When it suits Capital..........

2

Comments

  • AdsAds Posts: 37,037
    Forum Member
    Its funny that some posters are normally so quick to defend Capital/Heat's extremely tight playlist 'because its tests well', yet when some Global managed act which clearly doesn't fit in with the station's sound is thrown onto the playlist, that's fine because 'the stations can play what they want'!
  • overlineoverline Posts: 1,898
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    But that is the nature of commercialism. Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys and Waitrose all want my custom, and all sell much the same items. All are subject to the same basics of business and competition law. It amuses me when people think broadcasting should be different.

    You can't compare the two, whilst I have a choice of three of the major supermarkets locally, there's also the discount stores like Lidel & Iceland, other stores like the Co-op, a host of independent specialist food outlets and the market - there's no limit to competition.

    Whereas with radio there's a limit [ex-online, which is a tiny market share], so there's every reason to ensure as much choice as possible by regulation.
  • Station IDStation ID Posts: 7,401
    Forum Member
    mbessex wrote: »
    Sorry but you are SO wrong.

    This is a new phenomenon because it is using the airtime of the station to effectively promote and sell their own product outside of recognised commercial breaks.

    I believe EMAP used to do the same thing a few years ago but I didn't hear anyone complaining about that.

    What is so different from a station increasing the rotation of an artist who's performing at a gig they are selling tickets for. The radio station is using their output outside of commercial breaks to promote this artist/gig and make money as a result. I see no difference between that and Global playing their own artists in order to make money.

    What is really so wrong with a commercial business using one arm of the business to promote the other. In any other industry this would not be an issue and would be seen as good business. Why should radio be any different? As I say this has been happening for years anyway.
  • chipmanchipman Posts: 253
    Forum Member
    It's not wrong in a commercial sense, it's just dull radio. It's great that on Radio 1, music is usually there based on merit rather than just because of an inside interest although that happens sometimes too. However, when you have The wanted just 'popping in' all the time and their songs on a ridiculously high rotation and these new bands like Lawson who have become the next big thing because Capital suddenly decided to put them on their website, it just makes for poor radio.

    The Wanted are so cheesy it almost looks like they are doing an impression/skit of a typical male boyband; then you realise they are actually serious.

    Oh, and before I get labelled too, I do like Capital and do listen, but that does not stop me having an anorakky-style moan about the station. This thread should just be about discussing this stuff.
  • mbessexmbessex Posts: 2,253
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Station ID wrote: »
    I believe EMAP used to do the same thing a few years ago but I didn't hear anyone complaining about that.

    What is so different from a station increasing the rotation of an artist who's performing at a gig they are selling tickets for. The radio station is using their output outside of commercial breaks to promote this artist/gig and make money as a result. I see no difference between that and Global playing their own artists in order to make money.

    What is really so wrong with a commercial business using one arm of the business to promote the other. In any other industry this would not be an issue and would be seen as good business. Why should radio be any different? As I say this has been happening for years anyway.

    Because and you seem to fail to understand this - If Tesco want to push and promote thier own range ahead of others thats totally ok as I can set up a supermarket next door - The free market rules but in Radio Global have a licence and no one else can set up to compete - hence it's a closed market and requires regulation. in ANY other industry anyone els can set up and compete commercial radio is closed I can't open MB FM in London and let the consumer choose.

    Theres a whole world of difference from promoting a gig to over playing an artist you represent.
  • Station IDStation ID Posts: 7,401
    Forum Member
    mbessex wrote: »
    Theres a whole world of difference from promoting a gig to over playing an artist you represent.

    Even if you're over playing the artist (who's playing at the gig) you're promoting and the sole reason for this is to sell tickets to the gig and make money. I don't see any difference at all, it's using what's available to you for commerciala gain.

    The competion argument doesn't apply either because there's major competition in EVERY market that has a Capital FM. Apart from the national and DAB stations available there are many other station owned by other companies.Scotland has 2 strong GMG stations, heritage bauer stations, tin pots and community stations. Birmingham and East Midlands more or less the same, also in Wales and in London you can't move on the dial for competing stations.

    Lets face it most of the objections to this are purely because it's Global.
  • mbessexmbessex Posts: 2,253
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Station ID wrote: »
    Even if you're over playing the artist (who's playing at the gig) you're promoting and the sole reason for this is to sell tickets to the gig and make money. I don't see any difference at all, it's using what's available to you for commerciala gain.

    The competion argument doesn't apply either because there's major competition in EVERY market that has a Capital FM. Apart from the national and DAB stations available there are many other station owned by other companies.Scotland has 2 strong GMG stations, heritage bauer stations, tin pots and community stations. Birmingham and East Midlands more or less the same, also in Wales and in London you can't move on the dial for competing stations.

    Lets face it most of the objections to this are purely because it's Global.

    No not at all because its wrong. Its not a compatative market because new entrants cannot enter the market. Just because there are other stations does not make their actions justified.
    IF ANY group did it I would object because it is WRONG It's funy to see people like yourself leap to it's defence, but you are right it IS what you would expect from the weasles at Global.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 74
    Forum Member
    The guys at Capital have obviously been reading this thread and taken the criticism on board of not enough guiter-led music. But of course you can't push unknown artists as people switch off, so looks like they've gone for something in between by pushing the 2004 Greenday hit 'When September Ends' onto the playlist lol
    http://www.capitalfm.com/music-news/future-releases/
  • Station IDStation ID Posts: 7,401
    Forum Member
    mbessex wrote: »
    No not at all because its wrong. Its not a compatative market because new entrants cannot enter the market. Just because there are other stations does not make their actions justified.
    IF ANY group did it I would object because it is WRONG It's funy to see people like yourself leap to it's defence, but you are right it IS what you would expect from the weasles at Global.

    We'll have to agree to disagree then because I see nothing wrong with it and as I have said it's just an extension of what has been happening for years in the industry. It's a commercial operation doing something for commercial gain. As it falls perfectly within the CHR remit Capital can play this new band.
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    wckartist wrote: »
    What a load of tosh!!

    Considering the song is not out until 27th of May, and you boys ALWAYS say you wont play anything unknown, because people switch off, bla bla bla, yabba yabba yabba,:yawn:, this makes a total mockery of your "brand":rolleyes:


    Lots of other new guitar bands out there at the mo, but funnily enough, we're not hearing THEM!

    And yet Bauer and Juice are also playing the song...

    Let's just imagine that a smaller group like UKRD set up a talent agency and started promoting artists. Would the usual suspects still be moaning?

    Perhaps some would, but I'd put money on just as many congratulating William Rogers on a canny initiative and taking on the big boys.

    And if anyone thinks it "needs investigating" perhaps the best way of doing this would be a complaint to OFCOM rather than wild allegations in a public forum.
  • mbessexmbessex Posts: 2,253
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And yet Bauer and Juice are also playing the song...

    Let's just imagine that a smaller group like UKRD set up a talent agency and started promoting artists. Would the usual suspects still be moaning?

    Perhaps some would, but I'd put money on just as many congratulating William Rogers on a canny initiative and taking on the big boys.

    And if anyone thinks it "needs investigating" perhaps the best way of doing this would be a complaint to OFCOM rather than wild allegations in a public forum.

    Can I say totally yes I would maon because its wrong.
    GMG, UKRD, Global whoever its a sneaky practice done onlt for the benefit of the owners. I would complain to OFCOM but lets all be honest they'll let the groups please themselves. Much much better to publicise it on forums like this so the public know how Global behave.
  • mbessexmbessex Posts: 2,253
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And yet Bauer and Juice are also playing the song...

    Let's just imagine that a smaller group like UKRD set up a talent agency and started promoting artists. Would the usual suspects still be moaning?

    Perhaps some would, but I'd put money on just as many congratulating William Rogers on a canny initiative and taking on the big boys.

    And if anyone thinks it "needs investigating" perhaps the best way of doing this would be a complaint to OFCOM rather than wild allegations in a public forum.

    Is Tabor going to get upset and send his personal bodyguards after us? Something tells me that although you argue in tis favour is not somethnig the employees or global are particularly keen to have talked about? Why is that?
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    mbessex wrote: »
    Is Tabor going to get upset and send his personal bodyguards after us? Something tells me that although you argue in tis favour is not somethnig the employees or global are particularly keen to have talked about? Why is that?

    No, but if someone makes allegations against a company they should have evidence to stand it up. It amazes me how people seem to think a forum is immune from the laws of defamation and the wrath of corporate lawyers. Seriously, if some of the stuff on this site stayed up in its original form, DS would be bankrupt.

    You'd have to ask Global employees why they don't want to talk about dubious practices that actually don't exist.
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    mbessex wrote: »
    Can I say totally yes I would maon because its wrong.
    GMG, UKRD, Global whoever its a sneaky practice done onlt for the benefit of the owners. I would complain to OFCOM but lets all be honest they'll let the groups please themselves. Much much better to publicise it on forums like this so the public know how Global behave.

    No, they operate within the terms of the current Broadcasting Act and the relevant corporate and competition laws. So, as I've said, if people really are that concerned, file a complaint - and let's all see the result.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 53
    Forum Member
    mbessex wrote: »
    Is Tabor going to get upset and send his personal bodyguards after us? Something tells me that although you argue in tis favour is not somethnig the employees or global are particularly keen to have talked about? Why is that?

    Up until this post you may have had half an argument - but you just lost all your credibility there. Stupid comment.

    Listen, here's the score: I work for Global - just like a few others do on here. I don't deny where I work and I try and be helpful and answer any questions that I am able to answer from a point of view of someone within the company. I'm not biased: there are some Global policies and practices that I think are sh*t and some that are great. But at the end of the day I'm not in charge. It's not my company. I don't make the decisions - and I have to respect that a multi-million pound organisation that is the biggest commercial operator in the UK is focused on making money. That is the name of the game. I may - or may not - agree, but I don't get all stressed about it: I live with it, like an adult.

    That aside, come on guys, this place is full of bitter, pathetic morons who seemingly have nothing better to do with their time than post cr*p like what I've seen above. There's one poster making allegations in a public forum [I quoted it earlier] - obviously James Martin, whoever he is, thinks that he is immune from Global taking any further action against him with regard to his comment. There are other posters bashing Heart, Capital, LBC etc. I'm perfectly in favour of good debate but you have GOT to have substance; my four old niece is more mature than some of the posters on here. What is laughable is that most people on here don't even have HALF the knowledge of the subjects that they have chosen to discuss, argue and slate. It isn't even Global, I see UTV, Bauer and GMG being ridiculed by some guy sat at home in his armchair thinking he runs a huge company paying thousands of salaries and making millions in revenue. Come on!

    Bottom line... Global is a business. It is operating within the various parameters set by various agencies and bodies. IF you don't like it / disagree then you can either:

    - Complain to the aforementioned agency / body
    - Stop listening
    - Carry on whining about it like uninformed idiots on a forum

    I'm out.
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    ^^^^^^ This.

    Doubtless he'll be pilloried as a "corporate apologist" by some, toeing the party line.

    But you know what - it's probably the most honest and factual post I've read on this forum for quite some time.
  • hotmat3khotmat3k Posts: 1,496
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Half of you just don't get it. Okay, Capital can schedule what it likes when it likes. However, when it has a license to shape the station the way it has proposed; then it should fairly under the license. Of course, the fair way to get tracks into the playlist is through meetings with record companies and analysing any tracks through scouting. Radio 1 have already exposed they do it this way through loads of meetings across the different producers of the station. I agree that Capital don't have this structure but still, similar principals should apply.

    Let's say the beeb was found out that exec's from the top were instructing their producers to plug a BBC signed artist no matter what. Whether they've been tested again an small group What would everyone say? Yes, the same thing.

    And the shop anology just doesn't work. But, if you had a shop which was licensed by the government to sell a whole range of products, but they decided only to sell their own brand; then that would be wrong and fits to the same scenario to the current radio setup and related to Capital totally.

    All the artists on the Global Talent books have heavily featured/promoted on Capital stations. Ofcom should really get the book out and investigate what is seriously going on there. It just proves there's no-one at the top at Capital who gives a damn about providing a good radio service fairly and at a great quality. It's pure self-interest.

    Just highlights how crap the current licensing system is and how ineffective/non-existent Ofcom are to be honest.
    Bottom line... Global is a business. It is operating within the various parameters set by various agencies and bodies. IF you don't like it / disagree then you can either:

    - Complain to the aforementioned agency / body
    - Stop listening
    - Carry on whining about it like uninformed idiots on a forum

    I'm out.
    ...Or we continue to debate it on here :). Yes, some of us may sound like old rags moaning about the same thing, but please just let us continue on discussing what is a very valid subject. Please don't berate us as worthless and make yourself sound like a hero here because you work for the said company. I'd advise you be careful what you say as you do represent them. Anyway, your 3 points to report this disagree don't work. For one, the agency (OFCOM) are as useless as a chocolate teapot, we can't stop listening because Capital is littered everywhere and we'll continue to moan like uninformed idiots. :D
  • chipmanchipman Posts: 253
    Forum Member
    On an aside, James Barr on Capital on a saturday night is just brilliant. His links are just one of a kind and I like the remixes! Plus, he seems to do a lot of split ones doing shouts for different areas, etc. which shows an extra effort too.
  • MusicmasterproxMusicmasterprox Posts: 959
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Here's the score: I work for Global - just like a few others do on here. I don't deny where I work and I try and be helpful and answer any questions that I am able to answer from a point of view of someone within the company. I'm not biased: there are some Global policies and practices that I think are sh*t and some that are great. But at the end of the day I'm not in charge. It's not my company. I don't make the decisions - and I have to respect that a multi-million pound organisation that is the biggest commercial operator in the UK is focused on making money. That is the name of the game. I may - or may not - agree, but I don't get all stressed about it: I live with it, like an adult.


    Bottom line... Global is a business. It is operating within the various parameters set by various agencies and bodies. IF you don't like it / disagree then you can either:

    - Complain to the aforementioned agency / body
    - Stop listening
    - Carry on whining about it like uninformed idiots on a forum
    I understand where your coming from, and I do respect it. But having being the biggest commercial station across the UK, surely you could take avantage by having more on air interaction with the listeners or producers.. Like having some game segments (for example Scott mills on Radio 1 'Innuendo Bingo' http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00hq228) Loosening the playlist by including favorite songs that were in the chart/played well on the station since it's 2011 relaunch. Possibly have few more specialist programs?

    Could I ask why Capital have decided to cut-back on specialist output after the Galaxy rebrand? As a fan of Dance music and Urban stuff, I think that having these shows will add a huge character to the station. You did have great Specialist shows in the past, which started radio careers for people like Tim Westwood & Pete Tong. Just an opinion.
  • east_boy_16east_boy_16 Posts: 3,981
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Could I ask why Capital have decided to cut-back on specialist output after the Galaxy rebrand?
    The answer to this has been answered many times, it's because they don't fit with the Capital brand. The specialist output existing is there because they have to fulfil the requirements of the ex-Galaxy licenses.

    Capital has always been about Pop hits and this is why Capital is popular and also why Capital won't increase specialist output. They've already been allowed by Ofcom to drop the amount of hours they're aloud to broadcast specialist content, and no doubt the day will come when they will be allowed to drop it entirely.

    The specialist output though does sound really good on Capital and gives it the edge over Radio 1 especially on Saturday nights.
  • wckartistwckartist Posts: 1,682
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    chipman wrote: »
    he seems to do a lot of split ones doing shouts for different areas, etc. which shows an extra effort too.


    Amazing how EVERY Saturday night on the Manchester feed, Jane is getting ready to go out, and Laura is on her way home from the Trafford centre!:rolleyes:

    No one will notice though, will they?:mad:
  • jon craigjon craig Posts: 1,391
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Think it's time we got to the real issue on this thread. There is nothing wrong with Capital playing Lawson - the band fit the hit music format and the station are currently playing several guitar based hits from the likes of Coldplay, fun., Breathe Carolina - it's not like they've suddenly parachuted onto the playlist something massively off-brand. That is something they wouldn't do - no matter how desperate Global Talent may be to use their radio arm to promote their artists, it would not happen at the expense of the radio brand itself. They would not risk damaging their carefully constructed brands by playing something wildly off-message.

    The issue is one of transparency. OFCOM rules now permit product placement on commercial radio, so actually, Global are well within their rights to push their artists. The question is whether they are being given undue prominence, in which case they would be required to flag up to the listener the commercial arrangement that exists between Global's radio arm and it's talent division. Global, of course, would argue that the songs fit the brand and would be played even if the bands in question were looked after outside of Global Talent - and the problem is that, on a legal basis, that argument would be almost impossible to refute.

    I personally don't have a problem with the whole 'Global plays The Wanted/Cover Drive/Lawson' issue - in their position would I do the same? Too bloody right! The bottom line is though we all know what's going on and maybe the sting would be taken out of the argument if one or two would just put their hands up and admit it, rather than pretend it's all some massive co-incidence.Was Cover Drive's 'Twilight' really such an incredible piece of work that it deserved the kind of up-front play on Heart that even established artists fail to get?

    Then of course there's the stuff that Global don't play because of the petty prejudices and agendas of those at the top. Maybe someone should ask a Global representative why Alexandra Burke's 'Elephant' never made the Capital playlist? Just don't ask Mark Findlay - it wouldn't have been his decision! ;)
  • overlineoverline Posts: 1,898
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Product placement in radio, TV & film is bad news IMO, just like blurring the line between editorial and advertising in newspapers and magazines - we are all going to end-up going to hell in a handcart singing the number one Microsoft/McDonald/Simon Cowell/whatever song.

    Game over. :(

    Thank God for the BBC.;)

    And Radio Caroline. ;)
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    I understand where your coming from, and I do respect it. But having being the biggest commercial station across the UK, surely you could take avantage by having more on air interaction with the listeners or producers.. Like having some game segments (for example Scott mills on Radio 1 'Innuendo Bingo' http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00hq228)

    How, on a music radio station, would introducing a 10 minute speech segment be "taking advantage"?

    The only justification for such a game would be if a major sponsor was offering a £50k cash prize. Even then it would have to be carefully controlled across the network, and timed to the second.
  • Mapperley RidgeMapperley Ridge Posts: 9,922
    Forum Member
    jon craig wrote: »

    Global, of course, would argue that the songs fit the brand and would be played even if the bands in question were looked after outside of Global Talent - and the problem is that, on a legal basis, that argument would be almost impossible to refute.

    ... maybe the sting would be taken out of the argument if one or two would just put their hands up and admit it, rather than pretend it's all some massive co-incidence.Was Cover Drive's 'Twilight' really such an incredible piece of work that it deserved the kind of up-front play on Heart that even established artists fail to get?

    Which is why allegations using words like "payola" need backing up.

    And I don't see why Capital should have to justify anything as a coincidence - it's a coincidence that certain records, which are bang on target, are released by the Talent division?

    Business is business.
Sign In or Register to comment.