Taking Control Of The Infinite Dial by Sean Ross of Edison Media Research

Even before Wednesday’s announcement that Chrysler would make its 2009 US models Internet enabled, terrestrial broadcasters faced multiple challenges in securing their place on The Infinite Dial: the WiMax car radio of the future that would make every station stream in the world available to motorists.

The first is creating a unique selling proposition for their stations in a space with scores of Top 40 “Kiss FMs” or multiple Jack-FMs. That situation exists already, as it happens, on Clear Channel and CBS’ respective media players.

The second is being located among thousands upon thousands of choices — current terrestrial brands, Internet-only stations, repurposed satellite radio channels and likely hybrids of all of the above. Page through the offerings of even the best organized stream-aggregators now, and you’ll see what a challenge this represents for a potential listener.

And now we can add the issue of whether the Infinite Dial is even offered to consumers. It has long been believed that the automakers would regard streaming audio as only one aspect of a broad package of in-car options, and would probably offer a heavily culled list of radio choices. And so far, mainstream terrestrial radio’s track record in that environment, while improving, is spotty.

Some of the new tabletop Internet radio devices give special prominence to Webcasters like Slacker’s showcase on RCA’s Infinite Radio and presumably Pandora’s just announced deal with Grace Digital. Some stream aggregators, like iTunes, have long emphasized Web-exotica over mainstream terrestrial stations. Others rely heavily on fans as curators — wikiradio, essentially — and on even the well-tended sites, “W” and “K” call letters sit in the middle of an dizzying list of available choices.

Recently, the large groups have become more aggressive about securing their place among the stream aggregators. CBS Radio stations are now available on iTunes — practically the only mainstream commercial stations that are. Clear Channel got a lot of press for announcing it would make its streams compatible with the Receiva radio guide, but it had already done the same for RadioTime.

The majors are doing what they ought to be doing, but in their doing so, there is now a particular challenge for those stations that are neither major-group-owned or Webexotic in a curator-friendly way. Mark Ramsey correctly points out the distinct possibility of an automaker plugging in Slacker, Pandora, AccuRadio, or CBS/AOL radio, to which he could add the 750-plus stations now available in one place on Clear Channel’s player or Citadel’s stations, which have all been available on a single player for more than a year.

So what then can radio as a whole do to take control of the Infinite Dial?

1) Radio, as an industry, must assert itself into any dialogue now taking place on the architecture of the WiMax car radio of the future or any of the devices that precede it to ensure both ease of use and representation of as many voices as possible. Part of NAB’s job must be ensuring that smaller and standalone operators are not squeezed out.

2) Radio, as an industry, needs to redirect the effort that has gone into interesting Detroit in HD Radio into selling the value of 12,000 stations with an established listener base — not merely a less developed handful of “stations between the stations.”

3) Radio is already in the business of providing news, traffic, weather, and (in the case of most Rock radio websites) adult content. If streaming audio is going to be one of multiple applications offered by an in-car or tabletop device, radio should be offering one-stop-shopping. The only thing wrong with the multi-group initiative to offer traffic through HD Radio is its apparently limited scope.

4) To that effect, more broadcasters need to stay in the business of providing other services. Broadcasters’ willingness to let news, traffic and weather come through a relatively small number of pipes has given the advantage to the major groups to whom broadcasters already handed those functions on a local level.

5) Part of the job of every marketing director in radio should today become the on-line presentation and search optimization of their stream. Radio people know that Chicago’s Jack-FM rocks harder and L.A.’s Jack-FM plays more ’80s alternative. Nothing on the good-looking CBS Play.It tuner would yet convey that to a listener.

6) Part of the job of every program director must be honing a station into a franchise that has a reason to exist among thousands of others. Broadcasters cannot count indefinitely on the affinity that listeners currently show to their local stations, even on-line. (That said, the franchise for a station among thousands of others may indeed lie in being “New Jersey 101.5″ for their market, and broadcasters who want to own that franchise must now reassert their sense-of-place among hours of jockless content and syndicated shows that may not even be available on their own stream.)

There’s no intended bias toward mainstream terrestrial broadcasters here — they’re the emphasis of this article because, if anything, there’s been some bias against them in the early days of stream aggregation. On my fantasy WiMax car radio, there are already presets set aside for WHTZ (Z100) New York, Radio IO’s R&B Oldies channel, eclectic suburban Phoenix Classic Rocker KCDX, London’s Capital FM, Sirius Hits 1, and a few hundred others. I’m not going to be happy if every one of them isn’t readily accessible. Consumers shouldn’t be happy if their current choice of two dozen locals is replaced with somebody else’s limited slate of options. And the industry as a whole should be ashamed of itself it lets that happen.

Comments (1)

  1. LP @ July 1, 2008 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    A lot is being said here. Some good food for thought on issues that will affect us all in the near future.

    The point that “part of the job of every marketing director in radio should today become the on-line presentation and search optimization of their stream” made me smile. Not because I disagree. Au contraire. It’s clear that the successful radio brands of the future(and media brands in general) which survive, will be the ones that consumers can find with ease and ones that they understand/know what to expect if they tune in; not just the ones that they’re aware of – a luxury that media owners have enjoyed for a long time. It’s great news that the big media players are aware of this, (hopefully) before it’s too late.

    I’ve always thought the role of a marketing department in radio (and commercial radio in particular) is an important one. A very important one; and one that is under-valued, under-funded and under-loved. (You can thank me later, Clare!)

    The other day, I traced back my interest in the subject to a 90s TV commercial for a (particularly large) local commercial radio station, in which the whole spot consisted of one of those fake flowers that ‘dances’ to music whenever it ‘hears’ it. Yes, you read right. An ‘extreme close-up’ of a dancing flower. For 20 or 30 seconds. And the music it was dancing to? The radio station’s jingle. So what did this little gem tell its viewers about the radio station it was trying very hard to promote? I’ll let you answer that.

    The ‘dancing flower’ episode was, in media and technology terms, a long time ago. I’d like to think that the industry has learned a lot since then. However, I’m sure we’ve all seen slightly “less-than-perfect” (I’m being polite) TV or poster campaigns for commercial radio stations in recent years.

    I won’t name names.

    Back to the article. I’m not familiar with the finer details when it comes to the minute differences betwen the few dozen Jack FMs that exist in North America, so I didn’t know the Chicago version is rockier than its 80s-packed L.A. cousin. But I’m not surprised to read that the average American doesn’t, either. This is another thing that commercial radio stations have historically not been great at – telling would-be listeners what their USPs are/what they stand for and why people should ‘make the switch’ to them. (Incidentally, the only thing I do each time I come across a radio station with a marketing campaign comprising the phrase “make the switch” – and a picture of a giant switch – is… switch OFF).

    “I don’t work in marketing” is what I used to say. But as someone whose job consists has the dual function of helping to create the product and market the station to existing listeners, on-air (i.e. station sound production/imaging), maybe I am a marketing person after all. Which is perhaps why I have found the lack of creativity and focus the industry has applied to external marketing, at times, rather frustrating. When so much time and effort is being spent fine-tuning stations’ output and marketing the product to existing listeners, on-air, using clever and creative techniques, it’s disturbing that the same principles aren’t always being applied when marketing stations to new listeners (i.e. off-air marketing).

    I will, at this stage, quickly add that my frustrations are aimed mainly at local commercial stations, not so much the commercial nationals. But it’s still a concern, because local stations make up most of the industry. Having said that, some would say that even Virgin might be guilty of this in small, less-significant ways. For example, anyone who walks past One Golden Square will currently see the phrase “Purveyors of the Finest Rock and Roll” proudly displayed across the front of the building, taking up more space than the station name. You wouldn’t hear this quirky little phrase on-air, perhaps because it isn’t the best way of positioning the station. Perhaps because the average 30 or 40-something might picture less “Rock and Roll lifestyle” and more “Bill Haley and the Comets” at the mere mention of the words “Rock and Roll”. Anyway, so if something’s not right nor good enough for listeners already with us, why would we want to use wording like this to attract new listeners? What kinds of perceptions of the station do people exposed to this sign walk away with?

    Back to (points 5 and 6 of) the article – it is clear that the commercial radio industry needs to try a little harder to be seen and heard in the – now very crowded – media landscape. Radio stations must make sure EVERY potential listener in their market is aware of exactly how to find the station. They must also have a very, very good idea of what to expect from the station when they eventually tune in, BEFORE they’ve even tuned in. As the article says, just what is the station’s “reason to exist among thousands of others”. I don’t think these are ideals; they’re essentials.

    So how does a modern radio station make all this happen? Good question. Maybe off air marketing teams need to work more in tandem with on-air marketing teams (imaging producers and programmers) so that potential listeners’ perceptions are spot on. (If they sample a station for the first time, expecting something in particular but get something different, (better or worse), will they stay with that station? This, together with great PR (as we have here at One Golden Square), and someone who can ensure that the station is easily available on every new platform/hardware & software product that is going to surface in the coming years (of which there will be A LOT) is perhaps a good start.

    In my early days in radio, a senior colleague said in a meeting that “we’re lucky, because radio isn’t complicated”. He proudly announced that “the only two challenges radio people face are to 1) make good radio programmes; 2) sell ads. That’s it – simple! Let’s get out there and do it – and have fun!”

    Whilst I admired the way he fired up the staff, I was suspicious at the time about the simplicity of what he was saying, wondering how long this would be the case. I think, about now, my suspicions are being proven to be correct.

    Yes, we are all facing more challenges than ever before. But I reckon there’s more fun to be had than ever, too.

Post a Comment

Your email is never shared. Required fields are marked *

*