After spending the past 19 years at New Jersey 101.5 FM, Eric Johnson is ready for a new challenge. The veteran programmer is getting that opportunity in Philadelphia as the new Director of Sports Content at 97.5 The Fanatic. He starts his new role on December 4th, filling the seat previously occupied by Matt Nahigian.
Prior to joining 101.5, Johnson worked in sports radio. He served as the APD at crosstown rival Sports Radio WIP. He was also the PD of Philadelphia Top 40 station Y-100.
“Eric Johnson has the perfect skill set and experience to help continue the growth of 97.5 The Fanatic,” said VP/Market Manager Joe Bell. “He’s a Philly guy who understands that Philly sports fans are the best in the country and he can deliver a product with as much passion and knowledge as they have.”
Johnson added, “I am very excited to be joining the impressive team at Beasley Media Group. My thanks to Joe Bell, Buzz Knight, Justin Chase and Bruce Beasley for the tremendous opportunity! I am really looking forward to working with the talented staff at Beasley Philadelphia, a group of stations I have admired for a very long time. As a lifelong Philadelphia area resident with a sports radio background, I truly understand the passion of the Philly sports fan and the important role that 97.5 The Fanatic serves in giving those fans a powerful outlet. I can’t imagine a better time to be involved with Philadelphia sports radio than right now!”
This week’s topic is digital. Or as some media sales reps call it “the D word.”
I recently ran into someone I knew in media sales who said: “I hope everyone in our business knows how important it is we are selling digital, because it is the future.” I told him I had news for him, the future is now.
We have all read the numbers, we have all seen the reports. Traditional media is getting less and less of the spend and more dollars are being shifted into digital. If you are of the mindset that “digital is the future” as if to suggest it is something you should be preparing for now, you are behind, way behind.
The beauty of digital for the sports format is that it all boils down to targeted advertising. Figure out who you are trying to reach and go after that specific audience. Sounds familiar, right? Mainly because that is what we have been selling in the sports format for twenty-five years – targeted marketing at the male 25-54 demo.
So, the format that should be able to take the most advantage of digital is ours. Selling digital is no different than selling any of your other core radio products – it’s about ideas. In sports radio, we are often looking at ways to tie our advertisers and prospects into programming, but now with digital, that programming platform can expand.
I have seen some great examples of local digital programming that are being created in our space. As I researched WEEI for my interview last week with Matt Hochman, I ran across what the station is doing with their podcasting. Whereas some stations consider podcasting to be the replays of content that already ran on the air, WEEI is creating unique content that gives the listener more of a host’s personality, or their passion where they focus on one singular team or sport.
101 ESPN in St. Louis is doing high school football games through their website and Facebook Live. As part of a partnership with a local production company, they’ve been doing a game of the week throughout the football season. The games aren’t aired on the station, it is completely a digital product with the support of station and social media promotion.
Both ideas are great ways to tie in digital sponsorships while extending your programming to your local website or social media outlets. Other stations are having hosts do long form interviews if they have someone who excels at asking questions and getting the most out of a guest, or they are allowing hosts to branch out of sports and tap into other passions such as food and beer.
Additionally, almost all of us have digital extension products we can sell and that brings us into a whole new ballgame. Now, we can sell any audience a client is looking to reach, and we can tie your radio advertising and your digital advertising together. If you’re working with a business that sees a need to reach a pro or college sports team’s audience with radio spots, they probably would be served well by doing a geofencing or conquesting campaign around the same team’s stadium on game days.
No matter what it is, it once again all boils down to how good of an idea or campaign you help create for the advertiser, and then the execution of what you come up with. The real “D word” is dollars, and as those shift to other platforms, our ideas and solutions are how we can keep the money with us, both now and in the future.
We’ve all heard the saying “less is more”. Apparently though, Twitter doesn’t agree with that phrase. The company has decided to adjust its position on the length of tweets, giving users the chance to extend their comments from 140 to 280 characters.
On one hand, you can understand and appreciate the company’s flexibility. If users want the freedom to write longer and avoid being placed inside of a box on the platform, they should be able to do that right? After all, if the user isn’t satisfied, they don’t use the platform, and without customer activity and engagement, the social media giant is in an unenviable position.
But what about the rest of users who enjoy writing short and prefer reading bite-sized comments? They’re now forced to sift thru longer messages, which means that unless they extend the amount of time they spend on the platform, they’re going to see less tweets.
In situations like these, there are always pros and cons. It’s no different than starting a sports radio show and deciding which of two topics to lead a show with. But the challenge is trying to decipher if a strategic adjustment is critically necessary.
When Twitter first burst onto the scene, it was instantly noticeable how the company positioned itself opposite Facebook. Twitter wanted people to use their platform and present short and precise comments in order to continue conversation. Essentially the goal was to become social media’s sports bar, where patrons came together to watch and discuss games, movies, TV shows, etc. Then as the brand grew, the noise began to increase about having flexibility to write longer.
With any decision, there’s going to be vocal displeasure. But a brand has to decide who they are, what their unique point of entry is, and then reinforce that position again and again. The public loves to be heard, and feedback should be evaluated, but sometimes companies introduce change to satisfy a vocal minority rather than taking into account the feelings of the majority. As we’ve seen many times, the public can also push for change but when their convictions are tested, you find that they’re easily influenced to reverse their current position.
Was Twitter’s 140 character length the reason why people were or weren’t using the platform? I don’t think so. But from a competitive standpoint, the social media company is going to highlight the massive amount of users on other platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat, and in order to reach a larger amount of people they felt a need to try something different to increase activity.
As I considered the benefits (the user has more control) and risks (does anyone like the idea of President Trump doubling the size of his tweets?) of Twitter modifying its strategy, I began to realize how it connected to the world of sports radio. Having listened to more shows and stations around the country than most, I hear certain things that remain problematic. Many hosts examine their content plan and execution through their own lens, not necessarily thru the audience’s. They live in their rundown and approach their content with the mindset of “we have 3-4 hours to get this all in” rather than taking into account that the average commute in most cities is 25 minutes and what’s happening in the moment is the only thing a listener truly cares about. What you do in an hour or two has little importance to them, only the present.
How many times do you listen to a host hit the airwaves and at 3pm they start telling you everything they have planned later on? “We have special guest A at 4:30, a caller segment at 5:00 and our favorite feature at 5:30”. Ask yourself this, when was the last time you changed what you were going to do in 90-120-150 minutes based on what a radio host told you they had planned? I stand a better chance of regrowing a full head of hair than you do of convincing an audience to change their lives for the satisfaction and benefit of your show.
But do you know when you do have a chance of stealing their time? Right now! If someone has the equivalent of two quarter hours of time to spend with you, your best shot at stealing a third quarter hour is by getting into their head immediately. You do that by not wasting your words and time and providing a strong content experience.
Let’s look at how that applies to Twitter’s switch from 140 to 280 characters.
First, let’s look at the start of a segment. This is the difference between spending your first 60-90 seconds sleepwalking thru your opening comments as opposed to attacking the air with a defined purpose – 140 vs. 280. Once the liner is done and the music is playing, you should be right into your topic and opinion. That’s how you maximize the audience’s time and earn their trust. The excuses of “we like to build up to things and ease into the conversation” sound good to the host because you’re looking at your road map and challenge of performing for 3-4 hours. What you’re not doing is respecting the person’s time who is listening to you right now.
So much of earning ratings credit is about grabbing five minutes of listening in a quarter hour. You help yourself by drawing people in quickly rather than wasting time and assuming they’ll stick around for your good stuff later on. Another part of this is understanding the importance of executing the most topical and relevant content every single hour. What you did at 3pm has no value to the listener who gets in their car at 5pm. If a big trade has happened, a high profile sports figure has sounded off, or an important game is taking place that night, the listener expects to hear about it, not your fourth story of the day because you’re mentally talked out of the big story.
Secondly, think of how these Twitter changes apply to a tease. 140 characters requires a short focused message. Grab my attention immediately, and make me interested enough to click on the attached link in your tweet or engage with you in dialogue. That’s what a radio tease is meant to do. Can you climb into my mind and make me curious enough to sit thru a few minutes of commercials or return after your break, so I can hear the answer?
A tweet that is 280 characters in length is the equivalent of a host who wanders into their breaks. For example, “We’ve still got plenty to do, Jim, Fred and Jose hang on the line we’ll get to you shortly, we’ve got tickets to giveaway to this Sunday’s game, there’s news about Colin Kaepernick possibly being brought in for an audition, Peter King of Sports Illustrated in about 15 minutes, plus I want to weigh in on this Ric Flair 30 for 30 documentary, so stick around we’re back in just a few.”
As you read that last example, I’m sure you thought of a few hosts who execute that way. To be honest, there are some hosts who are excellent on the air or have built up longevity in their markets that they can get away with it. But guess what, not everyone has those skills or advantages and good habits are good habits, and bad ones are bad ones. To me it’s simple, whether you’re on the air for a year or have hosted a show for twenty, what gives you a better chance to keep a listener around to the next segment, promoting what’s next in a way that makes people think or not mentioning anything specific?
If your audience has minimal time available to listen, and they’re being separated from your content by a five minute commercial break, 60-90 second sports update, :15-:30 seconds of liners/music and possibly an audio clip leading back into the segment, not to mention if your station runs anything else such as traffic, weather, stock reports, etc., that means they have to wait nearly seven minutes to hear your next piece of content. You assume they’ll be back because they love sports talk and have limited local options, but you don’t know if they just pulled into their driveway, approached a tunnel and lost reception, scanned the dial and found something else, took a phone call or simply got bored and turned off the radio.
In each of those situations, there are two options. You’ve either invaded their head space enough to want to hear what’s next or you’re just noise in the background. Maybe they’re exiting the car but because you intrigued them they’ll head into their home and use Alexa or the app on their phone to hear more. Maybe they’ll download your podcast later because although they’re busy now, they still want to hear the payoff. But if it isn’t short, sweet and intriguing, good luck earning additional tune ins.
There is another side of this debate too. 280 characters is definitely more valuable than 140 on a sports talk show when it involves extending a topic. Diving into a segment with a plan and teasing what’s next are what I often refer to as “ins and outs”. When you skip past those formatics (the last :15 seconds before your break and the first :60 seconds starting off a segment), the way you keep people engaged is by being compelling, opinionated and entertaining in your presentation with a topical story. Storytellers with strong positions, timely humor and solid evidence to support their convictions make people laugh, learn and think. When you get the audience into that frame of mind, you’ve hit the right notes.
Essentially a host is a lawyer making a case, and trying to convince the jury to see it their way. The guests, calls, sound and bits are props that add to the discussion. If you’re masterful in the way you frame your content, the listener turns up the volume, listens closer, and begins to argue or agree with what they hear thru their speakers. If it’s informational, offbeat and lacking creativity, direction and suspense, they’ll disconnect quickly.
The other angle worth highlighting in support of 280 characters over 140 involves adjusting a brand strategy. Hardcore fans will clamor for what they know (Ex: Bring back Mike and the Mad Dog, SportsCenter hasn’t been the same since Dan Patrick and Keith Olbermann, etc.) but to stay ahead in business, you have to evolve, take risks and be unafraid.
In Twitter’s case, the proof is in the pudding. They’re trailing their social media competitors in revenue, relevance, reputation and routine. By switching to 280, they’ve created immediate buzz, which should lead to a short-term increase in activity. If people have a good experience, then it could lead to an uptick in users and/or activity. Twitter owns a niche but wants more, and to get it, sometimes you have the analyze the competition, the behaviors of the audience, your brand’s strengths and weaknesses, and modify your approach.
Which brings us back to the debate of 140 or 280 characters. In my opinion short tweets and long tweets can both be effective, but you’ve got to understand their purpose. If you’re trying to lead people to other platforms or develop dialogue, less is more. If you’re breaking news or providing opinions on important issues or personal matters, additional perspectives can be helpful. But if every thought that pops into your head becomes social chatter, you’ll not only waste the audience’s time, but you’ll make them question how important it is to follow you. And whether it’s on Twitter or sports radio, if you don’t have loyal fans spending time with you, you’ll soon be broadcasting to an empty room.
When you look for a sports media seller to profile, you might as well start with one of the most experienced. Matt Hochman started in media sales in 1987 and has been in the sports format, with WEEI in Boston, since December of 1995. For the math challenged, that’s thirty years in radio and coming up on twenty-two years in the sports format. That’s a lot of time and a lot of knowledge to tap into:
DG: Take me all the way back, how did you end up in radio?
MH: I started in radio in 1987. I graduated from UMass-Amherst and went to New York City for my first job which was going to be a buyer for Macy’s and I was going through their training program. I spent a year there and had my store set on fire by customers three different times, which was quite entertaining. After about a year I realized retail wasn’t something I wanted to do. I was contemplating my next move. I had done some stand-up comedy in New York and thought maybe radio would be something I might like.
DG: What did you know about radio at that point?
MH: Everyone I talked to about radio as a possible career painted this horror show, that it was a tough way to make a living. You are selling an intangible and it is really difficult. My first interview referred me to a gentleman at a talk radio station which was WRKO, right after they had the Celtics, for a number of years, with (Larry) Bird and (Kevin) McHale winning championships. So, I sold talk radio and the station was bought and sold by CBS and then Entercom. Since then, it has been pretty much all sports radio for me with talk shows, Celtics and Red Sox play by play and specialty programming for the Patriots.
DG: If someone asks you what you do, what do you tell them?
MH: Twenty years ago, it didn’t matter what type of format you were in, if you sold radio, you were a radio salesperson. Now, it is so different, with so many companies wanting to get involved in sports and brand their company with sports play by play, and with all the digital assets.
WEEI.com, over the course of a 24-hour period, can deliver over a million impressions on some days. The digital end is so big. I really feel like myself and my colleagues are really sports marketing professionals. There are so many different components to it that it really does need a little more clarification with what we do. Our industry isn’t that simple.
DG: How has selling radio changed since you started in 1987?
MH: It has changed immensely, but I tell you, I would not be in this business right now if I was not involved in sports. I feel so fortunate and I try and instill this to the folks I work with, especially the less experienced people, how fortunate we are to be in this marketplace where sports is so important and relevant. To be able to talk to companies now about a sports platform and have those companies understand the combination of sports radio with play by play and the digital aspect, it is so much more than just marketing, it’s a real relationship and partnership.
DG: Why are you good at what you do?
MH: There are others that have had successful runs and the common denominator for those of us in Boston that have been doing it so long, is the attrition rate is very minimal. When I am trying to do business with someone I am not talking about coming on board for two weeks and then let’s see what happens. Too many people that are involved in radio feel either a pressure, or they are scared, and they make a sale and the sale didn’t have an opportunity to work because there wasn’t enough thought put behind it to have something that was measurable. So many times, I think people in our industry don’t try and find out what the expectations of the client are and when the campaign is over, they aren’t on the same page as far as if the campaign was successful. I try to, minimally, put together a six-month program, and I feel very confident in the assets I have as well as the support people behind me that we are going to execute and deliver the deal.
DG: Why do you think so many people fail at media sales?
MH: I think sometimes we in the industry don’t put enough emphasis to our new people on the creative aspect of what we do. Somebody could know all the statistics about how many people are listening and where the reach is, but the magic is what’s coming out of that speaker. I try to get across to new people that it’s the creative end. I know that the biggest part of my success is because I am creative. I am not an analytical person, at all, but I can write a commercial in my sleep. If I can take a great piece of production, and we have great production people, to a client and say “how do you think this would sound on a Monday morning, fifteen minutes after Tom Brady has done his weekly appearance on WEEI?” Then I hit play and I’m quiet.
I don’t think that we in the industry emphasize that it really is simpler than we think. It’s the creative aspect, it’s the imagination, that’s the magic and I think that’s what we need to encourage people to keep doing more of.
DG: What’s your secret to prospecting and finding new business?
MH: The first thing, you have to know who your audience is. Part of prospecting is being able to share with a prospect, what you had in mind. The days of calling and saying you just want to come in and talk about their business are over. People don’t have time. The internet gives us a big advantage over those that started many years ago. Now, we can learn more about their business and we can have more of a valid reason for calling.
When you go in, these people are busy and are getting bombarded by all kinds of media. You have to get to the point and go in with a purpose. Many times, I have gone into a first call already with a spec commercial based on a conversation I may have had with the individual on the phone and then any reading I did about the company online.
DG: What advice would you give to a new seller about the keys to having success in our industry?
MH: You only get one chance to really prove yourself. I believe people can read through “bs” in a heartbeat. You are judged by clients and prospects more when something goes wrong. It is about how we in our industry respond, whether it be to an incorrect spot running or if a talent says something that isn’t overly complimentary of an industry or about a particular company. How quickly we are able to respond and make the situation better, that is how we get judged. I believe my clients know that I am a member of their team as well as the company that I represent. They know that when something goes wrong, which can happen, they won’t hear me blame anyone, I will be responsible and I will fix it.
The successful people are the ones that display great integrity and if you say you are going to do something, you do it. That’s so easy to say, but so many people don’t do it. People have so many options and they are buying you, the individual. We all have fine products and they can make a number of choices, but they have to feel comfortable with the individual before they start writing out checks.
Also – it’s all about treating people with respect. It doesn’t matter how new someone is to the company or what their job is, everyone needs to be treated with respect, dignity and appreciation. In our business, we need so many people behind the scenes to make things happen. Without all the support that I have had, I wouldn’t have been anywhere near as successful. This is not an “I” business, we can’t ever take the other people for granted.
DG: What is the creative idea you are most proud of?
MH: I once invested my own money on my radio station and bought my own advertising campaign for about four months. I did that because what better way to show potential prospects that I believe in what I represent than by putting my money where my mouth was. Now, I gave myself a great rate, but I spent thousands of dollars of my own money and recorded my own messages that were running on WEEI. To this day people still ask me about running those commercials.
What They Say:
“Matt is a rock star. I’m amazed by his continued energy and enthusiasm in this business after 30 years. More importantly, he is a good soul and an all-around good human being that people respect and look up to. He is gracious to everyone in our building. His clients trust him implicitly, 90% of his business is direct, and to date, he has achieved 10 out of 10 of his monthly goals. He is simply, the best of the best.I couldn’t be prouder to work alongside him. – Kelly Sutton, General Sales Manager, Entercom Boston
Clay Travis says Bomani Jones’ radio show was canceled by ESPN because it was hemorrhaging affiliates. Others say Jones asked for the show to end. Regardless, ESPN Radio is changing direction in afternoon drive.
Jones’ show has occupied the 4p-7p ET time slot since September 2015. He joined ESPN Radio in March 2015, hosting evenings. His ascension at the network over the past two years has included an increased presence on television. A new daily show featuring Jones and Pablo Torre is expected to debut this spring.
According to reports, Jones’ television duties have nothing to do with this decision. Bomani remains interested in creating a daily show, except his belief is that presenting his show in podcast form would be better for him and his fans as opposed to terrestrial radio. No word yet on what the network will offer in afternoons as a permanent replacement.
For the past decade, Matt Nahigian ran the programming department for 97.5 The Fanatic in Philadelphia. During that time, the radio station moved from AM to FM, added established local personalities such as Mike Missanelli, Tony Bruno and Anthony Gargano, secured the broadcast rights to the Flyers and 76ers, and surpassed market leader Sports Radio WIP in the ratings on a number of occasions. The radio station’s performance was strong enough to warrant a nomination for a Marconi Award.
Now, Nahigian is hoping to duplicate that success on the opposite coast.
95.7 The Game in San Francisco has announced it’s reached an agreement with Nahigian to become the station’s new program director. He fills the vacant seat which had previously been filled by Don Kollins. Nahigian is expected to arrive in the Bay Area for internal introductions and meetings on Thursday. He confirmed the new opportunity earlier tonight on Facebook.
In 2016, Nahigian was ranked 9th overall among the nation’s top sports radio program directors by radio industry executives. He finished 10th in 2015. He becomes the first programmer hired by new San Francisco market manager Susan Larkin.
Ironically, Nahigian was the third programmer hired by Greater Media in Philadelphia to lead The Fanatic. He now becomes the third programmer hired to lead The Game in San Francisco. In each of those situations, BSM president Jason Barrett served as the radio station’s naugural PD.
Each week my ears are glued to radio stations all across the country. Being a former programmer turned consultant, I’m constantly looking for ways to help brands and individuals get better. In doing so, it can sometimes be difficult to sit back, relax, and enjoy the content but when something excellent is presented thru the speakers, I instantly recognize it.
Last week, I caught two of those moments on the same show and station. I’ll explain what stood out, where it occurred and why it resonated with me in just a moment.
Before I do that though, let me be clear about one thing. When I highlight a show or brand, it doesn’t mean they’ve created the greatest show on planet earth. Nor am I suggesting that they’re better than their local competition. I’m simply appreciating and acknowledging a piece of content which had the potential to connect with an audience.
The latest example that grabbed my attention happened on 102.9/750 The Game in Portland, Oregon. I was listening to John Canzano host his daily program “The Bald Faced Truth” which airs weekdays from 12p-3p PT. For those who aren’t familiar, Canzano has been a fixture in the market for a long time, and has earned recognition nationally for delivering one of the country’s better sports radio programs.
As I was listening to John host his show, I was drawn in by his ability to tell great stories and not waste time diving into his segments. I’ll explain in a minute why diving into content is vital but as necessary as that may be, if the content itself isn’t great then it doesn’t matter what you’re diving into so I want to begin by highlighting John’s storytelling ability.
On this particular day, John recited a previous conversation he had with Pac-12 Network analyst Yogi Roth who told him “you’ve got to be where your feet are.” Canzano explained that too often people live in the past or plan for the future that they forget to enjoy, appreciate and recognize what’s taking place in the present. He then used that opening to springboard into a story which involved USA Today Network Tennessee Titans reporter Joe Rexrode.
While flying to Cleveland to cover the Titans-Browns game, Rexrode found himself on the verge of potentially facing death. The engine on his flight blew out and the Titans scribe was convinced (along with the flight attendants and everyone else on board) that the plane was going to go down. As he contemplated what was about to occur, he opened up his laptop to begin writing a letter to his family apologizing to them for dying.
I could transcribe everything Canzano said during this story, but you owe it to yourself to take 10 minutes and listen. What I enjoyed about this piece of content is the way John painted a picture with words and made the audience feel as if they were on the flight themselves. That emotionally taxing situation was used as an example of why it’s important to live in and appreciate the present.
Equally as interesting and entertaining was a second segment that Canzano delivered during the same show. Once again, John wasted no time diving into his content and provided a great back story to support a thought provoking topic. John began by explaining that his wife is Asian and described how their different backgrounds can lead to being treated differently when they go out to eat. That came into play recently at a Sushi restaurant, leaving John to feel like he was the victim of racism.
Over the next ten minutes, John shared vivid details about his dining experience and how the waitress who served him and his wife treated them differently than another couple in the same establishment. He allowed his listeners to draw a mental image of what was happening, and put them in a position where they could relate to it and contemplate how they would’ve handled it.
I can’t tell you how many hosts I hear on stations across the country waste time starting off segments. Rather than diving in with a purpose, they come across as if they’re lost at sea and hoping that if they drive the ship in a million different directions they’ll eventually stumble onto shore. The response I often hear from talent is “we need time to build momentum” or “we like to let the content evolve and ease into the conversation” except what they fail to understand is that they are not in the listener’s shoes at that point in time. A person with 15 minutes of time to listen to a sports radio show does not care about your need to ease into content. If they’re going to have to wait a while to hear something good, they’ll turn elsewhere.
Step back for a quick minute and think about what your audience is subjected to once you begin a commercial break. They’re hit with four to five minutes of commercials, probably a 1-2 minute sports update, :10-:15 seconds of music (sometimes longer if an audio cut is being played) and then they’re expected to wait another 3-4 minutes before the talk show host gets into the “good stuff” they have planned for the segment. I didn’t even mention traffic reports, stock reports, weather updates or other business driven benchmarks which stations sometimes put in place to help generate revenue even if it doesn’t necessarily excite the content consumer.
Do the math for a second. Your listener has 15-20 minutes to spend with your show. Do you really think you’re helping yourself by making them wait 10 minutes at a time to hear your A+ material? If the game within the game is to secure five minutes of listening in a quarter hour, are you helping or hurting yourself by wandering thru the first few minutes of your segments?
As a rule of thumb, I think there are three critical things a talk show host must do consistently to provide a benefit to the audience and position themselves strongly to gain their time.
First, tease something that makes them think thru a commercial break. It doesn’t have to be an over the top outlandish position, just a question or thought to leave them curious.
Secondly, pay off what you teased as soon as you return from your break. Easing into your content simply means you are not prepared for where you’re headed. Remember what you promised the audience and pay it off immediately. The challenge should be deciding whether the content you teased is worth :60 seconds or 10 minutes of airtime. If it’s only worth a small amount and it’s served its purpose of keeping the audience engaged then be ready with a strong follow up topic.
Finally, come prepared with GREAT material. Anyone can hit the airwaves and talk about how much of an emotional roller coaster Game 5 of the World Series was. What are you providing that nobody else is? What did you see that nobody else saw? What other vivid details can you pass along from your experience watching the game that mentally engages the audience and keeps them hanging on your next sentence? If your plan of attack is to field phone calls and rely on the obvious question “was that the greatest World Series game of all-time” be prepared to run out of gas quickly.
In our business, we put a lot of emphasis on formatics and I don’t want to discount their importance. But, if the only thing you have are great teases and payoffs and an ability to reset, then you’re not going to win. It still comes down to creating unique topics and angles that help steal a listener’s time and delivering opinions and information in a thought provoking and entertaining way.
Remember this, you have zero control over your radio station’s signal, the in-market competition, your lead in show or the ratings system. However, when you combine excellent formatics with great topic development and storytelling, you give yourself a chance to stand out. That approach seems to be working well for John Canzano.
While the Los Angeles Dodgers and Houston Astros engage in a battle for major league baseball supremacy, the news off of the diamond during the past week has been equally as interesting. Despite advancing to the playoffs with their respective clubs, Joe Girardi, John Farrell and Dusty Baker were each relieved of their duties as managers of the Yankees, Red Sox and Nationals.
In the case of Girardi and Farrell, they both had won a World Series title. Dusty on the other hand had managed a team which lost in the fall classic, and had just brought back to back division titles to the nation’s capital, a feat which the Nationals franchise had not accomplished before.
When moves like this occur in professional sports they happen because of a few factors. Many of which are relatable to sports radio. Here are five important items managers must take into account when overseeing a brand for an organization.
Reaching The Room – Does your message resonate with your staff? Are you seen as someone who unifies or divides people? Do you work well with multiple departments or just your assigned personnel? Are you consistently meeting with and introducing new ideas and approaches to help your people grow? Does your team exude confidence when discussing your style and abilities to others? Is your locker room willing to run thru a wall for you or are they waiting for the opportunity to give you the extra push to send you over a cliff?
Managing Up – In baseball, the manager has to have a strong connection to the front office and ownership. The same is true in radio where a PD and Market Manager must march to the same drum beat. If that sound is heard and enjoyed by corporate executives and the CEO, then you’ve got a chance to make great music together. If the collective vision though isn’t shared by all involved and the brand leader has difficulty interacting with superiors and gaining their confidence, then it’s only a matter of time until someone else is calling the shots.
Maintaining Public Confidence – In sports, each decision is scrutinized. Organizations don’t like it when misfires happen and customers lose confidence. For example, Joe Girardi drew the ire of Yankees fans for the way he mismanaged instant replay during Game 2 of the ALDS. John Farrell made Red Sox fans question the inside of the Red Sox locker room when David Price and Dennis Eckersley exchanged words on a team flight and the news trickled into the media. Dusty Baker didn’t have those problems but the Nationals’ inability to advance further in the postseason made fans feel like it’s the same old story.
In radio, if an on-air talent or brand leader says or does the wrong thing on or off the air, it can cost a station listeners and ad dollars. For example, if you look at ESPN’s recent issues, it’s raised many questions about the network’s talent, executives and policies. That can lead to less confidence from viewers and advertisers. Maintaining a strong brand image and keeping black clouds away from your organization are part of the job. How you handle each situation determines how quickly people will defend or bail on you at the first sign of trouble.
The Financial Bullseye – If you’re managing a team, whether in baseball or radio, if you’re making a sizable wage the expectations are going to be higher. Organizations pay closer attention to those they’re investing significant dollars in. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to fatten your wallet and receive your full worth but with great earnings comes greater responsibility. The more you make, the larger the target on your back. Anything less than championships or ratings wins and the noise increases about the security of your position.
Can You Win It All – Being competitive is a given. Getting maximum effort and contributions from your key people displays leadership. Being strategic, smart, creative and relentless in your pursuit provides evidence of how badly you want to win and what you’re doing to try and reach the ultimate destination. But even if your game plan and work ethic are good and the talent you’ve assembled are exceptional, there are still no guarantees. The members at the top of your organization don’t want to hear why your ratings or revenues are down or why you lost to the other team. They put you in power and gave you the tools and their trust with the understanding that you’d deliver victories.
Whether it’s fair or not, sports and radio are competitive businesses. Results are all that matter. Maybe the other station has a better signal, stronger marketing, a 2-3 decade head start or better talent. The question your leaders are going to ask you is “how do you plan to overcome that and emerge victorious?” Nobody’s going to argue that your competition has a few advantages. That exists in every business. What they’re going to expect though is that you’ll find a way to win in spite of it. If not, they’ll soon be doing it without you.
Technology is a great thing and I’m a huge fan of the meme that says: “Before you call me, ask yourself, is this textable?” However, when I read that, I’m relating it to friends and family, not to selling.
Let’s just call a spade a spade – too many media sellers are relying on technology, instead of relationships and conversations, to try and set meetings and close deals and it’s hurting our industry.
Don’t get me wrong, there are absolutely times when email and texting can be very convenient and save you a tremendous amount of time. Technology can be your friend and can certainly be a part of the sales process, especially as you strengthen your client relationship. The real issue is that I’m seeing too many people, nowadays, who are completely replacing the phone and face to face meetings with emailing and texting.
We are in a relationship building business. Relationships are best built in person, at lunch, at happy hour, on the golf course or at the game. The personal, one on one connection can’t be replaced, no matter how hard millennials may try.
I’ve talked before about the media sales “playbook,” the six responsibilities we have: prospecting, cold-calling, needs analysis, presenting, closing and servicing. Remember my McDonald’s analogy (have to cook the whole menu to be a cook there)? It applies here, as people are trying to succeed in sales, without doing all the necessary steps. Calling and meeting with people are essential parts of the job. You can’t cheat on those and try to replace them with electronic communication.
The next time you go to email a prospect to set up a meeting, flip the circumstances and ask yourself this: “If I received an email from someone, out of the blue, who wanted to sell me something, what are the chances I’d reply?” I know what the answer is for me and I bet I know what the answer is for you.
You can’t cheat the system. Picking up the phone and calling to talk with people, as well as, getting out and meeting face to face and talking with people are mandatory job requirements, not optional exercises. Trying to replace those with emailing and texting is not only lazy, it also greatly reduces the chances of you getting your desired outcome.
A study done this year by the Harvard Business Review found face-to-face requests were 34 times more effective than email requests. The study also revealed that most people tend to overestimate their power of persuasiveness via text-based communication and underestimate the power of their persuasiveness via face-to-face communication.
It’s just too easy to say no, or to ignore you, electronically. Additionally, you can’t read body language, dig for objections, or even understand context, over an email or text. Plus, you lose an opportunity to learn more about your client or prospect by not seeing their office, pictures, co-workers and more.
A huge part of what you’re selling is you and your belief in your presentation or station. You take that mostly out of the equation by not having direct conversations with your prospects during the sales process.
So, if emailing or not emailing is the question, I hope you now have a better idea of the right answer.
How many times in the sports media business have we taken the best :10 seconds of a commentary and featured it while looking past the remainder of an individual’s points? If that’s a foreign concept to you then you probably don’t work in the sports media industry.
On Monday morning I was catching up on my daily reading when that very situation presented itself. My Twitter timeline was flooded with negative remarks towards Alex Mather, co-founder of The Athletic, after he offered a couple of comments to the New York Times that came across as cocky, arrogant, and aggressive. When asked about The Athletic’s business approach Mather said, “We will wait every local paper out and let them continuously bleed until we are the last ones standing. We will suck them dry of their best talent at every moment. We will make business extremely difficult for them.”
In the same article, Mather called out newspapers for doing nothing to serve sports fans and labeled Bleacher Report and SB Nation as empty calories. He was also criticized by Dejan Kovacevic of DK Pittsburgh Sports for breaking a promise to not compete in the Pittsburgh market. Mather acknowledged that The Athletic initially had no plans to launch in Pittsburgh but the platform only makes promises to its customers, employees, investors and partners.
Upon seeing his comments take like a moth to a flame, Mather took to Twitter to provide additional context (read from the bottom up).
Most people who read the Times’ story or Mather’s tweets will probably take offense because the remarks are brash and portray the company as being out for blood. For an upstart digital brand which has played the underdog card and presented itself as the last bastion for sports journalism, a smug appearance from the head of the operation doesn’t provide good PR for a company which is trying to convince people to become future subscribers.
As I processed Mather’s comments, I found myself buying some of what he was selling and rejecting other portions of it. I don’t believe for a second that the company is rooting for newspapers to get the message. If they did, that would cause The Athletic competitive challenges. I also don’t buy the notion that the company is going to remain small when in the same article they preach about their plans to expand into every American and Canadian sports city where professional sports teams exist within two years.
However, I will defend Mather on the most important part of this story.
He’s absolutely correct that surviving in media is very difficult. It’s especially hard when you factor in the aggregation of content, navigating algorithms and building a brand thru word of mouth and social media marketing. For The Athletic to present the type of quality content it wants to deliver, they have to lure away established media people from legacy brands and count on those people to have enough of a connection in local communities to draw subscribers. The company didn’t arrive on the scene with millions invested in marketing and it is up against formidable competition. To complicate matters, The Athletic’s future is predicated on being able to convince sports fans to spend their money on ad-free premium content from highly trusted journalists even though those same fans can access information and opinion for free from other talented writers on most local and national sports media outlets.
If you read the full article it paints a full picture of why The Athletic believes in its approach. Some of that gets lost if you just read Mather’s quotes or the article’s headline.
In a nutshell, these guys believe the newspaper business has made many costly errors, overworked their best people, and failed to present a sound business model. They’re proponents of in-depth reporting and objective analysis and when unexpected opportunities present themselves, they’re quick to react to try to improve their company. Most of those things should be applauded not frowned upon.
Which leads me back to the real issue why this article created noise. People have an issue with arrogance. The turnoff factor towards Mather was high because of his use of words. However, being cocky and overconfident isn’t a crime. Do you think competing against and beating an entire newspaper industry is going to happen by being reserved and cordial? As Kid Rock once sang, “They say I’m cocky, and I say what? It ain’t bragging motherf**ker if you back it up.”
Have you ever watched the show Shark Tank? Do you think Kevin O’Leary cares if you like him? The reason he’s filthy rich and successful is because he shows no remorse and fights to win. If you get stepped on in the process, that’s his cost of doing business. It might make him harder to root for and a dose of humility would likely suit him well but if the formula is working, O’Leary isn’t going to change a thing.
Did you see the movie The Social Network which was based on the story of Facebook? What happened to Mark Zuckerberg’s friend and co-founder Eduardo Savrin? It may have been unethical and the cause of the relationship between the two Facebook co-founders becoming irreparable, but in the end, Zuckerberg was ruthless and willing to sacrifice his best friend for the betterment of his professional success. Some will say that makes Zuckerberg a dirtbag, but based on the way Facebook has blossomed, I’m sure Mark is sleeping just fine with that label hanging over his head.
It’s been a while since I’ve used a wrestling reference but this time the shoe fits. In the old days of wrestling, promotions ran shows in different regions. There was an understood rule among promoters that each was to steer clear of each other’s area and focus on their own pockets of the country. Vince McMahon Sr. operated under that agreement but after ceasing control to his son, Vince McMahon chose a different approach when an opportunity to compete on a national level presented itself for the WWF. Vince Jr. could’ve followed in his father’s footsteps and played nice, but he saw an opportunity to elevate the WWF and in doing so, turned it into the most dominant wrestling promotion on the planet. Did the move cost McMahon some friends? Yes. Did he present himself as a ruthless SOB with a willingness to steamroll anyone who got in his way? Absolutely. But to become the global entity that the WWE has become, something had to change, and McMahon chose to become the reaper before someone else did.
The point in all of this is that sometimes in business, things get vicious. Big money is at stake, competition is fierce, and one false move can do tremendous damage. You can’t be afraid or timid when swimming in shark infested waters and if a company delivers results, investors will welcome and encourage the swagger. If not, they’ll change their direction and tone, and in some cases, the people involved.
Alex Mather may not come across as warm and inviting in the New York Times’ article, but following the playbook of O’Leary, Zuckerberg and McMahon doesn’t make him a monster. It simply makes him a businessman. If his company has a sliver of the success those other operators have had over the past few decades, I’m sure he’ll welcome the negative ink and the tweets he’s been sorting thru today.
