In October, Chad Doing returned home to Portland and signed on with Rip City Radio 620 to host the station’s pre and post-game coverage surrounding Portland Trail Blazers basketball. Now after a few months, Rip City is ready to give Doing a heavier workload.
Effective today, Rip City Radio has added Doing to the afternoon show alongside Travis Demers. The Portland veteran enjoyed success as a member of 1080 The Fan and 750 The Game before taking a two year detour to host the morning show for 95.7 The Game in the Bay Area. His involvement as host of the station’s Blazers Warmup and 5th Quarter shows remains unchanged.
In addition to hosting the afternoon program, Demers also has a hand in managing the station’s programming. By adding Doing to the show it not only strengthens the program, but it gives Demers some flexibility to tackle other station business without having to worry about it compromising the show.
For more information on the Rip City Drive with Travis and Chad visit their website by clicking here.
The news trickled out in January and was made official today. The ESPN Radio network is adding ESPN New York Program Director Justin Craig to its management team as its Senior Director of Programming and Operations. Craig will report to VP of ESPN Network Content Dave Roberts.
With Craig shifting north to Bristol, CT, ESPN New York 98.7 FM is promoting Ryan Hurley to program director, and producer Jonathan Winthrop to Assistant Program Director. Winthrop will remain installed as Stephen A. Smith’s producer on his radio show which airs on ESPN Radio’s stations in New York and Los Angeles.
“Justin brings to this role a wide range of experience and winning results,” said Roberts. “He clearly understands the value of how the local and national networks can collectively create an even stronger culture of success. Bottom line: Justin Craig is uniquely prepared for this extremely important leadership role. He’s a winner.”
Having an in-depth conversation about diversity in sports talk radio is difficult. It’s a subject that makes many people uncomfortable and defensive, but it’s one that warrants further inspection.
To recognize the industry needs to do better is the first step. Working to improve it is the next. But progress only happens if the industry’s top decision makers believe it’s a critical issue.
Too often in our business, difficult subjects get addressed publicly, but once the questions stop being asked, it’s back to business as usual. The great Bill Parcells used to say “you are what your record says you are“. Well, if results are how we’re going to judge success and failure on the subject of racial diversity in sports talk radio, then thin-skinned members of the radio industry may want to stop reading, because they’re not going to like the evidence.
Before I continue, let me be candid for a second. I began writing this piece in January and almost decided not to publish it. It isn’t the subject matter I’m afraid to explore. I’ve already gone down this road before.
The reason why I considered keeping this column inside the vault is because our ability as a society to discuss race in a productive manner, especially as it pertains to sports media, has gone backwards in recent years. These days there’s an immediate outcry of racial prejudice whenever someone shares a different opinion or point of view about a particular story involving a high profile white or black personality. Social media for all of its positives, serves as a cesspool of negativity anytime a conversation arises that involves any inference of race.
First, nobody in the sports radio industry has gone on the record to explore this issue the way that I have. I do believe progress needs to be made, and what the business has presented collectively isn’t good enough. Let me make that crystal clear.
But despite pointing out the radio industry’s lack of diverse voices in weekday positions, and regardless of my track record of running brands and working with and hiring numerous minority voices, I’ve also been called out by people who read my website and have no knowledge of my background for ignoring black personalities in other columns I’ve written.
When I wrote the piece “Another 10 Talents You May Not Know But Should” I had a high profile TV personality respond by email adding “No blacks huh? Interesting”. It didn’t matter that the intent of the piece was to highlight people doing quality work in sports radio who didn’t earn a lot of fanfare, or that the people I selected to be featured deserved to be recognized. The simple fact of the matter was that none were black, therefore it was implied that I was ignoring minority voices.
Then in early February, I posted the annual Top 20 of the sports radio format. Over the span of 6 days I showcased who industry executives voted as the format’s top morning, midday, afternoon and national shows. Some of these categories included minority personalities. However, they were once again under represented.
That led to Howard Bryant suggesting that the morning drive airwaves were being controlled by white voices and influenced by white decision makers.
At first I was bothered by the tweet because it led to receiving a few hate emails for sports radio being dominated by white males, as if I created the problem. But after having an opportunity to process things I understood exactly where Howard and some of his supporters were coming from.
As a soon to be forty three year old white male, I don’t enjoy when I hear people criticize those who hold jobs in the industry and assume they have them because they’re white. That in my opinion is irresponsible. It ignores the fact that the employed white individual likely had some degree of talent that appealed to a hiring executive. If they’ve been hired to do a job, and have continued to do it well for an extended period of time, that should be enough validation for the hiring manager.
But it’d also be foolish of me to assume that there’s nothing wrong with a picture that shows every major and mid market local morning show being led by white personalities. This is what African American’s see when they look at a list which includes only two minority hosts, Rob Long in Baltimore and Damon Benning in Omaha.
The story was similar in middays where only 6 minority hosts were part of the nation’s top 40 shows, and in afternoons where 10 minority voices contributed to the top 40 shows in the country. It was more of the same on the national scene, where Stephen A. Smith, Bomani Jones and Tiki Barber were the only African American personalities to be included on the list of the nation’s top 21 programs.
I understand that if you’re a Caucasian male you may not want to hear this. You might even be offended that I’ve raised the issue, but I guarantee that you’d have a very different opinion if you looked at the nation’s top 140 shows and saw only 21 of 271 positions occupied by white personalities.
In order to avoid any confusion, I want to be clear that this article focuses on males and the ethnic composition that exists inside many of the nation’s leading sports radio brands. I will address the challenges facing women in the sports radio industry in a separate column. Although I could combine the two, I have found through previous experiences that messages get lost when you try to tackle too much in the same space, especially sensitive subjects such as this one.
Before I share my findings from this year, I do want to address a few things. The intent of this piece isn’t to suggest to folks on the outside looking in that all executives are against hiring minority voices. That would indicate that every single executive in a hiring position isn’t open minded to changing the look and sound of their brand. I don’t subscribe to that theory at all.
This column also isn’t intended to suggest that influence should be used to force minority individuals into high profile positions. I saw a column a few weeks ago on The Undefeated which took exception with Magic Johnson for not using his influence to make sure a minority candidate received consideration for the Lakers vacant GM position. It was insinuated that by not doing so, he failed to handle his responsibility as an African American executive. Not only do I disagree with that assessment, I feel it creates a further divide rather than progress.
Never mind that Jeanie Buss went to war with her family by firing her brother and GM Mitch Kupchak, but she also gave the keys to the Lakers kingdom to a minority (Magic Johnson) and gave him the freedom to hire the team’s next General Manager. Johnson chose Rob Pelinka (former NBA agent) who had an excellent reputation and relationship with many black players in the league, and great familiarity with the way the Lakers run their business.
Pelinka also had the blessing of another powerful minority (Kobe Bryant), who happened to be the best Lakers player of the past twenty years, and we’ve seen proof of agents (Bob Meyers) making the transition into NBA front offices and helping franchises have success. Magic did not nor should he have had to hire or pursue a minority candidate just to please members of his race. That’s the type of process I would like to see our industry avoid.
But that particular example is not what we’re here to discuss. I brought it to light because I want it to be clear that positions shouldn’t be filled based on a responsibility to pleasing one’s race, but rather in the best interests of the brand, company, and audience which each market serves.
In doing my research for this year’s piece, I focused once again on the weekday lineups of the nation’s Top 20 market sports radio stations and networks. Depending on how you look at it, we’re no better or worse than we were 12 months ago. Usually staying consistent is viewed as a positive, but in this instance, where progress is necessary, I don’t believe that does the trick.
Does this mean that companies and their executives aren’t aware of the problem? Not at all. As a matter of fact, if you flashback to ten years ago, many would say that the industry has made a better effort in adding diverse talent to its airwaves. But to expect sweeping changes or a 50/50 blend inside most brands is unrealistic, especially if a sports radio station is currently achieving success.
It’s also puzzling that minority’s rarely occupy management positions. There’s only one African American sports radio program director (Terry Foxx at 92.9 The Game in Atlanta) in a Top 20 market, and market managers, corporate executives and owners are also rarely non-white professionals. Are we really suggesting as an industry that there are no minorities capable of leading our operations? What type of message are we sending to minorities in our industry who have dreams about one day overseeing a company or sports radio station?
The real questions we must address are related to the processes being implemented inside of each station and company.
How are companies holding their executives accountable to make sure that minority candidates are given a fair look during the interview process? What checks and balances are being implemented to make sure stations place a greater importance on reflecting their communities on the air? How much involvement does a brand manager have in making sure the product is more attractive to non-white audiences?
Other questions that deserve to be asked include, is the radio station sending its leaders to speak at schools, job fairs or creating programs to invite individuals from different backgrounds to learn about their business? Are station executives analyzing their audience composition and working to make sure their brands have the right mix of personalities to reach and connect with their local demographics? Are executives looking for minority talent in different places besides colleges and other media companies? How are HR departments assisting executives to improve upon their shortcomings?
Many people love to point fingers, and express their frustrations with these type of sensitive issues, but when pressed for solutions and ideas they fire blanks. That does us no good in this conversation. Instead, we need accountability, action, and a long term strategy to make our business more attractive to people from different backgrounds.
And let’s be sure this next point is understood. As much as African Americans are underrepresented on sports radio stations, the percentage of on-air jobs that they hold is comparable to their overall population numbers inside Top 20 markets. They hold 12% of the prime sports radio positions, while representing 15% of the population from Top 20 cities.
If there’s a group with an even bigger reason to feel slighted, it’s Hispanics. They hold only 9 of 399 prestigious on-air jobs inside the Top 20 markets and national networks, which is slightly above 2%. Yet they make up 22% of the population from our larger cities, and 17% of the entire population in the United States, and that number is expected to rise in the future.
Similar to an office, locker room, federal government agency or restaurant, I believe that the more people you include from different walks of life, the more interesting your operation becomes. Certain conversations that some individuals can’t tackle on the air suddenly become possible due to the different personalities involved. The sound of a station changes too and becomes more distinct, and the more variety you can offer your local audience, the more likely they are to consume your future content. That in turn helps you expand your fan base.
But as we’re discussing this issue, and how to include more people from minority backgrounds in the process, we also have to recognize and acknowledge a few other important facts.
You can slice and dice it however you wish, but the reality is that the majority of sports radio listening comes from white male audiences aged 25-54. That demographic shouldn’t be tossed aside just because the other side is underrepresented. They are people too, and they equally love the content, and spend money supporting the radio station’s advertisers.
Let’s also not be naive to the bigger picture. Sports radio is a business. If the station and company are turning a profit, and the hosts who they employ are charged with producing ratings and they’re getting the job done, then why on earth would they alter their approach?
Most brands are measured by their ability to generate income and audience. Whether success comes from an Asian host, Hispanic host, black host, female host or a middle aged white male, isn’t as important to a company as an ability to fulfill and surpass company expectations.
I understand this issue is sensitive and personal to many. It’s impossible for some of us to see the world through each other’s eyes and skin. Speaking strictly for myself, I don’t believe that one’s ethnicity or skin color should determine whether they warrant an opportunity or not. If the white individual possesses more talent than the minority candidate, and is more equipped to produce results, then that’s who deserves the job. A major league baseball team doesn’t shape its roster based on fulfilling quotas to satisfy different races. A player either has an ability to pitch or hit and help the team win, or they’re not on the roster.
However, I also don’t think the radio business and major league baseball are an apples to apples comparison.
In sports radio, the words, actions, images and voices of our personalities determine how a brand is received by local listeners. If a station doesn’t offer a minority voice on its airwaves in a key weekday time slot, then it creates the impression to minority audiences that it’s going to take an act of god for someone from their background to gain a bigger opportunity on that brand’s airwaves.
Where it becomes even more challenging is when you consider how many positions exist on each station’s airwaves, how successful the brand is, and what level of interest is displayed from qualified candidates from minority backgrounds. Unlike pro sports where 25 men occupy a major league baseball team’s roster, and 53 suit up for an NFL team, and the entire country plays them at a young age and dreams of one day doing so professionally, some sports stations may only feature 2-5 people in their starting lineups. That’s even less than what an NBA team puts on the floor each night.
The other part of the conversation that remains a real issue is the lower level of interest from qualified minority candidates. I mentioned my personal familiarity with this issue when I explored it fifteen months ago, and after speaking to numerous executives for this year’s column, it appears that not much has changed.
Maybe the guy who works at Staples in the stockroom will turn out to be the next Stephen A. Smith, but when a programmer receives an application, and it includes no experience in the radio industry, no audio to judge someone’s ability, no mention of any type of work that would be related to the field for which they’re applying, and no references to anyone inside your operation who might know something unique and interesting about the candidate, chances are that application is going into the filing cabinet.
We can blame corporations and take issue with those who are in high ranking positions at radio stations across the country, but we also need to recognize that there’s a big issue with minority candidates not pursuing this industry as aggressively as whites. If the applicants pursuing work aren’t from a minority background, and those who do apply lack the skill level necessary to land an opportunity, what’s the hiring manager supposed to do?
These days you don’t necessarily have to be a radio veteran with stops in multiple cities, but you do have to provide something that gives a program director a reason to want to contact you. I may want to be the next President of the United States of America, but if I lack political experience, allies, a shortage of campaign funding, and possess little knowledge on the complex issues facing our nation, that opportunity isn’t going to be part of my future plans.
On second thought, maybe that makes me qualified after all.
But I digress.
Another issue that deserves to be raised is how smaller markets (where many people get their opportunities to learn and develop their skills) also have a shortage of minority on-air personalities. Is that because minorities are being ignored in smaller towns? Or is it due to a lack of pursuing entry level jobs in smaller regions and rejecting the idea of relocating and working for minimal pay?
Most small stations rely on young people who are willing to work for minimum wage salaries, and the trade off for low compensation is experience. Smaller markets should be even more open to giving people of color and different backgrounds a chance to learn the business, but it’s also incumbent upon minorities to explore these situations, and be willing to pay their dues because starting at the top in major markets isn’t a viable option.
I also don’t see a ton of minorities creating original content via podcasts, YouTube, Periscope or Facebook Live. These are all areas where an individual can practice their craft, build relationships with radio station executives, and develop an audience. And it costs next to nothing.
This issue is complex and it won’t be fixed immediately, but what’s critical is that the radio industry is making a collective effort to improve upon its shortcomings. Few can argue that the format is thin of minority voices. Nor can they suggest that enough training, outreach and internal accountability has been implemented to assure that brands take steps in the right direction to improve their diversity challenges.
Which means that each company has to decide if this is an issue they care deeply about, or if they’re content with their current standing. It also tells me that the current crop of minority talent on our sports radio stations can be part of the solution by getting further involved and encouraging people from different backgrounds to explore this industry.
The media business, and for that matter, the entire world, is a changed place. Image, sound, variety, and perception all impact a station’s ability to maintain and expand its business. What may have worked for the past thirty years isn’t necessarily going to work for the next thirty, which is why this is a subject that must be addressed.
Most radio industry leaders are good open-minded people with the right intentions, but the collective results we’ve delivered on this issue leave little to be desired. We can sweep it under the carpet, issue quotes to the radio trades, speak at conferences, and send out internal emails telling our employees how much we value being a diverse operation, but at some point, that noise must turn to concrete action, especially in desirable positions.
Keep in mind, I’ve only drawn to light the lack of minority voices in key weekday hosting positions. What do you think we’d find if we also shined the spotlight on update anchors, reporters and producers? Heck, is there one sports radio station in the nation that uses a minority as its main voice to position its brand? If so, I’d love to know. I study this format intently and I haven’t heard of any station doing that.
The late Michael Jackson said it best in his song “Man In The Mirror“. If you’re unfamiliar with the lyrics, they read like this:
I’m Starting With The Man In The Mirror
I’m Asking Him To Change His Ways
And No Message Could Have Been Any Clearer
If You Wanna Make The World A Better Place
Take A Look At Yourself, And Then Make A Change
Jackson may not have written that song with the thought of sports radio’s lack of diversity on the top of his mind, but the message rings all too clear.
Change starts in each city, building, company, and executive’s mind. If you care about growing your radio station and relating better to the community in which you operate, be willing to consider others who you may not have previously. Explore different avenues to identify talent. Get a firm understanding of where your brand’s strengths are, and what opportunities exist to make larger inroads in the marketplace. Don’t wait until your market’s demographics change. By then it’ll be way too late to make adjustments.
The collective improvement of diversity in sports radio won’t be resolved inside of a conference room by a group of executives joining forces to introduce wholesale changes across multiple regions and companies. But if better systems are installed, and one individual in one city takes action to make his or her operation more diverse, that becomes the first step towards making an entire industry look, sound, and feel better than it did yesterday. And that my friends is where progress begins.
On Tuesday night, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC had the entire world eating out of the palm of her hand. Except she forgot the most important item – the food.
Time and time again it’s been proven that Americans are suckers for hype. Networks and their on-air stars grace our airwaves and social media platforms, and tell us that they have something big, and immediately we start sharing, speculating and debating it with our friends, family and co-workers, working ourselves up into a frenzy prior to the big reveal.
But getting an audience to tune in one time for your content isn’t difficult. If you have something unique, and promote it effectively, people will stop by to see what all the buzz is about. The real challenge is delivering on what you promised when they show up, and rewarding them with a positive experience so they consider becoming repeat customers of your program.
If a restaurant in your neighborhood runs commercials and places signs in their windows hyping up that they have the best steak in town, you might consider eating there. But if you enter the establishment, and the wait staff ignores your table for a half an hour, and the steak they present is cold and tough to devour, then it’s unlikely you’ll return for a second visit.
This is what happened to Rachel Maddow on Tuesday night. She provided poor customer service, and a cold steak that few enjoyed eating.
I didn’t take the bait when I saw MSNBC touting they had Donald Trump’s tax return from 2005, because my immediate reaction was that the material was 12 years old (way before he entered politics, and the equivalent of three presidential terms ago), and I didn’t expect MSNBC to provide a fair and balanced discussion on the subject since they lean left. If the same situation unfolded and a democrat was president, I wouldn’t have turned to FOX News, because they do the same exact thing, except they serve the right side of the audience.
But when I saw my Twitter timeline begin to fill with emotional responses from many throughout the sports media, I became intrigued. The general consensus was that Maddow had promised something big, viewers tuned in for it, and were then strung along for a while before she provided a payoff, which was less than spectacular.
I then recorded the show to watch it afterwards because I was curious if she made the same tactical mistakes that ESPN did when they trotted out Jim Gray for the LeBron James special. If you remember that failed production, viewers (especially those in Cleveland) were put through an exhausting couple of segments, listening to LeBron talk about the ups and downs of his previous season, and his connection to the Boys and Girls club, only to learn at the end that he was leaving his hometown team to join the Miami Heat.
Although “The Decision” was awful, it did provide a big payoff. LeBron announced he was leaving the Cavaliers, and cameras captured immediate footage from Cleveland where people were visibly upset. Maddow on the other hand not only executed her show using the same failed playbook, but her grand finale was the equivalent of LeBron telling Jim Gray he still hadn’t made a decision on his future.
Rule number one if you’re a talk show host, never promise the audience red meat if you don’t have it. When you build your content around the President of the United States, a man who many will passionately defend or go to extremes to have impeached, and you tell the world you have exclusive information that’s going to interest them, you can’t then show up with only two pages of a tax return, one which shows that he paid a higher percentage of taxes than other presidents and candidates, and close to forty million dollars. That makes people angry.
Rule number two, if you have the smoking gun, and have convinced the world to stop by to hear about the evidence on your show, do not make the critical mistake of making the audience wait to try and gain one or two quarter hours of ratings credit. You might win this particular night, but you’ll never win another one. Word gets around quickly that you promise a lot, but deliver a little.
I saw a few of my industry friends on Twitter debating this issue Tuesday night, and I understood their points about Maddow playing the TV game to help her numbers. A few folks mentioned that she did her job to get people to tune in. Others commented that she created conversation about the show and was trending on Twitter because of her approach in making the audience wait.
There’s some truth in those commentaries, except there’s one critical point missing – she was already going to have a big ratings night because of the claim of having exclusive information on the President.
When you have the world’s attention, the way Maddow did on Tuesday night, you can’t afford to toy with the audience. Maddow chose to start her program with an extended twenty minute monologue, followed by a commercial break. She assumed that because she had information that nobody else did, that she could hold onto it for an extended period of time. But by operating that way, she not only pissed off the audience, but they were out for blood as soon as it was discovered that her evidence didn’t match up to the hype.
This is why people rejected ESPN for “The Decision”. It’s the same reason sports fans became upset with last year’s CBS Selection Sunday show. There are times when you play the quarter hour game, but not when you’re handed crucial information that the world is turning to you to learn about it.
When an opportunity of this magnitude lands on your plate, you have a simple job to do. Set up the story by providing insight on how you gained the information, and then provide the payoff. The sooner the audience gets it, the better, and the more satisfied they will be. You can add your analysis, post-monologue, guests, and other show elements afterwards.
Rachel Maddow’s biggest mistake on Tuesday night was that she thought more about her ratings, rather than the the people who actually provide those ratings spikes. When you execute that way, you lose every time. I’m sure MSNBC will see a boost in Maddow’s Tuesday night’s numbers. But that’s only one night. If the audience doesn’t return Wednesday, Thursday and beyond, then that tells you a huge opportunity was wasted.
Maddow can take solace in the fact that she was able to deliver her commentaries on Donald Trump to a large number of new viewers who might not have been familiar with her show or style. But turning those casual viewers into repeat customers was tossed out the window when she held on to the evidence too long, and then failed to produce material that would make the wait worthwhile.
On a normal night, she can execute a show that’s built for quarter hour viewing. The structure may involve a monologue in the first segment, a second topic or extension of the first topic in segment 2, and then a guest to offer analysis and opinion in the third segment. That plan makes sense most times.
But these situations follow a different set of rules, and require a different strategy.
If Barry Bonds agreed to come on your program and admit to the world that he used steroids, you wouldn’t wait 7 or 8 questions into the interview to ask him. If you did, the audience would turn on you. If you possessed a photograph proving that O.J. Simpson did in fact murder his ex-wife Nicole, you wouldn’t wait 20-30 minutes to show it, otherwise you’d earn the wrath of the audience.
In each of those examples, when you proclaim to have something exclusive, that will warrant the entire nation’s attention, it better be strong, and it better be delivered immediately. Rachel Maddow missed on both fronts.
Which is why the world is now talking about her failed performance, rather than the President’s taxes, something nobody could have believed was possible 48 hours ago. But when you ignore the audience’s demands for the betterment of your ratings, it carries lasting consequences. Rachel Maddow is now fully aware.
On the 5th episode, Barrett Sports Media President Jason Barrett shares his thoughts on the Infinite Dial study conducted by Edison Research. The Starting Point focuses on the positives and negatives of podcasting and why Jason believes the growth of digital audio could impact the way sports radio stations feature their content during the next 5-10 years.
Plus Mighty 1090 afternoon drive host, and longtime San Diego sports radio personality Scott Kaplan drops by for a conversation about the early days of his career in south Florida, landing a morning show in the big apple at the age of 30, heading west to San Diego, and all of the bumps, and ups and downs, he’s experienced along the way.
TOPICS COVERED WITH SCOTT KAPLAN
Developing the bug for sports radio while at the University of Pittsburgh
Working in television and discovering that the work didn’t interest him
Meeting Andrew Ashwood at WQAM and getting his first radio break
Learning alongside Hank Goldberg, filling in for him & working radio row
Getting a break at SportsLine USA & discovering radio host Sid Rosenberg
How Scott and Sid garnered the attention of CBS Radio executives in NY
The birth of “The Sports Guys” on WNEW and their 1-year run in the big apple
A bad ending in NY leads to a great opportunity in San Diego at XTRA 690
Auditioning with Billy Ray Smith, and how their first week of shows went
The keys to sustaining an on-air partnership for a long period of time
His short-term and long-term goals and prognosis for Scott & BR
Why he feels it’s important to be share your life on the air as a talk show host
Dealing with the ugly side of the business and why you can’t be afraid to take chances
Losing the Chargers and how their exit forces his show/station to change its strategy
Quick Hits – who taught him most, brand building, sidelines, SD sports, love of the job
Satisfying the wants and needs of the audience is a daily priority for every sports radio executive, host and employee. But when advancing the station-listener relationship beyond the airwaves comes into play, things become much more difficult.
One quote which I’ve grown fond of over the years is from Henry Ford, who said “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Ford was making the point that people fear change, but when you have a vision, you can’t be afraid to take risks and introduce new ideas which might make things better.
In 2017, most sports stations operate over the air, online and on mobile. They also have a Twitter and Facebook account, with some even extending their presence on Instagram and/or Snapchat. Social media platforms are where the audience reside each day, and where brands can further extend their relationships with their most passionate fans.
When you dig into a radio station’s social media account, you often find they post photos or links to stories, and occasionally a piece of audio or video from the station’s shows or hosts. You also discover just how inconsistent and far behind many brands are when it comes to using these platforms effectively.
These issues aren’t any one person’s fault. They’re a reflection of the industry not providing enough manpower or defined strategy to help their brands and people excel in a foreign space. Other companies outside of the radio business not only understand these areas much better, but they’re dedicating people, time, and resources to them, because they see the long-term benefits.
This is a big problem in our industry. When new opportunities arise, we assume that it’s a simple task, and try to solve it by tacking on more responsibility to the people inside our operations. If the audience seeks more written or video content, we just ask the talent to do more. If advertisers want a campaign built around the radio station’s digital and social media assets and our sales team doesn’t grasp the difference of the space, we just arm them with a presentation, and trust that they’ll get in the room and close the deal just as they would any other radio buy.
Except some of our top radio hosts aren’t great writers or equipped to perform on camera. And many salespeople who have spent years, and in some cases decades, selling traditional radio, don’t understand the complexities of selling digital and social media. Some also don’t see the financial upside in selling it. I’ve been in multiple places where it becomes a value added item for a client, or the account executive closes a radio deal and then shifts part of the total earnings towards social and digital so they can satisfy their budgets in those areas and keep their managers happy.
But if this is a space where people are investing most of their time, and advertiser dollars are shifting to it, then that should be enough cause for concern for the radio industry to invest more resources to becoming experts in it.
Here’s a sobering statistic from Edison Research’s 2017 Infinite Dial study. Did you know that 81% of all American’s use social media? That number has grown nearly 30% in the last 5 years, and 57% in less than 10 years. Altogether, an estimated 226 million people currently use social media.
If you consider that the average person sleeps 8.8 hours per day, that makes them accessible for 15.2 hours per day. This means that your brand has an opportunity to connect with the audience every 30.4 minutes, and a total of 30 different times per day on social media. More than a third of a person’s time is spent on social media, and each time they log on to check their account, your radio station is given an opening to present your content, personalities, promotions, and client messages to them (assuming they’re following your brand).
But now let’s look at the other side of this equation.
Inside most radio stations, people are consumed with the over the air product. They focus on ratings and revenue, and the thought of changing anything makes many uncomfortable, because it could disrupt the brands chances of earning a quarter hour of listening.
But once again, let’s look at some evidence.
First, the average person’s commute time in the United States is 26 minutes per day. This means that if they drive to and from work listening to your station, they will spend a total of 52 minutes per day consuming your content. That’s assuming of course that they never leave their car, make a phone call, play a CD or change the dial to sample another radio station.
Maybe they’ll also listen to your station while at lunch or at at work, but if we’re being realistic, most brands rely on in-car listening, which means that at best, you’ll earn 4 quarter hours of listening during a 52 minute drive. Even if I doubled that number of commute time for larger cities where traffic is heavier, that still only gives the radio station access to the audience for up to 2 hours a day, a total of eight quarter hours.
Meanwhile, the average person spends 50 minutes per day on Facebook, 25-30 minutes on Snapchat, 21 minutes daily on Instagram, and 17 minutes on Twitter. When you look at the younger demographic (18-29), the numbers are even higher. Most people now use a minimum of two social media accounts, and they’re investing more time before, during, and after work on these platforms.
Why should that concern you? Because soon these will be the people you’re trying to reach, except getting them to use your radio station will be as easy as convincing Donald Trump to stop tweeting.
Their parents may have grown up on radio, but they haven’t. That means you’ve got to play by their rules. Your entry point to them exists, except it’s not inside of a vehicle on a dashboard. It’s a place where they’re already established, and you too have a solid foundation. The big difference is that it dominates their life, while you consider it to be an afterthought – social media.
If the average person only hears 2-4 updates per day due to spending 52 minutes of total time in their car, and the reports themselves offer minimal original content and unique value (not to mention they’re often tied to a commercial break which causes further tune out), and we have key areas of our business performing poorly which require greater maintenance and focus, then what are we debating about? We’ve got to take a collective look in the mirror and ask ourselves, why we’re resisting efforts to serve the audience in the places where they’re most available.
We focus our time and energy resisting change to an antiquated update structure, which has a maximum potential of reaching our listeners 2-4 times per day, while the same listeners are engaged and accessible on social platforms 30 times daily and for the same amount of time as their daily commute. If you’re a gambler, would you bet on people spending more time on the radio and less time on social media over the next 5 years? If you answered yes, please email me. I have a bucket of steam, a left handed screwdriver and a wall stretcher that I’d like to sell you.
One of the biggest issues I see is that most sports radio brands don’t have dedicated digital and social media strategists inside of their buildings. Nor do they have a game plan or the knowledge of how to maximize the station’s relationship with the audience and advertisers in that space. They may receive corporate support from time to time, but even those corporate teams with great insights and strategies, are at the mercy of what each brand does on its own. That becomes increasingly difficult when overseeing the strategic efforts of more than one hundred radio stations, many of which broadcast different formats.
To excel in the social space, companies have to be willing to make larger investments to help their brands. This is vital to every station’s existence, relevance, and future growth. Before the company dedicates funds though, they have a right to question each operator about the dollars they’re already spending towards their on-air products. If resources are being used in areas that deliver minimal impact, then it’s worth exploring redirecting those dollars to further improve the brand’s social and digital media strategy and execution.
As it relates to the social picture, I did a study recently of twelve local sports stations to see how active and engaged their brands were on Facebook. The brands I chose for this project were WFAN and ESPN New York 98.7FM in New York, ESPN LA 710 and AM 570 L.A. Sports in Los Angeles, 790 The Ticket in Miami, 620 WDAE in Tampa, 1500 ESPN in Minneapolis, Arizona Sports 98.7FM in Phoenix, Sports Radio 94 WIP in Philadelphia, ESPN 97.5 in Houston, the Mighty 1090 in San Diego and Sports Radio 810 WHB.
I selected these stations for a few reasons.
I wanted to feature a number of different corporate groups. For this project, CBS, Entercom, ESPN, iHeart, Hubbard, and Bonneville were all represented.
I wanted to examine a few locally operated brands. Gow Media, Union Broadcasting, and Broadcast Company of the Americas all fit that description.
I wanted to see how stations executed on both coasts, in the north and south, and in the middle of the country.
I wanted to analyze a few stations with strong leaders who I know have thick skin, and who know that I don’t take personal shots and am only interested in helping our business improve.
I wanted to profile a few brands that I don’t have deep relationships with because it’s a little uncomfortable and forces me to be thorough and honest.
Over a period of 24-48 hours, I examined how often these stations posted, what time of the day their material went up, which content they featured, and the amount of response they provided to the audience’s feedback. I chose Facebook over the other platforms because it is the most utilized social network on the planet. The others aren’t even close. If you’re unsure about that, check out slides 1, 2, 3 and 4 courtesy of the 2017 Infinite Dial study done last week by Edison Research.
To see my full report for all 12 sports stations, click here.
Something that’s important to understand is that each platform requires different tactics. What you do on Twitter won’t work on Facebook, and what you do on Facebook won’t register on Instagram. You also need to understand which days and times the audience is most available, and capitalize on those opportunities. Fast Company conducted a study to share best practices and I recommend clicking the link to familiarize yourself with it.
An area of frustration for many radio stations is how Facebook uses sophisticated algorithms to limit a brand’s ability to reach their entire audience. But while it may fuel your desires to share a few expletive laced commentaries with Mark Zuckerberg, it’s the platform that delivers the biggest impact, and you can’t afford not to make this your brand’s top social media priority.
One thing you can do to help yourself, is make sure you’re posting material that doesn’t read as an ad. If it comes across as shareworthy content that’s even better. Anytime you attach a video or photograph to your posts, your odds increase of the content being viewed by a larger part of your fan base.
I noticed while researching this story that many stations tend to follow a similar pattern when posting material. They often update social media content during the weekday business hours when everyone is inside the building. However, when people are home from work at night or on the weekend, and actively engaging with a sports brand during a popular sporting event, the content dramatically decreases. They also tend to post content in off peak hours that isn’t as topical, which does little to help the brand.
Another area of concern, one which I consider the worst sin of them all, is the lack of engagement that most sports radio stations provide to their fans on Facebook. This is true for radio stations outside of the sports format too. Tons of comments are being sent to your brand each day, but they rarely get answered. Imagine if your audience kept calling your phone line to talk to your hosts, and sent in a flurry of texts to the air studio, but nobody ever acknowledged them. Eventually the audience would stop engaging. Well, this is the expectation you’ve created in the mind of your audience as a result of being absent on social media.
What happens in most cases on these pages is a one sided conversation. The radio station pushes out the content, hopes the audience clicks a link or gives the brand a like or comment, but rarely do they take the time to acknowledge the listener’s existence. What this tells the audience is that there’s limited upside for engaging with the brand, and they’re better off instead sending a text to the studio, an email to the program director or a tweet to the host. Why? Because in each of those three cases they have a much better chance of receiving a response.
Ask yourself this question, why would my audience engage with my radio station account? What is the upside in the relationship for the listener? Do they gain access to information they can’t get elsewhere by following the page? Are they earning any rewards for liking and commenting on your material? If they never gain a response or benefit, why would you expect them to continue supporting you in the future?
Here’s a few others to think about. If I asked you what your engagement percentage was on your social media accounts, would you know it? Do you know how many posts your band delivers each day? If your CEO called and asked, “how do we grow our Facebook likes by 10,000 over the next 12 months”, do you have a strategy to do so?
The term “social media” implies that you’re entering a public community where others will interact and share ideas, content and information. Except most sports stations aren’t doing that. The term that best describes our approach is “one sided media” because we focus solely on pushing content at people and not participating in the experience with them.
So how do we fix it?
It starts with each company, market manager, and program director taking a good hard look at the way they’re executing, and admitting that it’s a space they need help in. Most brand managers lack superior knowledge and vision in the social space because it’s unfamiliar territory, and still relatively new. But if this is where your listeners are most available, and advertisers continue to spend more on digital and social assets, then that should serve as a motivator to get it right.
Then what follows is exploring deeper ways to educate everyone inside each building. Whether that’s attending a social media conference to learn tricks of the trade, bringing a social media strategist into your building from a company unrelated to radio to share best practices with your crew or studying on your own time how to best use and monetize these spaces, it requires sustained effort and a lot of learning.
After that, each station has to review its internal structure, and figure out who inside their operation can help the brand improve its social media relevance, reputation, and response time. This may require reassigning people to new positions that provide a much bigger payoff for them and the company, and/or hiring non-radio people who are experts in the space to help lead the radio station’s digital and social media efforts.
But to those of you who would be tasked with hiring someone to lead the brand’s digital and social strategy, I want you to consider something. If this is an area you’re not skilled in, how do you know if you’re crafting the right job description, targeting the right candidates, and asking the right questions?
Too often in radio we assume that just because someone designed a website, wrote a newspaper column, or worked inside another media company’s digital department that they’ll be qualified to create the brand’s digital and social media identity and execute the vision to make it matter. But we learn afterwards that they’re not versatile enough. It’s easy to blame the individual for not doing the job, but the process also reveals a lack of strategy in our hiring, and an unwillingness on our end to go outside the box and look in different places for digital/social brand leaders.
When a radio station is hiring a program director, the market manager and corporate team work together to make sure they find a person capable of managing and leading the radio station’s on-air staff, strategy, and execution. In this case, the same line of thinking is necessary. You have to think of this person as the digital/social media programmer of your brand, and that requires a special set of skills. It’s not a job for the person with the least amount of hours in the promotions department or the handful of producers on your shows who are already spread way too thin.
Far too often in our business, there’s a lack of urgency for becoming masters in new areas. There’s this mentality that it’s simply enough to be strong on the air and present in the social space, rather than add people who are experts in it. Well guess what? It’s not enough.
Do yourself a favor today and take a few minutes to read this piece from Lori Lewis, who lists the various things that happen inside of an internet minute. This is what you’re up against every day if you’re not cutting thru the clutter and forming deeper relationships with your audience.
There’s no excuse to be invisible to the audience on your own page. If the audience is taking the time to like or follow your account, and they’re reading your posts, promoting it to their friends, responding to topics, and supporting your advertisers, the least you can do is acknowledge them. This will especially come back to haunt you with younger people who won’t be as patient or as loyal as your current P1’s might be.
If you saw the movie “Moneyball” you may remember the scene when Brad Pitt (playing the role of Billy Beane) tells his entire scouting department they need to think and act differently when replacing a few superstars who were leaving via free agency. Beane understood that the Athletics couldn’t match up against larger market clubs when economics entered the equation, and if they planned to compete, they were going to have to adjust their strategy. His message to the group was that they had a choice, either adapt or die.
Well, we’ve got to do the same if we want to take advantage of the social space.
Sports radio’s social media strategy may not be on the verge of extinction, but if we keep ignoring our fans, bombarding them with irrelevant material at the wrong times, and treating social platforms like an afterthought instead of a critical part of our business, we could miss out on significant opportunities to strengthen our relationships with our audiences and advertisers. Before we end up like dinosaurs, let’s educate ourselves, and make sure we’re positioned to ride this gravy train as far as it will take us.
Barrett Sports Media President Jason Barrett weighs in on the news of ESPN being tasked with eliminating on-air jobs as the network continues to experience a decline in subscribers and advertising revenues.
Plus CBS Sports Radio Network host Damon Amendolara chats with Jason about his sports radio journey, earning the wrath of WFAN’s Mike Francesa, his reasons for passing up opportunities in a few great sports radio markets, the method to his madness in approaching social and digital platforms, and much more.
TOPICS COVERED WITH DAMON AMENDOLARA
When he first became interested in sports talk radio
Landing his first radio job in Fort Meyers thanks to Thom Abraham
Moving to Kansas City to join 610 Sports and how the job came about
Adjusting to life and a new situation in the Midwest and how he did it
Leaving KC for WQAM and the challenges he faced working in Miami
Why he passed up an opportunity to join 101 ESPN in St. Louis in 2008
Mark Chernoff calls and asks him to join 98.5 The Sports Hub in Boston
How he developed a connection with his Boston audience as a New Yorker
What made it appealing to leave The Hub to join the CBS Sports Radio Network
Earning Mike Frances’s wrath for using his initials during the CBS Sports Minute
Why he believes it’s critical as a host to be active in social and digital media spaces
Zach Bye is leaving his position as co-host of “Big Board Sports” with Rodger Wyland on ESPN Radio 104.5 The Team in Albany, NY, for an on-air opportunity with 104.3 The Fan in Denver. He will join forces with former NFL wide receiver Brandon Stokley weekdays from 12p-3p MT.
According to the Albany Times Union, Bye signed his contract with The Fan on Friday. His final day at 104.5 The Team will be March 16th. His on-air debut with Stokley on the new “Stokley and Zach” show is expected to take place on March 31st.
“It’s more than a good opportunity,” said Bye. “I don’t even have the adjectives to describe it — top-20 market, one of 10 American cities with four pro sports teams, No. 1 station in the market. It’s insane. It’s absurd, is what it is.”
During the process, the radio station had the two hosts do an off the air audition together. Bye says that convinced him that this was the right professional situation for his career.
“It felt right,” Bye added. “It really did. It felt easy. He was humble and kind and considerate and doesn’t carry himself like a diva. He’s a normal guy. There was a natural back-and-forth with him.”
Stokley spent 14 years in the NFL, enjoying stops in Baltimore, Indianapolis, Seattle, New York and Denver. He had previously been working alongside Charles “CJ” Johnson before Johnson left the station for an opportunity outside of the radio industry.
One benefit of the new opportunity in Denver is that it reconnects Bye with program director Armen Williams. Williams had previously programmed and hosted for 104.5 The Team, and although the two men did not work together at the station, it’s where they first became familiar with one another.
I sat down recently with Damon Amendolara to tape an upcoming episode of the BSM Podcast and after our conversation he asked me “who out there today is revolutionizing sports radio”? I wanted to respond with a laundry list of sports stations who were doing unique things and staying ahead of the curve but I couldn’t.
And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. If a station has a system in place, and it’s working, and their fans are enjoying what they provide, then who am I to suggest that they should change just for the sake of being an industry leader?
But let’s be honest, not every brand in the business today is enjoying ratings and revenue success. Yet there’s a comfort factor that exists inside many buildings, which prevents stations from taking bold steps to improve programming in order to satisfy the growing demands and needs of the listening audience.
If you missed it, KNBR in San Francisco announced last week they were eliminating on-air sports updates. The move cost two update anchors employment at the radio station. While I never like to see anyone lose their position, the radio station made the right call, even if it wasn’t conventional or popular. Even the two terminated employees agreed with the station’s forward thinking.
For decades, sports radio stations have featured two to three sports updates per hour. WFAN in New York introduced the 20/20 sports flash which many CBS stations have adopted over the years, and brands which have aligned themselves with ESPN Radio, have taken a similar approach by using the branding of “SportsCenter Updates”.
In the past, the audience was at the mercy of relying on the radio station, newspaper and television for up to the minute information. We started our day reading the paper, utilized sports radio throughout the work day, and then turned to local sports television or SportsCenter at night to fill us in on what we didn’t know. These services were valuable because our access to information was limited and much slower.
But then along came the internet, which started making everything better, and in real time. All of a sudden, waiting until the next day to read a columnist’s opinion or reporter’s game story seemed ridiculous. As did waiting for the 10 o’clock news to watch a 3 minute sports report of information you learned about 8-12 hours earlier.
The worst of the group to adapt were newspapers. For decades the print business relied on selling advertising and charging people to read their work, but now thanks to the online space, readers were seeking the content online, and for free, causing the print industry to lose a ton of revenue it was dependent on.
The shift also placed more pressure on writers who were now tasked with writing their stories, adding blogs, chatting with readers, and in some cases, creating video. The same began to take place in television where some reporters and on-air commentators were heading into the field with cameras and being expected to edit their own work.
Next came the explosion of social media. Facebook and Twitter took off, and soon we’d have conversations with family and friends, while increasing our connections and relationships with brands and their key people. As we gained more knowledge of the social experience, we started passing along content which we found interesting, helping brands reach more people with their content in the process.
This forced reporters, columnists and personalities to open themselves up even more. Soon they were reporting information on social platforms, before even doing so on their own airwaves or websites. Once again, the audience demanded instant information, and if sports media members weren’t providing it, they’d find others who could.
So that brings us to the present state of sports radio and its connection to on-air updates.
Many have mixed opinions on the impact and benefit of these reports, so let me present both sides of the debate so you can process the information and arrive at your own conclusion regarding their future value.
First, why should they be kept? Those in favor of keeping them on the air will tell you that they provide a few positives. Here are six examples.
They air 2-3x per hour, which means sponsors have the opportunity to attach their :05-:10 tag lines to them. Considering that during the span of a 13-hour broadcast day, a radio station is going to provide 26-39 of these reports, which adds up to 130-185 per week, that’s a lot of frequency for sponsors to latch onto.
The updates help inform sports fans of the most important stories of the day in a short amount of time and if the talk show host isn’t discussing a particular story, the listener can still find out about it.
They are positioned at set times, which allows the audience to develop a routine with the radio station. The listener knows that regardless of what’s happening on a talk show, they can rely on the brand to inform them at specific times.
They add an extra voice to the daily conversation, and help break up the talk show. The extra voice in the room also at times becomes a contributor to the talk show, leading to an increase in entertainment value.
By having the updates in place, the audience doesn’t have to rely on their phones while driving, allowing them to stay informed without risking the potential of an accident.
They serve as a great marketing tool for promoting the radio station’s on-air content, often using audio from other parts of the broadcast day which the audience may not have heard, helping to drive digital downloads or additional listening to other shows.
All of the reasons that I mentioned above are valid and why some programmers and market managers are reluctant to change course. But now let’s look at the other side of the argument.
Although the radio station presents 26-39 updates per day and 130-195 per week, and they may be available for sponsorship, most brands use them as value added for advertisers, which means there isn’t a ton of revenue being generated specifically for the reports. Some will argue that the station wouldn’t land the advertisers dollars it does without added value sponsorship’s, but the client cares most about the frequency of their message being communicated on the air. Whether they’re attached to a time check, sports update, on-air reset or show feature, they’re flexible.
The update may serve up sports information but most of it is material which the the majority of the audience is already aware of. Sports fans are constantly seeking out information and opinion and feeding them material which lacks urgency, suspense and value gives them reason to change the dial.
Routine is certainly a benefit IF the audience values the content being presented. If not, you’ve created a position on the radio station which tells them the exact times of when to tune out the radio station.
Adding extra voices to a talk show helps keep it interesting, but does that mean the station needs to feature 8-12 reports during the show just to include the anchor in 5-10 minutes of conversation? Is that really a wise way to use a station’s resources, if this is the best value that comes from the position?
Yes it’s true, keeping the phone out of the listener’s hands when they’re in their car is a great idea. Nobody wants to see loyal listeners die or end up in a hospital, but this is assuming the driver in each car is going to act responsible, which we all know, they won’t. There’s also the reality that listening to shows by phone has increased and will continue to do so, and if a station is fielding 13 hours of updates when most people spend 1-2 hours per day in their cars, then the question is, why is that a smart strategy?
I love the idea of marketing the radio station’s content in updates but how many anchors actually do that? Most use the time to look ahead to what’s coming up each night or they use the time to share stories they discovered on other sports websites. Scan around the country and aside from hearing a different voice, cadence and energy, much of the content is similar. If it’s not unique, and not redirecting the audience back to the station’s website, talk shows or social media pages, then it’s not taking advantage of the on-air marketing opportunity.
When I raise this issue, I do so with a big picture view of the industry in mind. I’m not one of these people who thinks we should change things just for the sake of change. But I also don’t think that you fix the problem by just having your host read reports or changing the name from your updates. Those are the dumb things that we do as an industry sometimes that just miss the point. It’s not about name changes or who reads the script, it’s about the value of the actual update/content.
To move a brand forward I believe you need to look at things from the inside out. Each station and company has to decide what matters most and direct their resources to the areas where they can make the biggest difference. If your station has a bottomless budget and isn’t under pressure to satisfy the bottom line, then feel free to ignore this entire piece because clearly your brand is in such a unique position that it can do whatever it pleases.
But from where I sit, I see the world of digital and social media exploding and being critical to the future of our brands. It’s already grown leaps and bounds over the past decade and it’s only going to increase as we move forward. Yet when I look at the creativity, execution, originality and engagement of sports radio brands in these spaces it’s very underwhelming.
Have you looked at the iTunes charts to see which shows perform best? Aside from a few national programs which have the scale of hundreds of markets pushing their content, the majority of top rated programs come from shows which aren’t on radio stations. Whether it’s Bill Simmons, Pardon My Take, Richard Deitsch, Adrian Wojnarowski’s The Vertical or numerous wrestling podcasts which have built up dedicated audiences, sports fans who turn to the most powerful digital platform to hear sports audio can’t find sports radio shows here because they don’t stand out.
Keep in mind, sports stations have a megaphone to use to promote their audio offerings. Many of these other digital offerings don’t.
But let’s move iTunes to the side for a second. Have you taken a look at the websites of most of the nation’s sports radio brands? Many operate with the same shell, pull information from the Associated Press or other news providers, and when you turn to their audio section, you find 3-4 hours of audio per show (minus the commercials) and minimal original content of value.
A big reason why digital audio is attractive is because it gives the listener something back that they value tremendously – time! They want to enjoy the show/host, but do so in shorter fashion. Yet most sports stations take the same exact on-air product, throw it on the web, and call it a day.
Except that is not giving the audience what they want. The best 60 minutes of your content gives them reason to click and listen. A GREAT 15-30 minutes of your best stuff makes them even more likely to download your material. Heck, even websites like Clammr allow brands to showcase up to 24 seconds of audio, which can be used as a short teaser to give the listener incentive to listen to the podcast. Sadly not many take advantage of these opportunities.
But that’s only the audio portion of this story. Now let’s examine the social media picture. After all, it is where the audience begins, continues, and ends their day, and a space you can’t afford to not be an expert in. I’ll let you know that I spent 2 days last week evaluating a ton of sports radio stations across the country on social media and I’ll be sharing my findings in a future column.
Take a minute and locate your favorite sports radio station on Facebook and Twitter. Now go thru their last 10 posts, and tell me how much unique content you find on each platform. Then look at how often the station redirects the audience back to the airwaves, its website, its podcasts or another area where the brand can benefit.
You’re going to find a lot of holes, but that’s not even the worst of our sins.
Let’s now examine how often the radio station engages in conversation with its audience on social media. Go thru those same 10 posts, and tell me how many times you’ve seen the radio station respond or acknowledge any comments left behind by the brand’s most important asset, its listeners. It rarely happens.
When I see this occur, it reinforces a few of my opinions.
First, it speaks to a lack of internal focus on the digital and social experience. People just post content and assume the audience will see it. They don’t always think about what they’re posting, how they’re saying it, what times they’re posting it or if it involves a strategic element to redirect the listener to another part of the radio station’s business.
Secondly, it shows a lack of manpower in most buildings. Stations tack on the responsibility of social and digital media execution to their employees, but because they don’t understand the space or how to be experts in it, and don’t sell a ton of advertising on it, they just assume it’s an extra thing the brand must do.
The third thing I’m reminded of is that unless things change, a listener who values their time and making connections, is better served NOT following the radio station’s social media accounts. Instead they should invest their time in the hosts. Why? They’re more likely to earn a response on-air or on social media from the talent, plus they’ll get to know them better. They can also still learn about what’s taking place on the air from the host, and if the brand is only interested in a one way relationship, then what’s the return on time spent supporting the brand for the audience?
Folks, it’s called SOCIAL media for a reason. It’s not “push content at you and ignore your existence” media. If an audience litters your social media pages with hundreds to thousands of responses per day, and you never take a minute to hit the like button or respond to their questions, suggestions, comments or complaints or provide any special benefits or unique experiences that are only available to your followers, then there’s little reason for them to actively supporting your pages.
So now let’s bring this full circle.
The format lacks original podcasts. Brands don’t promote short-clips of their station’s best content to entice the audience to download their programming. They’re not condensing a 4 hour show into the best 30-60 minutes to make it more appealing to the listener. We’re also not engaged or strategically exploring ways to increase brand loyalty with the audience.
Yet here we sit, having a debate about the value of sports updates, an area of the business which many would agree is not critical to the success of our stations. Our reluctance to change what we do and focus on the areas of our business that matter is no different than the print industry’s ignorance of thinking their customers would continue paying to read their stories online. At some point you have to make difficult decisions or risk becoming expendable by the audience.
I’m not saying there aren’t some excellent anchors on the air in markets across the country. I’m also not suggesting that brands like WFAN or ESPN Radio should abandon utilizing sports updates because they’ve built a certain expectation with their products that the audience does tune to them for. There are always exceptions.
But that’s not the case with most brands.
It’s not the anchor’s fault that the audience has gained access to information faster on social and digital media. Or that the listener has been treated to thousands of audio options and now utilizes the station they love for a shorter amount of time. But if that’s what people are doing, and these are the platforms where they are spending time, and it’s where advertisers are shifting their dollars (they are), then your brand has to make a commitment to being great in the space or it will come back to haunt you.
I mentioned this on my last episode of the BSM Podcast, those who are in anchor positions, should be thinking of the ways they can reinvent themselves and offer value beyond two two-minute reports per hour. Can you deliver video commentaries? Write columns? Report on local teams and break news? Host shows? If you have knowledge of how to help the brand master its digital and social media experience that helps too.
Sports updates have lost their appeal because the content isn’t special, the information is available elsewhere, and it can be consumed in a much shorter time. The phone and computer have become great weapons for the audience, which makes it harder than ever to win the battle for their time.
The audience craves our talk shows and personalities. This is our entry point to their hearts and minds. They don’t get interrupted 2-3x per hour when watching a movie, sitcom or sports television show, and we can’t continue to place speed bumps in front of them during our shows and think it’s going to better serve us in the battle to grow ratings and brand loyalty. That makes zero sense.
Whether we like it or not, the audience’s demands have increased. We’re now operating in a sea of audio after decades of being the dominant fish in the pond. Attention spans are shortening, listening occasions are less frequent, and the appetite for social and digital media continues to rise like a phoenix.
The same hurdles exist on television where SportsCenter now finds itself having to reinvent its approach after being the go to source for the entire sports universe. As a result, ESPN has been losing money and viewers, and finds itself in the most vulnerable spot it’s ever been in as a business.
This is the reality of the world today, and when it comes to providing a strong digital and social experience, radio is standing in the batter’s box with a toothpick trying to hit an Aroldis Chapman fastball over the fence. It may not be comfortable, but to stay ahead in this competitive environment, each brand, manager, anchor and company has to evaluate the areas of their brand that matter most, and figure out how to shift resources from areas that are less important to others which provide a significant benefit.
KNBR recognized it needed to change for the betterment of its future, and did so by eliminating a convenient part of their product, but not a necessary one, sports updates. I can only hope that you’re willing to make the same gutsy decision down the line, because it’s not a question of IF it will be necessary, it’s a question of WHEN!
Before you know it, opening day will be here. And when it arrives, listeners will return in full force to hear their favorite local teams games on the radio, and to listen to talk show hosts offer up their perspectives and opinions on the season.
It’s easy to dismiss baseball as a thought until April, but if you’re looking to capitalize on the sport for the entire season, it benefits you to brainstorm and develop a strategy prior to the season’s first pitch.
Too often in sports radio we fly by the seat of our pants. We don’t lay out game plans for an entire season, instead we implement new ideas when they come to us. The focus is on each day’s show, except sometimes when you’re reliant on the day’s top stories, you don’t get handed a lot to work with. That’s especially true during the dog days of summer.
But if you venture into other media worlds, whether it be digital, television or advertising, they have a calendar in place to take advantage of annual opportunities and to develop sustainable campaigns which consumers can rally around. This is something every media executive and talk show host should have at their disposal as well.
So what do you do?
It starts with the brand manager having a vision for how they want to attack the baseball season. By the way, what I’m suggesting can also work for a station entering the football, hockey or basketball season.
The first question that needs to be answered is “how important is the team to the local audience”? Do they care only about the game or are there topics, features, guests and other interesting elements worthy of exploration around the club that the local audience will want to hear about on your talk shows? Knowing how relevant and important the franchise is to your on-air content strategy is necessary. This is how you determine whether it’s a daily hit or a sporadic conversation.
From there you start reviewing your assets and how to best take advantage of them. If your station is carrying a local team’s games, how often are promos, liners and creative themes emphasized to make them sound important? Are you simply announcing the matchup and game time or adding some intrigue to the game that will make people want to tune in? Is there a theme song used to drive the season long campaign that sounds cool and connects to the game, team or biggest storyline?
Then you determine if there are personalities on the team who would be attractive on a regular basis to your audience, advertisers and talk show hosts. If there are, you work with the player, their agent, and/or the team to structure an agreement to have them appear on your brand for the duration of the season.
My advice, if you’re going to compensate someone for making the time commitment, make sure you have a working agreement that calls for a weekly appearance. It’s hard to build listening occasions when things don’t take place consistently, and most audiences don’t remember and respond favorably to bi-weekly or monthly guest visits.
The second suggestion I’ll pass along, if you’re going to add the expense to your station’s budget for a player to appear weekly, make sure you get something back beyond the weekly 10-15 minute conversation. It’s very hard for a station’s sales department to maximize your investment when all they have to work with are commercials and a :05-:10 tag for the weekly phone call sponsorship.
Whether it’s an on the field meet and greet with your listeners, a player voicing a free commercial for one of your key sponsors, arranging a private luncheon or round table chat with the player and your key clients and listeners, having the player take over your Twitter or Facebook Live account, developing an in market autograph signing with the player at one of your key advertisers’ place of business or creating a charity event which they participate in, there needs to be more on the table than fifteen minutes of time each week.
From a promotion standpoint I’d also be sure to have an updated weekly appointment promo on the station (content promo built around the guest which highlights the day and time they appear) and social media posts scheduled so they run on the day of the guest’s appearance. Don’t waste your time promoting it 4-5 days before the guest appears. Your audience won’t remember it. Focus on when they’re available to be reached (the day of), and hammer it home so they give your station an extra quarter hour of listening.
Next, start taking a look at how your brand’s relationship with a team can strengthen the loyalty you receive from your audience. For example, tickets are always a huge attraction. When you have an opportunity to reward your audience for spending time with your brand, they appreciate it. Are you able to schedule regular ticket giveaways, trip giveaways, stadium tours, meet and greets or create a few other cool and unique experiences? All of those things matter.
From there, you have to examine your on the street game plan. Are you scheduling live remotes or appearances for your brand at or near the stadium? How are you dressing up those broadcasts to make them attractive to the audience? If you’re going to sit inside a gas station with a small table, station banner and your engineer’s equipment sitting on the table, I’m not sure I see the value. If though you can put the show in a highly visible location and turn it into an actual event which helps your station increase its connection to local fans and influence their ability to help you deliver bigger ratings then it’s worth pursuing.
Depending on your station’s business relationship with the organization, maybe there’s a possibility of promoting your brand inside the stadium either through remotes, video placement on the scoreboard, digital LED signage, ad space in the team’s program guide, or thru sponsoring an in between innings feature. You may even be able to create synergies with the team’s television partner to promote your brand on their airwaves, and them on yours.
If you add up all of those assets it’s a pretty impressive list, but even then there’s still an opportunity to do more.
What’s your strategy on social media? Do you have someone dedicated to posting key updates before, during and after the game? Are your personalities conducting chats during or after the game on Facebook Live? What original content videos and podcasts are you developing regularly to showcase the brand’s commitment to covering the local team in strong fashion? Maybe your digital team has someone with personality who can record on the street bits and turn them around for your morning show.
Whatever the case, being active, focused, and creative in the social space is paramount to reaching your audience.
Spring training is often a dead zone for sports radio. February and March traditionally rate lower, which means it’s the perfect time to take advantage of the airwaves to create a unique week or day and generate listener buzz while also making the product more attractive to advertisers.
Let’s say for example you were in Cincinnati and the next big opportunity to drive a larger audience to your shows occurs when the Reds return to the field, if you created a “Reds Celebration Week” or “State of the Reds” in March, and during that week the station secured big interviews with current and former members of the organization, gave away tickets, ran vignettes featuring some of the best moments in franchise history, dressed up the station’s website and social media pages to reflect the mood of the week, created a public town hall event, and all callers that week to your station’s shows were involved in discussions about various Reds topics, you’d have the audience more engaged, interested, and excited about your content. The alternative is to approach the calendar with your normal enthusiasm and rely on the news of the day which doesn’t generate as much enthusiasm or urgency from the audience.
The other way to capitalize in March if you’re a brand manager is to use the slower period to sit down with your talk show hosts and producers and get their brains racing with ideas for the upcoming season. Challenge them to come up with their next big promotion or appointment setting weekly feature. Review the team’s calendar and look at what you can deliver consistently and what key match ups will generate buzz that you might be able to build something creative around.
Sometimes hosts come out of the room with something simple such as a feature which is fun for them but not as sexy for advertisers or listeners. Other times they come away by adding something new and beneficial such as a Flashback Friday conversation (weekly interview for 26 weeks with 26 former high profile players/coaches), a Hall of Fame Report (26 weekly interviews with 26 members of the HOF) or a special Baseball Hour featuring two former members of the team who live in your local area appearing in studio with one of your local shows.
Regardless of what you come up with, the point is to get everyone in your building thinking of how to attack the airwaves for 6 months delivering baseball content that matters. By putting into affect creative imaging, unique benchmarks, promotions, a social media strategy and exploring ideas that will excite your audience, give your advertisers a reason to want to open up their checkbooks, and generating natural enthusiasm from your hosts, you’ll put yourself and your brand in a position to win the game that really matters most, the ratings and revenue game!
