Capital only has 57% FM coverage across the UK, whereas BBC Radio 1 has 99.1% coverage. I don't have the Kiss figure but it will be a lot less as it's only on FM in London, East Anglia and the South Wales/Bristol areas.

In London Capital has a larger weekly reach than Radio 1, and the weekly share is pretty close between them according to Paul Easton's blog. Radio 1 is slightly ahead in Q2 but they have alternated over the past few years. It's very much a contest where there is a level playing field and both are on FM.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-rkcTk9PTjf...+ShareQ212.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-rHtUKhmV9S...toric+Q212.jpg

They don't think about these things, but they notice them, in their own way.

Dave Foxx, and the story of Hot 103.5 in New York (now of course Hot 97.1), keeps coming back to me

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIsXNYWowZU

They may not think about it, but they do notice when the imaging is right or when it's wrong.


It's desperation, because it's not inspiration. It feels like they are harkening back to their past, rather than trying to shape their future. That is not a present feeling that they are putting forward.


And hype that actually can be easily disproved, as I did.

So?

That's not evidence to prove Capital made it famous. In fact, that backs up what I'm saying.

And that sounds like a line from Perfect Curve PR in 2012.

You really are reading too much into this. Unlike the vast majority of listeners.

Any hype can be easily disproved. Any imaging can be ripped to shreds by anoraks. Even Chris Moyles did this with the "Listen, watch, share/Cher" line from Newsbeat.

I don't see the kids complaining that Radio 1 is deceiving them?

It's no different from a presenter saying "and next, a song I just love" when they really hate it..

How about "Capital Remembers" or something similar?

Good for an oldies station, but not Capital.

Or, they could (should) do what any normal person would do play the song, back announce it as [song] by [artist] (what they do anyway, I mean it's not like the Capital DJs are programmed to do anything else, is it?) and move on.

No need to lie to the listeners and pretend they made a song big then, is there?

James Barr's microphone doesn't sound quite right.

Also have Capital had a slight imaging update?

It's not lying though is it?
You cant prove that any one thing made a song big, but its fair to say getting on Capital's a list cant hurt.

It's long, long, long overdue. A start would be to get shot of that pervy old bloke who does the jingles.

deleted

Seriously why can't you delete posts?

Are you serious?

Jack don't 'play what they want' any more than Heart do. Admittedly it's a clever strapline that fits the blokey, in your face, slightly arrogant style the stations have, but that is all by design. The Jack format is no less formatted than Heart - it's just as carefully constructed, but designed to appeal to a different audience.

Their favourites (REM, Journey, James, Lynyrd Skynyrd to name a few) still come round more than once a day week after week. It's Heart for the 40 something male, they just go about their business in a slightly different way!

Google Dr John Demartini.


No, I merely understand it. Other listeners might get a bad feeling, but just choose to ignore it. Nothing wrong with that.


See now there you go, heading down the easy route. It's easier to dismiss someone as an anorak, even someone from within the industry, than it is to argue against the facts. At this point, you just lost the discussion.


I find that kinda non-sensical. Why bother saying you like something when you don't? Just announce the song and be done with it. Fake happiness, fake claims of liking something, just do not ring true on the air. You can hear it. I'd prefer by a mile, far more natural presentation.

I am totally serious, and you have just proved my point.

Of course it's all by design. That is practically a given. But most stations don't understand the real importance of imaging. They don't understand that imaging is all about doing what you say, and saying what you do. It's all very well saying you play the most music, and then spending a whole minute telling listeners all about it. I've heard it done on radio stations, it sounds crap.

Calling yourself "The UK's Hit Music Station" is all well and good, but if over 40% of the country can't hear you on FM, then it's not doing what you say and saying what you do. Now, I would change that to "Your Hit Music Station".

i agree. Sounds like some old guy in a raincoat that lurks in the bushes!

Of course "song that Capital made famous" is nothing new - or more correctly "the songs we made famous" was a regular phrase when Pat Sharp did the Top Ten at 10.

Whats next to come back then ? "James Barr live from the top of the tower with more music P P Powerrrrr"

I hear the Hot 7 @ 7 and Birthday Bonanza are making a return!

I'd generally agree, but not in the case of a presenter asking you to recall a specific time and stating "Capital made this famous", asking us to remember listening to Capital in summer 2005 for example.

I'd just think "err it wasn't capital then, it was Galaxy", I don't buy that listeners have forgotten Galaxy etc. already.

"Remember when WE made this famous" might work, but saying Capital would just sum up thoughts of "but Capital wasn't on then" outside of London.

Sounds like an obit/tribute news show.

Ahn, you understand it. So you'd equally understand the point the the average listener doesn't give a hoot?

Anoraks/industry types. I fall into both categories. And it's a fact that people on the inside will spot this bit of imaging and do their best to dismiss it if they don't like it. By whatever means.

As for fake happiness, if you don't believe it's part and parcel of the radio industry, you're seriously out of touch. Many jocks may not admit it, but sounding on message and enthusiastic about the playlist is just a way of paying the bills.

Actually, no, it's not a case that they don't give a hoot, you, like so many others, seem to think the listeners are idiots, that don't understand or don't care. In fact, only about 20% of the audience doesn't care. The rest do, to varying degrees.


No, you actually misunderstand what I'm saying here. You can be on-message and enthusiastic, without trying to sound happy when you're not feeling that way. And you don't have to like a particular song, and you don't have to say you like it, to be on-message and enthusiastic about the playlist, and you can do it without forced jollity and it will sound 100% better to the listener. Again, listeners can tell when you're forcing yourself to be happy, it stands out like a sore thumb, and I've had listeners come up and tell me that it was obvious that I was not happy during a programme, when I was forcing myself to sound happy. It couldn't be more obvious if a big neon sign was flashing over the radio set.

I'd be fascinated to learn where you got that figure from. But even if it's correct, you've given yourself a massive disclaimer with your "to varying degrees".

So let's narrow that down. What proportion of that 20% do you think are genuinely concerned about Capital's use of the phrase "made famous by"? By that, I mean to the extent that they thought it sounds odd, or is a problem, or would consider making a complaint?

And what proportion of Capital's output do you think sounds forced to the degree you describe there?

I much prefer the upbeat Capital stings that are used before the news and coming back from the first break at xx20, rumours are that they will be used more when Capital TV launches mid-september