse, a place where listeners could believe themselves to be part of an unseen community of like-minded people. Today, with the Internet having taken over as the primary provider of semi-private meeting spots, radio stations are cutting costs and bleeding talent, ceding the leading edge to the Web's collection of micro-audiences and the iPod's promise of infinite, but closely held, choice (...) Yet the more I listened to the likes of Pandora.com, Last.fm, Slacker.com and all manner of music blogs and Web radio, the more I heard the sound of automation -- sleek, efficient recommendation engines scientifically selecting the music I am most likely to like, yet missing out almost on what radio once offered: a glimpse into the hearts and passions of personalities who knew what music was new and cool, voices that offered a guided tour of unknown worlds, and sometimes even a frontal assault of the unexpected.» fonte: FISHER, Mark, Weakening Signals Washington Post, 1/06/08

.

«In the Spring of 2007, if one aggregates all of Arbitron's diary markets (essentially the whole country except for Philadelphia and Houston), the weekly listening was as follows:

Not a College Grad: 18 hours 45 minutes
College Grad: 15 hours 45 minutes

Incredibly, I've never seen this talked about before, despite the fact that it has been possible to find this data all along. But this finding actually understates the difference. That's because the 'non-college-grad' group includes all the teenagers, who have always given significantly less Time Spent Listening (TSL) to radio. So look at the numbers if we look at listening among 25-54 year olds:

Not a College Grad: 21 Hours 15 minutes
College Grad: 15 hours 45 minutes

Wow. As you can see in Figure 1, below, college grads listen to five and one-half fewer hours of radio per week, on average, than those who have not attained a college education.

Figure 1

Is it that the programming available from commercial radio is just not appealing enough to college graduates? Has our programming simply chased college grads away from the dial? Or is it that college graduates just have less time available for radio listening and more income to buy replacements like iPods and Satellite Radio, and it is not a function of the programming?» fonte: «Has Radio Lost the College Grads?, Edison Media Research, Larry Rosin, Maio (30?) 2008

(uma visão optimista...)

«Bob Pittman may be known to most of the world as an Internet visionary, but he was a broadcaster first and he told the NAB Show Radio Luncheon yesterday that it is frustrating to hear people talk about radio as if there’s something wrong with the business. “Radio is mobile, it’s easy to use, it has a lot of choice,” Pittman said. Repeating comments we’d heard him use previously when talking about new media, he said what makes a great consumer business is convenience and brand – and “radio wins on both counts.” The one-time radio programmer noted, “I think there are probably no better brand builders in the world than radio programmers.” Despite all of the hype about the Internet replacing broadcasting, Pittman, who is currently an investor in radio and TV groups as well as new media, insisted “the Internet is not television or radio.” People still turn to broadcasting for entertainment, while they use the Internet to manage their lives.» fonte: Pittman: Internet does not compete with radio and television, RBR 15 April, 2008

(será um erro entender a Internet como uma espécie de meio que vem concorrer com os clássicos; a Internet não concorre com um, mas com todos. Mas a Internet concorre, integrando os anteriores, juntando-os, convergindo, criando algo de novo, fazendo coexistir os antigos mas de forma diferente, alterando-os; se a Internet fosse um meio concorrente, a história poderia repetir-se; assim, do que estamos a falar é de uma nova categoria, de uma nova ideia de comunicação)

«The history and evolution of media resemble that of species in nature: The introduction of a new medium (species) typically changes the uses and interactions among the existing media. This is not surprising given that the system consisting of media and ecological systems are both based on very similar principles (e.g., the survival of the fittest). (...) This is, in fact, how media have evolved as well Following the introduction of movies over a short span of time, they enjoyed their golden age, accompanied by relatively little change, until radio came along. The evolution of radio, television, and interactive media has followed the same general pattern. (...).

To survive radio’s challenge, the motion picture industry was forced to move to sound and later to color films. More direct and compelling challenges to movies came from television. Television provided the same entertainment function that movies provided but with the added convenience of delivering programs directly to homes. To survive this threat, the movie industry had to cooperate with television by providing materials for broadcasting. As for radio, it had to reinvent itself to survive the television challenge. Radio was forced to move from being a staple at the center of the living room to becoming portable and physically going to where television could not. The television industry, in an effort to survive with multimedia, introduced high-definition television, a breakthrough toward the computerization of home television sets. This digital technology is expected to provide multimedia Internet services for the television networks and local stations. Radio, too, has taken the step toward digital broadcasting in what is referred to as digital audio broadcasting. (PAIK, 2001: 24-25) 

«(...)by 1930, 46% of American households had a radio, and 10 years later that number had grown to more than 80%. By 1970, radio ownership had already reached 98%, nearly the current ownership rate (99%). Of course, one may question the appropriateness of radio ownership as a measure of radio's popularity, for it is entirely possible that a great many radios simply sat unused, collecting dust. However, as seen (...), the increase in ownership is matched by a comparable increase in the number of radio stations» (Paik, 2001: 11)

«In-home radio listening – as was the case in the ’07 study – is diminished as respondents continue to utilize other media in their residences. (This was an alarming pattern that we saw up-close and personal in "The Bedroom Project.") In-car and at work listening, and audio streaming display positive momentum.»

«TechSurvey 2008», Jacobs Media, Março 2008

OU COMO SE PROVA QUE UM MEIO PODE SUBSTITUIR O OUTRO SE TIVER VANTAGENS SOBRE O ANTERIOR:

«The Pony Express operated from 1860 to 1861. It was an expensive service for letters and most people couldn’t afford the up to $5.00 dollar cost of sending mail. The founders always assumed the federal government would come through with a contract to provide most of their income. It never happened. The U.S. government decided a new technology called the “telegraph” would be better and eventually, The Pony Express folded. Both services were able to deliver messages – one by traditional letters via riders, the other by Morse Code via wire. Both the Pony Express and telegraph delivered the same content. The telegraph just was able to do it faster and cheaper.

Is AM and FM today’s “Pony Express” and WiMax the next “telegraph”? When WiMax takes hold, Internet Radio and Podcasting might be able to do it better than AM and FM because startup costs for stations will be very modest, no one will need to apply for a license to broadcast, the F.C.C. won’t have control over WiMax-enabled radio stations (at least as of now), and stations will be able to narrowcast to a smaller audience with more unique content because less overhead will make it easier to support niche programming.  Given that scenario, this is no time for anyone in traditional Radio to look down their nose at the upstarts and wannabes because it is only a matter of time until they are given the technological footing to compete equally. All they will have to do is come up with good content – better content than old media did.» (How Will We Define Radio in the Future?  Corey Deitz, 3/01/07)

«Virtually everyone in radio believes the medium has become less fun, less creative, and just plain less worth listening to than at any other point since its birth» (Fisher, 2007: 294) 

«Stories about "why radio sucks" and "why radio stinks" popped up in the press. When Prince opened a concert at New York's Lincoln Center by asking, "How do y'all like your radio stations, New York City?" the crowd responded with a booming chorus of boos. At FCC meetings, activists favoring radio diversity dogged commissioners, urging them to defy the big corporations and return control of the airwaves to the public. And on the radio, Tom Petty, recently inducted into the Rock  the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, sang "The Last DJ": 'And there goes the last DJ

Who plays what he wants to play

And says what he wants to say»

(Fisher, 2007: 295) 

«Payola - gifts and payments to deejays made as inducement for playing records - wasn't illegal. Nor was payola new - in the heyday of sheet music, song pluggers handed out cash to get barroom pianists to play their tunes, and in the 1930s and '40s, promoters paid bandleaders to push their songs» (Fisher, 2007: 79)

«Others stuck to legal forms of persuasion. "I never gave a disc jockey money in my life," says Frank Falise, a promoter who worked the mid-Atlantic states for Universal, MCA, Capitol, and other record companies. "But you took care of those jocks very well. You made sure they got plenty of records, backstage meets with the artists, photos with the artists, great tickets. If they can take their listeners backstage to see Elton John, that builds their audience and helps them make more money at their station. There's no payola the way it was forty years ago, but the business was always based on relationships. "» (Fisher 2007: 288) 

«(...) the number of licensed radio stations has continued to creep up. It grew to 13,977 as of Dec. 31, 2007; that compares to 13,837 stations at the end of the year before. Breaking it down, there are 4,776 AMs, 6,309 FMs and 2,892 educational FMs, which the FCC lists separately. (...) there are 22 more AMs in the United States than one year ago, 43 more FMs and 75 more FM educationals.

More interestingly, how do these latest figures compare to 10 years ago? The numbers tell a 10-year story: no growth in AM signals, but boom times for FM educationals, translators and boosters. Total stations in 1997 would have been described as “above 12,000.” As of December of that year, according to FCC statistics we compared, there were 4,762 AMs — virtually no net change in AM station count from today (and down from 4,804 at the end of 2002; AMs were just shy of 5,000 in 1990). There were about 5,540 FMs 10 years ago, so that category is up about 14% in the decade since; and there were only about 1,900 FM educationals, a number that grew 50% in the subsequent decade.»

fonte: «Number of Licensed Radio Stations Grows Radioworldnewsbites 21,03,08

- The decline in sales – radio is losing advertising revenue to interactive media.

- Radio listening is down.

-Radio appeals mostly to Gen X and baby boomers.

- iPods, Smartphones and the Internet are cooler than radio.

- Gen Y doesn’t listen to radio. Their solution: try to make them think that your limited playlist station is playing the most variety.

- Too many commercials.

The totals for 2004-07 also are boosted by non-spot/off-air revenue and increased network participation in the survey in the last two years.»

fonte: radioworld newsbytes What a Difference a Decade Makes 7/02/08 

«JP Morgan analysts think radio ad revenue will fall 3% this year.

John Blackledge and Aaron Chew issued their outlook saying cyclical and “secular” pressures will produce a down year.

“We estimate that radio industry advertising revenue should decline 3% in 2008, driven by continued secular pressure (with continued audience losses leading to loss of ad share) as well as cyclical pressure as the soft macro trends should lower demand for advertising on the medium,” they wrote.

“We believe the radio industry is already amidst an advertising recession,” given declines in the second half of last year. The radio industry has underperformed nominal GDP by 5% on average annually since 2004, they said, but in recent months it underperformed by about 9%.

“We believe the below average underperformance will likely persist for most of 2008, offset to some degree by political spending” in the second half.»

fonte:Radio Is in Ad Recession, JP Morgan Analysts Say RWOnline, 29/02/08

«O rádio convencional, mais cedo ou mais tarde, se transformará num parente do antigo gramofone, um símbolo de um período, objecto destinado à exposição em museus» (Kischinhevsky, 2007: 126) 

«Uma tecnologia não erradica necessariamente a outra, emhora possa tomar espaços e atenções das mídias já existentes. Mas podemos tomar como exemplo os discos de vinil, que, no espaço de poucos anos, foram transformados em sucata (ou, na melhor das hipóteses, itens de colecionador), graças a um inédito acordo entre as grandes corporações da indústria fonográfica. Acordo esse que estabeleceu hábeis estratégias para conquistar a adesão do consumidor a uma nova tecnologia, digital, enbora de qualidade nem sempre superior à dos antigos long-plays analógicos.«(KISCHINHEVSK, 2007: 14).

e o DAT da sony, que não se impôs como substituto da cassete analógica, acabando por desaparecer.

Broadcast radio faces challenges from satellite radio companies for listeners, from the Internet for advertisers and even from automakers who are making it increasingly easy for drivers to turn their car stereos into mirror images of their iPods and skip the radio altogether.

Cutbacks haven’t worked out so well, serving only to speed the exit of listeners and making it harder to maintain smaller and smaller profit margins. Increasingly conservative playlists have made radio less essential to even the most casual of music fans, who don’t feel like they’re missing anything if they don’t listen every day since the same 10 or 15 songs are in heavy rotation for a month or longer.»

«NEW YORK – February 20, 2008: Reacting to the RAB's report that overall radio revenue declined 6%, Wachovia Securities analyst Marci Ryvicker today issued a report in which she described the result as a "horrible start to the new year" for the industry. In the report, Ryvicker also cut her Q1 forecast for the industry.
Whereas she previously had expected the industry to be flat versus year-ago levels, Ryvicker now predicts that the industry will post a 0.8% revenue decline for 2008.
She said, "We think Street estimates for 2008 are at risk and that most numbers will come down during the next two weeks as companies report Q4 2007 results and provide color on Q1 2008."» 21/02/08 radio INK 'Horrible Start' To 2008

INSIDE RADIO Thursday, February 21, 2008

Radio's worst January in more than a decade. There's no way to sugarcoat the stark fact that 2008 had a rough start for radio. Revenues fell 6% in January. But non-spot revenues continued to grow, increasing 11% last month. Wachovia analyst Marci Ryvicker says this "horrible start to the year" worries her. After just one month of data, she no longer thinks radio has hit bottom - and is projecting another negative year.

Big growth for online radio listening and revenues. Online music radio online logged 4.85 billion total listening hours last year, a 26% increase from 2006. AOL's Shoutcast remains the top destination, followed by Clear Channel Online. AccuStream iMedia Research calculates ad revenues increased 194% to $80 million last year - and that figure could jump to $150 million this year.

In fiscal 2007, which ended in August, the radio industry posted growth of 3.9%, according to figures published by the Radio Marketing Bureau. While this growth was restrained in comparison to a 6.5% increase a year earlier, the first four months of fiscal 2008 have so far produced growth of 5.6%,says Mr. Bayard.

Among radio’s strengths, he says, is its cost-effectiveness relative to other media, and the fact that radio rates highest for “the ability to connect with the consumer” who is close to making a purchase.»

fonte: Signals strong for radio industry, Astral and Corus, Posted: February 19, 2008, 9:02 AM by Jonathan Ratner

1. Our listeners are going away. (...)
2. Radio has maltreated its listeners and advertisers. Too much clutter, too many station promos, too little leadership, and too much research. We follow our listeners instead of leading them. We pander to them. (...)
3. Consolidation has helped the quality of the radio product…the actual “on air” presentation. It has not helped to expand the range of programming choices available to our audiences. This has been a huge disappointment.
4. Consolidation has done harm to one of our most basic and important tenets of commercial radio: the ideal of localism.

«Radio reaches a large portion of adults on a weekly basis, but time spent listening is at a 27-year low. In September 2002, Duncan’s American Radio reported that the “average persons rating” – the percentage of the U.S. population listening to the radio in any average quarter hour – has experienced a near-17 percent drop in listening over the last 13 years.» Future of Music Coalition, Radio Deregulation: Has It Served Citizens and Musicians?

«Many people are dissatisfied with the state of commercial radio in the U.S. today. “It all sounds the same” and “there’s nothing there for me” are common complaints. Observers point to consolidation in the radio industry as the cause. Since 1996, when Congress deregulated the radio industry, a wave of mergers has placed the majority of radio stations into the hands of a few large corporations. During this time the number of independent radio stations shrank. Uniform corporate policies and market research-driven programming have reduced the variety of music on commercial radio. One critic summed up this approach as “play the fewest songs that appeal to the most people.” Also problematic is the requirement that record companies make big payments to promoters in order to get their songs on the radio. As a consequence it is harder than ever for new acts to be heard on commercial radio; only the biggest and best-financed acts get access to the commercial airwaves. Bill Wyman of the Rolling Stones recently said, “The Rolling Stones would never make it now.”»

BREEDING, Andy (2004), Internet Music Services, MA: Giant Path, pag 18

«Constant denial -- that's what's killing radio.

Last week we heard the same old song again at the Southern California Broadcasters Association gathering. I don't know about you but these guys are starting to scare me.

Radio-Info's Tom Taylor reported that Clear Channel's John Hogan said "performance and capability is not our problem. Our problem is one of perception". (...) They have driven off the next generation -- have no clue what they want -- and think the problem is about perception. No one cares about perception -- they care about content and -- I might add -- how it is delivered.»

fonte: Jerry Del Colliano, Redfine Radio -- Don't Reinvent It 4/02/08

«Owing to numerous media alternatives available, overall time spent listening (TSL) has slipped 13% between 1998 and 2006, but less than an hour in the four years from 2002 to 2006. The largest erosion since 1998 for men has been with 18-24s, with a decline of 17%; for women, the largest decline has been among Teens, whose TSL has decreased 23%. The least slippage in time spent listening among men during those eight years has been with 45-54s, losing less than 6%; among women, it is the 45-54 group, down 9%»

fonte: Radio Today 2007, Arbitron, pag 91

«A friend put together this list of key radio companies before yesterday's roller coaster ride on the Dow. Look how well they have built shareholder value for their investors.

Spanish Broadcasting
High 42.00 -- Recently 1.54 -- Loss of 96.33% (1.50 yesterday)

Emmis
High 62.34 -- Recently -- 2.47 -- Loss of 96.04% (2.62 yesterday)

Radio One
High 31.33 -- Recently 1.77 -- Loss of 94.35% (1.68 yesterday)

Citadel Broadcasting
High 22.79 -- Recently 1.69 -- Loss of 92.58% (1.52 yesterday)

Regent
High 14.19 -- Recently 1.49 -- Loss of 89.50% (1.32 yesterday)

Salem
High 33.65 -- Recently 4.63 -- Loss of 86.24% (3.93 yesterday)

Entercom
High 67.75 -- Recently 11.00 -- Loss of 83.76% (11.00 yesterday)

Cumulus (Private buyout in progress)
High 22.70 -- Recently 5.90 -- Loss of 74.01% (5.43 yesterday)

Saga
High 23.44 -- Recently 5.90 -- Loss of 74.83% (5.97 yesterday)

Beasley
High 19.34 -- Recently 5.05 -- Loss of 73.89% (4.48 yesterday)

Cox Radio
High 34.67 -- Recently 11.10 -- Loss of 67.98% (10.89 yesterday)

Entravision
High 20.31 -- Recently 7.27 -- Loss of 64.20% (6.03 yesterday)

Clear Channel (Private Buyout in Progress)
High 91.50 -- Recently 34.42 -- Loss of 62.38% (32.14 yesterday)

CBS
High 35.50 -- Recently 24.00 -- Loss of 32.39% (22.28 yesterday)
(New issue missing most of the loss).»

fonte: «Radio's "Recession" Started A Long Time Ago», Jerry Del Coliano, 23/01/08

Continua a haver quem pense que basta olhar para o passado para a rádio sobreviver, que a rádio se reinventará por si própria. Como?

«Acontece, porém, que este meio sempre soube reinventar-se e ultrapassar todas as crises, atraindo novas gerações de ouvintes. A rádio serviu regimes ditatoriais e foi também a via usada para iniciar revoluções. Foi amadora e formou profissionais. Foi pirata e impôs novas frequências. Foi defensora do culto do programa de autor e apostou nos ouvintes segmentados. Foi um meio de comunicação unidireccional, bidireccional e agora é interactivo. Alguém tem dúvidas de que a rádio é um meio fascinante cheio de futuro?» (Rui Camarinha, Briefing, 19/10/07).

Vale a pena citar Mark Ramsey: «the absurdity of relating the present state of the radio (yes, radio) industry to any time in its ancient history. For example, the birth of FM back in the late 60's to 70's lived in a technological environment which this chart clearly shows has completely disappeared»

«Beaten down by the market for yet another year, radio companies appear poised to face more of the same in 2008, with projections typically calling for minuscule to nonexistent growth in advertising revenue and increased competition for listeners as a foregone conclusion.The current year certainly looks poised to go down as another difficult period for the industry, with total advertising revenue down 2% year over year through three quarters, according to figures released by the Radio Advertising Bureau Dec. 3, data that also showed revenue figures sagging further in the latter portion of the year, with third-quarter revenue down 5% year over year. (...) Wachovia Equity analyst Marci Ryvicker, for instance, recently said she now views radio as a "no growth medium" and puts zero percent growth as a likely, and potentially a "best case scenario" for 2008.  (...) Ryvicker noted three major trends that will conspire to hold radio revenues down in 2008 and beyond: the flight of ad dollars to new media, the generally depressed state of the economy and a slowdown in overall ad expenditures.»

fonte: MarketWeek: Radio revenues to get 'down' in 2008, SNL Interactive December 14, 2007 1:12 PM ET By Dave Hendrick

Eu tenho! «Meio fascinante» e «oásis»????

A frase é de Rui Camarinha, no Briefing: «A rádio em Portugal está a atravessar o deserto mas já tem o oásis à frente. Será miragem? Os números indicam que há uma série de estações de qualidade com fraca audiência e outras tantas que não se percebe por que são tão ouvidas. A verdade é que a rádio no seu todo perde ouvintes, tem menor notoriedade e regista pouco potencial para atrair investimento publicitário, pelo menos quando comparado com outros meios de comunicação, como a televisão e, principalmente, a internet. Numa frase, a rádio deixou de ser sexy.»

É um estudo inovador, realizado por Mark Ramsey e apresentado no recente NAB Barcelona (realizado com base nos resultados do PPM).

Mark mostra que no momento em que o microfone se abre aumentam as probabilidades dos ouvintes desligarem:

«Listeners are almost 4x more likely to tune away from WBEN during an open mic than during a song» (imagem 79)

O que fazer? «Actions... • An open mic is a privilege, not a right; • Get to the point • Use that time wisely • Keep it tight • Plan, don’t Spam» (imagem 80); ou seja a solução não é calar os dj's/animadores

(tambem pode ser acedido a partir daqui)

«With the clock ticking toward a new year, Bear Stearns analyst Victor Miller projects radio will have another “challenging” year as revenues hold flat with “many forces on either side of the scale.” Miller says “Incredibly, one of the biggest positives for local radio in 2008 is that there will likely be fewer negatives.” On the plus side are more political dollars and increasing web revenues.»

fonte: «2008 Forecast: “The scale could tip either way.”», Inside Radio, 29/10/07

«Over the last several months firms have either reassigned or fired their analysts covering radio. A year ago 24 analysts were assigned to