Ondertussen hebben een flink aantal gerenommeerde consultants als Gary Berkowitz, John Lund, Mike McVay en veteraan Lee Abrams hun filosofie los gelaten op de memo van Dan Mason en het 'announcing and back announcing of title and artists'. Een interessante discussie...
MASON MEMO TO CBS JOCKS: BACK ANNOUNCE THE SONGS
At some point along the way one of radio's brilliant programmers decided telling listeners the name of a song and artist was a waste of breathe. Of course that leaves the listener hanging, the artist without any song promotion and, apparently music labels unhappy. And, by the way, this is one of those things you NEVER have to worry about when you listen to music on Pandora, Slacker or any other online service. That information is always there. Always.
This silly programming idea is also a reason why the app Shazam became so popular. How it was decided that identifying the song and artist were clutter and station promos after every song, 8 minute stopsets and unprepared DJ chatter are not is perplexing. And, we challenge anyone reading this to come up with a good reason why that's smart programming. Especially if you program the station with the listener in mind first.
CBS radio President Dan Mason circulated a company memo yesterday that said CBS listeners "should hear an immediate difference in the way we present our day to day programming." The Mason memo was a conclusion he and others inside the company came to after Mason met up with a Los Angeles music executive. Mason wanted to know how CBS could help sell more music. The answer he got wasn't very complicated “Just give the title and artist of the music you play.” Mason told his people "We shouldn’t just play the music, we should showcase the music."
The executive rightly questioned Mason on how radio's brilliant minds decided dumping that information was a good idea. "He went on to question me as to how the concept of not giving that information ever crept into radio programming in the first place. Having been around programming for 40 years, my recollection was that in the early 80’s that information was defined as clutter - the more music and less talk theory. I didn’t subscribe to that theory, but it was the thinking at the time."
As a result, CBS Radio contemporary, rock, urban and country stations will increase the integration of title and artist information on new music releases in an effort to personalize, and drive sales of the product. CBS will also be expanding our radio play history online as far back as several years, providing a living synopsis of the songs we feature on the air for anyone to access.
Mason says "This is a commitment I feel very strongly about. This is a positive step CBS Radio is taking not only to support the sale of music, but in strengthening our relationship with the artists and those that promote and manage their careers."
CBS radio boss Dan Mason is one of radio's group heads not afraid to speak his mind and let everyone know what he thinks. When he writes a memo to his employees instead of worrying about somebody leaking it to the radio trades, his staff sends it out. He's visible at industry conventions, not worried about trying to fly under the radar. In light of the increasingly crowded and competitive battle for the consumer's ears these days, there's been a lot of talk about radio figuring out a way to speak with one voice. Mason wouldn't be a bad choice in that role.
His latest memo had to do with a directive given to CBS music stations. After a meeting with a music executive Mason came to the conclusion that the industry needed to do a better job identifying songs and artists on the air. Over the years, for some reason, stations have gotten away from opting, a lot of times, for unprepared and meaningless chatter that turns off the listener. That music exec told Mason identifying the artists would help him sell more music. That brings us back to the age old debate in radio. Why don't jocks back-announce songs? How much clutter is too much clutter? How much mindless chatter can the listener tolerate? There are many questions. And we turned to the industry experts for the answers.
Jacobs Media President Fred Jacobs says we're all struggling with those questions. "Doing great radio and finding the optimal avenues for different formats in which to deliver artist and title information is a key. This is clearly a promotable benefit. In research study after research study, listeners tell us that they value this information - and they're frustrated when they don't get it. The trick is developing the balance of delivering the information in a timely PPM-friendly fashion. For well-branded stations with strong personality, this won't be hard. Creative programmers will find a way, and their audiences will benefit from having this information, rather than using Shazam or racing off to a search engine to find out the name of that damn song!"
Jaye Albright of Albright & O'Malley tells Radio Ink there is no boiler plate answer. "The more compelling the personality and the content, the more. The less personable and relatable the non-music programming on a music FM is, the better the station will do with less of it, as long is the goal is short term only. LONG term, developing strong entertainers who know how to use content as a magnet, the better the station will do. Listeners like it best when there is NO clutter. Limiting unwanted elements that make money has always been the greatest programming competitive challenge. Running any clutter of any kind which doesn't drive revenue or usage is foolhardy.
McVay Media President Mike McVay says he's a huge fan of identifying the music. "WBEB/Philadelphia invented the tactic of "Song Tags." That's my favorite tactic. It's a quick recorded blip that announces the song title/artist name. Even if you have the visual tags on the listeners radio tuner, they still want to hear the name of the song that's been played. I do not subscribe to the "one size fits all" philosophy, but I do believe that you have to declare if you're a music station or a personality station. If you're a music station ... play 12 songs minimum per/hour. We've learned from the People Meter that the "tune out" types are gone by the second commercial, if they're tuning out, but if a listeners sticks through two spots, they're likely to hang-in for the complete set.
Lund Media Research President John Lund says the research says that listeners really want this. "Listeners do want to know what played. That’s why stations have this info on their website – including the last 10 songs that aired. But it is impractical to B/A all songs in every format since it breaks the flow – especially in PPM markets. Title and artist is highly desired – and that means back-announcing after the song, but not fore-announcing. Stopping to B/A every song will be perceived by some as stopping down. Must be programmed carefully. I bet Clear Channel and Entercom are looking forward to all CBS stations back-announcing every song with title and artist.
Humans like humans, and listeners like to hear our air talents communicate one-on-one. I don’t consider liners to be talk, but rather benefits of continued listening i.e., mini commercials for the radio station, and liners reinforce reasons to listen. I disagree with one sentence below – not all talk is perceived as “all that clutter”. That would be especially true this week on the Country FM in Joplin, MO Kix 102.5.
Second oldest question in commercial radio: “How many commercials an hour do we play?” Oldest is “what format do we run?”… Answer: Do not play many more than the competition you share audience with. We’re in the audience satisfaction business and we play the music targeted for the researched demo. But if we have to stop down, keep it competitive. Don’t give reasons for customers to shop other stores.
Gary Berkowiz of Berkowitz Consulting says "Yes, yes, yes. I have been a major advocate of this practice for a long time. Afterall, what do DJ's do? They tell you the songs they are playing. I advise my stations that when they are into music, always make the jock raps about the station benefits and the music. The biggest excuse I hear for not doing this is "They know all the songs we play." That is not true. In focus groups across the country, listeners frequently complain that they would like the radio stations to tell them the songs and artists more often. I have been using "song tags" on many stations for the past few years (a recorded backsell on every song played) and the listener reaction is always positive to them.
Listeners hear two things on radio stations. Music and everything else. They do not delineate promos, commercials, liners, etc. Its just music and everything else. For that reason, I try to play as much music as possible, keep it moving forward and still find a way to weave the personalities into the mix. If station promos are not highly compelling, I say drop em! I believe 12 minutes/12 units max is best. Lately, its the units that are causing problems. I have always believed that listeners hear "messages" not "minutes".
A memo, a few PD meetings and a well-organized media push gives us the impression CBS Radio President Dan Mason has bigger things in mind than just announcing a song title and artist name a few times a day. Could Mason be trying to lead an entire industry in a new direction? Following Mason's recent meeting with a music executive, the CBS media department has been working on all cylinders marketing the "Mason Memo." The easy part was getting it in the radio trades. However, it's been circulating around the Internet via social media, blogs and was even in the New York Times. Yesterday CBS trotted out Director of Programming Greg Strassell (see next story) to discuss details about how CBS is implementing its new programming rules. The changes are pretty simple. Music stations are going to go back to announcing an artists name and the title of a song. Not all songs but certainly more than what listeners have been accustomed to hearing.
Legendary radio programmer Lee Abrams. Among many accomplishments, Abrams invented and built Album Rock, the first successful FM format. He also designed numerous other highly successful radio formats including the first Eclectic Rock format at San Francisco’s KFOG; the first FM Urban/Dance format at New York’s WKTU, the first New Adult Contemporary format among others. In addition, he created the original blueprint for the NBC Source Radio Network. We wanted to get Abrams opinion on the "Mason Memo" and his thoughts on where this is going.
RI: Do you think Dan Mason is trying to change an entire industry with this organized push?
I hope not, because a memo isn't going to do it. To me radio is out of sync with 21st Century America content wise. Radio is Mitch Miller and the America wants Elvis...or Bobby Vee and the America wants The Beatles...or Poison and America wants Nirvana. You get the idea. Dramatic and noticeable evolution. I commend him for stepping out, but it's such a small point, it's not going to make any difference on the street, just like an App, a Facebook page or a new slogan isn't going to drive any significant movement in an era where evolution isn't a luxury it's a necessity. Something America WANTS but radio isn't delivering nearly to it's potential. We need to address and execute on intelligent but sweeping re-thinking, cultural change and execution, more than worrying about announcing titles.
RI: What is your opinion on whether or not Radio should be doing more song/title announcing?
Music has become a commodity at radio and the lack of song/title mentions is symptomatic of a much greater self inflicted problem at music radio. While the golden days where radio was relatively uncontested in the music space are over, there are some things that are timelessly important in a competitive music scenario. Musical credibility is earned and announcing song titles is just one minor component in embracing the artists and songs a station plays. Listen to a successful music station in the 60's and you'll hear the instinctive celebration and embracing of songs they played. Not every song as some are pretty obvious, but the "spirit" of the musical presentation was electric and exciting. Can't go back to that 'sound' but sure can re-interpret that spirit for 2011. As much as the 'underground dj's' caused great format adherance pains in the early days of FM, at least they had musical passion---something missing and replaced by rocket science. Somewhere between that intense passion and science, lies the zone of musical cred and a magnetic musical relationship with the public.
RI: How did the industry get away from doing it? It seems so simple. Who determined it was something the listeners did not want?
Again, a symptom of radio's creative coma. Leaders are looking for consolidation and digital answers which while important, are masking the true growth inhibitor---stations that simply don't connect with listeners beyond utility. Generating fans and not users. The presentation of music is on autopilot. An afterthought. Just the fact that Dan's comments are gaining such attention is frightening. It has never been more important for radio to go into creative over drive and that includes the total capture of the artists they focus on. The entire mind set of the radio industry has been in a denial driven self congratulatory state for awhile now, and especially in terms of music presentation. The level of clever, intelligent and hyper competitive thinking in terms of what comes out of the speakers would make a Storz or McLendon roll in their grave (if people dont know who those guys are---that's a problem in itself). Radio is in my DNA, I love it as most of your readers do, but if you really love it--get IN the fight on the most basic playing field---What comes out of the speakers. If Thar's brilliant, everything else from digital to NTR will flow from that and issues like song announcing will be irrelevent factors in the bigger picture of CREATING brilliant radio that ins in sync with the potential of this century. And---it isn't expensive. It's a mind not a money thing.
RI: Why not do it for every song when the jock comes back on?
Some songs need it...others don't. Some formats are foreground, some are environmental. The better idea is to blow up the playbook and redesign stations for the 2011 realities. Even successful stations should go through a "creative audit" as if they are REALLY successful, a re-think can only make them more so as they are operating from a position of strength. It's not just the song announce issue, it's EVERY element of how a station presents music in the new era.
RI: Can Mason's idea lead an entire industry to change?
The whole "announce the songs" thing is microscopic in importance. An inside the industry thing. I seriously doubt a single listener will notice. It's going to take a lot more than a memo from a respected group head to drive any change that is noticeable to the public. Just as it has historically, it's going to take a few breakthrough concepts not memos. The radio CULTURE is part of the issue too. Adverse to embracing the art of radio which as in "theater of the mind" is perhaps the greatest advantage radio has...or had. It's not arts and crafts...it's the quest to take people places as only radio can. If a film can...why not radio?
RI: How many spots should a music station be playing every hour?
It depends, but more important is that spot load isn't the problem. It's the lack of MAGIC between the spots. The whole vibe of what a station does. Its passion, character and muscle. Spots keep the lights on...but low spot loads are over rated unless of course you ran 8 and everyone else ran 18. But when most stations run about the same number, it borders on irrelevant in the big picture.
RI: Are we killing ourselves with the unentertaining chatter and long stopsets?
That doesn't help. In fact I often wonder if DJ's aren't, with a few exceptions, a relic of the past. At XM was had a "Classic Rock" channel with NO DJ's---just amazing production, killer songs (and not the standard tested library) and a few features that magnified certain artists and genres. The experts said you HAD to have DJ's, but what can a DJ possibly say about a Beatles or Pink Floyd song that is even remotely interesting. But again---it's not ONE thing that can kill anything---it's addressing every aspect of a stations' character from music to how the receptionist answers the phone. I think evaluating the function of the DJ in 2011 is a worthwhile excerise as it hasn't been thought through in decades. Maybe DJ's or the 'DJ style' is more annoying than compelling? Maybe...maybe not--but THOSE are the level of questions that need to be asked and acted on.
RI: Do you think online services are playing a role in how radio is starting to think?
No. We are at the most important crossroads in media history. The Apple/Google era, yet radio seems happy to live within its own 90's rooted walls. Radio remains omnipresent and a potential culture mover, but just not seeing the kind of 21st century creative content swagger it's going to take to be the soundtrack of America throughout the century. If anything, maybe Dan's letter will stir some thinking and that's a start. But this is serious stuff...there's a media WAR out there and it's going to take more than a memo, some slogans and a cool App to win it. THAT is what's exciting about the future of radio.
(6/7/2011 1:10:39 PM)
Dan Mason is just trying to get us to understand that the listener really does want to hear the name of the song and the artist.
- Webster James
(6/3/2011 6:55:51 PM)
One of the things Lee Abrams has always done well is to engineer radio formats into organic, breathing radio stations. Everything that happens on the air has to relate to the sound of the music and the lifestyle it reflects. and he's right in this interview - there's a lot of magic missing now. You know what I think is missing? What legendary consultant (and former Abrams partner) Kent Burkhart calls "Friday Night Lights." The great music stations of the past did a lot more than play the right music. The news related. The jocks related. Even the spots were like little cultural newscasts that related. And they all related to the communities they served. You could listen for a half an hour and get an idea of what was going on in that town. Lee's challenge now is to capture that kind of atmosphere with national formats on satellite radio; channels like XM's "The Spectrum" do a nice job, IMO. For the rest of us, our challenge is to make our stations more than a logo and a format; our challenge is to make great, local radio stations again that make our listeners feel like they're in the game... and that isn't cheap.
- Scott Slade
(6/2/2011 1:55:23 PM)
Great blueprint for how to become a consultant or better yet 'guru' or 'minister of innovation'. All questions--no answers. In the same paragragh he harkens back to the glory days of 60's radio then suggests DJ's are obsolete. Even more hilarious is the notion that XM's production was/is 'amazing'. Radio has been evolving and reinventing itself for decades and will continue to do so while reaching 90+ percent of the population each week through whatever means technology provides the marketplace. The most compelling content in media today continues to be Radio even as watered down as consolidation has rendered it. Radio was doing 'reality'
way before Survivor. Here in market 261 where everyone wears 11 different hats we still take time every day to ask "how can we do this different/better/cooler". The idea that Radio pros are simply blobs sitting in the middle of the road waiting to be run over by advancing technology is a farce. We ARE the digital revolution because our reach and content are unmatched and columns such as this one are read,debated and acted on by some of the brightest minds in entertainment today.
- Brew Michaels
(6/2/2011 1:38:07 PM)
Enjoyed the interview.
Because it's so much easier to point to problems than it is to identify specific solutions, I commend Dan Mason for the step he's taken. Maybe it's small in the scheme of things, but bless him for doing SOMETHING, right?
Re: spot loads, Lee said, "...spot load isn't the problem. It's the lack of MAGIC between the spots." I'd add that the spots themselves too often lack luster, let alone "magic." This, too, is something we can fix--if we choose to.
- Rod Schwartz
(6/2/2011 9:59:14 AM)
Lee hits the nail on the head - radio is suffering from a creative gap. The goal of most stations is to make sure the trains are running on time. Never mind that radio is supposed to be an experience. Announcing title and artist is the least of radio's issues. Radio has lost the understanding that it is about companionship. It was social but has ceded that ground. Music radio does need to re-invent itself but that would require risks. And, while risks do lead to rewards they can also fail.
- Steve Allan
