(Ramsey) The Media Are Wrong About Brian Williams

How the media got the Brian Williams story all wrong. And... Hey newspapers! Want a younger video audience? Try a sock puppet! It's episode 13 of Media Unplugged with branding authority Tom Asacker and media strategist Mark Ramsey.

Listen as we go inside media to reveal the ugly truth!

For our discussion on how the media totally screwed up the Brian Williams story, check this piece out from Grant McCracken (but don't expect us to agree completely with it). For our take on the newspaper that's seeking a younger video audience with an anchor who is (no joke) a sock puppet, go here. In our always popular rants and raves section, Tom rants about Cindy Crawford's face and so much more, while Mark rants about HLN's uber-pathetic new feature, "News and a Movie."

Special thanks once again to our awesome producer! Jeff Schmidt - Exciting Audio for Media.

Don?t forget to subscribe to Media Unplugged at Stitcher or on iTunes (for you RSS jockeys, here?s the feed).

And tweet us at @tomasacker and @markramseymedia using #mediaunplugged if you have any comments or content ideas.

Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

How to Fix What's Wrong With Management?

12-22-14
A Japanese company and a United States company decided to have a canoe race on the St. Lawrence River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race. On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. How does this relate to radio? Let me explain.

A team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So, American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team?s management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder.

It was called the ?Rowing Team Quality First Program?, with meetings, dinners and free pens to the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices, and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated the American management laid off the rowers for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles and cancelled all capital investments in new equipment. The money saved was distributed to senior executives as bonuses and next year?s racing team was outsourced to China.

I found that on a website called tickld, in their section called ?funny.? Sadly what?s funny about it is that we all can relate. We all have a story about some management misstep that we?ve made, or that we have experienced from others. How you manage and coach your team clearly has a significant impact on their development.

We think of Vince Lombardi or Phil Jackson as coaching giants. But YOU can become a coaching giant to every member of your sales team. Unlock your sales team?s potential by doing more coaching than training.

Coaching works better than training in many situations.  Master the art of coaching and you can take ?putting out fires? off your job description. If you find out exactly how to get into your salespeople's heads, you can influence their thinking and their behavior.

Shared this with your managers:

?The first step in influencing your salespeople?s thinking
?The secret of getting your salespeople to do what you need them to do
?How to eliminate "Got a Minute" meetings
?The five types of one-on-one meetings
?The best time to coach-when coaching works best
?The 7 critical differences between coaching and training
?How to free up massive amounts of your day by spending a little more time coaching
?The best definition of coaching we've seen
?The 7- question coaching rule that changes everything
?What mentors do

It?s Christmas week. As my gift to Radio Ink readers, I would like to provide you with a free copy of a one-hour webinar on this topic, complete with the slide deck and all the resources and tools we shared with our managers.  Just shoot me an email and I will send you the link.  It?s been my honor to be with you every week sharing ideas and engaging in discussions about sales and sales management. Creating a better sales team, generating greater revenue, and having your best year ever starts with a commitment to grow your skills. This free gift can help.

You?ve no doubt already ?set your course? for 2015 and determined where you want to go. Knowing where you?re headed is the first step to getting there. Equally important is knowing how many rowers you need and how to get the maximum performance out of your rowing team.

Merry Christmas!

Think Big, Make Big Things Happen!

Jeff Schmidt is EVP and Partner with Chris Lytle at Sparque, Inc. At Sparque We believe in challenging the status quo and thinking differently about sales and sales training. We believe training should be an investment based on a desired outcome rather than something you ?buy by-the-hour.? You can reach me at Jeff.Schmidt@Sparque.biz

Twitter: @JeffreyASchmidt
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/schmidtjeffrey

Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

How to Fix What's Wrong With Management?

12-22-14
A Japanese company and a United States company decided to have a canoe race on the St. Lawrence River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race. On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. How does this relate to radio? Let me explain.

A team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So, American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion.

They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team?s management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder.

It was called the ?Rowing Team Quality First Program?, with meetings, dinners and free pens to the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices, and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated the American management laid off the rowers for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles and cancelled all capital investments in new equipment. The money saved was distributed to senior executives as bonuses and next year?s racing team was outsourced to China.

I found that on a website called tickld, in their section called ?funny.? Sadly what?s funny about it is that we all can relate. We all have a story about some management misstep that we?ve made, or that we have experienced from others. How you manage and coach your team clearly has a significant impact on their development.

We think of Vince Lombardi or Phil Jackson as coaching giants. But YOU can become a coaching giant to every member of your sales team. Unlock your sales team?s potential by doing more coaching than training.

Coaching works better than training in many situations.  Master the art of coaching and you can take ?putting out fires? off your job description. If you find out exactly how to get into your salespeople's heads, you can influence their thinking and their behavior.

Shared this with your managers:

?The first step in influencing your salespeople?s thinking
?The secret of getting your salespeople to do what you need them to do
?How to eliminate "Got a Minute" meetings
?The five types of one-on-one meetings
?The best time to coach-when coaching works best
?The 7 critical differences between coaching and training
?How to free up massive amounts of your day by spending a little more time coaching
?The best definition of coaching we've seen
?The 7- question coaching rule that changes everything
?What mentors do

It?s Christmas week. As my gift to Radio Ink readers, I would like to provide you with a free copy of a one-hour webinar on this topic, complete with the slide deck and all the resources and tools we shared with our managers.  Just shoot me an email and I will send you the link.  It?s been my honor to be with you every week sharing ideas and engaging in discussions about sales and sales management. Creating a better sales team, generating greater revenue, and having your best year ever starts with a commitment to grow your skills. This free gift can help.

You?ve no doubt already ?set your course? for 2015 and determined where you want to go. Knowing where you?re headed is the first step to getting there. Equally important is knowing how many rowers you need and how to get the maximum performance out of your rowing team.

Merry Christmas!

Think Big, Make Big Things Happen!

Jeff Schmidt is EVP and Partner with Chris Lytle at Sparque, Inc. At Sparque We believe in challenging the status quo and thinking differently about sales and sales training. We believe training should be an investment based on a desired outcome rather than something you ?buy by-the-hour.? You can reach me at Jeff.Schmidt@Sparque.biz

Twitter: @JeffreyASchmidt
LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/schmidtjeffrey

Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

(WIZARD) Surprise! Your Client Is Wrong.

10-29-2014

How many times have you heard from a client, ?Our only problem is sales opportunities. If we had more sales opportunities, we?d make more sales.? It makes sense, doesn?t it? So you sold them a schedule and significantly increased their sales opportunities. But their sales did not increase proportionally. That?s when they said, ?You brought us the wrong customer.?

What?

I?ve always been puzzled by the fact that businesspeople think of advertising, sales training, and customer service as three separate departments within a company.

Have you ever developed an impression of a company through its advertising and then gotten a totally different impression of that company when you met with them? The external personality of a company is created through advertising. The internal personality of your company is created by management.

When a company delegates the creation of advertising to an outside group but gives that group no input into sales training or customer service, they create a company with a split personality, every time.

Are your advertisers using the words and phrases created by your ad writers and popularized in their radio ads? Or are they starting an altogether new and different conversation with your listeners, full of new and different words and phrases?

If it?s the latter, that?s a really bad idea.

If they continue the conversation that was begun in their ads, they?ll see their close rates rise significantly. Each of us has a natural connection with three of every 10 people we meet. Another three aren?t going to like you regardless of what you do or say. The remaining four people can possibly be sold, but only if the salesperson does and says the right things.

Does it surprise you that when all categories of selling are combined, the national average close rate is about 20 percent?

Let?s say your client?s staff is well above average, with a close rate of 30 percent. This means they?re selling three out of 10 opportunities. That?s 50 percent more than the two out of 10 everyone else is selling.

Even so, what if they could sell just one of the four remaining ?sellable? customers?

Their sales would immediately increase by 33 percent.

What if they could sell two of those four?

Their sales would increase by 67 percent.

What if, through clear focus and genuine inspiration, they could sell three of those four? Congratulations. You will have helped them double their sales volume with no change in pricing, no change in inventory, and no change in overhead. You did it merely by getting their staff to speak the same language currently being spoken in their ads. And consider this: You doubled their sales volume before you even increased their sales opportunities. Give them more sales opportunities, along with an elevated close rate, and they?ll think you walk on water.

The corporate wall between ad writing and sales training has troubled me for 30 years, but I?ve not spoken publicly about the problem until now.

Shall I confess?

I didn?t mention it because I didn?t want to be asked to fix it. Fixing it, you see, would involve talking to the employees of all the companies for whom I write ads. And frankly, nothing on earth could be as excruciating for me as having to smile and listen to well-meaning people tell me what they think I should do differently.

Truth be told, I?m not really a people person. Few writers are.

Ray Seggern of KROX-FM has put together a marvelous workshop to help businesses repair the split in their corporate personality. According to Seggern:
1. Story is what you say (external message created through advertising).
2. Culture is who you are (internal reality created by sales training).
3. Experience is what you deliver (what happens to your customers when they choose to trust you).

If any of these three is out of alignment, there will be predictable side effects.

When story and experience don?t align, a company gets bad reviews. But when advertising aligns with the customer?s experience, the company has authenticity.

When culture and experience don?t align, your client has a cancer in the building. But when corporate culture aligns with the customer?s experience, your client?s employees will have high morale.

When culture and story don?t align, your client will have a close rate that?s unimpressive. But if you help them get their sales training aligned with your advertising, they?ll need a wheelbarrow to carry their money.

And you?ll need a wheelbarrow to carry yours.

2015 is going to be a very good year for business.

Roy H. Williams is president of Wizard of Ads Inc. E-mail: roy@wizardofads.com.

Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

Mark Cuban is Wrong

10-18-2013

On a recent episode of your ABC reality series, "Shark Tank," you were presented with an opportunity from syndicated radio host, R-Dub. A 10 percent stake in his network radio show, ?Sunday Night Slow Jams?, for an investment of just $75,000.

R-Dub?s show is heard on almost 70 stations around the country and has been on the air for over a decade. Every weekend he talks to people in love, people that are hurt or sad, people that have a great celebration to share, or people just looking to unwind, and he plays for them a song that connects them more deeply to their moment. Mark, you and I have never had the pleasure to meet, and as a young entrepreneur who has owned my own businesses since I graduated from high school, you are someone I have always admired for the unique and innovative investments you make, but your response to this offer was one that, in the absence of anyone else in my industry being vocal, I simply couldn?t let go unchallenged. I urge you to read on and reconsider your opinion about the true potential of this form of media that I, and passionate people all over this country, give their lives to each and every day.

Following R-Dub?s offer, you said, ?syndicated radio is a horrible business.? Fellow Shark, Kevin O?Leary, added that, ?the radio market as an investment sucks.? With respect, I couldn?t disagree more. I believe your opinion is based on a flawed model. See, when I got into radio as a 17-year-old kid, it was because of how the medium connected to MY life. I woke up, and put the radio on. I got to work, and put the radio on. When I worked in the yard, or in my car, or lay on the beach, I put the radio on. And during each moment when that radio was on, it was scoring my life and adding a deeper, emotional layer that affects me even to this day. There?s not one person reading this, that hasn?t felt the same way. When a song comes on, whether through the radio, or new media like mobile or digital, it takes them back to a place and time as if they were right in it again. Sometimes it?s happy, sometimes it?s sad. It reminds them of a family member no longer with them, dancing at a party when they were kids. It takes them back to that moment on the beach with their first love. It sends a rush of emotion over them and takes them to the day they drove their baby home from the hospital. See, THAT is the power of radio and to me, being able to grow that experience is the best investment a man could ever make.

I don?t blame you completely for your opinion about radio. So many in our industry have simply lost their way. Somewhere along the way that personal touch, that unafraid approach to programming gave way to stockholders and corporations worried more about what?s safe and tested, and less about how they can truly create a better, more intimate connection to the lives of those listening. Rather than create a way to drive people TO the radio, they build every mobile and digital tool to drive people AWAY from it. ?If you don?t want to listen on the radio, it?s okay?just listen here, or here, or here.? What they forget is, circling all of our heads right now, are airwaves that we are fortunate enough to have access to. Airwaves that only WE can use to get to your ears right now. To connect to you and score your life?s soundtrack.

See Mark, I believe there is an incredible value to what we have here and what we can do if young, innovative thinkers are allowed to take chances and have the support of others who are simply bold enough to think differently with them. For the last five years, I?ve been quietly building my syndicated radio network on the principals that we CAN be great again. We believe that radio just needs better, interactive, personalized content that connects more directly to those we reach. It?s not about how many we reach, it?s about deeply we connect with them. I strongly believe a ?smaller? show in smaller markets, or with fewer stations that personally connect and interact with their audience, has greater value than some bulky show that by sheer mathematic manipulation, has more ?audience.? Somehow, that?s the measurement lately. Just own big stations, keep your expenses low, and the basic math will make the boardroom happy. Don?t worry about the listener??they?ll always be there.? What they?re forgetting is that their content is falling on deaf ears. And the younger those ears get, the more drastic the problem becomes.

Kids, parents, grandparents?they all need a soundtrack. They all WANT a soundtrack. They want to be entertained. They want to be spoken TO. They want to join in. They want to feel personally connected to their content. I believe that with some very different ideas and a very different way of thinking about our industry, they can be. And for you and Kevin O?Leary, I believe radio can indeed be something that you?d be proud to be part of.

So, call me. Better yet, come see me, and the people that give their lives to radio every day. Give us 10 minutes to talk to you about why radio IS and always will be a great investment, if we just get back to the basics.

As for R-Dub?I?ll use my closing lines to say, "Way to go, my friend." The people listening to you every week need that connection. They want that feeling that you give them when you listen to them and play a song to score their life. So keep it up.

Sincerely,

Jay Bailey
CEO
Sun Broadcast Group, Inc.

Reach Jay directly jbailey@sunbgi.com or leave your comments below.

(10/18/2013 2:44:22 PM)
Don't forget that Mark sold broadcast.net (formerly audionet) for $5.7 billion to Yahoo. The company streamed radio groups local radio stations on air signals. This paragraph I clipped from a release from Yahoo about the acquisition "The company will broadcast programming from 420 radio stations and networks, 56 TV stations and cable networks, and game broadcasts and other programming for more than 450 college and professional sports teams." Mark knows radios value
(10/18/2013 2:19:23 PM)
The problem with his pitch to the sharks is that he came in the room and taked about how great his show is. That was good but he never told them what the return could possibly be on their investment.
These guys want numbers.
(10/18/2013 2:12:10 PM)
Your argument is weak. You say that radio is great based on the connection it can have with listeners. You use no numbers to back up your claim. These guys are looking at potential return on investment. The money requested could be invested in another venture and possibly have a much higher rate of return.

The sharks suggestion that he should bring in a person to promote the show and share profits was a good one.

(10/18/2013 10:10:38 AM)
Andy,

I'd love to chat with you. I understand what you're saying and I think you missed the premise of the piece. You're right...that's how network radio is positioned today. It's flawed but radio and yes even network radio have great value. We just need to change the model. Email directly or call my office anytime.

(10/18/2013 9:56:42 AM)
Mark Cuban never said "radio sucks", Mark said that Syndicated Radio is a horrible business (just as you stated).

I ran the radio division of AudioNet/broadcast.com for Mark, and what he is referring to is the terrible inefficiencies of going to the network model.

Have a spot that goes for $1k in NY, now sell that spot as part of a network, figure the super low CPM's from being network, take out agency and rep commission, if your lucky, you get $50. That is what Mark is talking about.

Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

Smulyan Says Phil Boyce is Wrong

9-21-12

On Thursday Radio Ink reported the former WABC/New York PD Phil Boyce said the industry didn't really need an FM chip in cell phones -- an app is enough. Emmis CEO Jeff Smulyan (pictured) has about made it his mission in life to get chips into mobile phones and get them activated (some phones have chips installed but never activated), and he made it a point to call out Boyce during the Radio Show's leadership breakfast on Thursday. He wanted to make sure everyone understands the difference between an app and a chip.

The point Smulyan wanted everyone in the room to take home was that in order for an app to work, it needs to use the consumer's data plan. And at some point there will be a data glut, and consumers will be paying a lot more. An FM chip doesn't required a data plan; as long as the phone powers on, listeners are able to hear their local stations. Smulyan, and the NAB, believe that is vital during an emergency, when cell towers often fail.

Smulyan also threw a new number on the table: He said that in 2012, the American public will spend 3 billion hours listening to radio. All that time -- some of it now using up digital data -- could be transferred to mobile phones. As we pointed out, Smulyan has made it his mission to get the chip in all mobile phones. He said, "Every other issue the industry faces is 5 percent as important as this one.

(9/21/2012 4:06:16 PM)
Pardon for the dual post (also posted in the original Boyce story) but I will add some things:

Understand that Phil is coming from a slightly different perspective: most if not all of his stations are AM and they are not invited to the chip party simply because it is impractical. He is right when he says that he doesn't need the chip, just an app. That's the only way an AM station is going to get on your phone. Your mileage may vary if you are an FM.

Next, what will happen in a dire emergency situation or widespread disaster? You will still need a radio to pick up the AM stations that will manage to get back on the air and have actual programming you will need. Granted the phone can serve as an FM radio with the chip and that certainly doesn't hurt where those stations will serve your needs. But since the phone might be otherwise useless the device of choice might well be a radio - which will have the choice of both FM and AM where the phone will not.

I think the chip argument has creedence only because phones are being made with the FM capability and not being enabled. Cause it to make economic sense for the carriers to enable it and it will happen.

Something else to consider: Disaster happens, cell service and power service is down. You can get radio on your phone; you can radio on a battery-powered radio. The battery in your phone runs down. Do you have a spare charged-up battery? Probably not and there's a limit to how much time that'll work. Do you have spare batteries for your battery-operated radio? Probably. And likely enough to get you through the disaster if you planned ahead. You're not going to do that with cell phone batteries (too expensive for one thing).

(9/21/2012 10:18:05 AM)
Alright then - for those who cling to the "safety" or public service angle: How 'bout just those stations that can demonstrate they already have a staff that can be instantaneously on the job and on the air in the event of some disaster are the ones who get a chip-enabled cell-phone frequency....? Or, would that favor the congloms just a tad too much?
(9/21/2012 10:06:54 AM)
What back ups? its already there you cant ignore (radio)& phones are supposed to be multi-functional, right!?
(9/21/2012 6:31:11 AM)
An FM/FM-HD chipset mandate will never happen. The cell phone providers already have CMAS/NOAA weather alerts, which target specific areas, and backup procedures in case cell phone towers go down.

Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

Pittman: "There's Nothing Wrong With This Business"

It would have been an interesting sight to see if Bob Pittman gave his presentation side-by-side with Marci Ryvicker from Wells Fargo (see next story). The two seem to be telling two very different stories about the radio industry. Clear Channel's Bob Pittman had nothing but good news for Radio Show attendees, backed up with graphs, pie charts and a lot of cheerleading for the industry that he said he would defend vigorously if anyone tried to talk radio down. Pittman says "the consumer loves radio, radio is a companion, nearly everyone uses radio. This is not a product in trouble."

Pittman gave the crowd a lesson how to market the entire Radio industry and said he has never been around an industry that's runs itself down like radio does. And, of course, everyone knows he's right. Radio stations talk trash about other stations in the market. Radio reps talk bad about other sellers to advertisers. And, in the end that hurts the business and becomes part of why we continue to get 7 or 8% of the overall revenue pie. Pittman says Radio is not about towers and transmitters. "Our business is a brand. Radio is not selling a bunch of spots. It's about renting the relationships we have with our listeners to our clients."

So why do we underperform in the revenue department? Pittman says "we need to sell the medium. We need to tell our story. There is no good reason why we don't have more. Our fair share of the revenue pie is more than double what we have now. We're talking to people who have already decided what we're going to get. We just fight over that pie. We need to tell the story ourselves." Pittman also says advertisers get more bang for their buck with radio than they can with television. "Is TV more effective than radio? It's not even close. Radio reaches the influencers. Radio can do what TV does for a lower price." This coming from a guy who worked at MTV when it was first starting up.

Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

Why Jerry Lee Is Dead Wrong

by Kerry Brewer

June 15, 2011

Whether you are wasting your time and money on streaming has been an interesting debate over the past two days. For 3 months now Kerry Brewer has been writing for radioink.com touting the benefits of streaming. Every week he offers broadcasters tips on how to promote their stream, reasons why they should stream, ways to stream inexpensively and how to generate revenue. So, it;s no surprise Kerry does not agree with Jerry. He makes his case for why Jerry Lee is wrong.

In reading yesterday?s editorial about Jerry Lee of WBEB in Phili, I couldn?t help but think about the old buggy whip nalogy from the movie OPM, with Danny Devito. As a matter of fact, by the year 1890, there were over 13,000 businesses in the US that were in the horse-drawn wagon and carriage business. I am sure that there were many business owners in that sector that on any given day could find 10 different problems with the steam engine, and then its follow-on successor, the internal combustion engine.

One of the most valuable things that I learned in the Marines, is that you constantly have to improvise, adapt and overcome if you want to stay one ahead. In 1926, the U.S. Whip Company decided to face the inevitable, and switched from making buggy whips to making fishing line. Radio shouldn?t fear the internet, but embrace it and use it to its advantage like many are. A few years ago, the fear of losing listeners to the internet was far more prevalent. Today, more and more broadcasters have come to the realization that the internet is here to stay, and streaming is not a fad, and the ones that are denying the inevitable are simply sticking their head in the sand.

The ability to stream over the web also gives your listeners all kinds of new interaction ability, social media tie-ins and again, the ability to reach listeners at any time of the day, at any location. Providing you are using the right streaming provider, your advertisers can geo-target their ads to relegated market areas, or the whole world if they want. To deny that you need to be streaming, is telling your listeners that you are not willing to embrace the new media and communicate with them on their terms. To deny that you need to be streaming, is telling your competitors that you no longer wish to compete with them. To deny that you need to be streaming is refusing to acknowledge the huge proliferation of desktop players, mobile apps and internet devices that are flooding the market. No, this is not a fad that is ?going to fade out?. One has to simply study the history of transitions to new media over the last 100 years knows that this is not a fad, but has become deeply rooted in our culture and is becoming as mission-critical as the terrestrial signal itself.

And don?t count on the FM HD chip in every cell phone being the answer . . . or carriers that would cut their own bandwidth throats by activating the chips. That is far from a ubiquitous solution in a world where total penetration by the internet is now a reality. HD is still limited in many aspects; no DJ interaction, equipment is still very expensive, the higher-quality aspect is exaggerated when multicasting, as individual channel rates are reduced. On the other hand, streaming over the internet is as simple as hooking up an inexpensive PC to your board and sending your signal to a streaming provider that can multicast your broadcast to as many people as you want. Plans are very inexpensive nowadays with bandwidth getting cheaper and cheaper. And have you heard the quality of an AM or FM station that is streaming in AAC+, the latest format for streaming ubiquitously to any device, player or phone? In most cases, it is far more superior, especially when it comes to medium wave transmissions.

Many terrestrial station owners with whom I have talked over the years were resistant at first, in part because it is human nature to resist change, and in part because they really didn?t think they needed to. I do agree with Mr. Lee about keeping his eye on the terrestrial advertising ball, because that is the engine that powers the signal, but the internet is here to stay, and it complements the terrestrial side when used properly. Streaming is not meant to replace radio, but to augment it. Just like video didn?t kill that radio star, neither did the internet . . . it only made it stronger. My article last week

outlined several ways that a station can promote their online stream and I have written many articles on how to monetize and create new revenue. If you are not promoting what you are doing, you are not going to enjoy any real level of success. With all due respect to Mr. Lee, complaining that you have to pay additional royalties to SoundExchange to stream online is like saying that you don?t want to make any more money because you have to pay the taxes. Many broadcasters still don?t know what the real cost of streaming is, and are assuming themselves right out of the online arena. When the streaming fees and royalties are all added in, it may be a lot cheaper than you think, especially if you are a small broadcaster. If you are promoting your online streaming properly (see my article from last week), using it to its fullest extent, including all the listener-interactive features and social media tie-ins, you will start to gain simple shift momentum of the same listeners, and actually create more loyalty in doing so. The real key, however, and it?s simple to do, is monetizing the listener traffic with ads. If you really promote it and work it, you can not only cover your streaming fees, but also cover the additional royalties to SoundExchange . . . AND still make a profit.

And finally, let?s look at the cold hard facts of the fastest-growing medium in history.

Most of your listeners are at work or on the road during the day. Making your stream available to them over the internet, via mobile and desktop streams, gives them the convenience of being able to listen anywhere, any time. In today?s technological world, people are going to make choices based on what?s available to them. Online advertising, especially display advertising and impression ads, is literally exploding. According to eMarketer, online and mobile advertising is slated to hit $100 billion this year. That?s 1 out of every 5 ad dollars spent in the marketplace. And the area of fastest-growth? Online radio-anything. Look at the latest Infinite Dial 2011 by Arbitron and see the incredible growth charts, growth that is going to continue at this pace, with some continuum projections as far out as 2015. Bandwidth carries are, in fact, not doing away with bandwidth, but gearing up to try and keep pace with the flood of internet devices from home to the workplace to the car.

Kerry Brewer is Sr. Managing Director at Securenet Systems, a leading provider of online streaming services to the worldwide radio industry. He can be reached at kbrewer@securenetsystems.net or on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/kerrybrewer.

(6/15/2011 7:24:48 PM)
Mr Brewer, You also said that if you are promoting it right you can cover your royalty fees, bandwidth cost, and still make a profit. As far as I can see, no one is actually doing that. Can you tell me just one major market music radio station that is?
(6/15/2011 7:21:55 PM)
No, I didn't miss the article on the Lincoln, Nebraska cluster. On the other hand, Lincoln, Nebraska, while undoubtedly a lovely place to live, isn't a major market. And nowhere in the article does it say how much it costs them to stream and whether the 250k in revenue covers that. So, my original question remains.
(6/15/2011 6:49:48 PM)
I think Jerry makes a good point though that understanding the real cost of streaming and the potential revenue don't currently add up. If Pandora, who is doing this full time, is losing money on it, what makes you think a station that does not have the same kind of resources will have more success monetizing it. Now, that being said, a stream is a great "added feature" for your advertisers. If you can tell them that you can get them over the air and online, you just showed your value over Pando
(6/15/2011 11:02:14 AM)
Jake- I guess you missed this article.
http://www.radioink.com/article.asp?id=2204565
(6/15/2011 10:56:51 AM)
Hey d-fence, i never said streaming was replacing radio, and i have committed many years and my firm to helping terrestrial radio embrace streaming. look at some of my recent quotes that are threaded consistently through all my articles / "...the internet is here to stay, and it complements the terrestrial side when used properly." / "Streaming is not meant to replace radio, but to augment it." / "Just like video didn’t kill that radio star, neither did the internet, it only made it stronger" KB

Add a Comment | View All Comments Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here

Ask The Attorney: Contests That Go Wrong Can Cost You!

If you give away a house with a client and the client goes bust are you still on the hook for the prize? That's what clear channel is dealing with in Fort Myers Florida after a local developer went bankrupt after running a house-giveaway contest with the Clear Channel cluster. The case is going to mediation in August where someone will decide whether the developer bears 100% of the responsibility for failing to deliver or if Clear Channel has to pony up some cash. The contest also stated the winner would get a lump sum of $150,000 if not the house. But there is more than just a local court, big brother also watches over you. The FCC does not have a lot of tolerance for botched contests. We turned to attorney John Garziglia to give you all a detailed update on contests, contest rules and the do's and dont's.

John Garziglia:  The FCC dangers in radio station conducted contests encompass two general areas.  The first area is a failure to fully and accurately disclose all material terms of the contest.  The second area is a failure to conduct the contest substantially as announced or advertised. 
The station should have detailed written contest rules.  While those rules do not have to be read in their entirety every time the contest is mentioned on the air, the FCC requires that the material terms of the contest be broadcast periodically.  The FCC has defined material terms as encompassing (1# how to enter or participate; #2# any eligibility restrictions; #3# the entry deadline dates; #4# whether prizes can be won; #5# when prizes can be won; #6# the extent, nature, and value of the prizes; #7# the basis for valuation of prizes; #8# the time and means of selection of winners; and #9# any tie-breaking procedures.

The FCC regards a contest as any promotion in which a prize is offered.  Thus, even something as simple as the giveaway of concert tickets to the 10th caller should have contest rules in place, and the material terms of that contest must be broadcast.  For instance, is there an age restriction on who can call? Is there a requirement that the concert tickets must be picked up at the station and will not be mailed?  Things like this are material terms and must be stated at the time the contest is conducted.  For more complicated contests, a full set of written contest rules and the periodic broadcast of the material terms of the contest is a must. 

Broadcast stations manage to get themselves into trouble in a variety of ways with contests.  The FCC is particularly sensitive to contesting rule violations as the history of FCC regulations in this area goes back to the early days of television and rigged contests. 

Thus, a radio personality offering to give away the "keys" to a luxury car #but not the car#, a five night cruise #where the daylight hours must be paid for#, or dinner with Garth Brooks #a local dude who just happens to have the same name as the country music star), are all very bad ideas that can backfire on a radio personality who thought he or she was having a bright idea moment.  There are numerous examples of similar goofs on the air that appeared funny at the time resulting in an FCC notice of violation.

The contest prize that becomes unavailable is the classic conundrum for a radio station.  If Super Bowl tickets are offered, and the radio station finds out that the NFL really frowns on broadcast station promotions using its trademarked game name and is therefore unable to give away Super Bowl tickets, the radio station will likely also have an FCC problem if a complaint is filed. 

Comprehensive well-written contest rules, possibly prepared in conjunction with your FCC counsel and local counsel, are a must.  While it is impossible to write contest rules that cover every situation, detailed well-thought-out contest rules that management requires station personnel to absolutely adhere to can guard against contest mishaps.  It should also be noted that a contest rule that states that the station can do whatever it wants, whenever it wants, for whatever reason, will not pass muster with the FCC,

On the more dangerous, sad, side of radio station contesting are water drinking contests and treasure hunts where injuries and death have occurred.  Keep in mind that even benign contests and promotions can have a potential for injuries or damage, and can create a host of liabilities for radio stations.  Be sure that the radio station's insurance covers the contest and any liabilities.  Scrub the contest completely beforehand by asking "what can go wrong?" 

Violations of the FCC?s contest rules not only have the potential to incur fines and penalties if an FCC complaint is filed.  In addition, radio station management is likely spent many hours, and tens of thousands of dollars of legal fees, in responding to the FCC.  It is not fun, nor does it help to get ratings or meet goals, to answer an FCC contest rule violation inquiry.  Accordingly, be sure to fully and accurately disclose all material terms of a contest, and to conduct a contest substantially as announced or advertised. 

Add a Comment Send This Story To A Friend

View the original article here