Radio, it seems, has become like a utility: We take it for granted because it's always there. Like the lights, we don’t appreciate them until they go out.

Radio bashing is popular these days. Everyone wants to take a shot, because radio has been around so long and because they are  assuming -- wrongly -- that radio has lost its audience to television and the Internet.

True, new technology is changing everything. Craigslist and online news content dramatically altered the newspaper business years ago, and there's little sign of recovery. Yet in spite of the success of online audio, there is no evidence that it has dramatically altered terrestrial radio listening. Yes, radio listeners are sharing listening with online audio, but they have not abandoned radio the way so many readers abandoned the newspaper.

It seems to me that just about every time someone makes a case for radio becoming the next disappearing act, an event occurs that reinforces what cannot be done -- or at least, isn't being done -- by digital audio.

Last week's unfortunate events in Boston were a perfect example. A crowd of hundreds of thousands was dispersed following the bombings and told to go home immediately. Many left on foot, but most of Boston commutes by car, and those curious commuters turned to radio for their coverage. And for those who want to say, "Yeah, but they have their smartphones," let's not forget that cell service soon became unavailable -- most likely through overload, though some reported that authorities had service shut down to prevent the triggering of additional devices by cell phone.

There is no doubt that Boston radio stations rose to the occasion. Radio Ink has reported on many instances in which radio covered stories others just did not have. Because of great radio stations equipped with street reporters and large operations, radio in Boston stepped up the plate for Boston residents,  further reinforcing radio’s value.

I'm sure the residents felt a huge loss when their smartphones became useless, but there would have been fear and outrage if the radio had not been there to inform them.

Further reinforcing radio's value was Hurricane Sandy, earlier in the year, when residents were stranded for days, and, in some cases, weeks without power. No power to charge their mobile devices, no cable or Internet service in their homes, no power to mobile towers, no ability to deliver newspapers, no way to power the television.

It's time radio became recognized for what it offers. Though the digital era may usher in change, we must not forget that radio's distribution is deep, with an average of 5.5 units per home and distribution in virtually every car. We must also reinforce that we have backup transmitters at almost every radio tower site in America that can operate for days when power is down and battery-operated or car radios are the only form of mass communication in town.

There are only a few instances a year when the Internet and power are out and there is no way to charge a smartphone, yet those are the times people instinctively turn to their radios. You may be entertaining yourself on your iPad, but when you're driving and see a looming storm, a burning building, or even just a traffic jam, radio continues to be your lifeline.

Everyone, it seems, wants to imitate us, grab our audiences and our advertisers,  yet few are willing to build the teams necessary to cover a major tragedy in town or keep the staff available to inform a community -- and none can touch radio's ability to remain on the air when the power, the Internet, and other forms of communication fail.

One area we can improve as an industry is in our ability to sell our strengths in times when radio shines extraordinarily bright. Attacks from other sources will continue with the intent of stealing our audience relationships. New music or radio services from giants like Facebook, Twitter, Google, YouTube, and Apple will continue to try to erode our audience loyalty. We must not get complacent and assume they cannot make progress, or let any complacency extend to our own industry promotion efforts. When radio shines, we need to make sure the world knows, to remind them of what we already know. Radio is the lifeline for America.

Dear Readers:

My Editorial about AM/FM removal from cars has caused great concern in the radio industry. My mistake is that I put something in quotes from my recollections of the panel and the discussions afterward and my quote was inaccurate. Furthermore, my mistake was that I did not verify what was said by contacting the car companies directly for confirmation before running the story. As I received concerns from within the industry I looked at the video and learned my quote was inaccurate. My editorial stated two inaccuracies: I quoted, "AM and FM are being eliminated from the dash of two car companies within two years and will be eliminated from the dash of all cars within five years." The fact is, my recollection was incorrect and this was not said on stage as I reported.

So that I can abide by my history of journalistic integrity, here is exact and explicit documentation of what was said, where I thought I heard that quote, which I pulled from the video of the session.

Specifically, Thilo Koslowski, Gartner Research's VP and Practice Leader, Automotive, Car, ICT, Mobility stated:

"The changes we are talking about, they will actually really happen over the next couple of years. They are beginning to now, kind of bloom in certain areas where you have technology readily available like the Bay Area, but eventually you will see this everywhere. The challenge that I see is radio listening in the car consuming content is not going away but the way you do this and the platform that you use, platform meaning the technology that I use in order to get to that content will be very different."
Rhoads: "So what I want to know is if I own a radio station, and I'm not trying to put you guys on the spot, I really love what you're saying…"
Kowslowski: "Please do, please do."
Rhoads: "But if I own a radio station and I've got a lot of money invested in transmitters, or HD Radio or otherwise, and everything's gonna go to IP and you'rre gonna pull that AM and FM receiver to save twelve cents out of each car, I want to know it. Do you think that's likely to happen?"
Koslowski: "Absolutely. I think you will see that happening."
Rhoads: "When will that happen?"
Koslowski: "That will not happen over the next five to ten years, but past that absolutely."
Rhoads turns to audience: "Five to ten years, gang."
Koslowski: "No, but you will see already some changes happening over the next couple of years. Before it goes away completely that will take a little bit longer but think about it, how many cars can you buy today that have a cassette player? How many cars will you buy going forward that have a CD player? Not that many anymore. There are companies that actually are designing radios that don't have AM."
Rhoads: "Who are they?"
Koslowski: Shakes head.
Rhoads: "No no, who are they? You can’t bring it up without telling us who they are."
Koslowski: Shakes head.
Rhoads: "You can’t say it, it's confidential?"
Though I honestly believed I was accurately reporting what was said, the video reflects that I did indeed misquote what was said and that I clearly thought Mr. Koslowski has stated that the changes would occur within five to ten years when he actually said that it would not happen within that time from but sometime thereafter. His statement about changes happening over the next couple of years was also not as clear as I believed it to be.

My quote referencing two companies in two years was not an exact quote, and my reference to five years was inaccurate. What I wrote was based on my recollection of the session and conversations after the session. In hindsight, I should have waited until I could view the video and put the exact quotes and also should have not just assumed Mr. Koslowski was representing the automotive companies, which is why I should have contacted them.

Furthermore I made this statement based on my recollections from the panel and the behind the scenes discussion: "according to the Convergence panel, radio will be gone from new cars within five years." It was my opinion and was inaccurate.

My editorial has caused many within the radio industry much grief and therefore, I feel it best to rescind my original quote and issue an official apology. I care deeply about this industry. I've been a radio advocate for over four decades and I have always had radio's best interest at heart. My intent in the editorial was to give the industry a heads up about possible looming threats. I was deeply concerned because of my passion and concern for an industry and improperly measured the impact it would have. I truly regret any confusion or misinformation that resulted, and I sincerely apologize for the error.

There is good news in all of this, which is support from one major carmaker. GM issued a statement that they intend to keep AM/FM in their cars. See statement. Furthermore, Ford spoke to Editor Ed Ryan stating their support for radio. Both are a silver lining to this cloud.

Again, I apologize if I created problems or issues for anyone in this industry, which I dearly love.

 

CLICK HERE for an important update.

But I also felt vindicated. The moment I am referring to was during our Radio Ink Convergence conference, held earlier this week. For two days, digital experts talked about the surprising growth of online radio listening in the past 12 months. We heard statistics and facts about significant increases. We heard that the iPad is the new transistor radio and the smartphone is the new radio receiver. We heard that Google's YouTube is about to launch a radio service like Pandora, and that Apple is doing the same. So what I heard should have been no surprise, and in a way it wasn't. But it was a shock.
 
For a decade or more, I have been banging my fist on the table, telling radio that a moment will come that the industry must prepare for. Some listened, but most ignored it as some "out there" prediction from an overzealous futurist. Yet what I'm about to tell you is not a prediction, and it's not a guess. It's a fact. And it was a giant shock for the people who attended Convergence.
 
On the stage were three representatives of the automotive industry: one from Gartner Research, a highly respected tech research firm; one from the Silicon Valley offices of General Motors, where they design interactive experiences and new technology for their cars; and one who represents an industry association for the connected car. They were on a panel moderated by Buzz Knight of Greater Media, and they talked about the direction of in-car experiences, the digital dashboard, and what will be coming next to the dash of the car -- apps, Internet radio and audio in the car, and other things we knew were on the way. Then, suddenly, this statement was heard:
 
"AM and FM are being eliminated from the dash of two car companies within two years and will be eliminated from the dash of all cars within five years."
 
Gulp. Really? Did someone really just say that?
 
The panelists went on to say that young people don't use radio anymore, and automakers see no need to continue to put radios in the car. The kids want Pandora, Spotify, and other audio services, and if they want radio, they can get it on TuneIn or iHeart or a similar service.
 
I couldn't sit quietly anymore, so I went to the stage, apologized for interrupting, and started cross-examining the panel to find out if they really meant what they were saying. I was fuming inside, because it appeared they were working from incorrect assumptions. I wanted to find out if they were backed by solid data, or if they just believe "Nobody listens to the radio."
 
Probing The Research
When I questioned the panelists on their statements about the lack of youth listening, I asked if that was based on data, or is just a Silicon Valley perception. After all, Arbitron listening statistics don't support their claim, and they needed to know that. Though I've seen personal evidence that young people seem to be listening less, Arbitron numbers say that's not true.

The answer I received from the General Motors panelist is that GM uses youth consultants MTV Scratch, a unit of the giant media company Viacom that consults with brands about connecting with consumers and advises GM on trends. I was told there was extensive research to support the lack of interest in radio among youth and that GM researches everything to make sure they are giving consumers what they want. When I asked who did the research, I was told these are proprietary studies but clearly show trends saying young people no longer use radio.
 
Goodbye, AM & FM
Now that I'd established that GM doesn't believe that youth listen to radio, I wanted to probe the statement that two car companies are pulling AM and FM radios, looking for specifics. I was told that is proprietary information, and that which two companies won't have in-dash AM and FM couldn't be shared. All they would say is that it was decided a year ago, and it will be happening within two years. The change is already in the works. This wasn't a prediction that this might happen.It was stated as a fact by a top industry researcher. And it seems GM's Chevrolet could be one of those automakers.
 
Will Others Follow?
Before the conference I'd heard a rumor that Ford and Toyota both believe AM/FM should be left out of new cars, and that these big radio advertisers want cars to have online radio only so they'll be able to measure their advertising reach precisely, rather than relying on estimates. Frankly, all other advertising has gone in that direction. Why not radio? Another motivation is that these companies will be offering LTE service in their cars. So they may be doing this for the income from data consumption, much as Apple makes money for having these services on iPads.
 
We've known for a long time that radio is losing its in-car monopoly as other music services hit the dash. But until this moment, we didn't have confirmation from anyone in the auto industry that AM/FM receivers will be eliminated -- by at least two companies, and soon.

If this is true -- and these people have no reason to mislead us -- this is the most important "unofficial" announcement in history regarding the future of broadcast radio. Though radio broadcasts will be available through distributors like TuneIn and iHeartRadio, your competition won't just be in-market stations anymore. You will be facing a world full of competitors.
 
Many readers will be in denial after they hear this, saying it could never happen. One commenter on our website said AM and FM will not be removed from the dash in our lifetimes, while others raised the costs of bandwidth. Most who hear this will be tempted to ignore it.
 
Alert: Within two years, AM and FM will no longer be offered by two automakers. According to the Convergence panel, radio will be gone from all new cars within five years. Since the automotive companies work three years in advance, these decisions are being made now. It appears that radio really will be gone from the dash unless it's heard through an Internet radio distribution platform.

What can be done about this? It depends on which camp you're in. I happen to believe that this was inevitable, and I've been warning about it for a decade. Internet radio in car gives an exact measurement of listening, and that could be a good thing.
 
But I am deeply concerned about two things:
 
1. Are the car companies operating on incorrectly skewed research, or on the opinions of a youth-oriented consulting company? It's easy to say radio is dead, but the Arbitron numbers don't support it. GM and other car companies need to understand that if they are wrong, there will be consumer backlash if they remove AM and FM from cars. People love their radios. Young people don't often buy cars, and radio is clearly stronger with baby boomers and older adults.

2. Safety is a giant concern. AM and FM radio stays available when the power goes down. Cell towers and the Internet do not. You can't communicate with consumers in their cars during a storm or a mass evacuation when the signals cannot reach the car. Plus, there are still dead spots in America where there is no cell coverage. Is a car owner in a remote community to go without a car radio that works?

This is a slippery slope.

So what can you do?

1. You need to believe this is happening. It's now a fact, directly from the mouths of the people behind it.

2. You had better start working out a strategy to strengthen your brand relationship with your audience now so they'll still seek you out when they have tens of thousands of other choices.

3. You need to be on the TuneIn or iHeart platforms (probably both), and you need to be streaming.

4. If you want to fight this, you may want to consider starting with your local congressman. Congress may wish to consider legislation to require in-car receivers for safety purposes -- though I'm not big on forcing regulation on consumer preferences. But Hurricane Sandy made it clear once again that Internet and cell signals cannot be relied upon for safety, and radio is the only means of communication that stays on the air in an emergency. Removing it from cars might not go over well with consumers for that reason alone.

5. You may consider having a talk with your biggest advertisers, local car dealers, to ask them to offer their input to the car companies. Pressure can change things quickly -- but be careful; this approach could backfire.
 
Whatever you do, don't ignore this. As Bill Burton of the Detroit Radio Advertising Group always says, a car is a radio on wheels. We've owned the car, and traffic has been a friend to radio listening. But it appears that, unless something changes, the AM/FM signal to the car will soon be a thing of the past. Whether these same companies will still offer HD Radio needs to be addressed -- it may or may not be part of their plans. If it is, you'll be forced to upgrade to HD to reach people in new cars.

Most people at the conference found this very unsettling, and I suspect it will create quite a ruckus in our industry, forcing the issue and bringing more details to light. Let's hope so. We need all the facts so we as an industry can properly respond.

When Radio Ink turned 20 last year, I made a conscious decision to re-commit myself to radio. Though my head may be grayer, my goal has never really changed: to challenge broadcasters to grow, to consider new innovations, and not to accept the status quo. Since getting into the publishing business 20-plus years ago, I have wanted to help make the radio industry stronger, offer fresh ideas, and be a resource for those of you who own and operate radio stations. While all other print magazines in our sector have disappeared,Radio Ink remains committed. Of course we’re also very digital, with tablet editions, RadioInk.com, and Radio Ink Daily Headlines.

As you know, the radio industry is littered with trade publications, many of which serve a specific niche. They all provide value to the industry, and though we all tend to compete for some advertising dollars or for readers, each has a purpose and a good reason to exist. Technology is making this a very exciting time; today, any good thinker can put up a blog and be seen by huge numbers of people. There are many news outlets within our industry that essentially amount to an enthusiast with a keyboard. In fact, today most fit into that category, and many do a wonderful job.

An Era Of Publishing Giants

There was once an era of publishing giants in radio. A big gun like Radio & Records had a floor or two in a skyscraper in L.A. and offices in Nashville. Even Radio Ink at one time occupied an entire floor of an office building. But as the Internet became dominant, things changed, and life at those big operations began to falter. No longer was it practical to have a staff of 40 or 50 people. Most publications struggled to survive, and many fell. Fortunately, during that era Radio Ink was challenging radio to embrace new technology, and we had access to the great minds of the Internet as we built our Convergence conference (at that time called the Radio Ink Internet Conference). So we had some indication of what was ahead — in fact, Radio Ink offered the first free online news e-mail and website in radio.We trimmed our operations elsewhere so we could continue to produce a print product, which not only survived, but remains viable today.

Giant Press Teams

Today very few radio news outlets have large teams of reporters to gather the news. A large staff isn’t as necessary when serving a niche of the industry. But staff is still crucial for a publication offering serious news coverage and volumes of data. Since I made a new commitment to radio, it was my goal to seek out strategic relationships and acquisitions to strengthen my own platform and own more than one of the “big gun” publications. After R&R went away, there only three big heritage publications left: Radio Ink, Radio Business Report, and Inside Radio. A research study we recently commissioned from Harker Research indicated that these three brands remain dominant in daily readership. Since Inside Radio is owned by Clear Channel, it became clear to me that my only acquisition target was Radio Business Report. Discussions began.

Targeting A New Life

In 2011, Jim and Cathy Carnegie, the founders of Radio Business Report, made a decision that they would sell the publication when they hit the 30-year mark. Both had worked 16-hour days over many long years, and the idea of the beach, a drink with an umbrella, and life on a golf course sounded very appealing. Plus, Jim wanted to go back to his roots and do some hands-on work with stations again. Jim contacted me at that time and our talks continued, but everything came to a halt when Cathy died suddenly of a brain aneurysm. Only slowly, as Jim became able to tear himself away from his grief, did discussions resume.

Two Directions

By now you’ve seen the announcement that this very strategic acquisition has been completed. Today RBR is part of the Streamline team, and today we offer the industry two of the big gun publications in radio. Each will remain independent. We won’t share stories. RBR and Radio Ink serve the same industry, but each serves a separate purpose. Radio Ink has always been a manager’s tool, helping owners, managers, sales managers, and sellers with strategic ideas to improve their businesses. Our news leans toward solution-based thinking, and “What would I do if this happened to my station?” RBR leans toward the financial sector, offering deep data and deep analysis. They “follow the money.” Both publications play critical roles.

Of course, RBR also has TVBR, which puts Streamline in the television/cable reporting business as well. TVBR is widely read and respected. RBR-TVBR offers free daily news, but also offers deep analysis and detail for operators and investors, available only to subscribers. Though it’s already a huge success, we intend to expand the content with more white papers and reports, and deep intelligence to help broadcasters make more money, understand trends, and make sound decisions. Radio Ink, meanwhile, will enhance the depth of its commitment to the hands-on operator. Both publications will carry our passion and commitment to this industry.

Committed To Radio

As a business founder who shows up at my desk and stays there for 16 hours most days, I too know the day will come when I have to part with the dream I’ve built. At our closing with Jim Carnegie, I realized that it must be a bittersweet parting —sweet with dreams of retirement, travel, and a different brand of fun, and sweet because Jim’s consulting practice will afford him the time to influence stations and companies. But bitter because he is parting from the team he built, most of whom have been with him 15 years, 20 years, or more. He remains passionate and committed to radio.

Offering Kudos

I want to encourage you to give your heartfelt thanks to Jim Carnegie for his 30 years of devotion to radio. Love him or not (he tends to have strong opinions and a no-BS attitude), he gave our industry a great brand in RBR-TVBR, and gave you 30 years of his life. Sadly, Jim and Cathy never got to realize their dream of retiring together. But Jim, in his normal headstrong, disciplined manner, is hell-bent on living up to the commitment he made to Cathy, which I think is admirable.

Practicing High Standards

At our closing, I learned of all the companies that tried to get RBR. Jim could have sold it to anyone, including a giant radio company that chased it, a competing trade publication, and a large, well-funded start-up. At the end of the day, he lived up to his own standards: to make sure his loyal team was in good hands, make sure the publication remained independent so it would never be putting company press releases before real news, and making sure RBR went to someone full of passion for the industry. Jim and Cathy had no children; RBR was their child, and it was their intention to have its new adoptive parents have similar standards.

An Industry We Love

Though it’s no secret to Jim or anyone else that we have often disagreed about style, one thing we never disagreed on was our passion for an industry we love. We both started our careers on the air at a young age. I’m honored that Jim Carnegie made the decision to place the future of his enterprise in our hands, and I can assure his readers that we’re not here to change it, to cut its staff and trim expenses, or to strip RBR-TVBR of its resources. We’re here to operate it, grow it, and add it to our platform, to offer viable solutions and give our readers and advertisers two of the big guns in the radio trade press.

As my grandmother used to say, “This is a red letter day.” Indeed, it is cause for celebration!

You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. You put radio in Sprint smartphones, and we’ll make it worthwhile by placing the weight of the radio industry behind it. $15 million a year for three years. The radio industry’s deal to promote Sprint and the NextRadio app seems to me like a giant win for radio. Why?

First and foremost, no one really knows what will happen when you put that many smartphones in the market with a radio built in. Will it be used? Will radio replace streaming listening? Will radio see an increase in listening overall?

There’s bound to be a bump in radio use, and that’s a good thing. If I have any concern at all, it’s that Arbitron’s PPM measurement won’t capture listening over headphones, the way most smartphone audio is heard. Still, more radio listening — and more response to advertisers — even if some of that listening is not recorded, can only be good.

But better still is that we, the people of radio, have a giant opportunity to show what radio can do to drive adoption of phones with radio on board. It’s a giant test to show how radio performs — and proof is critically important today.

Last, this will gain the attention of other phone manufacturers, which may also look to radio to boost their sales by committing to put radio chips in their phones as well.

Should radio continue to push for other smartphones with radio built in? Absolutely. Now is the time for radio to step up to the plate. This is a brilliant strategy, a reasonable quid pro quo, and a chance to keep radio in the hands of every American.

Congratulations again to Jeff Smulyan for his leadership and to the RAB’s Erica Farber and her board for making this commitment happen. Only good things can come from this.

Yesterday while I was sitting at my desk, my cell phone made an alert noise (even though the volume was turned down) and an Amber Alert flashed on the screen. That reminded me of the need to put radio on mobile phones, not only so radio can entertain, but so alerts can go out to phones even when cell towers are down or not functioning, as during Hurricane Sandy.

Coincidentally, Ed Ryan yesterday broke the story that Sprint had announced that several models of Android and Windows smartphones will be enabled over the next few years with FM radio chips and the NextRadio platform, developed by Emmis Communications.

Though Sprint has already had offered some phones with FM chips in the past (I had it on my HTC Evo two years ago), this is the first time FM will be offered on a wide variety of devices.

Why is this a big deal? As I have written in the past, radio transmitters work when the power is down and when cell phone towers are not working. An FM chip can send emergency messages to all enabled phones during a storm, a power outage, or a national emergency. The cell companies can't do that without placing expensive generator plants at all cell tower locations, a virtual impossibility.

Additionally, some claim the carriers cannot possibly keep up with ever-growing bandwidth consumption, and this will allow radio listening on a phone without the need for streaming. Phones may soon be able to transparently switch between streaming and a local radio signal, saving both bandwidth and battery life.

Radio's big win here is that now we have expanded our potential reach. We're in 100 percent of cars and now on more smartphones. Though it's only Sprint so far among the major carriers and won't include Apple devices, this sends a giant pro-radio signal to the marketplace, offering Sprint a competitive advantage until others catch up. After all, radio listening remains strong, and we will see increases in listening with the convenience of a radio in the pocket.

Will others follow? Hard to tell, but this is great news and a giant leap for radio, thanks to the leadership of Emmis CEO Jeff Smulyan, who has made this his top mission for the industry.

Last year Radio Ink and Dick Orkin's Radio Ranch made radio spots available to put pressure on wireless providers and consumer electronics manufacturers to offer radio in cell phones. Many stations are still running these spots, and they continue to be available here.

Though the battle to be on all mobile phones continues to be a lofty goal, congratulations are in order to Jeff Smulyan and his team.

Eric Rhoads

Discussion boards have been buzzing with the news of Arbitron's being acquired by Nielsen. What does it mean for radio?

I wasn't sure what to think at first. After all, Nielsen went into the radio ratings business and only stuck with it for two years before they realized the industry would not embrace it. It wasn't for lack of trying -- Lorraine Hadfield put her heart and soul into it. Yet they were using a paper-diary methodology in an increasingly digital world. The promise of PPM was a lot to go up against.

It was also difficult to get radio companies to pay for two services, even with the prospect of eventually abandoning Arbitron. But Nielsen clearly still sees radio as a powerful place to invest, and its purchase of Arbitron makes perfect sense.

The Advertiser Perception
Though Arbitron has been a powerhouse and has been before the agency world for decades, there is no doubt that Nielsen holds a highly esteemed position in the minds of advertisers. My guess is that its re-entry into radio will send a message: If radio is interesting enough for Nielsen to invest in it, there must be something to this radio thing. My guess is that Nielsen will bring the radio industry greater credibility with advertisers.

So should Nielsen keep the Arbitron name? I think it should become Nielsen/Arbitron to make sure everyone recognizes that Arbitron is now a Nielsen division. It benefits them, benefits radio, and strengthens the Arbitron brand.

But what about measurement techniques? What about PPM?

Special Meetings With Broadcasters
If I were running this newly acquired division of Nielsen, I'd say the first step is simply to be all ears. In spite of significant improvements over the years, Arbitron is still perceived by many in radio as a necessary evil. There are decades of pent-up anger over unresolved issues, mostly based on strong-arm practices from years or even decades ago. Though today it's a different Arbitron, there's no doubt that old wounds heal slowly.

The first step, therefore, needs to be a series of meetings with radio groups and owners at all levels and market sizes -- not just the big guns. There should be high-level meetings with leaders in formats that feel PPM has disadvantaged them (Hispanic, Urban, Talk, etc.).

Share Your Voice Now
Now is the time for radio to speak up again, loudly, about the issues related to PPM: how it has damaged some formats, concerns about numbers dropping sharply after first-hour listening (due to uncontrolled exposure to radio), how PPM has resulted in lower prices for radio across the board, and a bevy of other issues. Rather than ignoring the elephant in the room, the air needs to be cleared and radio overall needs to feel the issues are being resolved.

I think our industry is exhausted, and has largely given up on discussing the PPM. But these concerns are still in the back of our minds, and need to be properly addressed. Nielsen should also meet with people like Ed Christian and others who have some valid ideas to make PPM stronger. This is the time for every operator and every manager in radio to speak up and share your true feelings about what you feel needs to be addressed.

We also need to see new life breathed into the Arbitron Radio Advisory Council to make sure the industry is fully represented and that Nielsen will be listening and, more importantly, responding. Frankly, Nielsen needs to understand the vitriol that still surrounds the PPM and make sure they can resolve the issues to radio's satisfaction.

Solving Radio's Giant Problem
It is in Nielsen's best interest, as it was in Arbitron's, to keep radio thriving and healthy. (Some would argue that radio doesn't need Arbitron, but I'll not address that today.) At our Forecast conference last month, it was revealed that radio has a serious credibility problem in the agency community, based on two primary issues: 1) the lack of evidence that radio actually works and 2) the belief that radio is no longer relevant in a digital world.

Nielsen has the brand strength and credibility to conduct an in-depth study of radio's viability as an industry -- something I wrote about a couple of weeks ago. Radio needs to invest in proving our ability to drive business, as other media has done, so firm metrics can be provided to advertisers. This is an excellent opportunity for Nielsen to help radio get to the next level. 

Partnership, Not Forced Relationship
Finally, Nielsen needs to understand that it's in their interest to create a real partnership with radio. The company needs to make sure the culture of Nielsen/Arbitron is about making sure radio remains successful. (I'm not talking about keeping numbers falsely high, but working with us to develop the tools needed to take us to the next level.) Talk is cheap, and action is what radio needs from the new Nielsen/Arbitron.

Under New Management
I'm heartened by Nielsen's acquisition of Arbitron. They have an opportunity to strengthen radio, to give radio more credibility, and to move us into the digital era both literally and perceptually. But most of all, I'm encouraged by the fact that Nielsen has a history of listening, and my guess is that they will truly transform Arbitron. Though I've been encouraged by the actions taken by the Arbitron team over the past couple of years, it's still been like that restaurant you tolerate and keep going back to, but always wish was better. The "Under New Management" sign hanging out gives us all hope that the service and the food will improve. 

Time is of the essence, though. Quick action, quick listening, and bold actions are what will prove to radio that Nielsen is truly serious about making Arbitron the partner it should be.

As America mourns the tragedy in Newtown, I was curious how radio would respond to the crisis. Thanks to apps like TuneIn and iHeartRadio, I was able to listen to stations in the Connecticut area. (Here's how Cox Media Group in Connecticut covered the
events as they unfolded.)

To my surprise, during my brief sampling of music stations, I heard upbeat air personalities playing music as if nothing had happened. Talk stations raised the issue, of course, but I heard little local talk programming, which is why I had tuned in. I wanted to hear the local perspective.

Frankly, I heard much more mention of the events on nationally syndicated talk, and even during some non-issues talk programming. For instance, weekend computer guru Kim Komando acknowledged the tragedy at least once each quarter hour, saying she was trying to have a normal broadcast while America grieves. It was appropriate.

What are stations to do in times like these? I'm sure programmers across the country are wondering if their normal glib or comic tone is appropriate. Frankly, listening to some stations where cheerful air personalities rambled on about the music felt out of sync with America's grief. Especially stations in Connecticut.

And of course, one wonders about automated or voicetracked stations. Were they playing the hits as if nothing was wrong?

These are moments when it's not easy for radio, during a tragedy that has touched all of America. What's the right tone for a music station? As a former programmer, I'm not sure what I would have done back then, but today I believe frequent acknowledgment is important, along with a slightly somber or more measured tone. Listening to upbeat DJ breaks just feels wrong somehow.

To their credit, loads of stations are showing their true community spirit, including many outside of the Connecticut area, raising funds to help the affected families, having their communities sign cards, etc. This is where radio shines, using local relationships to help.

When I was a program director, I used to say my title was really "program reflector" because my job was to make the station a reflection of the community. It is that reflection that makes us more than just another media property; it makes us part of the family. Clearly, this past few days has been a time for radio to reflect, in some way, the grief felt in all communities across America.

For decades, the RAB and others have preached that selling is about being customer-centric. We've all heard it, we've all been trained to interview clients about their needs, and there is not one broadcaster on earth who does not know this to be true. So why is radio not getting its fair share of ad dollars nationwide? I've discovered what is probably the major reason.