INK TANK

Local Heroes In Alabama Tornadoes

This week's tornado devastation in Alabama not only brought a huge death toll, it destroyed the homes and livelihoods of thousands of Americans. As the media coverage comes out, we're learning of many stories of bravery -- and many of the local heroes are radio broadcasters.

Imagine for a moment the devastation if something like this were to hit your town. There is mass hysteria. People not knowing where to turn, having no way to contact others, not knowing if family is alive, not knowing where to go or what to do next. The power is down, the phones are out, the cell towers are not operating. There is no Internet or mobile Internet, no streaming radio or television, and the ONLY means of communication are the local radio and television stations, operating off generators. But most consumers don't own battery-powered televisions. So their battery-operated or in-car radio is the only lifeline to learn where to go, what to do.

The broadcasters in these markets are working impossible hours. They've put the needs of their own families aside, have put revenue generation and their normal formats aside, in the interest of serving their local communities.  City officials have no way to communicate with consumers other than radio.

Radio broadcasters in these communities are true heroes. We as an industry should applaud the efforts of our fellow broadcasters, and every radio station in the U.S. should volunteer airtime and efforts to point consumers to the RED CROSS or others raising money for the victims.

Times like these reinforce radio's value in every community to Congress and local officials. Imagine if every cellphone had an FM chip during this time when almost everyone has to rely on radio. Those phones would have provided extra radios, and even more consumers would have had access to critical information.

Join me in giving recognition to our fellow broadcasters for their heroic efforts.

Here is a great spot created by Jim Kipping of Emmis in Austin. It says it all.

I Want FM

  

In a recent editorial, I stated that I think every radio station in the world should be streaming and have its signal on a worldwide aggregator like TuneIn, one of my favorites. I stated that statistics bear out the fact that most streaming use is by in-market listeners who simply find it more convenient to listen to the stream, or who may be out of market at the time and want to stay connected with their hometown.

I'm a big supporter of streaming, and I think every radio station should be doing it.

But there is are problems, which we will be addressing at our Convergence conference in May. There is a giant bandwidth crash coming. And a giant issue related to streaming will be increases in consumers' data plans, which carriers are learning is their big profit center.

I recently gave up my iPhone for an HTC Evo, which I like as much or better. One of the reasons I bought it is because I wanted to find out if having FM on my phone would impact my personal use of streaming.

On day one at the gym, I was able to use the FM on the phone to tune in to the TV broadcasts in front of the treadmill, with the audio being fed via FM. I also started using FM instead of streaming on my phone because of the occasional start-and-stop cutouts of the streams. But the giant issue was battery life. Though the EVO is a great phone, its battery goes down fast when using the data plan, and I found that the more I streamed, the more I killed my battery. Not so with the FM -- I can listen pretty much all day without much battery drain.

There is a great debate going on over FM on cellphones. Some think it's silly and putting old technology into a high-tech world, while others want Congress to legislate FM chips in phones because that would make radio available even when cell towers are inoperable in emergencies. Frankly, that can't hurt and might help -- I've changed my tune considerably on this now that I have FM on my phone.

But I don't want to wait for Congress to take action, and frankly, I think consumer demand is what we need to drive. So, in an effort to stop talking and start taking action, I went to my friends at the Radio Ranch in Los Angeles and commissioned this radio spot, which encourages consumers to say, "I want FM" when they buy a new cellphone.

If every FM station in America airs these spots in heavy rotation for 90 days or longer, it will drive adoption of FM on cellphones by consumers, and it will put carriers under pressure to put FM on more models in the future. Consumers win and we win.

I’d like to ask every person in the radio industry reading this to bring this spot to the market mannager, GM or group head and ask to put it on the air immediately in your unsold FM inventory for at least 90 days, and on your streamed stations. This spot is not anti-streaming, but it is pro-FM. (Sorry, AM people, I wish there were phones with AM too.)

Please report in and let us know if you're using the spots, and the reaction you're receiving from the market (and the carriers).

Click here to download the spot. If you need assistance, please e-mail [email protected].

OR try this link to download as well: http://www.radioinkforums.com/mp3s/Iwantfm_radioInk_radioranch_01.mp3

Thanks to Dick and Sandy Orkin and the staff at the Radio Ranch for creating this ad.

 

 

 

 

Defining Discrimination: Has the FCC Gone Too Far?

 

Discrimination is a terrible thing, and there is no place for it in life or in business. But I'm not sure it's the job of the Federal Communications Commission to determine when business decisions do and do not involve discrimination.

The FCC will soon require stations to include a non-discrimination clause in their ad contracts. Stations are being told that if they sense discrimination, they must not accept the ad revenue. But is it reasonable to place a burden on a salesperson, under pressure to make goals, to pass on revenues because they think the client may be unfairly discriminating?

Radio Ink has made it a point to highlight advertisers that have imposed "no urban dictates" or "no Hispanic dictates," refusing to advertise on black or Hispanic stations. Though it's much reduced, this kind of discrimination still goes on quietly. There may be, for example, an automaker that thinks blacks or Hispanics can't afford to buy their cars. Either the people at such an automaker are misinformed about the buying power of these important audiences, or they are simply bigots.

Discrimination by advertisers is wrong. But what if an advertiser legitimately knows that an audience is not a realistic target for its products? 

One broadcaster wrote to me in an e-mail: "There is nothing discriminatory about 'no urban dictates' ... It's targeting a market. The local store that caters to blacks won't advertise on [station] because they figure blacks don't listen to old country music." Is that discrimination?

Is it discrimination when a business that targets African-Americans doesn't buy ads on a station with almost no African-American listeners? Is it discrimination when a product targeting young Hispanic consumers doesn't buy on a Soft AC?

Is it discrimination when advertisers don't buy ads on a station because they hold a different political point of view? Ask broadcasters who have dropped certain right-wing programming because of "no radical right wing dictates." Where do we draw the line?

Is it discrimination to buy only one station deep? Or should that same advertiser be pushed to buy a second station, just so the first station can prove it doesn't let advertisers discriminate? What if the second station has an audience that has historically made up only a tiny proportion of the advertiser's sales? Is it radio's responsibility to encourage an advertiser to waste money?

Business owners know their markets and, assuming it's a legitimate business decision, they should not be pushed to buy any station they don't believe best reaches their target market. Though bigotry and discrimination are clearly wrong, a business owner has the right to act in the best interest of the business, and the government should not be interfering in that decision.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has said the commission will "vigorously enforce its rules against discrimination in advertising sales contracts." But what does that mean? If an advertiser makes a decision to advertise on one station and not on another, and the commission concludes the decision was based on discrimination, then will the FCC -- which has no authority over the advertiser -- come down on the station?

This regulation is well intentioned, but I'm not sure it's quite the same as having a non-discrimination law in housing or business. I fear that advertisers who want to target an audience as a practical matter will simply avoid any medium that attempts to get them to buy advertising they don't want or need -- as broadcasters may feel they have to do to avoid trouble with the FCC. The commission has potentially created a very real conflict of interest for broadcast salespeople.

Is buying keywords on Google discriminatory? Or buying only certain cable channels? Those things may or may not involve discrimination, but the FCC has no authority over those media. Special rules for broadcast buys will merely drive business away from broadcast.

Though we should all make an effort to eradicate discrimination and bigotry in any form, I believe that this action will backfire and push advertisers away from the broadcast medium for fear of being badgered to buy advertising they don't want, or accused of discrimination when all they are trying to do is reach their target in the most efficient way.

Start with a call to your representative in Congress, and a call to the NAB. This rulemaking should be challenged.

  

 

Is Radio Ready?

Lessons from Japan One Month Later

Though the television coverage has slowed since the Japan earthquake and tsunami, even as Japan deals with ongoing and sometimes-huge aftershocks, it continues to amaze me how much devastation occurred and how people continue to struggle for basic sustenance. The recovery in Japan will probably take decades.

Though being a fatalist isn't popular because our nature is to seek the positive, there are lessons to learn from Japan that broadcasters need to consider. Though Japan has never assumed it was out of harm's way from earthquakes, and though experts had predicted for decades that "the big one" would someday come, human nature always wants to believe that day is far off in the future and may never come at all. No one expected the magnitude 9.0 earthquake that hit one month ago today, the massive tsunami that followed, and the damage and resulting radiation pollution from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

No area of our country is immune to natural disaster, and many of our cities, including some in the inland Midwest, are built on fault lines that experts have said for decades could eventually become active. And of course, many of our largest population centers are in coastal cities or in earthquake zones.

Watching coverage from Japan, we see cities where the entire infrastructure has been crushed. No water, no sewage treatment, no access roads for food delivery, and no sources of sustenance. Though helicopters are dropping in care packages, one Japanese citizen said, "The government is trying to provide supplies by air, bringing in food and medicine, but it's like dropping a little salt into the ocean."

As broadcasters, we have to assume that an equally horrific disaster can and will happen in our community and that our radio stations may be the only source of information and communications for the people in our towns.  Our ability to survive and stay nourished so we can continue broadcasting will depend on how well prepared we are.

Years ago, I owned a radio station in Salt Lake City, and our transmitter was atop a mountain that was accessible only by snowmobile in the winter, and often impossible to reach at all. My staff mocked me when I stocked the transmitter building with a week's worth of long-term survival food, until the day our chief engineer got stuck in the building for two days after a storm came in while he was doing routine maintenance. The power went down, and he had to endure the loud clanking and heat of the diesel generator in the building for two days. I was vindicated, but more importantly, the food stored at the site helped save his life.

Radio stations should assume they will be the lifeline for their communities. There should be systems in place, in advance, to communicate with local authorities, ham radio operators, and anyone who can get to others and communicate back to you, under the worst conditions, with no power, no food or water. How long will your generator last without fuel? How long can your staff broadcast, assuming no one can get to them for a week or two?
 
You should always assume:
- Anything that can happen will happen.
- Things will happen when least expected and will be worse than predicted.
- The best preparation is never adequate.
- Wishful thinking does not delay events or make survival possible.
 
Every radio station and every transmission facility needs to store enough fuel, food, and water to last a staff of people (and their families) for at least two weeks. Though we assume things will get better within a week or two, that has not proven to be true in Japan, where there are still people starving a month later.

I also think it would be good to have an annual meeting of all local radio stations and local community officials/ham radio operators to coordinate how stations can play a role in a worst-case scenario.
 
Most of us have never lived through a disaster and we don't expect to. Neither did stations in New Orleans, and they can share stories about how they could have been better prepared when Hurricane Katrina hit.

Disaster comes in forms we never expect, and you can never be prepared enough. But lives depend on radio, and it's important to think through the worst-case scenarios for your community and do your best to be ready.

Thank God And Radio

Country radio people are different. It's what I discovered at my first Country Radio Seminar many years ago, when the artists were walking the halls with the rest of us, attending sessions and participating. Each artist was just one of us. At the time I hadn't paid much attention to country music and didn't know many of the artists.

I was manning my booth that first year, and while everyone was upstairs at a session, the exhibit hall was pretty sparse. So I ended up sitting on the edge of a table, talking for an hour with a woman who had been walking through. Finally, as we were wrapping up, I asked her what she was doing at the show and she said, "I'm an artist, and I come every year."

"Have you had any success?" I asked, and she humbly said, "I've been blessed with a little." When I asked her name, I learned it was Tammy Wynette. That’s when I learned just how different that part of the industry is.

Last night, while watching the 46th annual Academy of Country Music Awards, I was reminded how most of the people in country music remain humble and thankful. Most acceptance speeches had two things in common: The artists thanked God and radio, usually in that order.

These days it seems everyone wants to find something wrong with radio, and it's refreshing to hear something positive. It makes me proud of our industry to see these artists grateful for radio airplay; they understand it's critical to their success and a part of the lives of their fans. Clearly they would not thank radio if they felt it no longer had value.

Radio may have its challenges, but it remains a viable and important medium to most Americans. Sometimes it takes outsiders to remind us, "Thank God for radio."

The Bidding War Over Beck In New York

When Rick Buckley at WOR dropped Glenn Beck in New York, he may have empowered what will soon be the highest-billing radio station in the world.

Though the people at activist group Media Matters have been trying to make a story out of Buckley's dropping Beck with claims that Beck now has less than 400 radio affiliates, there really is no story there. Beck remains a radio powerhouse, with no deterioration of audience or affiliates.

WOR's decision to drop Beck is a trend of one. No other radio stations are dropping Beck, and his remains a strong and viable program with more than 430 affiliates. Rick Buckley heads one of the few privately held broadcasters, and he can make a stand on personal principle and take a financial hit if he decides he does not want something on his airwaves. For others, Glenn Beck is good for business, and there is absolutely no trend of station losses.
.
The trend everyone is paying attention to is that an FM News station in market number 9 is the number one biller in America. This week the conversations taking place in New York are about how to get Beck and top that figure with a News/Talk station that could surpass WTOP/DC's $57 million -- and perhaps look at $80 million-$90 million.

CBS Radio already knows that moving WFAN to FM would make it the number one-billing station in America, but moving it would leave an AM signal with nothing to do. But the nightmare they probably hope never happens would be ESPN's scooping them with the first all-Sports FM in New York. That would likely become the highest-billing station in the U.S. -- that is, unless Emmis, Clear Channel, or another broadcaster flips an FM to News/Talk with Beck.

I suspect that Clear Channel is also giving serious thought to the Beck/FM scenario in New York. Though a station like WWPR (Power 105) is probably pulling down 70 percent margins and cash-flowing $18 million-$19 million, that would look pretty small in comparison to having the number one biller in NYC.
 
Though all would deny the discussions, only a fool would ignore what could be. The only question in my mind is, who will land Beck and use his show as the catalyst for a launch? It seems Clear Channel would be the likely winner since their own network syndicates Beck on radio, but Premiere is going to take the best overall deal it can make, so I don't think Emmis or CBS would be locked out.

It's simply not conceivable that a strong talent like Beck won't get back on the air in New York, and an FM News/Talker that adds his show is going to be a powerhouse with a license to print money. Only time will reveal if there is a bidding war for Beck, but even on the slim chance that he doesn't replace the lost New York affiliate, his network of stations remains strong and he continues to be a talent who brings great success for the stations that carry his programming.

 
Eric Rhoads
Radio Ink

TWITTER
FACEBOOK
LINKEDIN

P.S. Here are some facts we've uncovered about Beck's show:  

Affiliates:
The Glenn Beck Program is available on over 430 stations
The program added 88 stations from March 2010-March 2011
Minor affiliate losses are often picked up by critics who know nothing about radio while gains don't get reported.

Ratings:
WOR/New York: Glenn outperformed or tied the station's Monday-Friday 6 a.m.-7 p.m. ratings in 11 out of the last 13 months he was on (actually winning eight of those months) with Adults 25-54 and outperformed 13 out of the last 13 months with men 25-54.
Glenn was third-highest-rated radio host years before joining WOR, which he was only on for about two years.

Sample of growth:

PPM Metros, FA'10 to Feb. '11, Adults 25-54

KRLA-AM/Los Angeles: 5.2 percent
KNEW-AM/San Francisco: 20 percent
KTRH-AM/Houston: 10.1 percent
KFMB-AM/San Diego: 55.6 percent
KFTK-FM/St. Louis: 11.3 percent
WFLF-AM/Orlando: 10.3 percent
WISN-AM/Milwaukee: 70.6 percent
WHJJ-AM/Providence: 25 percent
WLAC-AM/Nashville: 12.5 percent
WREC-AM/Memphis: 80 percent

Sample of Outperformed Affiliate Share, Adults 25-54

KRLA-AM/Los Angeles
WIND-AM/Chicago
KFMB-AM/San Diego
WFLA-AM/Tampa
KFTK-FM/St. Louis
WWRC-AM/Cincinnati
KNRS-FM/Salt Lake City
WFLF-AM/Orlando
WXNT-AM/Indianapolis
WHJJ-AM/Providence
WRDU-FM/Raleigh