A couple days later, the always charming Angela Perelli retweeted my little message, indicating her high gush factor about this story for air talent.

So I read it again. And she was right, and so was C.C. for sending it out into the Twittersphere to begin with.

So here’s the link and some commentary about why anyone doing radio – or anyone who simply wants to be memorable for whatever the reason – could benefit from the thoughts of Jeff Haden.

Here’s his 6-pack of memorability tips:

1. Don’t see. Do. So the idea is to not just talk about what interests you but to do it. For radio people, this is fundamental because it’s easy to do your basic prep (i.e., watching a lot of TV, doing your Internet routine), discuss it in your charming way, and call it good. But as Haden reminds us, opinions are essentially farts in the wind. No one remembers them. But your experiences are what matter.

It got me thinking about George Plimpton, the intellectual, erudite author who actually did incredibly, crazy things that he then wrote about. Paper Lion was his book about actually joining the Detroit Lions’ practice sessions (even though he had neither the talent or the size to play pro football). It made for a much more interesting book (and movie) than if he had  just hung out with the team and interviewed the players about what practicing in 90 degree weather feels like. In fact, Plimpton did these types of stunts in a variety of sports, helping to make him famous. Which leads you to…

2. Do something unusual. So that’s Plimpton again. But it could also be any of you on the air. One of his suggestions – work at a coffee shop for a day – could be a great ongoing series about spending a day in your audience’s shoes. The experience alone would make for great radio, not to mention broadening the content and relevance of your show.

3. Embark on a worthless mission. As adults, we become conditioned to doing things that make sense. But as Haden points out, doing things that most rational people don’t do – hang out with a cop on a Friday night or drive eight hours to see a band or a sports team – are truly memorable experiences that will very like make for memorable shows.

Like sitting on a billboard until that great rock band decides to play your town. Or stay on the air until your beloved baseball team finally wins a game. (Right, Bob Rivers?)

Steve Dahl’s “disco demolition” was in that same vein. You start a little fire, and the next thing you know, your “worthless mission” becomes legendary.

4. Embrace a cause. This is where the caring piece comes into play because when people see that you mean it, it’s better than any cash giveaway. Remember Imus in the glory days at WFAN? All year long, he was the total curmudgeon. But one day a year, he embraced S.I.D.S. (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) because GM Joel Hollander’s daughter, Carly, tragically lost her life to that disease. It made for incredible radio.

And I think back to those halcyon days when radio personalities on FM were just getting established. Henry “The Bull” Del Toro (pictured), the agent provocateur on FM99, seemed to gravitate to these things. Maybe they were simply ratings stunts, but living in a cage to raise money for the local SPCA was indicative of the crazy things Henry did to support a great cause.

5. Let other people spread the word. Haden notes that good news travel fast, and that bragging is gauche while good deeds become viral. This is especially true in our modern social age where people simply love to tell others about wonderful events and other good things. As social media consultant Greg Verdino reminds us, “Everybody in the audience has an audience.” True radio stars shine through.

6. Get over yourself. Haden’s charge here is to stop trying to be perfect, take chances, accept your faults, and go for it. As he notes, “…people will definitely remember you because people who are willing to fail are rare…and because people who display grace and humility, especially in the face of defeat, are incredibly rare.”

You have to admire personalities like Dennis Miller and Mike Huckabee, guys who have had big-time success elsewhere but who are taking their shot with radio – and winning. In local markets, personalities who are willing to put it out there would be most welcome. Sadly, the tight, conservative nature of the business over the last decade or so has trickled into the air studio. I know I may get knocked for saying it (or accused of being part of the problem), but a little more danger and risk from morning and personality shows wouldn’t hurt.

For radio to stand out, to be memorable, we are going to need personalities who are true risk-takers and gamblers. The Janet Jackson affair put a chill into radio and our teeth are still chattering many years later.

At a time when radio’s share of voice – literally – is being challenged by new and different digital competitors, remembering what got our personalities and brands to the dance is a start. I think if you look at some of the biggest and best shows, DJs, and stations in 2012, it is less about the music they’re playing, and more about how their people connect, inspire, surprise, and stand out.

Are you memorable?

EMAIL RECIPIENTS: CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE VIDEO

Now I know there have been other big stories this week that may have captured your attention – the hottest recurrents of the summer, that clever “all polka” stunt in Colorado City, and ratings results in markets where half the stations’ numbers are redacted.  So put those distractions aside because this release from the RAB is a news item that should be a central discussion topic at every station in America from New York City to Nantucket to Nome.

According to the RAB report, while spot sales were flat in Q1, sales revenues attached to digital assets jumped 10%.  (Network dollars posted an increase of 8%).  And yet we know, thanks in part to guys like Gordon Borrell, that the radio industry is leaving millions of digital dollars on the table.

In the midst of Jacobs Media delivering its Techsurvey8 findings – now in format installments over the next few weeks – doesn’t it just make sense for the industry to finally devote more time, attention, and resources to bolstering its digital strategies?

Many radio companies are still flailing around in the digital space, chasing the “flavor of the month,” losing salespeople to Pandora and Google, or somehow still in denial about what’s taking place in the media world. 

Radio’s not alone.  According to a new survey from the CMO Council, less than 10% of companies say they have a “highly evolved” digital marketing strategy.  Overall, 200 marketing mavens from around the world took part in this new piece of research.  And more than a third say their digital strategy is essentially tactics minus strategy.  And yet, all that ad money is out there – and it will only multiply from this day forward.

Stations and brands need a digital strategy in order to effectively compete in this space.  That was Seth Godin’s position in Meatball Sundae, and it has never been more true.  A digital hierarchy is paramount in order to truly understand the space and profit from it.

Interestingly, stations are still spending money to find out “Who’s the concert authority?” or whether “Baby, I Love Your Way” is a little burned.  When it comes to investing in where the audience is moving in digital and how brands can better serve them online, socially, and on mobile devices, the dollars dry up.

Techsurvey8 and studies like it are starting points, providing a digital hierarchy from which strategies can be built.  But to truly benefit from the surge in digital ad dollars, it will require more comprehenvise research, consulting, strategies, and tactics – the same tried and true formula that built radio brands, garnered ratings, and produced revenue decades ago.  That same series of disciplines is required in the digital space.  In fact, it’s even more paramount, given the level and scope of the competition.

How much money in R&D, personnel, and other resources has your company spent toward these endeavors to date?  And how much has been devoted to learning more in 2012 and beyond?  That’s a question that every Board of Directors should be asking as we head into the summer.

Digital strategies are the cornerstone of what we’ve put together here at Jacobs Media, starting with our Techsurveys, our mobile initiatives, and the presence of a true social media visionary, Lori Lewis.  Even the “false positive” of a big political year shouldn’t deter our attention from focusing on that big money spigot labeled “digital.”

We’ve got to figure this out.

It’s time to walk the walk.

For radio people, however, this is something of a leap.  That’s largely because most of us were brought up in the “School of Theatre of the Mind” where we learned that our words were more important than the pictures shown on TV and in print.  Legends from Stan Freeberg of yesteryear to Nick Michaels in modern times have reinforced the power and influence of words.

Of course they still matter, but today, the world is totally visual – it’s in color, it’s carbonated, and it’s instantaneous.  Radio needs to participate in this revolution.  In June, I’ll be moderating a panel at the world famous Morning Show Boot Camp in Miami called “Must See Radio” that will focus on the importance of visual tools for radio people and stations.

And that takes us to the social sphere and the ability to be able to communicate feelings and attitudes on Facebook, Twitter, and other channels – even though we’re in the radio business.

The use of a great picture can stir up conversation, kindle an incredible wave of emotions, and help stations and personalities build their brand images by connecting with the real people who enjoy them.  On social media, there is a lot of information in our feeds.  An emotional, compelling picture allows us to crack through and tap into our audiences’ true feelings and attitudes.

A case in point occurred last weekend over the Memorial Day holiday.  Many stations simply posted pictures laden with flags and soldiers (as did this blog).  There’s nothing wrong with that, but like Seth Godin’s stance in Purple Cow, there’s nothing remarkable doing what everyone else does.

Then there’s WCSX’s Paul Buck.  He posted this picture on the station’s Facebook page, along with a compelling question for station fans.  You can see the result below:

There’s a reason why Instagram got their billion dollars, why Pinterest is growing, and why you’ve stopped carrying a camera in favor of your smartphone.  It’s a visual world, and those who take the time to make smart emotional connections with pictures stand to be the winners.

Click.  Share. Comment. Connect.

P.S. By the way, if you and your team does a great job with video for your show or station, please email them to me: fred@jacobsmedia.com We are looking for great examples of radio people that use visuals well.

We will be back on Tuesday with a new post.

Along the way, regular reader Mike Anthony has been a regular contributor via the “Comments” section of the blog.  Unsolicited, he sent me the following open letters last week – one to Pandora and the other to broadcast radio.  Given how Pandora continues to insert itself into the news – goading and challenging radio - here are two very interesting “takes” on how both might benefit from their newfound and historical success.

Dear Pandora, The question that has been on every tongue at any and all gatherings of broadcasters: “Is Pandora radio?” The most recent answer based on research – not opinion – is both “yes” and mostly “no.” According to Jacobs Techsurvey8, even Pandora users are split as to whether the Internet pure play should be considered “radio” – 43% “yes” – 49% “no.”  You boast that you’re a new kind of radio. (What does that even mean?) It’s my opinion the question is irrelevant. The questions I ask myself are, “Why does Pandora want to be radio” and “Why doesn’t Pandora want to be Pandora?” Chris Spiek of the Re-Wired Group said in a Forbes article recently, “Branding experts and customers agree that the world doesn’t need another ‘me too’ car, music site or energy drink. Imitation may be flattering but it isn’t inspiring.”  To quote Mike McCue, Flipboard co-founder, “I’d rather compete with 1,000 copycats than 1,000 innovators.” Stanford Professor Steve Blank talks about the four paths of startups. Pandora, see if you recognize your path. Did I miss the research data that said radio listeners are clamoring for “a new kind of radio”? Seth Godin is famous for telling business to invent a new category so you can own it. Create your own path. Apple is the best example of this but the Internet has many more. So why would you want to compete in a category that’s full? Not to mention a category that many think is irrelevant or at least less relevant every day with all the new digital choices people have now. It’s my belief that to succeed, you obsess over your customers and don’t divert your focus toward the competition. It’s clear Pandora branding doesn’t match the Pandora user perceptions. Pandora, your users have defined you and I’ve not heard one person say that “Pandora is a new kind of radio.” You are what many wish radio should be. The good news is – again according to Techsurvey8 – nearly half of those who listen to Pandora believe your music is better than the stuff they hear on commercial radio. From a business POV, you have a very unique and engaging sales story and it’s not commodity ad sales. You can hyper-target active listeners in specific zip codes and zero in the local business message with documentable ROI which traditional radio has not found a way to do. You have so many unique qualities and benefits in product, service and sales that are so… Pandora. Imagine Pandora-like experiences or partnerships with Pandora-esque products and services (think Fab.com – Thrillist.com) where you charge a premium. Pandora, be proud of what you are… celebrate your uniqueness, your individuality. You own a category and you don’t seem to realize it. You have risen to the rarified air of a one name brand. No explanation necessary. When people say Pandora, it’s understood. I have my own Pandora incubator, my teenage son. To him, Pandora is about music discovery. Now that’s a personally relevant benefit. That’s “what’s in it for him.” Whether it’s classics or new music… what’s new music to him, he finds on Pandora. Pandora, you are succeeding because you are different than radio in ways that are very relevant to those who love you as Pandora, and NOT because you are a new kind of radio. Stop telling people what you want to be and hear your users when they tell you what you are to them. Facebook never said they were better than MySpace… they just were in personally relevant ways. So be the best Pandora you can be… not a better-than-radio Pandora. Remember in the movie Social Network when Sean Parker told Zuckerberg to “Drop the ‘the’… just Facebook”? Drop the “radio”… just Pandora. Regards, Mike

Dear Radio, The question that has been on every tongue at any and all gatherings of broadcasters: “Is Pandora radio?” The question I ask myself is, “Why does radio care what Pandora calls itself?” One of the things I learned early on in my tenure at The Research Group and then spent many years teaching others was the concept of strategic warfare…more specifically the rules of defense. How do you defend when under attack? One of the keys is to “know the difference between useful and useless attacks and allow useless attacks.” According to Jacobs Techsurvey8 – even Pandora users are split but leaning “NO” as to whether the Internet pure play should be considered “radio” – 43% “yes” – 49% “no.” Radio let Pandora miss-brand themselves. Also according to Techsurvey8, of the main reasons why they’re AM/FM listeners, favorite songs and DJs are on top of the list. Pandora lets algorithms pick the music and they have no talent. They are not human, yet that’s what listeners want in their local radio station. Radio, let Pandora be a science project. It’s time for self-examination. The very first rule of defensive marketing warfare is defending what’s important to the base target user. For radio, that would mean re-investing in talent and listener research because this is no time for guessing what consumers want. The key is about radio remembering what radio is – what radio does best – and that’s to serve listeners. In order to do that, we need to know them on a more personal level than ever before. Radio seems to have lost focus on its purpose. It often appears to be focused on maximizing shareholder value, selling things and getting ratings. Radio’s real purpose is to inform, entertain and provide solutions for listeners. Shareholder value maximizes, things sell, and ratings happen as a byproduct of listener obsession and satisfaction. You have important, relevant emotional characteristics that Pandora does not. The biggest advantage is that listeners trust you. So, the important question to be asked is, “Is radio losing that trust? Trust is earned every day. Radio is not sharing with or touching listeners like it once did. How can we be a constant companion when there is no one on the air, no one replying to emails, or even answering the phone? Back announcing is not sharing. The less we share relevant information or make them laugh, the less emotional connection there is. When we lose relevance, we lose emotion, we lose trust and we become more Pandora-like and the relationship withers. In the words of Gary Vaynerchuk, “If you’re not entertaining or have expertise you’ve got no shot.”  This is also how radio will lose the dashboard. Warren Buffett just invested $142M cash in a newspaper company serving 63 markets in the South! I thought newspaper was dead? Buffett said “In towns and cities where there is a strong sense of community, there is not more important institution that local paper.” This is exactly what people should be saying about radio. Like I’ve said before – everything old is new again. Your future success will depend on how many people decide to interact with you. Listeners will continue to engage with you if the content/reasons are relevant and personal (what’s in it for them?). What are you doing every day to provide solutions to problems and improve people’s lives? When you have real answers to these questions, only then will the platform to connect on matter. This is how to stay relevant in cars. Are you going to be neutralized by the Internet or use it in combination with your well earned advantages? Bottom-line for radio: stop worrying about Pandora. If you need to look over your shoulder then keep your eye on Facebook, Amazon and Apple. They are changing your listeners’ worlds. Best of luck. Sincerely, Mike

So what’s your two cents?  How do you see the radio/Pandora wars?  Please leave your comments below.

And the question revolved around an old theme – ROI.  It seems that in these times of rapidly depleting resources – human and financial – the same questions continue to be asked about whether social media has definable, measurable value.

How do broadcasters at the local level or in the corporate corner office determine whether any “extra-curricular” activities have demonstrable worth – streaming, podcasts, social media, mobile apps, and the countless other “channels” that demand time, staffing, and attention?

On the social media front, the question becomes even murkier because broadcasters don’t even own these assets – their Facebook pages and their Twitter accounts.  We’ve discussed the “rent/own” relationship in this space before.  When you consider that radio only controls certain fixed assets – the on-air sound, websites, databases, podcasts, etc. – is expending time and effort on the social media stage worth it?

So here’s my response…

Let’s say that you were invited to a party where the guests promised to be some of the city’s biggest, most important advertisers and civic leaders.  Would you go?  Would you even go out of your way to make sure you had a great look and were prepared with ideas, questions, thoughts, and conversation-starters?

Keep in mind that the chance of writing any business at the party is probably non-existent.  This is simply a social gathering where you have a chance to chat with some of the biggest players in town.

Of course, you’d go.  Because the opportunity to introduce yourself and strike up relationships and network with these people is so powerful that you’d definitely invest the time.  Essentially, what’s the ROI on this gathering?

Would it be any different if I told you that the party guests would be mostly comprised of some of your biggest and most loyal listeners?  These are some of your core followers who simply like your station, many of whom are connected to their own fan and friend networks of significant size.  So, if they get to know you better and like you even more, they’re very likely to tell many others.

And I’d bet that if you came armed with some entertaining ideas, questions, facts, or even pictures, you’d share them with this group – and then maybe stay around to talk and even laugh about their reactions to your content.  You could be the life of your own party.

So if it’s that easy to hang out, converse, and engage at a social gathering – and some of us do this much better than others – why then is this practice of doing it digitally often debated in broadcast circles?  Why do radio people argue about the need to acknowledge important, supportive, and nice “party guests?”

Why do some seldom show up, or spend more time talking about themselves than engaging with others?  We all know what happens when a party guest is a boor, is self-centered, or simply ignores everyone in the room.  Over time, he’s “uninvited” from future parties because he just doesn’t get it.

Thus, social media.  And the station-level discussions that we have tend to revolve around priorities.  At our client digital strategy sessions, where Lori Lewis and I walk into station conference rooms packed with key staffers, we frequently spend time discussing digital goals.  Too often, station staffers – and their parent companies – struggle with the real purpose of why they’re engaged in digital and/or social in the first place.

Maybe it would be helpful to think about success through a different lens – as a new version of the Three R’s.  In this case, ratings, revenue, and relationships.

Stations need to decide which of these is truly desirable as a byproduct of their social efforts because it may be possible to attain a percentage of all three – maybe just not at the same time.  Lori might argue that without relationships, the ability to attain higher ratings and increased revenue is stunted.  Too often, station managers are at odds with each another but what’s most important socially for their brands.

But the fact is, you could dedicate your social efforts to making money (deals, web traffic, and “pinballing” listeners to your contests or sales promotions), and it might work.  In the process, however, you might miss something very important – the essence of why social media exists in the first place.

Or you could simply use social to drive ratings.  Keep promoting your contests, giveaways, and morning show guests – at specific times – and hope that your Facebook and Twitter communities take you up on these appointments, offers, and promotions.

Or you could focus on creating stronger bonds with your most important and engaged listeners via social relationships.  But what good does that actually do you?

So, what’s the goal?  Is it ratings, revenue, or relationships?

Clearly, ratings lead to revenue (at least a lot of the time).  And you can see that depicted in the diagram below.  And sometimes the reverse is true, if in fact, revenue/profits are plowed back into supporting the station’s content, marketing, or research – rather than just being thrown to the bottom line.

But then there are relationships.  And while ratings and revenue don’t really improve relationships, the opposite often works, albeit indirectly (hence the clouds).  That’s also why the arrows leading from relationships to revenue are hashed.  None of us knows precisely how engagement and trust translate into higher ratings and more sales – but we know that in our life dealings, this is often the way it works.  Yes, it’s a leap of faith in a metric-driven, ROI environment.  But we know it when we see it.

You become friendly with a car dealership and you want to buy your cars from your go-to salesperson who has helped you through a few jams, gnarly financing, or getting you the features you value.  A local restaurant treats you well, knows you by name, and always seems to have a table for you.  Your doctor always takes the time to listen to you, and squeezes you in when you have a medical issue, and so you recommend her to others.

The list goes on, but we all have those relationships that keep bringing us back, even though temptations abound from other deals, discounts, and pressures.  When there’s trust, good things happen.

Relationships matter.

For the first time since you established your database, social media affords you the ability to connect with fans – and not just at street events or on the request line – but thousands of them in a direct, digital way.  And many are just the type who enjoy sharing your stories with others in their fans/friends/followers networks.

If your database is essentially a house of cards – built on contests and come-ons – your social media channels provide you with a second chance to create an environment where you have the opportunity to finally create bonds that truly matter.

Fostering relationships isn’t easy.  You can’t just throw up a bunch of boards, test the music, or come up with a first quarter sales trip. Not of that builds trust.

It takes work, focus, dedication, and a deft touch – resources and skills that are not typically in abundance at many stations.  The good news is that small stations, independent owners, and agile teams may actually have an advantage in building and maintaining relationships.

If you need help in this area, by all means get it, but this is a wonderful time to focus on that all important “3rd R” – especially before the competition does.

There is ROI on relationships.

This week, it’s my “other alma mater,” the University of Michigan, where I received a Bachelor’s of General Studies degree back in the early ‘70s.  (You can look it up, Yahoo board – it’s a fact.)

It turns out that a fellow Michigan alum is none other than one of Google’s founders and CEO, Larry Page.  He tells the story about his student career and attending a summer leadership course.  Its slogan – “a healthy regard for the impossible” – has been rumbling around in his head ever since.

This philosophy is about dreaming big, and acting on those dreams.  Page now talks about Google+ in that same way.  According to our Techsurvey8, Google+ is already at the 16% penetration point, and looking pretty good.  One of its best innovations is something that radio could and should be tapping into – “Google Hangouts.”

Here’s Page’s retelling of how it came about: “Last year, the Google+ team decided to integrate multi-person video into their efforts.  They had a small committed team that was crazy enough to believe this was possible, and Google+ Hangouts was born.  You can now video chat with anyone, anywhere, even from the Great Barrier Reef.”

Finding innovative new ways to use existing resources to improve lives and foster communications should be something that radio could strive to accomplish.  A mature, ubiquitous medium that has well more than 90% penetration is in a great position to change the game.

But it comes down to creating agile teams of innovators who have the freedom to fail.  If we’ve learned anything in the past decade, it’s that change is in the air and it happens fast.

Innovation isn’t creating an algorithm like Pandora’s or a deals program like Groupon’s.  It’s developing new applications that can leverage radio strengths in unique and creative ways.  What is it about the simplicity of the radio model that lends itself to new ideas and apps?  Is it about new HD Radio uses, creative deployment of old AM radio signals, an industry-wide approach to tempting youth?

Radio needs to be a part of the change and innovation that we see in the culture of digital companies.

Just ask a Wolverine.

One of those elements revolves around registration.  Some say that getting information about users is the Holy Grail because it creates a sales environment where every inch of America can be targeted, right down to the neighborhood, house, or individual.

That is, if the information and the person who entered it is being totally truthful.  I can’t find any data about how many people lie about their Facebook lives.  Some studies suggest that people are no more likely to stretch the truth online than in person, but it’s not hard to intuit that fibbing is prevalent on everything from dating sites to commenters on news stories.

So the big question surrounding Facebook is, how viable is it as an advertising medium?

On the NPR feature, they interviewed a company that will buy you “likes” – by the thousand, if you desire, to plump up how your brand page profiles.  Why?

As they explained, because this “matters to television networks, which sell advertising based in part on the number of ‘likes’ they have.”  Of course, Planet Money tracked down a country singer in Nashville who bought a slew of “likes” – mostly from Egypt.

Arbitron takes a lot of flack for all sorts of reasons, and yet, there is knowledge and inherent trust that the audience you’re buying is local and tuned in to stations that are under consideration.  The demographic information they provide is rarely questioned.

On Facebook, even a brand with thousands of “likes” may have garnered them in any number of ways.  And ultimately, isn’t the true test of whether an advertising medium is effective is whether the program leads to sales and customers?

If you’re buying ads on sites that have actually bought their “likes” or “fans” by the truckload, your marketing program is doomed to fail.

These days, it’s de rigueur to slam traditional advertising media in favor of hot, new digital models.  But when those systems can be gamed or when the credibility of registrants is called into question, aren’t we really talking trade-offs here?  The numbers mean nothing if attendance is low, sales are down, or no one is walking into the store.

Just asking.

And for Ashton Kutcher, I suppose I’ll always see Michael Kelso from That ‘70s Show, the good-looking neighbor moron kid who always got by on his looks.

Well, that’s not what Ashton Kutcher is all about, as we’ve learned during the days since Eric, Hyde, Donna, and Fez passed unseen joints around in the Forman basement.

Kutcher’s creation of MTV’s Punk’d was the first indicator that this guy had an understanding of television beyond that sitcom, and his mastery of Twitter became apparent when he was the first to reach the 1,000,000 follower pinnacle.

But Kutcher’s newest accomplishment is heading up one of the 100 YouTube channels that will be creating content, all kinds of content.  His production company, Katalyst, is the force behind Thrash Lab (already causing controversy).   Google (owner of YouTube) is writing checks for $100 million to incubate content for these channels.

This video from Bloomberg gets very thought-provoking at the 2:00 mark where Kutcher warns traditional media of the competitive challenge brought about by digital media fragmentation.

>EMAIL RECIPIENTS: CLICK HERE TO WATCH ASHTON KUTCHER VIDEO<

The money line:

“If you don’t cannibalize yourself, somebody else will cannibalize you.”

At a time when some broadcaster CEOs are still musing about whether they’re getting enough ROI on streaming, a guy like Kutcher is out there redefining media.  As he suggests, some of these YouTube channels are going to become mainstream – and given the viral impact of the web – it could happen faster than we think.  Just ask the broadcast TV networks how they perceived Discovery, HGTV, and the Food Network just a decade ago.

Kutcher is emblematic of the new breed of content creators.  He takes risks, he invests, he leads.  Broadcast radio companies – by and large – have assets, personalities, shows, franchises, and viable brands.  Sitting tight, hoping for billing to pick up, playing it safe in PPM, and counting on election dollars isn’t going to change the greater forces around us.

Dude, that Kelso guy is much smarter than he looks.

Thanks, Mike Anthony, for the inspiration.

The announcement was a déjà vu for me, because it reminded me of an encounter I had with a broadcaster very early in my career while an analyst for Frank Magid.  As we were planning a research study for a new client, I suggested testing the station’s marketing awareness.

The General Manager flat out told me, “We tried billboards and they don’t work.”

Now I was pretty new at the research process, but started asking questions.  What creative did you use?  How extensive was the billboard buy?  And what was your expectation from the campaign?

(By the way, it turned out that the creative was horrid, the buy was very small, and the manager expected a big turnaround for a station that had problems with both its music and its morning show.)

This is not to suggest that GM hasn’t studied the situation with their extensive analytical resources and their large team of marketers.  But particularly when you’re test driving new media, you have to apply a certain trial-and-error mindset, while carefully defining your goals and outcomes.

What does success look like for a Facebook campaign?  Are you building your brand, strengthening your relationships with consumers, purchasing proximity on the largest social media network on earth, or selling cars?  Or something else?

GM’s arch rival, Ford, rapidly came out with their reply to this decision:

“We’ve found Facebook ads to be very effective when strategically combined with engagement, great content and innovative ways of storytelling, rather than treating them as a straight media buy.”

So there.

True fan engagement and communication, or “Katy Perry tickets at 2:15.”

It’s all a matter of expectation.