Home Blog Page 2717

Meltser and Payne Move To Mornings on Sports Radio 610

BSM Staff
-
0

Lineup changes are coming to Sports Radio 610 in Houston. Although the radio station has yet to make an official announcement, the Houston Chronicle has revealed the details. The newspaper reports that 610 will move Mike Meltser and Seth Payne from middays into morning drive. The promotion for Meltser and Payne helps the radio station fill the void left behind by Nick Wright who left for Fox Sports in April.

With Mike and Seth moving up, that leaves a vacancy in middays. The Chronicle reports that John Lopez from the previous morning show with Wright, will change timeslots and be part of the new midday program. Joining Lopez will be Cody Stoots, and former Texas A&M Aggie, and former NFL special teams star and wide receiver “The X Factor” Dante Hall.

Barrett Sports Media will have a follow up story on these changes coming out on Tuesday when the radio station makes its announcement.

Finding Stability In An Unstable Media Industry

Jason Barrett
-
0

The world I grew up in was one where people stayed at the same job for a lengthy period of time. My father dedicated nearly twenty years of his life to being a member of the New York police department. Many of his partners did the same. School teachers spent decades inside the same classrooms. Your postal worker was someone who spent years stuffing your mailbox and getting to know you on a first name basis.

In media circles, the story was similar. Newspaper writers covered the same teams in the same locker rooms, and had their stories featured in the same section of the same newspaper for decades. Broadcasters talked to the same audiences on the same radio dials in the same timeslots. The relationship between employers and employees were favorable and built to last.

But then something changed.

The internet took off, causing a ripple effect on the way we consume media today. The FCC allowed big banks and corporations to buy up local radio stations, creating consolidation, and the elimination of hundreds to thousands of jobs. Radio groups started focusing on the growth of their stock prices and shareholder satisfaction, rather than the quality of their programming and the connection formed with their communities.

As a result, trust began to erode. Companies became less interested in paying top dollar for the best talent. Instead, they sought people who would do the work for less, even if it meant sacrificing quality in the process. Being profitable was more important.

Those weren’t the only reasons that change began in the radio business, but that mentality certainly caused a large number of people to reevaluate their situations. Suddenly untouchable commodities who had enjoyed large levels of success were open for business, and the radio industry as we knew it was different.

And it wasn’t just in radio either. The same was becoming a bigger issue in society. People became less patient and developed a win-now mentality, and as distractions increased, further changes were necessary. Whether it was switching cars, houses, friends, or marriages, the thought of sticking with one thing became less appealing.

I started thinking about a number of the media stories that have hit the newswire over the last few weeks, and it made me realize that loyalty is not what it once was in this industry. Every company and individual now strikes while the iron is hot or when they have an advantage to better their own situation. Becoming attached is less common, and people are now willing to say goodbye to what they’ve previously known if it helps them enjoy a better tomorrow.

Companies do the same exact thing. If money can be saved, and ratings can be increased, change is going to happen. Whether you’re a good employee or not isn’t as important as the way you impact the bottom line.

In less than one year, Mike Tirico and Heather Cox have left ESPN. They spent more than twenty years with the network. Colin Cowherd, Skip Bayless, Robert Smith and Chris Spielman all left Bristol University after more than a decade there. Even local personalities like Roger Wyland in Albany, NY, who was a fixture on Fox Sports 980 for the past fifteen years, agreed to join the competition.

When I analyze the current climate for sports media, any situation that lasts longer than five years is considered a success. If you’re accepting a position and expecting to be in it long-term, I’d encourage you to have Plan B in your pocket. The goal may be to establish a long-term relationship with your employer. You might even find yourself signing multiple contracts with the company. But understand that the odds of it happening are unlikely.

The more you’re willing to test the waters, relocate, and adapt to different situations, the better your chances are of making a better income, earning bigger opportunities, and extending your career. Your paycheck and ability to influence decisions may increase, but with those advantages comes instability. You may have to rent an apartment rather than buy a house. Driving down the road to see your family could be replaced by catching flights to visit. Even friendships and working relationships that you consider positive parts of your life, may need to be terminated or altered every couple of years.

I don’t blame any individual who leaves a place of employment for greener grass and brighter sunshine. In most cases, they’re just doing what many American’s do – accepting a position that pays more, provides a better opportunity, and offers a stronger commitment. I also don’t blame an employer from moving on if an individual isn’t meeting expectations or has an unrealistic view of the way the business world works.

But what does cross my mind, is why situations fall apart when both sides are enjoying success. If an individual commits their lives to your organization, does exceptional work, builds an audience, satisfies clients, and conducts themselves with class, shouldn’t they be worth going to bat for? If a company pays you well, treats you great, and gives you a big platform to perform on, shouldn’t that matter?

Budgets do come into play, but any smart corporate executive can figure out how to play with numbers to assure that a brand’s best talent remains in place. A talent should also be willing to get creative and work with their boss to find a suitable middle ground for both sides.

If a person leaves because the dollar value and position being offered elsewhere is impossible to replicate, that’s a different story. But in some cases, I’ve seen people leave for different opportunities over a few thousand dollars. A couple of companies not only demanded that some of their best people accept deals that were below market value, but they also wanted a long-term commitment to go with it. Most broadcasters are not going to accept those terms. It’s that type of disrespect that leads top talent to shut down negotiations and move on.

A signed agreement is the result of a strong relationship between the media company and the individual. There is no winner and loser in the deal making process. Each situation may present its own unique challenges, but if you enter into a negotiation with the mindset that you’ve got to beat your employee or employer, it’s not only going to fracture your relationship, but it’s probably not going to work.

If a few thousand dollars is going to stand between retaining your best people or watching them walk, don’t be foolish. That type of short sighted thinking has a way of coming back to haunt you in the future. That said, sports programming is not cheap. If an employer is willing to extend to make a deal happen, the employee should be appreciative and offer to help the company find solutions to offset the additional expense. That shows that you care about the company and aren’t only focused on your own personal gain.

Equally important for the company to be conscious of, is that everything that gets created through the speakers is the result of human effort, passion, and creativity. Those who deliver compelling and entertaining radio content on a daily basis, provide more of an experience for an audience than any other form of media.

Let that sink in for a second.

Writers don’t provide ten daily columns. Television shows usually run thirty to sixty minutes in length. Even podcasts, videos, and social media activity doesn’t fill up three to four hours per day for five days per week. Besides, the radio host invests themselves in those areas too. Too often talk show hosts get taken for granted, but the great ones are hard to replace. If you have a good one under your umbrella, make sure they don’t get rained on.

The biggest area of weakness for many sports media talent when it comes to this subject is that they’re insecure. Receiving a contract makes them feel safe, important, and untouchable, but in reality, most companies have the flexibility to get out of the agreements that they sign. It may calm your nerves, but the feeling you get when you sign on the dotted line is not the same one you’ll experience in the future if you’re locked into a long-term deal and being dealt a bad hand inside your workplace. In those cases, you’ll start to feel trapped.

This is why it sometimes pays not to be under contract. Sure there’s the risk of the company having the ability to drop you like a bad habit anytime they wish to. But if they do, you’ll likely be collecting unemployment while chasing your next opportunity.

The good news is, if you find a new position, you can usually get started immediately. Some situations are different and include a non-compete. Most of them though involve some form of compensation which is always positive when you’ve been let go from a job.

In the end, a contract is a piece of paper. It outlines the terms, prevents both sides from hurting each other professionally, and can be enforced inside a courtroom. But the one thing you won’t find inside of it, is a promise to care. If either party has an emotional disconnect from the other, you’ll be headed down the road to ruin. It won’t matter if you’ve been together for two years or twenty at that point.

To create an environment that everyone wishes to remain in takes hard work and clear communication. If respect is given, expectations are met, and each side wishes to extend the relationship, there’s a good chance that it’ll come together. Just remember though, the odds are not in your favor. A signed agreement won’t change that.

When the book on your career is finally written, unexpected opportunities will pop up, offers will be made that you never expected, and you’ll have multiple home addresses and business cards to show for it. Finding stability in an unstable media industry is expecting too much. But, if you’re willing to roll with the punches, and keep moving forward, you just might find yourself enjoying a great career, and looking back one day with one heck of a story to share. Just don’t expect it all to happen inside the same location.

Zach Gelb Hired by Fox Sports 920 The Jersey

BSM Staff
-
0

For the past few years, Zach Gelb has gained invaluable broadcasting experience. He’s served as the radio voice of the Temple Owls football and basketball programs, interned for Sports Radio 94 WIP in Philadelphia, held the title of Sports Director and Host for college radio station WHIP, and worked as a stringer for CBS Sports Radio. Now, those experiences are starting to pay off.

Gelb confirmed on Twitter that he has been named Assistant Program Director and afternoon show host at Fox Sports 920 The Jersey in Trenton, NJ. The radio station is owned and operated by Connoisseur Media and launched as a sports station in January 2016.

FullSizeRender

For more information on Fox Sports 920 The Jersey visit their website by clicking here.

The L.A Rams Choose 100.3 The Sound and ESPN 710

BSM Staff
-
0
The L.A Rams Choose 100.3 The Sound and ESPN 710

According to a memo obtained by LARadio.com, and distributed by Peter Burton, Market Manager of 100.3 The Sound (KSWD), the Los Angeles Rams will have their games broadcast on two local radio stations starting this season. 100.3 The Sound will be the FM provider, and ESPN 710 will be the AM supplier. The Rams were previously broadcast on 101 ESPN in St. Louis prior to relocating to Southern California.

The report states that this will be the first time in Los Angeles radio history that NFL football is broadcast on the FM dial. It also allows the Rams to reach two different audiences – hardcore sports fans, and casual observers who listen to classic rock music.

The Rams will begin play this fall in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. They are expected to move into a new stadium in Inglewood in 2019.

 

Why The Media Is No Longer Trusted!

Jason Barrett
-
0

As a kid, I used to read the New York Daily News, and New York Post. I enjoyed the opportunity to learn about my local sports teams from the media members who covered them, and I trusted the information they provided. When a columnist wrote an opinion piece it was clear that it was subjective, and I was able to form my own thoughts based on what I had read.

When I turned on the television, sports anchors like Warner Wolf, Len Berman, Scott Clark, Russ Salzberg, and Sal Marciano, made local sports fun, and informational. Although they each had their own style, and preferences, they relied on the facts to help tell each night’s stories.

Granted, back then things were a lot simpler. There was no internet, social media, a flood of sports radio stations, and the world wasn’t as cynical, and reactionary as it’s become today. We relied on the newspaper, watched the nightly sportscasts, and we trusted the people who reported the news to us.

Maybe I was naive, and things were worse than I knew, but in the 1980’s the broadcasters, and reporters that I supported, didn’t make themselves the story. Instead that honor was reserved for the individuals involved in the games. The focus was placed on what transpired between the lines, rather than what occurred outside of them. Sure there were players who weren’t warm and fuzzy, but the relationship between the media and athletes was cordial. More importantly, the public’s trust in the media was higher.

The inspiration I drew from those sportscasters, and writers, along with the local personalities I listened to on WFAN, led me to pursue a career in broadcasting in 1996. I loved sports, and the passion people felt for them, and the thought of telling a story, and talking about it with an audience, seemed like the greatest job on the planet.

Who wouldn’t want to attend sporting events, form relationships with athletes, coaches, and executives, and report the information back to listeners? I looked forward to attending games, talking to people, and sharing what I learned. I never considered twisting the words of the people I covered, or letting my personal feelings get in the way of the truth. I considered it a responsibility to be factual, and I didn’t feel it was right to manufacture drama.

During my early years, I saw the media change right before my very eyes. I stood at a locker next to Bobby Bonilla when he was with the New York Mets, and famously told a reporter “make your move”. I watched Bill Parcells berate broadcasters who tried to lecture him how he should’ve coached against the Seahawks when he was running the New York Jets. I even witnessed Michael Strahan lose his cool when media members attempted to bait him into saying things to create bigger headlines for upcoming rivalry games.

As these moments unfolded, I sat there wondering why these media members sought to provoke and create additional issues. It wasn’t their job to draw Bonilla, Parcells or Strahan into a fight. They were supposed to be there to ask questions, and report the facts.

The great Walter Kronkite once said “our job is only to hold up the mirror – to tell and show the public what has happened”. But as I discovered, sometimes the truth just isn’t sexy enough.

Without drama, what will the front page of next day’s newspaper say? Will people want to watch a sportscast without some form of controversy? Are people going to call a sports radio station if something doesn’t stir their emotions?

This is the formula that helped make ‘First Take’ successful. It’s why the public gets overloaded with Barry Bonds, Brett Favre, Tim Tebow, and Johnny Manziel stories. We bitch and complain about negativity and controversy, yet stop to watch the car crash. It’s why we flocked to a Mike Tyson fight, but failed to give our full respect to Evander Holyfield who kept doing things the right, and honest way.

While those days in the 90’s were certainly different than what I had experienced in the 80’s, I can’t help but feel like many parts of the media business today are even worse. That’s not to suggest that errors and agendas didn’t occur in the past, but today’s influx of media outlets and the audience’s quest to control situations have led to many more mistakes, irresponsible reports, and agendas aimed to satisfy personal beliefs.

To gain access in the past, you had to work for an established media company, and possess the qualifications necessary to be placed in an important setting. Now press passes are given out like candy on halloween to children. Everyone fancies themselves as a talk show host, and due to the advancement of technology, they are. The launch of a podcast, YouTube page, or website makes you a part of the media machine.

Some of these things are excellent. I love that interest in broadcasting and writing has grown. Audiences deserve to have content options. But somewhere along the line, we became more enamored with being first than being right. Generating web traffic, and social media response, now matters more than presenting stories fairly. Relationships with athletes, coaches, and team executives are quickly fractured because there are media members who won’t hesitate to embarrass someone if it helps them gain favor with their bosses. For each person who treats someone fairly, there are others who don’t. As a result, trust is difficult to gain.

Because agendas have gotten in the way of the information, it’s led athletes to break news on their own social media platforms, websites, or places such as “The Player’s Tribune“. This allows the athlete to tell their side of the story in a safer environment, and while that may annoy various members of the media, it’s partly our own fault.

Last week I read a piece on “The Undefeated” titled “36 Hours in Beast Mode“. Lonnae O’Neal was the reporter. She spent time in Oakland, with Marshawn Lynch and members of his inner circle. Lynch, who’s notorious for saying very little, wasn’t eager to be cooperative because he’d been burned by the media before. If he couldn’t trust O’Neal to present his story fairly, and honestly, why speak at all?

Lynch’s cousin, Quarterback Josh Johnson told O’Neal, “The problem with the media is that you’ve got someone telling your story who doesn’t know you, or where you’re from, or what you’ve been through. On top of that, the story is already written. They just want a couple of quotes to confirm what they want to put out there. It’s a created perception. And the media doesn’t have to live with that perception, we have to live with that perception. It affects our family and friends, the community, and our ability to make money going forward. You flew in here to exploit this story, and now you’re going to go back, where editors can twist our words and faces, and turn them into something unrecognizable. And he’s (Marshawn) not having it”.

As I read those quotes, I couldn’t help but find myself agreeing with him. The reason so much mistrust is in place is because few care about the individual they’re reporting on, only the information they can provide. If a quote can be squeezed out of Lynch to say something negative about Russell Wilson, Pete Carroll, the Seahawks, or Roger Goodell, it’s media gold.

That’s exactly what Al Jazeera and Shaun King of the New York Daily News did to assassinate the character of Peyton Manning. Was the future Hall of Fame Quarterback completely innocent of what he was accused of? Who knows. But why was the story coming up in the first place? It was more than twenty years old.

Secondly, why wasn’t Manning’s side of the story told? Where was the research into the backgrounds of the individuals claiming he had done something wrong? It wasn’t hard to uncover. BSN Media discovered it.

When someone is successful in sports, and relatively clean throughout the majority of their career, many media people are cynical. They’ve been burned before by famous athletes, so they see it as a personal challenge to dig up dirt to knock an individual down. The second they have one small ounce of information, they present it irresponsibly, and with malice and bias.

When these stories come out, public opinion usually sways in favor of the report. That’s terrifying, because it goes against what our society tells us – that we’re innocent until proven guilty. Those words were true when I was growing up, but now people find themselves guilty until proven innocent.

It’s even worse for a professional athlete. If they get accused of something, and don’t sue, the speculation increases immediately. I can recall being in St. Louis when the Mitchell Report came out, and media outlets rushed to judgment on Albert Pujols. Customers at his restaurant were harassed, and the good name he had built as a solid member of the community was stained immediately.

What did Pujols gain when it was discovered that his name wasn’t on the report? An apology? Nope. His big win was banning one local television station from attending his news conference. Doesn’t exactly seem like a fair trade does it?

How about the Duke lacrosse case. Remember that? If you don’t, watch the “30 For 30” on it on ESPN. It’s brilliant.

The public formed quick opinions on the case due to the way the story was presented by the media. The families involved endured public humiliation, and emotional pain, Duke’s head coach was fired, and the three accused men had their reputations permanently damaged.

We later learned that no evidence existed to find any of the men guilty, and a corrupt district attorney seeking re-election, money, and fame, attempted to use the case as a springboard for his professional career. Had numerous members of the media stuck to reporting the facts rather than attempting to be the judge, jury, and executioner, they wouldn’t have been left to eat a healthy heaping of crow.

I’m trying to come to grips with why members of our industry adopt this practice. Why is it that the information is not enough, and we feel a responsibility to tamper with evidence? What happened to allowing the public to form an opinion based on what we know? Are we so thin-skinned that we can’t stomach the thought that the public won’t agree with our point of view?

Here’s another example. The Washington Post conducted a poll to find out how offended Native Americans were by the Washington Redskins team name. In the poll, nine out of ten said they weren’t bothered. The results were similar to a previous study done in 2004.

Why was this a story in the first place? Were Native Americans beating down the doors of the press demanding justice? The team name had been acceptable for the past eighty years, so what changed that made it a larger mainstream issue?

The answer – the media and government. It didn’t matter that the franchise had built its entire image, history, and business around the name for eight decades, or that the majority of Native Americans weren’t offended. Media people and politicians took exception, so they decided to try and flex their muscles and influence the result, rather than report the facts.

Except, it never was their fight in the first place. It wasn’t their job to tell Native Americans how to think or feel or Dan Snyder how to run his business. Other NFL teams, television announcers, analysts, and reporters even started referring to the Redskins as “Washington” on team schedules, and national broadcasts. Did the viewing public request that? Did the team apply for a name change? The answer is no.

We don’t have to agree with it, and we can express our views that we believe things should be done differently, but we don’t make the rules, set the laws, and decide how others consuming our work should feel. It’s our job to present the information, offer both sides, explain where we stand, and let the public figure out how they feel about the issue.

Just last week, the New York Times did a hit piece on Donald Trump because they don’t think he should be our next President. They crafted a story and used quotes from a woman he previously dated (Rowanne Brewer Lane) to present an image of Trump behaving poorly towards women.

Except, Rowanne Brewer Lane quickly took to the television airwaves of MSNBC, and Fox News, and proceeded to destroy the Times for attempting a smear campaign. She mentioned how well Trump had treated her, and how the Times took her words and edited and twisted them to present the narrative that they wanted.

If a Times columnist writes an opinion piece taking Trump to task, that’s acceptable. A columnist is paid to present their opinions. They are essentially the written version of a talk show host. The reader consumes the material that they present, knowing that it’s one person’s point of view. But when news stories are reported, the public expects them to be factual, not altered to support the newspaper editor’s personal preference.

One week prior, a former Facebook employee pointed out how the social media company uses editorial judgment to decide what news you receive in your trending topics. While that may not seem like a huge deal, when the majority of the information provided represents only one side of a story to billions of people, that’s not presenting an even playing field.

If Mark Zuckerberg and his company choose to vote, and live their lives under democratic guidelines, that’s ok. They have that right as Americans. But to attempt to influence thought, belief, and opinion of the public by showcasing only one side of the news, rather than allow them to form their own judgments after seeing both, is wrong.

To Zuckerberg’s credit, he responded quickly, and met with conservatives, and acknowledged that Facebook has to do better. This isn’t about politics, and whether or not republicans or democrats are better, it’s about being fair, balanced, factual, and letting the public decide for themselves.

Media outlets operate like they’re in the middle of a war zone, and social media platforms have become the new battleground. The minute something happens, people rush to Facebook, and Twitter to express their views. What’s frightening is to see how many individuals, and companies overreact due to negative feedback.

Not every situation is defensible. I recognize that there are times where you have to cut bait or punish someone for poor judgment. However, not every situation warrants that. It takes courage to stand by someone during difficult times. But, if you believe they’ve done nothing wrong, be prepared to have their back, even when others might not.

The general public, and professional athletes, coaches, and executives, have become less trusting of the media because of agenda driven reporting. When information is withheld, words are twisted, and judgments are rushed, it’s hard to put faith in reporters.

That’s not what our business is supposed to be about. When you cover a team, athlete, executive, or event, the story can be told by keeping your eyes and ears open, and gathering facts. Your job is to share what you’ve uncovered, and let the audience decide what to think about it.

It may not always be fancy, or create an avalanche of social media activity, but you can’t put a price on sleeping with a clear conscience. Some would rather take a shortcut and advance their career at the expense of those they cover. I believe you can enjoy the same success by earning their trust and respect. In doing so, you may even improve the image and reputation of an industry that few have confidence in.

Changing The World Through Innovation

Jason Barrett
-
0

I was reminded this week that there are still people in the media industry who seek to inspire, and change the world. To introduce new concepts in a business driven by instant gratification is difficult. It’s even more amplified when the project falls under the ESPN umbrella and takes years to lift off the ground.

Say hello to the latest venture from ESPN, “The Undefeated“. Unlike the network’s mobile phone business, I think this one might just stay a while. How it influences, advances, and engages people along the way should be fun to follow.

Since the site launched on Tuesday, I’ve buried myself in a number of the articles. They are deep, informative, provocative, and edgy. I especially recommend the “36 Hours in Beast Mode” by Lonnae O’Neal.

The presentation reflects what Editor-In-Chief Kevin Merida promised the brand would offer. In December, Merida told the USA Today that he hoped the site would provide “an urgent feel” and “some swagger.” He added that it wouldn’t be predictable.

I have never met nor spoken to Merida. Our only interaction includes him clicking like on a comment I posted on Twitter congratulating him and the brand on their launch. But, I don’t need to have a conversation to get a sense of whether or not one has vision. I can appreciate when an executive explains what they’re striving to accomplish, and then hires the right people, and puts into action a game plan that captures what they said they would.

When you’re in the position that ESPN is, there’s a large bullseye on your back at all times. One talent departure, one dip in ratings, one loss of a play by play partnership, and the next day you’re featured in the newspaper’s obituary section.

ESPN is to sports media what the New York Yankees, Dallas Cowboys, and Los Angeles Lakers are to professional sports. Everyone pays attention to what they do, and more root to see them fail than to watch them succeed. Cheering for Goliath to defeat David feels wrong, and positive news doesn’t generate clicks or tune-ins the way controversy and negativity does.

But while the vampires salivate at sucking the blood out of the worldwide leader, many fail to appreciate what the network can create when it puts its collective muscles behind a project. Maybe SportsCenter isn’t the same to a forty year old as it was twenty years ago, but find me a sports fan who doesn’t watch a “30 For 30” episode and yearn for more.

In this particular instance, what ESPN has done with the launch of “The Undefeated” is special. They’ve created a brand for a targeted audience, and in doing so, they will reach, educate, and interest other fans who might have otherwise turned a blind eye to some of the discussions taking place on the digital platform.

What I particularly like is that they’re placing their bets on exceptional journalism still being important to people. The writing is powerful and descriptive, the use of video is different, and by examining a mixture of subjects that emotionally move all of us (sports, race, culture, and politics) they’ve developed a product which leaves readers feeling informed and fulfilled.

That got me to thinking, where is radio when it comes to these situations?

How is that no radio station in America offers an all-black sports radio lineup? Or an all-female sports radio lineup? Is ESPN Deportes the only brand capable of offering a full menu of spanish sports programs? Why aren’t podcast companies offering these options?

We have nearly eight hundred terrestrial sports stations operating daily and none of them are even built around specific league content. If the NFL is popular enough to drive record radio and television ratings, warrant massive sums of money for its play by play rights, and create a television network that continues to deliver an audience, then why hasn’t one terrestrial radio station created an all-NFL channel?

I give a lot of credit to SiriusXM because they’ve revolutionized radio by offering channels which are league and sport driven. Why do 30 million people subscribe to the service? Because they get what they want, when they want it, from people who are qualified to deliver it.

Following the leader is fine, but being the leader makes you memorable. It’s why I hold Steve Jobs in such high regard. He didn’t just challenge the status quo and ask people to “Think Different”, he led by example. That attitude and commitment to make a difference is what fueled Apple’s growth and helped it become one of the most successful global brands.

The reason why many of us explore a career in the media industry is because it’s supposed to allow us to tap into our creativity and talk about things that emotionally interest us. There’s no greater feeling in the world than taking a thought out of your brain, delivering it to an audience and seeing it catch fire. The response to our passion, opinion, and creativity is what excites us to come back the following day and do it all over again.

But what is it that energizes programmers, market managers and corporate executives to continue battling for their brands? Is it the paycheck? The ratings? Internal relationships? The statistical analysis and revenue projections you provide for your brand? Is any part of your enjoyment driven by the quality work being done by your staff and the way it resonates with people in your community?

How much time do you allow in your workplace for innovation discussions? Do you consider new ideas weekly, monthly, quarterly, or annually? Or are you too busy with the day to day grind that big picture thinking gets placed on hold for a rainy day?

When I see someone like Bill Simmons or Dan Patrick create a powerful brand after leaving ESPN, I appreciate it. I realize that it’s the result of thinking big, trying new things, and pursuing all of it passionately. Some may fail, but never due to a lack of vision or effort.

The reason why “The Undefeated” is now a living and breathing brand is because ESPN didn’t let a couple of early stumbles and economic challenges prevent them from seizing opportunity to make media better. They stayed committed, refocused their strategy, hired the right leader, and added people who were capable of carrying out the mission. They were willing to take risk to try and do something unique, and memorable, and the result now, is a product they can all feel proud to be associated with.

Now ask yourself, what is it you’re proud of? Which idea are you going to work on today in order to change the world tomorrow? The future growth or failure that you experience will be the result of what you think about and put into action. I hope for our industry’s sake that we have a storage until full of great concepts, and the support from up above to allow them to become a reality.

The Miami Dolphins Return To WQAM

BSM Staff
-
0
The Miami Dolphins Return To WQAM

The Miami Dolphins are returning to Sports Radio 560 WQAM in Miami. The two sides confirmed they have entered into a long-term partnership which makes the radio station the official flagship radio partner of the franchise. The Dolphins previously aired on WQAM during the 1997-2004 and 2007-09 seasons. In addition, all Dolphins games will be simulcast on Kiss 99.9 “South Florida’s NEW Country” and feature expanded pre, halftime and postgame shows.

“We are excited that we reached this agreement to return home to Miami’s Sportsradio 560 WQAM,” Miami Dolphins President & CEO Tom Garfinkel said. “This expansive and exclusive programming throughout the week and on game day will greatly benefit fans that have a desire to consume Dolphins content on multiple outlets in partnership with CBS Radio.”

“We have rich broadcast history with the Miami Dolphins and are proud that the team is returning to Sportsradio 560 WQAM,” CBS RADIO President Andre Fernandez said. “This further demonstrates our strong and steadfast commitment to the sports radio format, and making continued moves in delivering extensive and exclusive programming on our stations. We are excited to bring premier content to our loyal fans and listeners on Sportsradio 560 WQAM and Kiss 99.9.”

As part of the agreement, WQAM will have the radio broadcast rights for all preseason, regular season and playoff games. The radio station will also carry live broadcasts of Head Coach Adam Gase’s day-after game press conferences, and “Dolphins Friday,” a day of Dolphins’ centric-content on the station featuring interviews with players, coaches, and team executives. Additionally, CBS RadioO Miami will promote Dolphins community and foundation initiatives across multiple platforms.

 

When Talent Gain Influence In The Hiring Process

Jason Barrett
-
0
When Talent Gain Influence In The Hiring Process

Professional sports are an excellent teacher for understanding how a quest for power can rip apart an organization. When too much control is placed in the wrong hands, good situations turn into nightmares. Just look at the St. Louis Rams, Denver Broncos, and Philadelphia Eagles under Mike Martz, Josh McDaniels, and Chip Kelly.

But for every individual who sends a franchise into a downward spiral, there are leaders like Bill Parcells, Bill Belichick, and Pat Riley who remind us that great results can be achieved when power is placed in capable hands.

In the radio business, the person making the final call on key decisions is often the Program Director or General/Market Manager. Some PD’s have strong vision, excellent decision making skills, and are empowered to do their jobs. Everyone inside the organization knows that it’s their way or the highway.

In a few other instances, programmers are hired who are great caretakers, and schedule makers, but not equipped at making important hiring decisions. Some PD’s get hired because they’re willing to concede control to a GM who wishes to decide all key programming decisions.

GM’s can operate very differently. Some put their trust in their programmers, allow them to make decisions, and hold them accountable to their decisions and results. Others are fixated on picking the talent, seeing their names in print, and taking advantage of their power.

It may seem exciting, but when you put your fingerprints on a decision it can be exhausting and extremely stressful. Not everyone is good at it. Even great ones make mistakes. I find that most who have success, do so after they’ve failed once or twice.

In most situations where talent need to be hired, there are plenty of qualified applicants. However, there’s only room for one individual. Making a move that delivers results is all that matters to your employer, advertisers, and the people inside your building. One wrong step, and it’s your ass.

The normal process involves the PD and GM, but when bigger shows and personalities enter the equation, one can make a case that including your top performers is good business. Some staff members may get jealous or annoyed, and listeners may object or get angry when they hear that a key on-air figure has veto power or influence over a big on-air decision, but, you’re not in the popularity business, you’re in the ratings and results business. To involve your best talent, and make sure they’re invested is important, and necessary.

To be clear, not every personality in your company deserves a voice in the decision making process. Just because a show had a good year in the ratings, doesn’t mean they’ve earned the respect of being included in big picture conversations. I’m a big believer in trust, long-term relationships, and track records. If a show has exceeded expectation for a lengthy period of time, beat the competition, generated revenue, developed trust, executed the game plan I’ve asked them to operate, and built a profile as the show of record locally or nationally, I’m more likely to bring them into my inner circle.

Gaining input from shows that have helped you earn a couple of raises and contract extensions is smart. It makes your people feel valued, and respected. It also shows that you share a common goal of making a good decision that will put the show in position to earn future success.

Anyone who has the power to hire or fire an employee, loves the challenge of making the final call. To relinquish that power or allow another individual to influence your opinion might be hard to stomach. But one thing PD’s and GM’s forget, is that nobody has a better read on why a show works than those doing the show on a daily basis. They don’t prep with the show, hang out with the cast outside of work, or understand the highs and lows of the relationship until issues are brought to their attention. If the right ingredients aren’t supplied for the crew to make an award winning meal, everyone starves.

This doesn’t mean your top people will have all of the information that you do, or the vision to see the things that only you can. But, hearing their feedback should matter. As long as they understand that the final call comes from the top, and the goal is to continue winning, they’ll respect, and appreciate you more for hearing them out.

What triggered my interest in this topic was something I read last week.

Having an inside track on sports television news has never been my area of expertise, but when radio people are involved my ears perk up. A few weeks ago, Skip Bayless announced he was leaving “First Take” on ESPN. Fox Sports 1 is expected to become his new home, thanks to a sound relationship with Jamie Horowitz, and a whole lot of Benjamin Franklin’s.

That leaves Stephen A. Smith without a partner once the NBA Finals are over. Which leads to the following question, who will fill Skip’s void?

Mike McCarthy of the Sporting News wrote an excellent piece which gives people an idea of how involved Stephen A. Smith will be in the final decision of who becomes his permanent partner on “First Take”.

Upon hearing that news and tweeting about it, I received a number of emails and social media messages asking “how could ESPN grant executive power to Stephen A.”? I heard the same exact thing when Chris “Mad Dog” Russo left WFAN, and Mike Francesa was given the same respect from CBS New York executives.

In both cases, if I was currently running ESPN, or WFAN when Russo left, I’d do the exact same thing.

You reward performers who bring you big ratings, and bigger revenues over a sustained period of time. Having their full support and buy in is critical. That doesn’t mean you have to hire the person they like most, but if you keep them removed, and put someone into the studio that you like, and they don’t, a future trip to the unemployment office will await you.

Can you imagine if “Mike & Mike” were split up? Or some of the top local sports radio shows in America, such as “Valenti & Foster”, “Toucher & Rich”, “Boomer & Carton”, “The Musers”, and “Waddle & Silvy” were separated? Do you think any of those shows would have a chance at future success, if their station’s excluded the holdovers of each program from the process?

It’s hard enough replicating success when the original version of a program has been altered. The odds fall less in your favor if you place a stop sign in front of your most important talent during critical times. Without their blessing, and complete investment in the future direction of the show, you’re dead man walking.

So why is ESPN giving Stephen A. Smith this type of respect? Here are a few things to consider.

  • Precedent – Before Stephen A. was added permanently to “First Take”, executives sought Skip Bayless’ feedback and support. The show was rotating co-hosts, but reached a point where it needed consistency. Having their key star (Skip) buy into the concept, and sign off on his partner was important. Judging by the decision that Skip and ESPN executives made, it was a good one. Skip earned that respect, and now Stephen A. has too. The goal now is to have the next decision turn out the same way as the last one did.
  • Ratings Success – Whether the show turns your stomach, or soothes your soul, it’s been a ratings hit, and continues to get stronger. The show has been built around Stephen A. and Skip’s personalities, so having the right combination is critical. If Stephen A. doesn’t believe he can find common ground with someone, and create a conversation that is must-watch television, he deserves the right to say so. That should matter when determining who to hire.
  • Loyalty – By no means is Stephen A. Smith hurting financially. ESPN re-signed him last year for a reported 3-3.5 million dollars per year. You may feel he’s overpaid, but that’s the going rate for high profile sports television talent, especially ones who move the needle. If Bayless can warrant close to 6 million annually from Fox Sports 1, don’t you think Smith could get the same? One can argue that he brings more to the table than Bayless. He hosts a national radio show, and appears on SportsCenter, and NFL and NBA programming. Skip is rarely seen outside of “First Take”. Stephen knew there were options out there, but he remained loyal to ESPN. When a big show that he’s involved in experiences adversity, loyalty should be reciprocated.
  • Pressure – With Skip off to FS1, all eyes will be on Stephen A. If the ratings slip, or his on-air relationship with his new partner seems fractured, critics will be out for blood. TV executives can push their own guy or girl, but if the connection isn’t there, the program is doomed. Chemistry, comfortability, passion, and a willingness to engage in heated conversations without things getting personal are all part of the job description. Nobody knows how to execute the show better than the two men who have done it. If Smith feels a connection to someone outside the company is what the show needs to enjoy future success, it’s management’s job to figure out how to make it happen. The main priority should be making sure the show succeeds, not worrying about who they win with.

If “First Take” falls apart in the future, do you think the blame is going to be directed at John Skipper, Norby Williamson, or John Wildhack? Not a chance. The public will point their finger in Smith’s direction.

ESPN may wish to make headlines by signing the biggest name, excite employees by rewarding an internal candidate who’s well liked, or please advertisers by choosing someone they’re comfortable with, but when it’s showtime, nobody will know the fit better than Stephen A. If the conversation isn’t natural, the vibe and chemistry feels forced, or mutual respect isn’t shared, the only thing guaranteed is cancellation.

Which is why ESPN is making a smart decision by involving one of their most high profile stars in the final process. Executives may love the thrill of making the final call, but when this much is on the line, you owe it to yourself, your company, and your best talent to make sure they’re heavily involved.

A few weeks ago I mentioned four candidates for the opening. I later learned of a fifth. Four of the options had radio connections. They were Max Kellerman, Chris “Mad Dog” Russo, Brandon Tierney, and Doug Gottlieb. Will Cain was the one television candidate.

I know that trust, chemistry, on-air connection, and a healthy relationship off camera with Stephen will be important, which is why I have a tough time believing Will Cain will be the choice. Will is very talented, and may have support from management, but he doesn’t have history with Stephen A. I can’t picture Stephen placing the fate of the program in Cain’s hands, unless he’s forced into it.

I could be wrong. I’ve never claimed to be nostradamus, especially when it comes to television hires, but, I believe Russo, Tierney, and Kellerman hold the advantage. They’re comfortable debating him, have his respect and prior experience working with him, bring the edge, volume, and style that the show is known for, and share similar interests from living, and/or growing up in the same area.

What will be interesting to see, is whether or not Stephen has the courage to take a risk and bet on someone like Tierney who he has excellent chemistry with, rather than take the safer path with someone like Kellerman. Both are excellent, and offer something fresh, and different than Skip. Max has the internal advantage, and higher profile. BT requires going outside the company, and developing another network star.

The scenario with Russo is also intriguing because Chris is a high profile talent, who’s older than Stephen (so was Skip), and not afraid to mix it up. He’s the one guy best suited for keeping the show similar to where it was previously, although his sound is different, and his knowledge is superior to Skip’s. He’s also earned Stephen’s trust due to hiring him at SiriusXM. The downside is that he’d likely command a higher price tag which probably doesn’t excite ESPN.

The five candidates I’ve listed remain strong options, but there will likely be others who emerge in this process. One of the outside candidates could very well become the choice. The question is, who will Stephen A. love the most?

The only one he should be giving his heart to at this point is ESPN. After all, they’ve given him greater influence behind closed doors than they do on their own airwaves. Now they need to make sure that his decision making skills are in line with Bill Belichick’s not Chip Kelly’s.

Under The Radar:

  • 92.3 The Fan in Cleveland has hired Landry Locker to produce the morning show with Ken Carman and Anthony Lima. Locker previously worked for ESPN 103.3 and Sports Radio 1310 The Ticket in Dallas as an Assistant Program Director, Producer, and Host.
  • Dave “Deuce” Mason, who was recently let go by KHTK in Sacramento, was brought in to do some fill-in work at rival station ESPN 1320. Mason stepped in last Thursday with Whitey Gleason of “The Rise Guys” while co-host Mark Kreidler was off. Whether it will lead to future fill-ins or additional opportunities in unclear at this time.
  • Congratulations is in order for Mike Taylor who recently signed a multi-year extension to continue hosting mornings at The Ticket 760 in San Antonio.

Houston Sports Radio Stations Hit By Soft April Ratings

BSM Staff
-
0

The April ratings book in Houston produced softer results for its leading sports radio stations. The report from Nielsen covers the dates March 24 through April 20.

Surprisingly, the stations dipped despite Astros baseball returning, and the Rockets reaching the playoffs. On-Air host Nick Wright also signed off at Sports Radio 610 during this time. A total of eight weekday morning shows were rated without the program having a consistent presence in the lead position.

In analyzing the monthly results which were originally published in the Houston Chronicle, here are the key breakdowns. They focus on Men 25-54 which is the key demographic for sports talk radio stations.

M-SU 6a-Mid:

  • Sports Radio 610 = 2.0 (T-21st)
  • ESPN 97.5 = 1.3 (24th)
  • SportsTalk 790 = 1.0 (26th)

Sports Radio 610:

  • 6a-10a = Nick Wright/John Lopez – 2.5 (down from 2.6 in March)
  • 10a-2p = Mike Meltser/Seth Payne – 1.9 (down from 2.2 in March)
  • 2p-7p = Rich Lord/Sean Pendergast/Ted Johnson – 2.5 (down from 3.5 in March)
  • 7p-11p = Paul Gallant – 1.5 (down from 2.4 in March)

ESPN 97.5:

  • 9a-10a = Barry Warner/Dylan Gwinn – 1.1 (flat from March)
  • 10a-12p = John Granato/Raheel Ramzanali – 0.8 (down from 1.5 in March)
  • 12p-2p = Sean Salisbury/John Granato – 1.1 (down from 1.7 in March)
  • 4p-7p = Fred Faour/A.J. Hoffman – 1.9 (down from 2.5 in March)
  • 7p-12a = Mixture of ESPN Radio/Local Shows = 0.7 (down from 0.8 in March)

*** Mike & Mike and Russillo & Kanell also air on the station but their numbers were not available

SportsTalk 790:

  • 6a-10a = Lance Zierlein/Matt Thomas – 1.0 (up from 0.8 in March)
  • 10a-12p = Greg Koch/N.D. Kalu – 0.5 (down from 0.9 in March)
  • 12p-3p = Adam Clanton/Sean Jones – 0.5 (down from 0.7 in March)
  • 3p-7p = Charlie Pallilo – 1.1 (flat from March)
  • 7p-12a = Astros/Rockets/Fox Sports Radio – 1.4 (up from 1.0 in March)

Content Creation In The Social Space

Jason Barrett
-
0

I’ve written numerous times about the power of social media and its importance in the sports radio industry. Simply put, it’s where your audience lives, and you can’t afford not to be present in it. Yet some brands still go hours, or even worse days, not promoting their content.

My theory has always been, that inside of each radio station’s social media pages lies a couple of listeners who carry meters. If a brand I’m managing has been granted permission by thousands of people to notify them of on-air developments, and it can help advance my ratings, then why wouldn’t I take advantage of it?

Aside from the obvious of being socially active and present, there remains the question of how to be unique, and use each platform to its full potential. I see it time and time again, stations fall in love with Twitter because messages can be written quickly. Except they sometimes do it at the expense of Facebook. Instead of being strong in both locations, they feel like they have to make a choice. That often results in picking the platform that identifies with their personal interests, and saves them the most time.

That’s a mistake in my opinion. You can’t assume that everyone does what you do. People enjoy being entertained differently. For some, Twitter consumes their life. For others, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Tumblr, Google+ or Pinterest might be their social preference. While I realize challenges exist with being exceptional in every one of these locations, there’s no excuse for not being present and engaged in at least a few of them.

Creating great content is what every host and producer aspires to achieve when they enter a studio each day. They put countless hours into developing topics, researching stories, and laying out a game plan for the show, hoping it will resonate with a local audience. I don’t want to minimize how important it is to create a quality program, but if you lack a distribution strategy to further expose your content afterwards, you’re denying yourself the opportunity to realize the true value of your material.

The audience today listens on their time not ours. You may host a three or four hour talk show on-air, but if people are unavailable to listen, you’ve still got an opportunity to reach them later. You might feature your interviews individually, post each full hour of your talk show without commercials, and even offer quick snippets of your most powerful material all on your website. When the audience enjoys what you do, and have those type of options available to consider, they usually return to hear what they missed.

Assuming the digital offerings are laid out well, then comes promoting it on your brand’s social pages. On Twitter you’ll have to be short and succinct with your messages, whereas Facebook will let you be as wordy as you want. You might use photos or create graphics with text to help deliver more clicks, or feature bold headlines, and open ended questions to peak curiosity. Whichever path you take, the reality is that your approach to using social media to highlight your content will factor heavily into the way your program is received.

If time is something you’re pressed for, and you’re struggling with promoting your work across all of these social media platforms, familiarize yourself with Hootsuite. It allows you to schedule messages in advance, and reach multiple locations at once. It’s a tool I use daily and I can’t recommend it enough.

To expand further on this subject I called on Michael Grey who most recently hosted morning drive on WBBL in Grand Rapids, Michigan. In addition to his time in Grand Rapids, he’s worked for 710 ESPN in Seattle, and AM 590 ESPN in Omaha.

Michael raises some very interesting points about this topic, and I think that as you read his thoughts, you’ll find yourself nodding in agreement with most of it. A strong social distribution strategy, and intimate knowledge of how to best use each platform is necessary to win in today’s radio climate. Obstacles will never fully disappear, but your level of success, and importance to the audience will, if you don’t take this seriously.

Content Creation In The Social Space by Michael Grey

“The Medium is the Message.” – Marshall McLuhan

The words of McLuhan – mandatory reading for anyone in broadcasting – ring true today, though with the necessary adjustment “The Mediums are the Message”.

If you’ve been in radio for more than a moment you’ve undoubtedly heard of “topic trees” or “show maps” or any of a number of other catchphrases for the development of layered talk topics. However, how many of us have considered the additional layers of content that the ever evolving social space requires us to create? How will your show content look when laying out a show plan? What is the video component to today’s hottest show topic? How would your big story this morning represent in a single photograph? How much of your radio show is going to happen – live – in the hours before or after your show airs?

The question of how, or worse whether or not, to integrate social media into a radio show in 2016 is misguided and out of step with reality. The question should be how are you going to integrate your radio show into the social space where everyone else is already broadcasting?

Creating compelling talk content is just part of the job and we all bear the responsibility to not just represent but develop topics in a full 360 degree multi-platform manner. Not only do you owe the audience the effort, but these different mediums and platforms are yours for the branding which makes them personal and portable. Jobs will come and go, but your ability to deliver content across a range of platforms is something you take with you, and is a powerful asset in your climb through the industry. These social spaces, all too often used by those in radio for simple cookie-cutter promotion, should themselves be a part of everything you create.

Social Media experts have said for years that the different platforms each require a unique approach in terms of content production and presentation just like the topics on your show. The natural progression is to view your radio show as one wing of your own personal media company and to develop your show and your topics with unique content and angles for each of the platforms available. This invites almost infinite possibilities when developing programming as it is no longer limited to the studio or the audio realm. After all, what is the most important thing that any of us can provide to sports fans today? Access. The audience has become increasingly accustomed to on-demand access to their favorite content, opinions, commentary, teams, players, coaches and yes, the voices & faces they seek out to get that content.

For example, Facebook Live now makes it possible (mandatory) to host a daily post-show show and invite comments and input from the audience that already follows you in a personal and unique way. It’s also a way to grant last-minute, breaking-news access to your show when your team trades it’s starting quarterback 3 hours after it aired. With the state of the news cycle, if you wait until tomorrow to start the conversation you will always be discussing yesterday’s news. A video component to what you’re doing on a daily basis, whether it’s behind-the-scenes coverage or additional programming is a must. It is a prism that shouldn’t just reflect the audio content of the show but guide it and be embraced on its own merits as well.

Video, while incredibly powerful, is just one example of course and every social media platform has its strengths & weaknesses and should be used to accent various aspects of your content and show – just as a topic tree defines the various levels of story development.

Twitter serves the instant gratification crowd & is an excellent tool for reaction & commentary in the moment. Are your producers constantly at the wheel of your show Twitter account for the ‘Wow’ moments throughout the program? They should be. The individual Tweets may capture spontaneity but discipline in using the platform to ensure that they’re captured should be anything but. It’s a powerful in-the-moment lure to bring people to the table.

Can you catch a moment in a photo from your everyday life and grow that into a topic for the next day’s show? That’s Instagram and the exploding world of Snapchat (10 BILLION videos posted as of April). A chance for people to get a peek at your world in a first person perspective is yet another level of connection and – more importantly – a way to develop unique aspects of the day’s biggest stories to extend the conversation.

Each unique platform needs to be used to generate content and your brand development in unique ways (a point missed all too often in radio with one-size-fits-all, e-blast style posts about the “radio” portion of the product line). Social Media has made it not just possible but imperative to take anything you present on your radio show into these spaces and to further develop everything that you do accordingly. Used correctly you will not only satisfy an audience increasingly granted access from every possible angle but retrain your own mind about the development of your product & brand in the process.

Everything that we do on the air or in the digital space comes with the ability and responsibility to develop tactics & topics unique to all of these platforms in creating a complete product.

So what does tomorrow’s show look like?

1...2,7162,7172,718...2,753Page 2,717 of 2,753