Isn't it ironic that if the local stations had been smarter and limited the playlists and DJ prattle, they'd have had bigger more targeted audiences
and made enough revenue reliably to stay in business longer if not indefinitely.
It really is hard to disagree with the MANY on here who see you as arrogant when you assume ALL broadcasters were guilty of "DJ prattle".......That's such an insult, not just to the former personalities, but those still hanging on in the job now!
Also, take it from someone who was there in the early days, if Piccadilly, City etc had played the same couple of dozen songs on a loop when they first launched, they would have gone "bang" within a very short timescale..........indeed, "Beacon" was so successful because of its innovative style and music policy!
Sadly today, "Dumbed down" radio is seen as the way forward, as, especially with "Heart", you target a core who don't even notice the repetitiveness, and others who are not really listening, evidence of that being how many times the same guesses were given on the "Whos on Heart" comp!
I'm not sure how this mess can be cleared up, except by imposing a 16-hour local content and a music to speech ratio which puts the emphasis on speech, and to ban licence holders from advertising during networked or automated programming.
Top marks for one of the most hilarious comments ever posted on DS.
The thread title is "The death of local radio", this would be one way to ensure that happens by bankrupting all the companies and making all the listeners tune out. Music is the number 1 reason the majority of people listen to commercial radio by a country-mile.
It really is hard to disagree with the MANY on here who see you as arrogant when you assume ALL broadcasters were guilty of "DJ prattle".......That's such an insult .....
... Ad Hominems are a bit desperate, but that aside, who said anything about eliminating personality? Good jocks can deliver great one thought one link personality in 30 seconds or less
Also, take it from someone who was there in the early days, if Piccadilly, City etc had played the same couple of dozen songs on a loop when they first launched, they would have gone "bang" within a very short timescale..........indeed, "Beacon" was so successful because of its innovative style and music policy!
No, they did ok when the competition was much less. Anytime in the modern era when listeners are given the option of more music and less talk they choose it, that's even kind of true about R2 which plays a lot of music in each hour (I still hear many complain about the chit chat though)
Sadly today, "Dumbed down" radio is seen as the way forward, as, especially with "Heart", you target a core who don't even notice the repetitiveness, and others who are not really listening, evidence of that being how many times the same guesses were given on the "Whos on Heart" comp!
It isn't 'seen' as the way forward, both the big commercial network operators are responding to consumer tastes. Finally, Heart isn't designed to be listened to all day, the idea is there's a great song you know every time you listen, so it's not that surprising that people aren't there for every incorrect guess.
Oops didn't quite get the format right for replying to each of the very reasonable points - hope it makes some sort of sense 😃
Further though to Wck's point about the early days of Beacon et al, never forget the anoraks great icon Laser 558 and how it blew most of those stations off the dial with the tiniest of playlists
It isn't 'seen' as the way forward, both the big commercial network operators are responding to consumer tastes. Finally, Heart isn't designed to be listened to all day, the idea is there's a great song you know every time you listen, so it's not that surprising that people aren't there for every incorrect guess.
That's quite depressing if you think about it as it really shows that UK Radio in general is down the shitter but then again Heart (and Capital) isn't really designed to be listened to at all.
Local Radio did not need tight Playlists to make it commercially viable. Most had massive audiences before they were took over and Networked, what they did need to do was reduce staffing levels and take on more volunteers / hospital radio guys,
some commercial Stations had presenters doing 2 hour shifts, 3 max, and then they would leave the building and go home ( the original show and go). And up to 8 paid presenters a day. , if they halved that and worked in other depts at the station. They could have survived ....... A lot of stations though from 96 onwards were set up to be sold, and they didn't stand a chance.
Local Radio did not need tight Playlists to make it commercially viable. Most had massive audiences before they were took over and Networked, what they did need to do was reduce staffing levels and take on more volunteers / hospital radio guys,
some commercial Stations had presenters doing 2 hour shifts, 3 max, and then they would leave the building and go home ( the original show and go). And up to 8 paid presenters a day. , if they halved that and worked in other depts at the station. They could have survived ....... A lot of stations though from 96 onwards were set up to be sold, and they didn't stand a chance.
A good point there Allen and it was true when there was just essentially R1 and the heritage station, it was possible then to just wander into local businesses with a portable and sell. Trouble is now the competition ranges across 'radio' platforms and other media types entirely. A business is just as likely to buy a pre-roll ad on a youtube video as a radio package.
That last sentence.....My experience of radio in that era was a marked snobbishness towards volunteers and hospital radio people.
To the second paragraph, you've answered your own charge there, the stations were over staffed, bizarrely programmed (Sometimes to meet IBA requirements) and run like the near monopoly they were. The measures you suggested would have automatically made them more attractive to a buyer.
So why do companies like Bauer and Global have such a vendetta against local radio? It's sad to see (or hear) all these radio stations like Radio City which were once good turn into a bland piece of crap.
Hmeisters question is as interesting as any of the answers so far - even mine! ;-)
To call it a vendetta rather than plain old commercial activity suggests a leaning toward conspiracy thinking - Like there's a Phillistine impulse to rob us of the towering achievement that was local radio, directed by a cat stroking Dr Evil in a hollowed out volcano in Leicester Square.
I would just chip in one further morsel that I don't think has been mentioned so far.
Jack FM is licenseable and some smaller stations have flipped to that identity, now they remain local stations with a bolted on standardised format, is that part of local radio's death?
It isn't 'seen' as the way forward, both the big commercial network operators s responding to consumer tastes. Finally, Heart isn't designed to be listened to all day, the idea is there's a great song you know every time you listen, so it's not that surprising that people aren't there for every incorrect guess.
Surely you mean the same song everytime you listen!!! The mentality of Heart listeners is so shallow.
Surely you mean the same song everytime you listen!!! The mentality of Heart listeners is so shallow.
Even if I did mean that, there's nothing stopping the same song being a great song, in fact a station that's done it's research properly, expertly avoids the dogs.
I must admit I'm very disappointed about the way the Myers report was interpreted by ofcom.
Small stations obliged to run full scale local programming were in trouble, jocks being paid £10, licences being handed back etc... IN THESE CASES it is absolutely right that resources should be shared and programming networked outwith peak to ensure profitability.
However, the fact that the rules were relaxed across the board rather than for stations genuinely in need of concessions has resulted in the ridiculous situation where cash cow big city services like the former Red Dragon FM are now operated as though they were 100 watt tiny stations and big cities like Cardiff are left with the bare bones of local radio when they were absolutely capable of retaining relevant local programming and still turning a healthy profit.
I don't blame John Myres, his recommendations stopped many smaller services handing back their licences, I don't blame Bauer or global, they are being allowed to make even fatter profits so of course they're taking advantage,
I blame ofcom for robbing the listening public of these great big city stations and the unique sound and service they gave to each area.... And for what? Bigger wallets for Mr Tabor and Mr Bauer.
The irony is that actually, many of the small stations are the only ones now maintaining a full local output.
Local Radio did not need tight Playlists to make it commercially viable. Most had massive audiences before they were took over and Networked, what they did need to do was reduce staffing levels and take on more volunteers / hospital radio guys,
some commercial Stations had presenters doing 2 hour shifts, 3 max, and then they would leave the building and go home ( the original show and go). And up to 8 paid presenters a day. , if they halved that and worked in other depts at the station. They could have survived ....... A lot of stations though from 96 onwards were set up to be sold, and they didn't stand a chance.
Stop living in the past, you're talking about over 20 years ago.
You're talking about the days where most people only had four television channels and no Internet access. The world, and especially the media landscape is vastly different today.
Stop living in the past, you're talking about over 20 years ago.
You're talking about the days where most people only had four television channels and no Internet access. The world, and especially the media landscape is vastly different today.
I don't need you to tell me what I was talking about as I wrote it ? and I was referring to a station I worked on 2 years ago not 20, hardly living in the past, my point still remains, you come across as an arrogant idiot who storms in with a ill thought through idea , implements it, watches it fail and walks away.
I am well aware of the change in media of our times, I was part of it then and still am
Now.
Stop living in the past, you're talking about over 20 years ago.
You're talking about the days where most people only had four television channels and no Internet access. The world, and especially the media landscape is vastly different today.
this comment makes no sense, most Radio Stations have more listeners than 20 years ago not less, the fact we have more TV channels and the internet has only been a positive move for Radio, it's the accountants and idiots who have ruined the industry , not people with rose tinted spectacles.
It was you that said they are deceiving listeners, I was just wondering what you're thinking.
In terms of what they do and how they do it - it seems to work for them, why change it. McDonalds could add a fried egg to their Big Macs - it would be different, daring and few people might like it but the majority wouldn't and Big Macs wouldn't sell in the volume that they do now.
Any more thoughts ledders, about explaining how listeners are being deceived? I'm still curious about your thought process.
most Radio Stations have more listeners than 20 years ago not less
Actually, radio listening has remained fairly stable over the last 20 years. That's because broadcasters have moved with the times and responded to the changing media landscape.
Nobody has "ruined" the industry - quite the opposite, in fact. If commercial radio stations had stuck to the old model there would be a lot less radio stations around today!
What is completely beyond logic to anyone other than Ofcom, Global and Bauer is why the likes of Scarborough, York and Harrogate can have separate independent stations (under UKRD ownership) why Derby, Nottingham and Leicester for example have to share what local programming they get with rest nationally networked.
Its called making tough business decisions. Today's economic landscape is very different to years past. Plus don't forget Global re-introduced regional output to Smooth this year.
For Bauer look at TFM. Those were drastic changes and it's done them no harm whatsoever.
And were they outraged that their local station had rebranded to Heart six years ago and that most of the output comes from London or did they just want to hear some songs they liked?
The underlying problem with all media, but I'll concentrate on radio for the obvious reason, is the output is dumbed down to fit in with demand from a dumbed down public. Over the years through political correctness, trends and content/influence people have been engineered to become a very shallow species, programmed to accept what they're given as the best they're going to get, eventually, their brains have shrunk so much in terms of consideration and ideas such as creativity, they then ask for less, until eventually, as we see with radio, people are so dense in thinking, they simply become numb and don't care. It's very easy to achieve, rather like a domestic violence relationship; continuously tell a person they're inferior, and in turn eventually, they simply not only become re-programmed, they simply give up and also get used to the idea there is nothing better. The media do the same thing, albeit it's taken longer due to it being inflicted on a much large number than in terms of a one to one basis, thus taking longer to achieve. Radio has become lazy in response to a growing mass of lazy minds made that way by the rich and powerful creating a lazy world
No doubt I'll get told I'm talking nonsense, not least by one thread poster who seems to have a highly negative ego, who's actually proved to have a bigger one than another here which I didn't think would be possible, or perhaps the other is merely more sneaky and passively mocking. Anyone with some intelligence and deep sense will see the points I'm making, and may not agree directly or in the same way, however they may understand my stance
Here we go again.....anyone who doesn't like Heart is an anorak blah blah.....luckily there are still a few commercial stations around who actually interact with their audience and play music people want to hear.....e.g. Time 107.5 (Romford)....where you can (shock horror) phone email text or FB message the on-air presenter and they will play your request, even if it's not on a playlist of about 200 songs. They even have (gasp) some specialist music shows!! BTW I know quite a few of their listeners and they are not anoraks just normal people....
As above, you are correct, anyone who dares to challenge policy etc is merely brushed off as inferior using some dense, insulting label designed to cause others to parrot the same and thus we have a crowd of following, nodding dogs
As above, you are correct, anyone who dares to challenge policy etc is merely brushed off as inferior using some dense, insulting label designed to cause others to parrot the same and thus we have a crowd of following, nodding dogs
The problem here is that both sides behave in exactly the same way. Those wbo like Heart or just support and understand the business model are equally spoken about in a derogatory and insulting way. This is classic internet forum behaviour where someobe has a view and cannit simply accept that someone else has a different view. Very few people seem to look at it in an objective way and think that despite not liking it or even understanding why it works it clearly does. It attracts an audience and it makes money which are the 2 important objectives for a commercial radio station.
I'm willing to bet that it's a fairly high caliber audience too. I seem to recall some interesting research a few years ago about Magic London when it sounded like Smooth does now. They had next to no presenter content and a playlist of no more than 200 songs yet they shared an unusually high number of listeners with BBC Radio 4 and today in particular. Listeners would get their news and then switch to Magic.
The death of local radio is one step closer now that Global could be buying Juice FM Liverpool.
In reality apart from a couple of off peak specialist shows what willl really change. They'll still play Rihanna and links about the same things will be donein London not Liverpool.
I'm sure people will say that Liverpool is different and people won't stand for it but that's rubbish. Capital has worked in Scotland so that says it all.
The problem here is that both sides behave in exactly the same way. Those wbo like Heart or just support and understand the business model are equally spoken about in a derogatory and insulting way. This is classic internet forum behaviour where someobe has a view and cannit simply accept that someone else has a different view. Very few people seem to look at it in an objective way and think that despite not liking it or even understanding why it works it clearly does. It attracts an audience and it makes money which are the 2 important objectives for a commercial radio station.
I'm willing to bet that it's a fairly high caliber audience too. I seem to recall some interesting research a few years ago about Magic London when it sounded like Smooth does now. They had next to no presenter content and a playlist of no more than 200 songs yet they shared an unusually high number of listeners with BBC Radio 4 and today in particular. Listeners would get their news and then switch to Magic.
I can accept others have a different opinion, what I can't accept is when either a corporate minded/conformist listener refuses to believe there is something more available than what's essentially forced upon them when simply sticking to the FM/AM dial. Also just as bad are the posters who sneer upon another for daring to dislike what's mainstream
Not only the above, but I think what most fail, or don't want to accept or at least understand, is that due to how the industry over the years has dumbed down content, people's minds have shrunk to believe that only 200 songs exist and a human robot can play them while saying a few inane, boring and repeated words and daren't have a personality through fear of annoying advertisers, bosses and shareholders
Comments
It really is hard to disagree with the MANY on here who see you as arrogant when you assume ALL broadcasters were guilty of "DJ prattle".......That's such an insult, not just to the former personalities, but those still hanging on in the job now!
Also, take it from someone who was there in the early days, if Piccadilly, City etc had played the same couple of dozen songs on a loop when they first launched, they would have gone "bang" within a very short timescale..........indeed, "Beacon" was so successful because of its innovative style and music policy!
Sadly today, "Dumbed down" radio is seen as the way forward, as, especially with "Heart", you target a core who don't even notice the repetitiveness, and others who are not really listening, evidence of that being how many times the same guesses were given on the "Whos on Heart" comp!
Top marks for one of the most hilarious comments ever posted on DS.
The thread title is "The death of local radio", this would be one way to ensure that happens by bankrupting all the companies and making all the listeners tune out. Music is the number 1 reason the majority of people listen to commercial radio by a country-mile.
It isn't 'seen' as the way forward, both the big commercial network operators are responding to consumer tastes. Finally, Heart isn't designed to be listened to all day, the idea is there's a great song you know every time you listen, so it's not that surprising that people aren't there for every incorrect guess.
Further though to Wck's point about the early days of Beacon et al, never forget the anoraks great icon Laser 558 and how it blew most of those stations off the dial with the tiniest of playlists
That's quite depressing if you think about it as it really shows that UK Radio in general is down the shitter but then again Heart (and Capital) isn't really designed to be listened to at all.
some commercial Stations had presenters doing 2 hour shifts, 3 max, and then they would leave the building and go home ( the original show and go). And up to 8 paid presenters a day. , if they halved that and worked in other depts at the station. They could have survived ....... A lot of stations though from 96 onwards were set up to be sold, and they didn't stand a chance.
A good point there Allen and it was true when there was just essentially R1 and the heritage station, it was possible then to just wander into local businesses with a portable and sell. Trouble is now the competition ranges across 'radio' platforms and other media types entirely. A business is just as likely to buy a pre-roll ad on a youtube video as a radio package.
That last sentence.....My experience of radio in that era was a marked snobbishness towards volunteers and hospital radio people.
To the second paragraph, you've answered your own charge there, the stations were over staffed, bizarrely programmed (Sometimes to meet IBA requirements) and run like the near monopoly they were. The measures you suggested would have automatically made them more attractive to a buyer.
Hmeisters question is as interesting as any of the answers so far - even mine! ;-)
To call it a vendetta rather than plain old commercial activity suggests a leaning toward conspiracy thinking - Like there's a Phillistine impulse to rob us of the towering achievement that was local radio, directed by a cat stroking Dr Evil in a hollowed out volcano in Leicester Square.
I would just chip in one further morsel that I don't think has been mentioned so far.
Jack FM is licenseable and some smaller stations have flipped to that identity, now they remain local stations with a bolted on standardised format, is that part of local radio's death?
Surely you mean the same song everytime you listen!!! The mentality of Heart listeners is so shallow.
Even if I did mean that, there's nothing stopping the same song being a great song, in fact a station that's done it's research properly, expertly avoids the dogs.
Small stations obliged to run full scale local programming were in trouble, jocks being paid £10, licences being handed back etc... IN THESE CASES it is absolutely right that resources should be shared and programming networked outwith peak to ensure profitability.
However, the fact that the rules were relaxed across the board rather than for stations genuinely in need of concessions has resulted in the ridiculous situation where cash cow big city services like the former Red Dragon FM are now operated as though they were 100 watt tiny stations and big cities like Cardiff are left with the bare bones of local radio when they were absolutely capable of retaining relevant local programming and still turning a healthy profit.
I don't blame John Myres, his recommendations stopped many smaller services handing back their licences, I don't blame Bauer or global, they are being allowed to make even fatter profits so of course they're taking advantage,
I blame ofcom for robbing the listening public of these great big city stations and the unique sound and service they gave to each area.... And for what? Bigger wallets for Mr Tabor and Mr Bauer.
The irony is that actually, many of the small stations are the only ones now maintaining a full local output.
Stop living in the past, you're talking about over 20 years ago.
You're talking about the days where most people only had four television channels and no Internet access. The world, and especially the media landscape is vastly different today.
I don't need you to tell me what I was talking about as I wrote it ? and I was referring to a station I worked on 2 years ago not 20, hardly living in the past, my point still remains, you come across as an arrogant idiot who storms in with a ill thought through idea , implements it, watches it fail and walks away.
I am well aware of the change in media of our times, I was part of it then and still am
Now.
this comment makes no sense, most Radio Stations have more listeners than 20 years ago not less, the fact we have more TV channels and the internet has only been a positive move for Radio, it's the accountants and idiots who have ruined the industry , not people with rose tinted spectacles.
Any more thoughts ledders, about explaining how listeners are being deceived? I'm still curious about your thought process.
Actually, radio listening has remained fairly stable over the last 20 years. That's because broadcasters have moved with the times and responded to the changing media landscape.
Nobody has "ruined" the industry - quite the opposite, in fact. If commercial radio stations had stuck to the old model there would be a lot less radio stations around today!
The underlying problem with all media, but I'll concentrate on radio for the obvious reason, is the output is dumbed down to fit in with demand from a dumbed down public. Over the years through political correctness, trends and content/influence people have been engineered to become a very shallow species, programmed to accept what they're given as the best they're going to get, eventually, their brains have shrunk so much in terms of consideration and ideas such as creativity, they then ask for less, until eventually, as we see with radio, people are so dense in thinking, they simply become numb and don't care. It's very easy to achieve, rather like a domestic violence relationship; continuously tell a person they're inferior, and in turn eventually, they simply not only become re-programmed, they simply give up and also get used to the idea there is nothing better. The media do the same thing, albeit it's taken longer due to it being inflicted on a much large number than in terms of a one to one basis, thus taking longer to achieve. Radio has become lazy in response to a growing mass of lazy minds made that way by the rich and powerful creating a lazy world
No doubt I'll get told I'm talking nonsense, not least by one thread poster who seems to have a highly negative ego, who's actually proved to have a bigger one than another here which I didn't think would be possible, or perhaps the other is merely more sneaky and passively mocking. Anyone with some intelligence and deep sense will see the points I'm making, and may not agree directly or in the same way, however they may understand my stance
As above, you are correct, anyone who dares to challenge policy etc is merely brushed off as inferior using some dense, insulting label designed to cause others to parrot the same and thus we have a crowd of following, nodding dogs
The problem here is that both sides behave in exactly the same way. Those wbo like Heart or just support and understand the business model are equally spoken about in a derogatory and insulting way. This is classic internet forum behaviour where someobe has a view and cannit simply accept that someone else has a different view. Very few people seem to look at it in an objective way and think that despite not liking it or even understanding why it works it clearly does. It attracts an audience and it makes money which are the 2 important objectives for a commercial radio station.
I'm willing to bet that it's a fairly high caliber audience too. I seem to recall some interesting research a few years ago about Magic London when it sounded like Smooth does now. They had next to no presenter content and a playlist of no more than 200 songs yet they shared an unusually high number of listeners with BBC Radio 4 and today in particular. Listeners would get their news and then switch to Magic.
In reality apart from a couple of off peak specialist shows what willl really change. They'll still play Rihanna and links about the same things will be donein London not Liverpool.
I'm sure people will say that Liverpool is different and people won't stand for it but that's rubbish. Capital has worked in Scotland so that says it all.
I can accept others have a different opinion, what I can't accept is when either a corporate minded/conformist listener refuses to believe there is something more available than what's essentially forced upon them when simply sticking to the FM/AM dial. Also just as bad are the posters who sneer upon another for daring to dislike what's mainstream
Not only the above, but I think what most fail, or don't want to accept or at least understand, is that due to how the industry over the years has dumbed down content, people's minds have shrunk to believe that only 200 songs exist and a human robot can play them while saying a few inane, boring and repeated words and daren't have a personality through fear of annoying advertisers, bosses and shareholders