11-21-2012
Everyone at Radio Ink Magazine and Radioink.com would like to wish our readers a very happy Thanksgiving holiday. Daily headlines will return Monday, November 26th. If there's important breaking news during the holiday, we'll send you an e-mail, post to our Facebook and Twitter pages and here on our website. If you see or hear about news happening in your market, be sure to send an e-mail with all the details (in confidence) to edryantheeditor@gmail.com
11-8-2012
Readers posted a lot of feedback on our story from Thursday about David Field's comments from the recent Wells Fargo Media Conference. When answering a question about whether radio was even relevant anymore, Field said there's "a lack of respect for what radio is and has accomplished" out there. Check out what the radio rank-and-file thinks about the respect radio should get.
Entercom CEO David Field got the hair on his back up a little bit yesterday when speaking at a Wells Fargo Media Conference yesterday. When answering a question about whether radio was relevant anymore, Field said there's "a lack of respect for what radio is and has accomplished" out there. "More people listen to radio than ever before. When you aggregate all the other listening of audio, it's still less than 10%. Radio is still over 90%. Go compare that to TV. They never have to answer about their relevance."
That question could have been prompted by what's turning out to be an anemic performance by most radio groups in the 3rd quarter of 2012. In a year political advertising spending - and easy comps from 2011 - should have given radio a boost, it has not. Political is coming in weaker than expected, their have been complaints about national and local has been sluggish. Saga reported a 19% decline in national for Q3. Clear channel revenue was up 3%. Cumulus declined 3.7%. Field reported a revenue increase of 2% to the street on October 26th. Back to yesterday's conference. Field said it's helpful to put the relevance question in context.
"Our product is not just a music service. I'm not denigrating the other services. We have companionship. We have local content. These are the reasons we've been able to stay successful. We are not giving up on distribution either. Wherever consumers want audio, we will be there." Entercom stations can be heard on TuneIn.
During his time on the stage yesterday, Field had a lot of praise for Clear Channel's industry leadership. He cited iHeartradio and in what Katz has been doing to market the industry. He emphasized the need for everyone in the radio industry to "leverage" the value of radio more than it has in the past.
(11/9/2012 3:25:48 PM)
I lost all respect when radio got involved in the iBiquity scam, trying to make a quick buck. Hopefully, the ad skipping will skip Struble's silly coupons and other glossy paint.
(11/9/2012 7:28:09 AM)
Lisa Adbuyer, it looks like a federal court judge in California has decided that Dish Hopper's spot skipping technology is constitutional - the decision is currently sealed, but the plaintiffs (amongst them, Fox TV) are none to happy). When SCOTUS rules Dish Hopper technology is legal, are still going to buy tv with the same fervor that you currently do?
(11/8/2012 4:00:37 PM)
"Respect ourselves", indeed.
First of all, let's do something worthy of respect rather than just having access to a pretty (potentially) whizzy medium.
(11/8/2012 2:23:40 PM)
For the moment, it remains the only ubiquitous audio medium. It may feature less sizzle and ego gratification than TV for clients and agencies, but repetition of an audio message is very effective, so radio plays a unique and important role in almost any smart, efficient media campaign.
In many markets it's easy to beat radio down because spots are a commodity and other audio media are growing... growing from zero, that is. And it's much easier to attract attention under that circumstance than to maintain the perception of stature in the face of periodic predictions of radio's demise, even after a century during which TV, CB, MTV, IPods, Pandora, and other phenomena du jour have had little effect.
Radio is what it is, and of that we can be proud.
Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend
By Jeff Simmons
I love the big buttons and volume adjustments... but overall it's a sorry version of Pandora. The fact that you can see others playlists in a search is excellent. It's not clear on the surface how what the similar artists algorithm works... and a company like AOL/TimeWarner most likely wants to sell it's own artists, etc, etc After I skipped a few songs i hit a 30 second LOWE's commercial... super bummer. Song selection fairly good for similar artist algorithm... but I don't have any reason to sign up for service... it wants me to sign up and give them my info but doesn't give me any reason to do so... no offer to take away ads or pay a monthly fee... Slacker involvement seems to point to mobile use... maybe for pay similar to Spotify mobile... but again... there's zero explanation of the premium services on the player page... but assuming that's on the way as it mentions it on www.aolradio.com. AOL owns shoutcast and although I understand the move towards the "pureplay" genre fad... they could harness the power of stations at http://www.shoutcast.com/ and have the stations promoting for them. Overall it seems like a weak version of Pandora + Spotify from a multi-national company that could do better... 3.5 out of 5 stars
by Dean Jackson
In a oversaturated market, AOL Radio is an interesting alternative for web based listeners. The site is crisp, easy to navigate and packed with a reasonable selection of music genres. I even found a nice selection of perennial favorite TV tunes. (Good for name that tune with friends.) I could do with out the cotton candy of AOL music news in the right side bar, there are plenty of other and choices for entertainment news. I would have liked more news and talk content - I can only assume that's forthcoming. I didn't expect much, its a good choice, but I find it lacking compared to the smart-phone applications like iHeartRadio from Clear Channel and others. We aren't putting down our phones anytime soon, this site has its work cut out for it. I fear, its battling for a market that's already moved on.
www.deanjackson.net
by Kendall Weaver
There's no way to discuss AOL's new "AOL Radio Powered by Slacker" without comparing it to Pandora, and the new iHeartRadio service from Clear Channel. Truth is, if you like those, you'll like this. Functionality is similar. I like the layout and controls.. nothing too complicated. You get 6 chances to fast forward past a song you don't want to hear.. which seems to reset upon each visit to the station. And if you search, in the upper left hand corner is a little heart.. click on it to "Favorite" a station. They should make this a bit more obvious, since it's the only way I see to return to a station you created earlier. The only thing I see as missing from this and IHeart Radio, is the option Pandora offers to "Add Variety," in which you can add an artist to the channel, thereby widening the scope of songs it picks to play. Also, when I created an account, I can't see anything different than using it without an account, other than them offering to send you a newsletter. Again, this is a quick review, so I may have missed something. But clearly, it's a nice way to listen to and discover new music. Although technically, the songs don't have any crossfade, which means long gaps of silence between some songs.. something a terrestrial radio station would never let happen. Ads? I don't hear any yet... but...The biggest question to me is not whether or not this works, or works well.. but does anyone possibly want or need another way to stream music? With over 750 streams of Clear Channel stations alone, plus the ones you can create yourself, plus Pandora, and Last Fm... is there room or desire for another service like this?"
Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend
Ask Billboard is updated every Friday. As always, submit your questions about Billboard charts, sales and airplay, as well as general music musings, to askbb@billboard.com. Please include your first and last name, as well as your city, state and country, if outside the U.S.
WHICH SUPERSTARS HAVE YET TO REACH NO. 1? READERS RESPOND, CONTINUED
Dear Gary,
I thought of yet more artists that fit the "Ask Billboard" discussion about star acts haven't topped both the Billboard Hot 100 song chart and the Billboard 200 album chart. In fact, the following five acts, amazingly, never hit No. 1 on either chart.
How about the English group that impacted the world from the "generation" of the British Invasion to the generation currently watching "C.S.I." ... Who is this act? the Who.
If you think "My Generation," "Who Are You" (the "C.S.I." theme), "Won't Get Fooled Again" ("C.S.I.: Miami") or "Baba O'Riley" ("C.S.I.: New York") were Hot 100 No. 1s, think again. None is even the Who's highest-charting song.
The band's top-peaking title remains "I Can See for Miles," which reached No. 9 in 1967. The song marks the first and only top 10 for the group from Shepherd Bush, London.
On the Billboard 200, two albums from the Who reached No. 2: "Quadrophenia" in 1973 and "Who Are You" in 1978.
How about another group that helped lead the British Invasion yet never hit No. 1 on both the Hot 100 and Billboard 200: the Kinks.
If you believe that "You Really Got Me" was this band's greatest Hot 100 hit, you'd be incorrect (and could fittingly repeat the song's title upon being stumped). Two other songs peaked higher, but again, not at No. 1: "Tired of Waiting for You" in 1965 and "Come Dancing" in 1982, both at No. 6.
On the Billboard 200, the Kinks' only top 10 album - among 33 visits - was "Greatest Hits!," which peaked at No. 9 in 1966.
A legendary American band that never topped the Hot 100 and Billboard 200? the Grateful Dead. On the Hot 100, "Touch of Grey" became the group's only top 10 (No. 6, 1987), while parent album "In the Dark" (also No. 6) is its only top 10 among a whopping 49 chart entries.
Two more: Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers' highest-charting Hot 100 single is "Stop Draggin' My Heart Around," with Fleetwood Mac's Stevie Nicks (No. 3, 1981). On the Billboard 200, "Damn the Torpedoes" in 1979 and "Mojo" in 2010 each peaked at No. 2.
And, the Pretenders' best showing on the Hot 100 remains "Back on the Chain Gang" (No. 5, 1983). On the Billboard 200, their highest-ranking album is "Learning to Crawl." In 1984, it climbed to No. 5.
Despite not topping the Hot 100 and Billboard 200, the Who, Kinks, Grateful Dead, Petty & the Heartbreakers and the Pretenders share a more important trait. All have been inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, music's number one honor.
Sincerely,
Mackenzie (Mac) Scott,
Fajardo, Puerto Rico
Hi Gary,
I think that Bruce Springsteen requires an asterisk when listing major artists that haven't scored Hot 100 and Billboard 200 No. 1 hits.
As a songwriter, the Boss has done quite well on the Hot 100, notching a No. 1 back in 1977 with Manfred Mann's Earth Band's "Blinded by the Light."
Springsteen also wrote Hot 100 top fives for the Pointer Sisters ("Fire," No. 2, 1979; coincidentally, the closest that he group would come to No. 1, along with "Slow Hand" two years later) and Natalie Cole's "Pink Cadillac " (No. 5, 1988, again, tying the legendary R&B singer's best chart placement).
Springsteen also penned "Because the Night," the highest-charting Hot 100 singles for two acts: Patti Smith (No. 13, 1978) and 10,000 Maniacs (No. 11, 1994).
Best,
Brad Lyman