Research:Listener
Choice Radio 2000 – The Overview
Everything
must change .Oleta Adams, Circle of Life
Listener
Choice Radio Study 2000, initiated by Sue Schardt and Ken Mills in
Fall 1999 and completed in April 2000, looks to one of public radios
closest content-competitive environment that is measurable commercial
radio to determine what the most important aspects of public radios
current content are, and to see what opportunities there may be for producers
to distribute existing programming, or to innovate new content. By talking
with commercial radios key gatekeepers and thinkers -- who are also
public radio fringe listeners -- we gain perspective, learn about opportunities
for program placement, and hear ideas for how commercial and public radio
might work together.
This proprietary
study was deliberately driven by radio stations and independent producers,
with a view that some of the greatest opportunities for innovation and
new vision begin with local content creators those closest to the
"source" and on the front-line with listeners. Listener Choice
sought participants who produce nationally distributed content, who are
idea-driven, and receptive to new thinking.
This initial
study contained several components:
A "crossover"
analysis of seven major markets, focusing on public radio listeners
why migrate to commercial radio. We included Arbitron/RRC data gathered
over a five year period in order to chart trends, and looked at the
patterns in All Listeners 18+ , Men 18+, and Women 18, and for the metro
survey area (MSA). All of our station participants had some knowledge
of crossover listening in their individual markets, but prior to Listener
Choice Radio, no one had ever compiled a national composite, showing
broader trends in audience sharing between public and commercial radio.
We commissioned
Nova Research, a division of Clear Channel Communications, to conduct
an "Insiders" perceptual survey of commercial radio programmers.
This consisted of a series of commercial radio gatekeeper telephone
interviews and a questionnaire designed, in part, to show us how these
programmers perceived public radio, how much they listened to public
radio, and whether or not they were interested in public radio type
programming for their stations. 3. Sue Schardt and Ken Mills conducted
a series of "Deep Insider" interviews with top commercial
radio executives and key decision-makers. These individuals included
station owners, network and syndication company executives, commercial
radio researchers and the head of commercial radio's leading trade organization,
the Radio Advertising Bureau. Some gave their comments on the record,
some off the record.
A canvas
review was made of the on-line activities of 31 commercial radio stations
that share significant cume with the Listener Choices participating
stations and that were included in the cross-over study. The full report
is not available to non-participants. See "Radio
Study 2000" section on this website for a review of some of
the highlights.
If
you are interested in information about the next Listener Choice Study,
expected to get underway early in 2002, contact project director:
.
Listener
Choice Radio 2000
Sue Schardt
and Ken Mills (August 2000)
The full
findings of Listener Choice Radio Study 2000 are proprietary, available
only to project participants. Following is a synopsis of some highlights
from the study.
During one
of the conference call debriefs for the Listener Choice Radio project,
John Decker, Program Director at KPBS summed it up, "Someone with
the money and the desire could damage me steal the fringe of my audience."
Mike Flaster,
Associate General Manager of Programming at KPBS, points to public television
as an example of the consequences of underestimating "the power of
commercial media to enact public media ideals." Flaster, one of 13
founding station/producer participants of Listener Choice Radio, went
on to say, "The themes of public radio can be easily
exported. Public TV got trapped into seeing ABC, CBS, NBC as the competition,
when the competition was actually The Discovery Channel they learned
how to make money with small audiences."
At XM, Sirius, and in the hip backrooms of dot-fiefdoms across the land,
folks are busily crafting audio content for these new portals. PRI and
NPR, too, have blank slates between them, there are five, brand-new,
24 by 7 channels to fill. Many of those at the programming helm of public
radio stations are trying to imagine the landscape just over the horizon.
"What should we be doing that were not doing?" some ask.
Others are excited by the potential it offers to expand what public radio
does better than anyone else -- crafting and delivering the best programming
in the land.
The Listener
Choice Radio study, initiated by Sue Schardt/SchardtMEDIA and Ken Mills/Ken
Mills Agency just a year ago, began with 3 key premises:
1) Public radio stations are a leading competitive force as content creators
and programming centers.
2) The non-commercial nature of public radio insulates it from many mainstream
competitive and economic forces. This insularity is vital to "quality
control" in programming, where mission and quality still take precedence
over the bottom-line. This intrinsic inwardness can work negatively, however,
and now is an important time to look beyond the border to hold
up a mirror and view, as objectively as possible, public radio programming
strengths, weaknesses and opportunities.
3) Were beginning to chart trends and understand what relationship
radio listeners have with the Internet. The territory of satellite distributed
programming, which will undoubtedly have significant impact, is unexplored
because it doesnt exist yet. We do, however, have the means to view
the relationship between public radio and its closest commercial media
brethren commercial radio. There are alot more suits in public
radio than in my world. A lot of wingtips They have triple the staff,
and I know they have a lot of meetings." - Bill Campbell, President/CEO
Charles River Broadcasting
Listener Choice examined trends in audience sharing between stations and
between formats, going behind the scenes in commercial radio to a) learn
how consolidation has affected the operation of commercial radio, b) determine
how leading commercial radio broadcasters perceive public radio and public
radio programming, c) determine the competitive advantages and weaknesses
of public radio versus our commercial radio dial-mates, and d) find out
what, if any, opportunities might exist for placing public radio programming
on commercial radio stations.
Besides KPBS, founding participants
of the Listener Choice Radio study are KUOW in Seattle, WBEZ in Chicago,
WNYC in New York, WAMU in Washington, WBUR in Boston, KERA in Dallas,
The Weather Notebook, and Lichtenstein Creative Media.
Research for the project was conducted in February, March and April of
this year. Nova Research was contracted to conduct a portion of the study
and to tabulate some of the data. Nova Research, based in San Diego, is
owned by Clear Channel Communications and specializes in audience analysis
and perceptual research.
While some of the results of the project remain proprietary, we agreed
with participants who felt it was important that some of the findings
of Listener Choice Radio be released to the entire public radio system.
This article will, we hope, incite your curiosity. Like some of our participants,
you may come away with more questions than answers.
Scope
The Listener
Choice Radio study contains several components:
1. A "crossover"
analysis of seven major markets, focusing on public radio listeners
who migrate to commercial radio. We included Arbitron/RRC data gathered
over a five year period in order to chart trends, and looked at the
patterns in All Listeners 18+ , Men 18+, and Women 18, and for the metro
survey area (MSA). All of our station participants had some knowledge
of crossover listening in their individual markets, but prior to Listener
Choice, no one had ever compiled a national composite, showing broader
trends in audience sharing between public and commercial radio.
2. Nova Research conducted an "Insiders" perceptual survey
of commercial radio programmers. This consisted of a series of commercial
radio gatekeeper telephone interviews and a questionnaire designed,
in part, to show us how these programmers perceived public radio, how
much they listened to public radio, and whether or not they were interested
in public radio type programming for
their stations.
3. Sue Schardt and Ken Mills conducted a series of "Deep Insider"
interviews with top commercial radio executives and key decision-makers.
These individuals included station owners, network and syndication company
executives, commercial radio researchers and the head of commercial
radio's leading trade organization, the Radio Advertising Bureau. Some
gave their comments on the record, some off the record.
4. A canvas review was made of the on-line activities of 31 commercial
radio stations that share significant cume with the Listener Choices
participating stations and that were included in the cross-over study.Audience
Sharing Trends Ten years
ago, I had eight push buttons on my car radio and one was set to a public
radio station. Now Ive got ten push buttons and five are set to
public radio stations. -- JT Anderton Vice President/Managing Director,
Duncans American Radio
Since
1995, there have been several notable changes in the audience sharing,
or cross-over, between the participating stations and other stations on
the dial.
Perhaps the most dramatic trend is the decline in crossover with commercial
classical stations. Each of the seven markets has at least one commercial
classical station. In all seven markets, audience sharing between the
participating station and commercial classical stations dropped between
1995 and 1999. Audience sharing with commercial classical stations dropped
19% versus the combined seven stations.
In 1995, commercial classical was the top audience sharing format with
the seven stations. In 1999, it fell to fourth in crossover cume.
The biggest gains in crossover audience were with Smooth Jazz stations,
up 27% from 1995 to 1999, and other public radio stations, up 15% from
1995 to 1999. Other public radio stations now share the most audience
with the seven participating stations.
News, News/Talk, and Talk format stations continue to share significant
audience with the seven stations but there has been little change in degree
of crossover from 1995 to 1999. Overall, cume sharing between the seven
stations and all other stations has fallen slightly from 23.4% in 1995
to 22.1% in 1999.
Holding
up the Mirror
My advice
to public radio decision makers is remember who brung [sic] you
Dont lose the distinctiveness of what you are doing." -- Thom
Moon, Director of Research and Development; Duncans American Radio
By and large,
the commercial radio people interviewed for this study are fringe public
radio listeners most tune to at least one public radio station during
the average week.
A few of the commercial radio executives we spoke with are heavy, perhaps
core, public radio listeners. There were a few who didnt listen
at all. With a few exceptions, both heavy and light listeners are listening
about as much each day as they were 3 years ago.
Like many that listen to public radio, these respondents most familiar
programs, named without prompting, include All Things Considered, Morning
Edition, Car Talk and Garrison Keillor. They appreciate public radios
"in-depth news," "thoughtful analysis," and absence
of commercials.
The most negative attributes of public radio programming in the view of
the commercial radio gatekeepers and executives we spoke with are that
its boring and predictable, often has a condescending tone, is "out
of touch" with what the mass audience wants to hear, and that segments
of programs last too long.
Some other key observations by commercial radio gatekeepers and VIPs
include:
Many of
the commercial radio interviewees said that public radio does a poor
job promoting itself. They advise public radio to "raise your flag
higher," "promote your independent stance," and "tell
people who you are."
Those
who reported listening more now than they were 3 years ago tell public
radio programmers to "get a sense of humor; dont take everything
so seriously," and to "research your market to learn more
about what the needs are."
One Director
of a major commercial research company reports that public radio comes
up in his focus groups on commercial radio News/Talk. Focus group participants
will say, "You should listen to NPR " and others in the
focus group will respond "whats NPR?"
Those
few commercial broadcasters who criticized public radios "liberal
bias" tended to be those who reportedly listened to "little
or no public radio" during the day.
When
queried as to whether or not they considered public radio a threat,
most of the commercial radio programmers interviewed say they do examine
the cume sharing between their station(s) and public radio stations,
and are equally split on whether or not public radio programming had
any impact on their own station(s) programming. Overall, public radio
is considered a medium to weak competitor for commercial radio stations.
Most
commercial radio interviewees do not know how public radio operates.
Many did not know the roles that CPB and NPR play. There is still a
common perception that public radio is "funded by the government."
Stereotypes
abound about public radio within commercial radio circles. Public radio
programming is said to be "....obsessed with political correctness
to point of being sterile" and that "public radio needs to
walk a fine line [in programming] because of government funding "
The Shifting Ground of Commercial Radio
Consolidation
of ownership since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has created vast
changes in the operations of most commercial radio stations. The size
of the new, publicly traded, commercial radio companies is staggering.
In gross revenue alone, several big commercial radio companies have annual
budgets far surpassing the entire estimated annual revenue of all of public
radio.
Commercial stations are typically managed in clusters of three to eight
stations. The clusters are owned by corporations, often far from the city
of license. The "mom and pop," local, family-owned radio station
has almost vanished.
It is not uncommon for a single General Manager to oversee a cluster of
commercial stations. Often, one Program Director will be in charge of
several stations with a variety of formats. This means that station management
is often distant from the programming heard on stations. Most stations,
particularly music stations, are programmed by the results of research.
There is little "gut feeling" involved in program decision making.
According to Duncan's American Radio, considered the most authoritative
source of commercial radio ratings and revenue data, commercial radio
time-spent-listening is declining.
Duncan's data shows that commercial radios average persons using
radio, Monday through Sunday, 6:00am to Midnight, Persons 12+, has decreased
from 17.5 in 1989 to 15.8 in Fall 1998. During this same time period,
public radio's average quarter hour audience has more than doubled.
Roughly the same number of people listen to commercial radio each week
but they are listening for shorter periods of time. Duncan cites five
primary reasons why commercial radio has lost listening:
1. Increased Commercial Loads
Radio & Records reports in it's April 21, 2000 issue that commercial
station spot loads increased 6% in 1999 after increasing 13% in 1998.
Music stations average around 12 minutes of commercials per hour. News
and Talk stations average 22 minutes of commercials per hour.
Part of the reason the amount of commercial inventory has increased is
the pressure to enhance the stock price of publicly traded companies by
increasing advertising revenue. Another reason is that with station clusters,
competition between stations within a market has decreased and owners
have less fear that high commercial loads will chase listeners to another
station. Now, they probably own the other station.
2. The Trend Away from "Local-ness"
Duncan believes that too many operators are succumbing to a "set
it and forget it" mentality. Bonds with the local community are lost.
The sound of commercial radio formats have become the same from city to
city. There is the perception of increased boredom with commercial radio
programming.
3. Program Format Segmentation Has Gone Too Far
Not enough attention has been focused on sampling by new listeners. Hyper-focusing
on core listeners has come at the expense of cume listeners. When core
listeners fall away, there is little to attract new listeners to replace
them.
4. Less Money is Being Spent on Marketing and Promotion
There have been major cuts in the budgets for outside promotion because
one owner often controls a format in a market. Because there is minimal
competition, corporate owners see little reason to promote formats they
control.
5. Some Formats Have Vanished or Have Moved to Weaker Signals
Because advertisers are so focused on the 25-54 demographic cell, formats
that attract listeners outside of that group have suffered. Formats such
as Easy Listening, Adult Standards, Jazz and even Contemporary Hit Radio
are heard on fewer stations now than they were ten years ago.
Working
in Commercial Radio Today You ask
me about what is going on in commercial radio. Ive been on the front
lines of commercial radio research for 15 years and I dont know
what the hell is going on. The biggest change Ive noticed, particularly
since the Telecom Act of 1996, is that commercial radio isnt a pleasant
place to work. -- Confidential; Director of Research; Major Commercial
Radio Research Company
Perhaps the
most telling trend within commercial radio is also the hardest the quantify.
For a number of people, commercial radio isnt an enjoyable place
to work.
The pressures of bottom-line performance and increasingly homogenous niche
formats have led to a feeling of boredom and lack of purpose.
When I talk to people in at commercial stations they are often running
scared. No one wants to take a chance because they might wind up with
egg on their face. And, you dont want to be the person who fails.
-- Confidential; President; Major Commercial Radio Syndication Company
Rather than trying to change commercial radio or considering working in
public radio, Listener Choice respondents report that many of the best
and brightest commercial radio leaders have left to work for dot.com companies
or in other fields. Commercial radio people speak of a hunger for new
ideas, new magnet personalities, and new ways to stop the drain in listening.
But, the current commercial radio system discourages risk-taking and unproven
ideas.
The climate
within commercial radio is "take no risks." Things have become
even more conservative over the past couple of years at the publicly traded
companies. Programmers know they have to meet the target numbers or they
are out of a job. -- Thom Moon, Director of Research and Development,
Duncans American Radio
Not
everyone involved with commercial radio feels negative about the changing
consolidated industry. Large station groups and local commercial station
clusters have been very successful at increasing commercial sales and
gaining a larger share of the advertising market.
Stock prices for publicly traded radio companies have exceeded the stock
market average. Several major group owners have raised large amounts of
investment capital through new stock offerings. Some people have become
rich in the new commercial radio environment.
Many of the leaders of commercial radio are not concerned about rising
commercial loads, the deterioration of audience, or increased format segmentation.
Gary Fries, President of the Radio Advertising Bureau feels that commercial
radio broadcasters will make adjustments before the situation becomes
too critical that the current problems within commercial radio as
part of the natural growth of a maturing industry.
Five Lessons
for Public Radio Stations The
biggest change upcoming that will affect both commercial and public radio
is direct satellite XM and Sirius .they will take major shares
away from terrestrial stations. I plan to buy a receiver as soon as they
become available. -- Neil Sargent, Founder and Former CEO of TM Century
Syndication; Former VP Affiliate Sales for Westwood One
There is no doubt that NPRs [satellite] channel will hurt local
NPR stations. If you are running a station in Erie, where youve
got limited audience already, the NPR satellite channel may really hurt
you. -- Jim Farley, Program Director at WTOP-AM
Public radio is uniquely positioned to take advantage of the new, consolidated
commercial radio industry. What can stations do to build on strengths
in the new environment, and to best position themselves for coming challenges?
1. Strengthen
your local programming and identity Public
radio" as a concept is different than "NPR." In Chicago,
"public radio" listeners tend to be younger and interested in
college and community radio stations as well. When they tune to NPR, it's
a place for older people. The challenge is in keeping both groups happy.
-- Torey Malatia/WBEZ
In many markets, public radio stations are now the only locally owned
and operated stations in town. Local service, such as news, events, personalities,
and ties to community become increasingly important as ways for public
radio to distinguish itself among all media. The "power of the mirror"
is one of radios greatest strengths listeners want to have
themselves reflected back to them, and the time is ripe to attract disenfranchised
commercial radio listeners who are looking for alternatives to the homogeneous,
bland, cluttered commercial programming that has become commonplace in
many markets.
2. Put
money and daring into local promotion Public
radio can make "stealth" maneuvers to gain greater market share
and bring value to listeners because commercial radio operators are very
tied up with the nuts and bolts of figuring out how to efficiently manage
their acquisitions. They are seldom concerned about what is happening
in public radio.
It takes money usually a lot of it to run an effective promotional
campaign. Most stations large or small cant afford
prime time television commercial, or running a month-long campaign of
bus advertisements. Good ideas are abundant, however, and cost nothing
to generate. Beef up your promotion/marketing budget, and then bring together
your best and brightest to decide how to spend it. Invite young people,
and representatives from other elusive listening groups to the discussion
about ways to dispel public radio stereotypes and put your station front
and center with a new and wider constituency.
3. Open
the gates for program experimentation
The promise
that some put forth several years ago that commercial consolidation would
free up broadcasters to experiment and develop new programming has dimmed.
In particular, Listener Choice indicates that it is unlikely that anyone
is planning to compete with public radio's news magazines anytime soon.
Too costly, too risky, and respondents feel that public radio already
does a good job providing listeners with a suitable "alternative."
Where public radio is vulnerable, according to some commercial radio broadcasters,
is in the area of talk programming. Talk radio is inexpensive to produce,
even with marquee hosts such as Rush Limbaugh. WKWX-FM, for example, is
a 24x7 Talk operation in Trenton, NJ featuring all local news and local
hosts, no syndicated programming, no tapes, no repeat programming. It
is reportedly grossing $13 million a year, and has, according to one commercial
radio consultant, never lost money. The revenue return from the talk format
may well allow commercial radio operators to find new magnet personalities,
perhaps at the expense of public radios audience.
The program many in public radio point to as a bright light in the programming
landscape is This American Life. Like many of success stories, TAL began
as a local, weekly "experiment" in Chicago with little budget
and lots of enthusiasm. The time is right for public radio gatekeepers
to make room on their schedules for real-time experimentation. Its
the best way to grow new ideas, new sounds, new voices.
4. Court
the fringe Program
decision-making based entirely on core listening is a bad habit. One doesnt
need a crystal ball to see the potential negative effects of focusing
exclusively on the tastes and preferences core listeners. There are key
lessons to be learned from the commercial broadcasters surveyed who feel
that theyve "gone to far" in serving their core audience.
You ignore your fringe audience, you pass up a prime opportunity for audience
growth.
5. Bring
outside talent into public radio
Like many
industries today, public radio is suffering from a dwindling stream of
fresh talent. This is another area where Listener Choice points to opportunity
for public radio. Public radios mission and commitment to broadcasting
ideals look mighty attractive to those who are fed up with the grind of
working in commercial radio, especially those who love the medium. Put
ads in commercial trade publications, and get word into the local pipeline
that you welcome radio talent.
This study tells me that we need to be true to our school.
George Boosey, Program Director, WBUR-FM
Perhaps most importantly, public radio should not to be complacent. The
past few years have been good for most public radio operators. But, public
radio's success will likely attract new competitors, as commercial radio,
Internet, and satellite companies search for new niches to exploit.
Public radio people often complain that the industry is becoming “too
commercial,” and these cautions may have merit. But, as much as
public radio has changed over the past twenty years, commercial radio
has changed even more. Now is time for public radio stations to be bold,
to innovate, to make current programming better, and to create new programming
that will not only serve the core audience, but attract new converts.