Orginal content... where is it then?

I was listening to Stan Park's interesting interview with Les Burrage this week. Les is the CEO of Roberts Radio and a very likeable man who has strong views about parts of the radio industry.  In this podcast, recorded at Maple Street Studios in London, he believes there is far less original content on the radio today, than there was 10 years ago. I have pondered about that a lot this week. There are hundreds of community radio stations right now often contributing fresh and interesting content, student radio is awash with talent and is often very original, listenership to radio is up across the decade, podcasts galore showcase tons of new thought provoking stuff (although is that radio?). There are more radio stations from The BBC, some DAB offerings are wonderful and the list goes on. He is right that there are less ILR stations around these days but most of those that have gone should not have been awarded in the first place. However, commercial radio has more listeners now even with fewer services so it must be doing something right. The industry is hardly suffering in this respect. 


RAJAR suggests that in areas where local names have disappeared, network shows are increasing audiences so while you could say original 'local' content could be reducing, the audience don't seem to mind. To me the excitement of radio is in discovering great content. I like to dip into music brands now and again but I mostly tune in for content and perhaps companionship alongside that. Presenters who engage me, shock me a little, inform and educate, bring colour to my grey world are always welcome to wrestle with the odd thought in my head. So if Les is talking about mainstream FM radio stations of the past, he might have a point but surely in this world, radio is much more than that. 


To change his view on this, where would you suggest we point Les to look? 

Hear the podcast with Stan Park right here 

Radio Bull..

I was on a plane for a couple of hours this morning, so I spent the time reading through all the PR statements of the last quarter (03/11).  I then compared those statements with the ones which dropped into my inbox this week. Honestly, if you find the time to do this please do. It is an eye-opener to say the least and underlines my campaign for an agreement to be put in place right across the industry on how numbers should be presented in PR terms.

This morning, I was chuckling so much that I nearly spilt my hugely expensive Easyjet coffee over the guy next to me. I read how just three months ago a certain breakfast jock was a hero, this time around he was not even mentioned. Could it be because they had gone down? We were then talking about share, this time share has disappeared. It's all about reach. Oh hang on, that's down too, but as we are up by 0.1% in hours, we have won. You have to hand it to these PR professionals because they are nothing short of brilliant. I also played this game myself so I am equally guilty for past transgressions but like everything else, we have to move on. It is not what people say, it is what they leave out that is confusing to so many. Today, for the first time in years, I read that we have a stunning afternoon show somewhere in our midst. Let's be honest, when did you last read a story about how good the afternoon show was doing? What have we missed? 

If this was TV you would see me now standing with my big hand up to the Lord almighty and the other on my blue peter badge. I promise from next quarter that I will ask a small team of smart, hardnosed, totally fair, unbiased individuals to a cheap lunch where we will read through all of the PR releases, review the numbers in reality while looking at everything in the round. Then we will award the UK RADIO PR BULLSHIT AWARD to the station or group that deserves it. I am all for being positive, but it is now positively ridiculous.  We have a world best radio product that attracts the love and loyalty of 92% of the population. We don't need to spin, we just need to be open and honest. 

Be brave. When it's good tell the world it's good, but when it's bad, just say so. We get it, we understand, we know you will come back strongly the next time. It's not your fault. We only look at Year on Year anyway - right? 

Rajar thoughts...

So another set of rajar numbers have come and gone.  PR firms and internal press darlings did their best to spin it all their way although it is rarely worth the effort. A lifetime in radio has taught me many things about audience figures.  The first is that audience numbers quarter on quarter, while interesting and occasionally heartstopping, can be a false picture. Secondly, the only figures worth looking at is year on year. Making decisions on anything else is just asking for trouble. It might give you a reason to go to the pub, but it is never a reason to panic.  

Advertisers will always use depressing numbers to make a few quid. They are generally quick to pay less and slow to pay more but it is the way in which we handle these numbers in PR terms that I find annoying. At one time it was just amusing. I think the time has come for action. We should all sign up to a code of practice. A simple template that displays the numbers year on year and in the same format, the same style. Either that, or we adapt www.rajarsmilies.com. A brilliantly simple way to cut through the crap. Just once I would love to read a station release that said "the numbers are bad, we deserved better and we can't comment as we are in the pub. When we sober up we will come back fighting'.  

When the numbers are up, stations go wild with claims of brilliance. That promotion worked, the marketing campaign hit home, that new presenter delivered for us. When it goes down, they think we won't notice when they swiftly switch their retric from quarterly figures to year on year numbers but it's good to know Dopey dwarfs under 35 are now listening for longer these days. The world has moved on, we know the game now and even though everyone plays it, most end up just looking stupid. The client knows the score, the press certainly do. Those who work in radio are not idiots.   

Anyone worth their salt will know that year on year is the only sensible measure worth forming a view on. This won't stop the John Plunkets of this world finding a snappy headline or two, but if we continue to mix and match at will, we simply devalue the currency. So you can look at what you like, panic if you want, celebrate if you must (and you should always find time to celebrate hard work) but audience figures generally have a slow build or a slow decline. For those programmers who have had a bad book this time around, just remember that talent is permanent, luck is not. I have rarely seen anything good come from a snap decision. 

Of course none of the above will stop the PD's who care from having a crap night.