Mason's Morning Minute

Advice From Walt Disney

Do what you do so well that they will want to see it again and bring their friends. - Walt Disney

Don’t you love it when someone makes a point simply and clearly? I guess the challenge comes in on the definition of “what you do well.” What does radio do well? What can we do that will cause our listeners to come back time and time and tell their friends about it?

Or perhaps more focused, what does your radio station do so well that it will cause listeners to come back again, and bring some friends?

Every station has to decide on it’s own what it does best, but I can tell you one thing.

It’s not creating share holder value.

Four Changes To Pay Attention To

"In times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists". - Eric Hoffer

I can’t believe it’s 2008! Another year, and another opportunity to embrace the change that’s happening all around you. Will this be the year you embrace the change that’s happening around you, and begin to create a success for the future?

Since it’s that time of the year, and everyone else is doing it, I want to share four things that are bringing change to your front door:

The Growth Of Social Networking

MySpace, Linked-In, FaceBook, Plaxo, and something new I’m being invited to called “Spock.” Social Networking is growing dramatically, and it’s far beyond our control. The listeners are driving it, we aren’t. I keep hearing that social networking takes too much time, and most people won’t take the time. They could be right, especially if you’re looking at older boomers. Meanwhile millions sign up ever day, including some who would love the opportunity to affiliate and become involved with your station. Oh yes, here’s a secret for you - Social Networking is a research tool as well as a networking tool.

The Value Of A Brand

Radio stations that focus entirely on their music, even unique music, are oblivious to the fact music is becoming commoditized. We need to become more than just a music service, we need to become a brand. After all, who would you rather be, Starbucks or Winchells?

The Divergence Of Product Distribution

One of my favorite discussions is whether we should be focusing on the Internet, wireless, cell phones, or something else. The answer is simple: Yes!

There is no ONE next big things, there will be lots of them, and you’d better be on all of them. The days where we could employ “push programming” to tell people what they like to hear, and then manipulate them through contests that 80% of then have no interest in. You’ve got to be ready to be everywhere, even places we don’t know about yet. Remember, the iPod isn’t the trend, personalization is the trend.

Personalizing the experience

Which brings us to the trend that drives the other three. I noticed on the Kleenex Tissues web site that I can design my own Kleenex box. I can also design my own Starbucks card. How can I personalize my experience with your station?

These are just some of the things happening around us. They all involve change, and they all involve the opportunity for both innovation and destruction.

I think the choice is yours

What's Your Concept?

Most people miss the point on strategy.  It’s not simply about having a long-term plan, that could be a long-term operating plan.  It’s not about doing what everyone else is doing, that’s called cloning.  What was the name of that cloned sheep that died anyway?

The difference between a plan and a strategy is that a strategy involves a concept.

It’s not radio, but take a look at Dove’s Campaign For Really.  It started with the concept that women really dislike the “model look” of being 120 pounds and 6 foot tall.  Instead it’s more along the line of the movie “Real Women Have Curves.”  So Dove created the campaign for real beauty, which springs from the concept that every woman is ok just as they are.

Following the concept comes focus.  If you say you’re all about one thing, and then on-air are about all kinds of things, then you have no focus.  Take a look at http://www.campaignforrealbeauty.com to see what focus is about.  Their web site doesn’t have a lot of flashy web-designer eye candy, but it leaves no doubt what the campaign is all about.  They produced a movie showing a “normal” woman being made-up, and then “photo-shopped” into the perfect look.  There are several versions of it on You Tube, totaling to over 10 million views.  By the way, how many people saw your last TV campaign?  They continued with several other videos focusing on the concept.

Continuing the focus, their web site they have launched a fund for self-esteem in young girls.  They have a section for Mom’s and mentors.  If you look closely, you’ll see that almost all the parts of the web site are designed to get you involved in the campaign.  It’s not flashy, but it leaves no doubt what the concept is.  Compare that with the typical radio web site.  The problem with radio web sites is that they’re designed by web designers, and not strategically, but that’s another story for another time.

Here’s the deal: Dove is soap.  Not the sexiest product ever, and certainly not as personal as radio, but they seem to know a lot more about reaching their target than we do.  Shouldn’t one most personal of the mass media – radio – be able to focus on personalization?  Or are we just happy with the cosmetic analogy of the best mix of oils, fragrances, and coloring?

Revolutionary Research

"You can never really go and ask your customers how to come up with a revolutionary product." —James Dyson, Designer and Engineer

It’s something most radio research people still don’t get – you can’t get hypothetical answers from listeners.  They’ll do a great job of telling you what they think about what exists, if you ask the question properly, but they can’t imagine what they can’t hear.

We radio people would like the simple answer to a simple question, but listeners aren’t always able to give you a valid answer.  Yes, they’ll try to answer, often with what they think you want to hear, but they aren’t good at telling you what you should do.

It’s not hopeless, though.  Often if you just listen to what they have to say about a subject, you can get enough information to build an idea.  Once you’ve implemented the idea, then you can ask them what they think.

But to do it that way you have to take a risk, and corporate radio has eliminated the desire to risk in programming.  So many people have been axed for one reason or another that a risk seems to be an easy way to unemployment.  So we continue to have radio research questions about whether the station is too soft, or if it shouldn’t talk over the intro, or whether it should do contests.

Think of it this way.  Last year I flew 95,000 air miles in my travel.  While I know quite a bit about travel, and can answer some questions, I am not equipped to answer questions about how the pilot should fly, or whether they should take route A or route B.  Even more interestingly the airline wouldn’t think of asking me questions about that!  Instead they ask me if the seats are comfortable enough, which I can definitely answer.

We’re at a point in the growth of radio, with digital media looming closer on the horizon, that we need to be thinking in revolutionary terms.  But our questionnaires seem like good friends we’ve met with many times before.  It’s time we stop asking people what they think about our radio stations, and instead ask people what they think about life – their lives in particular – and build a radio station that takes that information into account.

That’s exactly what James Tyson did.  He looked at his customers and how they used vacuum cleaners, and the part they played in their lives, both good and bad.  From his watching and listening, he invented a revolutionary product.

How does your radio research look?  Like it did 15 years ago, or does it really dig into what people are thinking and why?

Sound Exchange Shoots Self In Foot, Film At 11

“Perception is strong and sight weak.  In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close and to take a distanced view of close things. “ - Miyamoto Misashi, 1584-1645, legendary Japanese swordsman

Yesterday I noted how Viacom was repositioning itself as yesterdays business, and today it’s a little closer to home.  Whatever in the world Sound Exchange is, they have fired their own opening shot at the digital world, with the unconscionable increase in streaming fees.  As it stands now, many Internet streams will disappear under a mountain of debt, and the promise of more free exposure of your artists and their music will fade.

It’s startlingly stupid.

It’s also greedy and litigious in the same “old world” way that Viacom is handling the situation.  Talk to me in five years, when authors find fewer and fewer songs making the cut, because there are fewer and fewer outlets programming them.  How in the world did you miss the simple fact that many of those Internet broadcasters are ones most likely to experiment and take a chance with your new material?  And who do you think the consumer is going to blame for the lack of programming?

As you penalize us for embracing technology, you’re starting the ball rolling on a consumer disaster, where your very clients will be the ones seen in the uncool, unhip world of yesterday.  It’s about content dummy, and you are limiting your options.  You can be smug about your recent “victory,” but I’m wondering how you’ll explain it when it becomes seen for the strategic blunder it is. 

Next time you feel compelled to fire the opening shot in a battle, you might want to check first and see that the gun isn’t pointed at your own foot.

Viacom vs. YouTube

"An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo, 'Histoire d'un crime,' 1852

If you were looking for people who don’t’ understand the digital revolution, and what it means, you’d only have to look at Viacom.  Their $1 billion dollar lawsuit against YouTube for copyright infringement completely overlooks the cultural aspect of YouTube. 

More importantly, though, is that YouTube has more “cool points” than MTV , which is owned by Viacom, and the lawsuit may well put MTV in the position of being a Luddite.   Sumner Redstone may think he runs Viacom, and therefore MTV, but his viewers might disagree.

Sumner, my man, you were getting free publicity on one of the coolest sites in the world.  You talk about a fair licensing deal, but you don’t seem to understand the promotional power of YouTube, MySpace, and the others.  The world of media is changing, and you’re not going to stop it, because you’re no longer in control – the consumer is.  True, radio isn’t much better, but this one is about you.

The copyright battle will go on in the court for months, if not years, and you’ll be irritating those YouTube fans the entire time, and proving that you don’t “get it.” You may win the court in case, but it’ll be a case of you winning the battle and losing the war.  There’s nothing more “uncool” than someone who uses the law to stop growth, and that’s how it will be seen.

We may be witnessing the first shots fired in the war that kills MTV.

Do You Have A Disease?

"Sometimes that need to put your stamp on something is a recipe for disaster." — Louise Mingenbach, Costume designer, "Superman Returns"

I’ve mentioned before the old Navy rule about not changing the course of a ship, when you take over the bridge, for a specified time.  That gives you long enough to see why the previous OOD had chosen that particular direction.  It’s be a good thing for radio to adopy.

We programmers have a reputation for being to radio stations, as dogs are to fire hydrants.  When we get to a new station we need to immediately put our stamp on it, whether it’s doing well in Arbitron or not.    But we’re not alone.  Sometimes the ego runs higher in the organization, to the very top.  The principles are the same, but the titles are larger.

That happened at MoJo 94.9 in Cincinnati shortly after they were sold.  Without any investigation into what was going on, the new owners chose to change the format, even through the station had been a pretty consistent top 10 performer, frequently top 5, in adults 25-45.  Guy Zapoleon, with one of the most respected minds in radio noted that MoJo 94.9 had "been successful for the last six years".  In-demo rankings over the past few of books have been 3rd-5th-5th-7th-8th-8th.  I guess you could see a perspective on those last two books where a change was called for.  And it was a Jammin’ Oldies station, and everyone knows those don’t work, right? 

I can’t help but wonder how they felt today, when the Summer Arbitron came out.  MoJo 94.9 was 3rd Adults 25-54, first women 25-54, and fourth adults 25-54 in morning drive.  There are quite a few broadcasters who would love to have those kinds of rankings.  Myself, I felt very strange as I called program director Keith Mitchell to congratulate him.

But Mojo 94.9 isn't really the point.  The line of thinking that led to that decision is.

Corporate ego?  Maybe, but I think it’s more a case of NIH disease.  That’s “Not Invented Here” disease in case you haven’t heard of it.   We can get so full of ourselves that we lose sight of reality, or create our own reality that justifies bonehead decisions. We’re an industry that’s much more likely to be proprietary than strategic.  It’s a global case of what basketball coach Pat Riley used to call “The Disease Of Me.” 

The “Disease Of Me” blinds us to reality, no matter how obvious it is to others.  It causes us to create alternate realities that justify our actions.  And most of the time it causes us to lose.  That’s why I appreciate the people around me who point out the obvious when I miss it.  In consolidated radio I think the term for them is “troublemakers,” but I love them.  They aren’t always right either, but they keep me honest and make sure I’m always looking and listening.

How about you?  Any areas where you have all the answer, and don’t need to look at what’s happened to bring the station to where it is?

Are You Standing Still

“If you think you can survive by standing still, you’re crazy.” - Hilde Neuman, global business director,  J. Walter Thompson

I guess we all realize it, but it’s still difficult to accept.  What once made you great will eventually become your destruction, if you let it.

Change is difficult for most of us, and in times of high stress it’s even worse, because you don’t really want to have to take the time to learn something new.  We just want to be left alone to do our job.  Unfortunately we live in a time of change, what I heard described as a constant “Beta” world. If it helps any, we’re not alone.  Newspaper is adapting and moving to the Internet, because subscriptions are down.  TV is encountering huge challenges from advertisers as audience figures sag and the cost-per-spot goes down.

Of course, not all change is good.  When the consolidated radio companies decided to become “efficient” it didn’t help anyone.  Lots of good radio people lost their jobs, listeners got a highly inferior product, and the radio stocks haven’t performed up to expectations.  And radio revenue?  Don’t ask.  This isn’t nostalgia for the past, it’s just an honest look at the performance of the industry.

But not all change is bad either.  As change swirls all around us, we are presented with great opportunity.  The Internet is both competitor and opportunity, as streaming listenership increases at a rapid pace.  Word Of Mouth Marketing is finding it’s place in the marketing tool box, even though we’ve known about it for years.  Social networking sites are booming as people look for a place to both project their identity and stay connected to others.

But will we accept the change that’s headed or way, or will we try to stay where we are in the hopes it will all go away?  Will we realize there’s more to Internet broadcasting than only running a terrestrial stream?  Will we deploy word of mouth campaigns, or will we avoid them because they aren’t mass enough?  Will we start training talent to truly connect with listeners, or will we continue to offer clichés and slogans?

How are you doing with change?  Are you prospering with it, or are you standing still, thinking you can survive?

Do not try to change the channel, we are in control

When the TV show The Outer Limits started in the 70's that sentence was a part of its opening. But things have changed since then. We are not in control any more. They are in control, and if we don't learn that, we'll soon be spiraling out of control.

Mark Ramsey of Mercury Research wrote this email last week, and I'd like to share it with you:

"We’re all unique.

That’s the attraction to the iPod. The very filling of it turns it into myPod, not yourPod.

And when ourPods are different from theirPods, what does it mean to be “average”?

The Decline of "Average"

It’s the “average” we measure to figure out what music to play. It’s the “average” person who votes on our songs. It’s the “average” we reduce our stations to when we’re out to cut expense.

In today’s growing technologically mediated audio entertainment environment, the “average” no longer exists. That’s because music fans no longer need to share common tastes with others in order to find a radio station “they can all agree on.” In fact, the very idea of “agreeing” on a station is antithetical. Who needs to agree when your perfect, ideal station is one set of earbuds away?

"uControl" vs. "iControl"

With the end of the average and the rise of the individual comes the end of “uControl” and the dawn of “iControl.” The power has passed to the listener, my friends. The genie is out of the bottle and there’s nothing the radio industry can do to stick him back in.

“uControl” means if your stations won’t play it, I won’t hear it. “iControl” means I no longer depend on you, the station, to introduce me to songs I haven’t heard before.

“uControl” means the only way for me to hear what sounds like radio is to use the radio. “iControl” means my ability to rotate and schedule songs I like on my iPod is better than yours on your radio station.

“uControl” means radio is in the business of running ads. “iControl” means radio had better get into the business of connecting me with the products and services of advertisers who interest me, no matter where I am: In front of a radio, a computer, or a cell phone.

"uControl” means you can offer more stations in more formats (HD or otherwise) in order to cover a wider spectrum of my tastes, but “iControl” means this doesn’t even come close to serving my tastes: Check out anybody’s iPod and you’ll see a variety broader than the broadest station – all in one place. You’ll see genres obliterated and all but irrelevant. You’ll see playlists labeled by mood, not just category.

Niche to Oblivion

One of the entrenched myths of radio today is that listeners hunger for more choices, and whether those choices are from satellite radio or HD radio or Internet radio, more choices are better than fewer.

Yes, more choices are better than fewer, but more niche stations are not better than fewer broad ones. This is a critical point, and if you don’t understand it you don’t understand your audience at all.

Listeners are complex people with complex tastes, each different from the next. What they really want is not more niche options and more reasons to switch between them. What they really want is to be understood.

Broader, not Narrower

That’s why their iPod playlists cross so many musical boundaries, but why a purely automated mix of music – even the one on your iPod – feels so lifeless and empty. Yes, it’s your iPod. But it’s not you. You have more dimensions than any mix of songs, no matter how deep or how broad.

And that is why everything around the music on your broad-based radio station matters so much. It’s why personalities matter. It’s why connection matters. It’s why promotions and contests and events matter.

Radio’s biggest mistake is that we view our stations as portfolios of songs rather than portfolios of listeners, each with different tastes, converging here and there, but always desiring novelty and change and magic and something between the music that’s as complex and complicated and unique as they are.

Trimming the fat

The “fat” is what we cut out.

And the more “fat” we cut, the more average we become. The more complexity we lose. And the less listeners like us, no matter how many niche channels we serve up.

It is, after all, the fat that gives meat its flavor.

Blending Art & Science

The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed. - Albert Einstein

What makes great radio?  It’s a question I often hear, and management is always poised to hear my 10-point checklist.  I’m sure I disappoint them with my answer, because I believe great radio is a careful balance of art and science.

We’ve all heard total “art” radio, undisciplined, unfocused, stream of consciousness radio that goes nowhere.  Unfortunately we’ve also heard many total “science” radio stations, technically correct, few negatives, and very sterile.  But it’s when you hear both combined you find truly great radio.

When it comes to music the science let’s you know which songs the listeners like, and the art comes in when you choose the tested songs that make your radio station sound special.  You choose which songs to play initially from the art of “I think that’s a hit.”  Once you’ve exposed it enough you use the science to see if the listeners like it.

When it comes to being on air you use science to help you understand what the listener is interested in, and the artfully use that information to communicate and connect with them.

In imaging you use science to help determine the core values of the brand, and then apply art to how you’re going to communicate those values.

It’s the balance that creates engaging, interactive radio.

Unfortunately we seem to be stuck on the scientific road of eliminating the negatives and “lite rock/less talk.”  The country is awash with technically proficient DJ’s who do everything precisely right without ever wondering if they’re doing the right thing.  Stations that never make a mistake, and never make the heart beat faster.

Science, it turns out, is easier to syndicate than art, and art brings with it those messy, high maintenance creative types.   Better to be technically correct in voice tracking than to be emotionally engaging in person.

How do you perform your job every day?  Are you all science, or do you remember that great radio is a magical balance of art and science?

April 19, 2006

What's that noise

“Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory.  Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” – Sun Tzu, Chinese military strategist

The more I talk about the importance of strategy, the more people are asking "Why is strategy important tome?"  I can answer that with one word.

Iraq.

No, this isn't a political message, it's a strategy message.

The value of strategy is shown by the air strikes, followed by the lightening-fast land advance, bypass attacks, encirclement, and victory with amazingly few causalities..  Irrespective of your feelings about the war, there's little doubt that a well crafted strategy made success possible.

The danger of not having a strategy is evident in what has followed the military victory.  Again irrespective of your feelings about the war, there's little doubt that we had no follow-on strategy, no plan for what would happen following the victory.  The result has been chaos and an extraordinary drain on resources.

So the answer to the question of why strategy is needed comes from another couple of questions:

Which of these scenarios best fits your radio station last year, precision victory or chaotic failure?  Better yet, which do you want to fit your radio station?

And finally, do you really want to see what you’re doing now become “the noise before defeat”?

A Lesson From Nike

"The fluidity of information will bring about a radically democratized society where consumers enjoy unprecedented power." Adam L. Penenberg, journalism professor at New York University and technology columnist for Slate

Please read the following paragraph:

Nike Site Lets Runners Map Routes

“Apparel marketer Nike has launched a new Internet service that lets runners plot jogging routes through a Google Maps mash-up. A mash-up is a Web application that combines multiple sources of content; it can be built by users with minimal programming experience. Nike's new service can be found on the company's Run London Web Site, where visitors can view others running routes, and search by distance, terrain, location, popularity and other variables. Simon Jefferson, account director at Nike's interactive ad agency AKQA in London, said the mapping application is a good example of a brand using technology to tap into the natural community created by its consumers. "RouteFinder enables runners to do what they already do in the real world, but better and more effectively," he said. "Runners drive their car around a route to measure the distance of their run and they talk about and share their running routes with other runners."

We can learn three important things from this announcement.

First is the depth of understanding Nike has of its consumers, both behaviorally and psychographically.  They really understand them, and know how to design something that truly adds value to their brand.

Most of radio research is done directly opposite..  We ask the listener all about our radio station, as seen from our perspective.  We hardly ever look at their entertainment needs or find how they "use" the station and why.  As far as the listener as a person, beyond radio, we're often deaf, dumb ans blind.

Second is Nike's use of technology.  They found an existing technology and adapted to their needs.  They weren't off on a technological big-game hunt for what's hot.  They observed behavior, found a need, and used technology to serve the consumer need, and in doing so added value to their brand.  They aren't looking for how technology can help them, they're looking for how technology can help them create a better, more relevant experience foe their consumers.

What I see us doing today is chasing technology that will give us an edge, without a clear understanding of the benefit and value to the listener.  Sometimes I wonder if we're not in search of something that will allow us to say "See, we're cool too."

Last, and maybe most importantly, they created yet another way for their consumers to involve themselves with Nike, and become partners in the process.  Nike continues to be interactive with their consumers.  They aren't just putting out shoes and waiting for someone to buy them.

Which has the better handle on the future, Nike or your station?

March 7, 2006

Touch Me In The Morning

"We have to create a great experience every time you touch the brand." — A.G. Lafley, CEO, Procter + Gamble

It’s interesting, isn’t it, that a radio station that watches what the talent can and cannot say on-air, carefully scrutinize every promotion for fit, and spend hours tweaking Selector so it’s the best it can be, pay little attention to the “touch-points” for their stations. Here’s a couple of examples of paying attention to the brand:

I may have mentioned this in the past, but the first time I went into Warm 98 in Cincinnati, the telephone receptionist had a sign on her work area that said “Vice President Of First Impressions.” What a wonderful perspective! Think of how many people touch your radio “brand” through the person answering the phone. I know some radio stations I’ve called who do a great job of handling listener calls, and others who create the impression their brand is angry and impatient. I like to call in every now and then just to see what happens.

Another is the promotional team of MoJo 94.9. As what may be the most consistently successful Jammin’ Oldies station in the country, PD Keith Mitchell and Director Of Programming TJ Holland have hired well and trained the promotion department on what the MoJo brand is all about. When they go out to set up a remote, or be the representatives of the station, they’re all about fun and having a good time.

It’s easy to become totally inward in our thinking. We think the touches only happen while people are listening, but those are actually rare as touch-points because there’s not the interactivity of a phone call or meeting someone at a promotion.

Yet another is the attitude I frequently see toward “contest pigs” that gives freedom for a jock to be rude to them. They are also more often big fans of the station, and how you handle them can get around in no time at all. Further, because such a small portion of your audience is actually interested in contests, they’re going to show up more often.

What are your touch-points? How do the jocks handle calls in the control room? What is your receptionist like to call? When jocks are out at a remote or promotion do they hide away somewhere, or do they go out and “act the brand?”

Thursday February 16 2005

It's Your Lucky Day!

Depend on the rabbit's foot if you will, but remember it didn't work for the rabbit.  ~R.E. Shay

It’s Friday the 13th, and everyone knows that means bad luck, right?

Or does it?  What if there’s no such thing as bad luck, but instead bad planning, bad strategy, or bad tactics?  What if good luck really equaled good planning, good strategy, and good tactics?  What if you and God were responsible for your own “luck,” whether it was good or bad?

I don’t remember who said “The harder I work the luckier I get,” but it’s a great place to pose a new concept:  “The smarter I work the luckier I get.”  Hard work isn’t enough any more, because I see plenty of stations working very hard, but without the strategy necessary to create success.

If your “luck” hasn’t been very good lately, you should think about your strategy.  Do you really have one, or are you just working with a list of ideas assembled from elsewhere?

What Are You Going To Be?

"Control is an illusion." — Avram Miller, VP of Business Development, Intel

It’s October, and radio stations and broadcast companies across the nation will be starting to put their plans together.  Some will do it in minutes, some over months, and, of course, some not at all.

Most of those who do put together a plan for 2006 will make two fundamental errors:

1.    Stations will focus on what they want, when in reality they aren’t in control.  The listener is in control.  You can image any way you want, and promote whatever you want, but it’s what sticks with the listeners in a meaningful way that’s important.  So the first step in successful planning is to gain a thorough understanding of what the listener things you are.  Only then can you really say “We’re here, and we want to go there.”

2.    Stations will plan what to do in 2006, and most frequently plan what they want to repeat in 2006 from what they did in 2005.  Hardly anyone really goes back to zero-based planning any more.  The challenge here is that what you’re going to do takes a distant back seat to what you want to be.  It’s not just putting together a Spring book promotion, it’s about what you want the listener to be thinking about you by the end of the year.

In the not-so-distant future, successful radio stations will be those that have made the transition from musically commoditized radio station to a true radio brand.  And a brand happens as much, if not more, in the head than it does in the ear.  So what you’re going to do takes a clear back seat to what you’re going to be to the listeners.

If you haven’t thought about it yet, looking at a new year is the perfect time to do it.  By this time next year you could see increased listener loyalty and a stronger, more consistent Arbitron ranking.

The Four Types Of Talent

"You have to focus on the basic relationship with the consumer." - Chris Lowe, Chief Marketing Officer, Coca-cola

Your relationship with the listener is perhaps the most important criteria to your future success. Some stations have a great relationship, and some have none at all. That's because listeners don't build a relationship with a music service commodity, the build a relationship with the human elements of the station.

Yes, they must like your music, that's the price of admission in today's radio combat arena. But they can get your music elsewhere, and, as I mentioned yesterday, sometimes they can pick and choose the music themselves.

Your relationship with your listeners comes from the “touch points” you present every day. Those include talent out at events, the switchboard operator, etc., but the single most important touch point is the talent you have on-air. As I travel around the nation I hear four basic types of people on-air in music radio:

1. The this is/That was style announcer who just gives the station info and announces the song. Many of them are very good at it, with smooth, resonant voices. But they don't build relationships because they aren't human on-air. They may as well be voice tracked.

2. Personalities who think they are but aren't. We also find on-air people who like to talk a lot and give their views on everything, They also like to “share” exciting things they've found.

3. True personalities. From Delilah to Howard Stern (how's that for a reach), there are a handful of on-air people who are truly personalities. They are in touch with what their listeners look for, and deliver it consistently, in an entertaining way. There are very few of these, and I'm not sure we're cultivating new ones.

4. The fourth type of on-air person is what I call “the connector.” These are people who talk about “real” things in their lives that connect with the audience. Not things about themselves, but things they have in common. The connect with the listeners the same way friends connect, by talking about what they have in common, what's shared. There are also very few of these.

This is going to be hard to take: Only the last two types of on-air people build relationships with listeners. The others are simply “white noise” in the increasingly busy and hectic life of the listener. What we need to sustain success are talent who can connect, whether it's through being a true talent, or a connector. The reason there are so few of them is because the traditional avenues for development of true talent are gone, and there are few radio company's willing to invest in development. They all talk a good story, but they don't do much at all.

But that's not the biggest problem. As Pogo once said in the funny papers, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” The primary reason there aren't a lot of connectors is that PD's aren't putting the time into coaching and developing as they should. Dealing with coaching instead of critiquing is an acquired skillset. Instead of learning, they're more comfortable with tweaking Selector, designing contests, writing clever liners, etc. Their better at the tasks that don't take people.

So we continue to plod along, doing what we've always done, and expecting a different result. So, we're not only helping to turn our radio stations into replaceable commodities, we're actively participating in our own future demise. How very Krvorkian of us.

Programmers - you've got to take the time to coach and develop your talent. There are few other responsibilities that will create a personal like with your listeners like your talent.

GM's - You've got to make sure your PD is attending to this important business, and hold the PD accountable for coaching.

Talent - You need to realize that this is ultimately our future we're talking about, and use whatever resource you can to learn how to connect with your listeners.

Everyone - take a listen to your station today. Which of the four types of talent are you hearing?

It's Better To Be Different Than It Is To Be Better

"In order to be irreplaceable one must always be different.” - Coco Chanel

I don’t know about you, but I want my stations to be irreplaceable.  So what makes your station different?  Unless you’re one of those rare instances where there are no other competitors playing your music, what makes you different may also be what makes you successful.

So what really makes you different?  What if you looked at the answer to that question through your listeners eyes?  What would you see and hear?

You play a certain kind of music, they play a certain kind of music.  You play too many commercials, they play too many commercials.  You have contests, they have contests.  Your announcers focus on “this is-that was,” their announcers focus on “this is-that was.”  You have a morning show that talks a lot, they have a morning show that talks a lot. 

But what is uniquely you?  What belongs to no one else?

In radio, we tend to see small nuances as big differences, but most of those are invisible to the listener.  Not being “in” to radio as much as we are, they see many more similarities than differences.  There are few truly differentiated radio stations any more.  We’ve all become so conservative, so as not to offend Wall Street, that we have gravitated to a middle ground where we are superficially different but overall very similar in the eyes of the listener.

The value of differentiation is clearest when you study Jack FM.  It is a radio format built on being different.  But in most cases Jack is playing music that can be found elsewhere in the market.  They’re not the first format to try being jockless.  The differentiation comes from the radio personality they’ve created through their imaging and advertising, because the creators of Jack understand that differentiation happens in the mind, not the ear.  They relentlessly attack the mind, through the ear, with their on-and-off-air promotion.

Next time you have an opportunity, ask your listeners what your station does that no one else in the market does.  Outside of your morning show you may see many different answers, all built around non-critical elements.  If you’re lucky enough to hear listeners respond consistently, to a “big picture” difference, then congratulations, you’ve achieved one of the 9 elements of future success.  If not, well then it’s time for a brainstorming meeting, more discussion (that’s what I call research) with the listeners, and a hard look at what you’re doing now.

All On Gilligan's Island

"People think it's easy to fall down and get hit in the head with a coconut." - Sherwood Schwartz, on the death of Bob Denver

Well, Bob Denver made it look easy!

I don't remember if Bob Denver ever played anyone other than Gilligan.  He probably did, but his passing calls to mind the classic benefits of a brand.  When you think of Bob Denver, you think of Gilligan.  When you think of Gilligan's Island, you think of Bob Denver.  Many of us can sing the song.  Most of us know he really did have something going with Mary Ann.   We knew there wouldn't be anything with Ginger because she was just too high maintenance.

I can build this mental picture of Gilligan because his “brand” is so clear and consistent.  Bob Denver always played the same Gilligan, scene after scene, show after show.  When a brand is that consistent, people will begin to extrapolate things about it.  We can see him with down-to-earth Marry Ann, but Ginger is just out of reach.  Gilligan earned a place in our minds, by being entertaining, yes, but also by being simple and consistent.

I wish most of our radio stations were as well branded as Gilligan.  The majority of radio stations aren't clear and consistent enough so that the listeners can extrapolate us a real people.  We're too much of a little of a lot of things.  We don't employ the “Law Of Sacrifice” and focus on being a one “something” to people.  Instead we want to promote a radio personality that's more complex than Sybil.

People like the simple things in life, and your listeners aren't any different.  Brands help simplify and organize in their minds, and that's a true benefit in a world that moves too fast.

When you listen to your own radio station, whom do you hear?  The simplicity, clarity and easy-to-understand Gilligan, or the complexity of Sybil? 

It makes you miss Bob Denver.

Reach Out & Touch Someone

"A product is something made in a factory; a brand is something that is bought by the customer. A product can be copied by a competitor; a brand is unique. A product can be quickly outdated; a successful brand is timeless."
Stephen King, WPP Group,

London

How did we do that?  How did we come so much smarter than Starbucks, Nike, Nordstrom, Virgin Airlines, and Budweiser?  Those guys don’t sell products, they build brands that people are motivated to buy.

I’m hoping someone will straighten them out.  Starbucks needs to get it together and start promoting the best mix of beans and water.  Virgin Airlines needs to lower their prices and start copying the ideas of the leader.  Get with it guys!

Now radio, we know how to market things.  Forget that touchy-feely “emotional connection” stuff.  Radio knows people care about – the tangible parts of the station, the attributes that make out station better than the competition.  Reach out and touch this AT&T, I’ve got a better variety of the 80’s, 90’s and today.  You’d have been a lot better to have just told people to pick up the phone and call their moms.

OK, so maybe I get to sarcastic from time to time.  But the facts are the same.  Radio tends to focus only on the tangible format values that ensure stations sound the same.  Successful industries tend to focus on the intangible values that make them different.  It’s time for us to learn that being “Safe For The Whole Family” is just the start of what branding can do to create long lasting success.  In fact, the future calls for the kind of radio station that effects the mind as well as they ear.

As you listen to your station today, what are you hearing?  The development of a radio brand that builds equity with every day, or a radio station explaining why they’re better than the competition.  And don’t forget, the more you listen to more you hear.