People still listen to music on the radio?

Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Maybe they're not corporate hacks or people in search of payola? Maybe they're visionaries! (pops)

Goddamn it! I should have known better!

John Buck 41: FTA---"The death of payola is something of a myth," says Rossman. "Payola scandals appear like clockwork every 15 years: 1959, 1974, 1990, 2004.



The 2004 Scandal was more about people at the station taking prizes meant for listeners more than anything else. That wasn't so much payola as it was crooked PD's stealing big screen TV's from promotions.

Gyrfalcon: I miss the heyday of LA hardcore, when publishing one's own record was required, and KROQ would play just about anything anybody sent to them, no matter how amateurishly produced. The early 80's were just rife with bad, good, really bad and really good music...I still have some of it. Ah, the good-old-days!

I saw the Go-Gos at the Roxy. Saw Thomas Dolby at the Roxy. Saw Jane's Addiction at the Roxy, and I saw G & R at the Roxy.

I never really liked the Roxy, except when Devo played there.

John Buck 41: FTA---"The death of payola is something of a myth," says Rossman. "Payola scandals appear like clockwork every 15 years: 1959, 1974, 1990, 2004.

I guess I'm in the clear; didn't become an MD until '91.

Seriously, this article is so full of shiat I can smell it thru my laptop.

Since I know nothing about the subject at hand, you are (or at least claim to be) an expert, and I am curious, I must ask: How is it bullshiat?

I never got why payola is such a big deal. Perhaps I just don't understand the radio industry...in fact, I'm sure I don't.

Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff? Are they not owned by private corporations? I thought they were. Wouldn't the first amendment require that they be able play whatever they like for whatever reason they like?

I can accept this reasoning because, like any person actually interested in music, I do not listen to the vast majority of radio stations (and none in my area, save the classic rock station). Really, who cares? It seems to me that the bands who have the money to pay for such a thing would be the type that mainstream radio would play anyway. Taylor Swift or...I dunno, some other teenie bopper with soulless music can pay to have her song heard? Well, I'd imagine that the media machine behind her would insure that people'd listen to her music regardless.

But seriously, can someone tell me why this is illegal?

John Buck 41: FTA---"The death of payola is something of a myth," says Rossman. "Payola scandals appear like clockwork every 15 years: 1959, 1974, 1990, 2004.

I guess I'm in the clear; didn't become an MD until '91.

Seriously, this article is so full of shiat I can smell it thru my laptop.

Thank you. Exactly what I was thinking. In radio for 26 years.

BadSpellingAGoGo: Toshiro Mifune's Letter Opener: Maybe they're not corporate hacks or people in search of payola? Maybe they're visionaries! (pops)

Goddamn it! I should have known better!

Hey you can't mess with the classics

Does it work like this:

Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?

Sorry, I guess we aren't all as advanced & super-cool as you.

dam: Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?

Sorry, I guess we aren't all as advanced & super-cool as you.

It's not so much that he's advanced or super-cool. He might just have decent taste.

Unless you're living in an area with a good college station, or God forbid a station that plays indie stuff BEFORE it blows up, there is absolutely no reason to listen to regular radio. Except, like I said, the classic rock station.

dam: Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?

Sorry, I guess we aren't all as advanced & super-cool as you.

you mean to say youre poor. what a shame.

Radio is dying and it fully deserves to DIE! And I will happily cheer on the day it dies!

The guys I work with run the radio all day. Most of the time I have my headphones connected either to my iPod or Pandora running through my droid. But the radio is always on in the background at all times.

A couple of months ago the radio was play "Drops of Jupiter" by Train. Not a favorite song of mine but it was on and when it's done the DJ come on and says that Train has just released a new album and you can go to the radio stations web site to listen to it.

I thought I was listening to a music station? Why the hell didn't they just play a track off the the new album rather than play "Drops of Jupiter" for the 10,000 farking time? It would be a break from the monotony. A radio station that only play the same few songs over and over... 30 years ago that would have been an SNL skit... now it's reality.

Baldanders: Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff?

They can, and they do. They're called commercials. If they accept money to play a song, and identify it as sponsored airtime, it's perfectly legal.

That article was one of the funniest articles about radio I've ever read. Will that be in next week's Onion?

Thanks subby, you owe me a new console. Damnit, now I gotta call the engineer.

/17 years in radio.

Baldanders: dam: Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?

Sorry, I guess we aren't all as advanced & super-cool as you.

It's not so much that he's advanced or super-cool. He might just have decent taste.

Unless you're living in an area with a good college station, or God forbid a station that plays indie stuff BEFORE it blows up, there is absolutely no reason to listen to regular radio. Except, like I said, the classic rock station.

Correct, you are super-cool and I am not. I listen to whatever I enjoy musically with lyrics that I can relate to, which to date doesn't include much I've heard from your super-cool "indie" stations. I do listen to a Classic Rock station but it is probably too mainstream for you.

xSauronx: dam: Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?

Sorry, I guess we aren't all as advanced & super-cool as you.

you mean to say youre poor. what a shame.

Correct, you are more advanced. Yes I am still buying CDs, I cannot afford those newfangled MP3s that you kids purchase from The Pirate Bay.

@Baldanders Radio stations like TV stations are considered part of the public trust and so limitations are made on them that are not made in other industries. If anyone could open a radio station, then I like you would not see what the problem was, however the number of radio slots available is severely limited. The Feds thus attempt to make sure that no one company can overly dominate the airwaves and so have declared payola illegal.

I'm a music director, so I'm really getting a kick out of these replies...

FWIW: in my opinion and experience this is a profoundly stupid and uninformed article.

Okay, I may be wrong here, but when Norah Jones hit it big in 2002 with "Come Away With Me" I thought payola was involved. I mean, it was played everywhere including top 40 pop charts. I just had a hard time believing zombified TRL kids were requesting/buying that single as much as the charts reflected. I'm not a hater, and I'm probably way wrong, but............

Baldanders 2009-12-22 09:59:28 PM
I never got why payola is such a big deal. Perhaps I just don't understand the radio industry...in fact, I'm sure I don't.

Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff? Are they not owned by private corporations? I thought they were. Wouldn't the first amendment require that they be able play whatever they like for whatever reason they like?

I can accept this reasoning because, like any person actually interested in music, I do not listen to the vast majority of radio stations (and none in my area, save the classic rock station). Really, who cares? It seems to me that the bands who have the money to pay for such a thing would be the type that mainstream radio would play anyway. Taylor Swift or...I dunno, some other teenie bopper with soulless music can pay to have her song heard? Well, I'd imagine that the media machine behind her would insure that people'd listen to her music regardless.

But seriously, can someone tell me why this is illegal?

Yeah, and...you're one of the reasons payloa laws are needed.

Not saying you're inherently a douche, but your post certainly indicates a certain douchiness.

To give you the benefit of the doubt, and a clue: Airwaves are meant to serve the public.

Baldanders 2009-12-22 09:59:28 PM
Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff? Are they not owned by private corporations? I thought they were. Wouldn't the first amendment require that they be able play whatever they like for whatever reason they like?

I'd like a chance to answer this as well...

Not only are the airwaves owned by the public there is another dynamic to keep in mind as well. Since music is not only a form of expression but also an art form, the promotion of poor art via payola schemes lowers the quality of art in a most obvious way. So, if only music that people like gets played there is an innate level of quality that also improves or has the chance to. What we have now promotes musicians with good marketing, good looks and/or a well-cultivated image. No wonder we have to deal with boy bands and other ill-contrived trends.

Objectively music would naturally improve if payola was eliminated from the marketplace. I would love to have a reason to listen to the radio once again.

DocRoberts 2009-12-22 10:53:57 PM
I'm a music director, so I'm really getting a kick out of these replies...

FWIW: in my opinion and experience this is a profoundly stupid and uninformed article

I really hope you are kidding. your comment suggests an incredibly low education level and set of personal standards.

Cool story: I'd never even heard Freebird until I replayed San Adreas recently. I assumed it would be hair metal or something, but no. What a shiatty, whiny song.

CaptainFatass: Baldanders 2009-12-22 09:59:28 PM
I never got why payola is such a big deal. Perhaps I just don't understand the radio industry...in fact, I'm sure I don't.

Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff? Are they not owned by private corporations? I thought they were. Wouldn't the first amendment require that they be able play whatever they like for whatever reason they like?

I can accept this reasoning because, like any person actually interested in music, I do not listen to the vast majority of radio stations (and none in my area, save the classic rock station). Really, who cares? It seems to me that the bands who have the money to pay for such a thing would be the type that mainstream radio would play anyway. Taylor Swift or...I dunno, some other teenie bopper with soulless music can pay to have her song heard? Well, I'd imagine that the media machine behind her would insure that people'd listen to her music regardless.

But seriously, can someone tell me why this is illegal?

Yeah, and...you're one of the reasons payloa laws are needed.

Not saying you're inherently a douche, but your post certainly indicates a certain douchiness.

To give you the benefit of the doubt, and a clue: Airwaves are meant to serve the public.

I'm not saying you're inherently a psycho, but your profile quote of "Too many people, not enough bullets. Yeah, and that includes you," indicates a certain psychosis. So, you hate people and I hate shiatty music. We'll see how that one balances out in the end.

The laws aren't for people like me, because I don't care. Burn down every radio station in America tomorrow and my life will change very little. Actually, I imagine that it'll improve, as people will be a little less inundated with cookie cutter pop music and, in searching for tunes, might stumble across and support better bands that will themselves become more popular.

The airwaves are meant to serve the public, eh? So that's why they were all sold to three corporations that constantly recycle the same dreck year after year, occasionally adding another emotionally void piece of sonic leprosy? Who in God's name does that "serve?"

What with there being, as others have pointed out, a severely limited amount of radio stations on which to play music, and with almost every single one of those stations sold to a Clearchannel or Clearchannel clone, radio will never, ever be relevant to anyone except soccer moms, teenage girls and gay clubbers again. So who cares what they do? Anyone with any interest in music beyond the tiny slice we're presented on the public airwaves has already turned to satellite or the radio.

Sigh. It is a mistake to end a rant with a typo. Satellite or the INTERNET, I mean.

I really am curious to hear how playing Popular Song 1 for the 50,000th time is a public service while playing Popular Song 2 that the station is being paid to play for the 50,000th time is not.

Also, why should commercially licensed channels be a public service?

CaptainFatass: Baldanders 2009-12-22 09:59:28 PM
I never got why payola is such a big deal. Perhaps I just don't understand the radio industry...in fact, I'm sure I don't.

Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff? Are they not owned by private corporations? I thought they were. Wouldn't the first amendment require that they be able play whatever they like for whatever reason they like?

I can accept this reasoning because, like any person actually interested in music, I do not listen to the vast majority of radio stations (and none in my area, save the classic rock station). Really, who cares? It seems to me that the bands who have the money to pay for such a thing would be the type that mainstream radio would play anyway. Taylor Swift or...I dunno, some other teenie bopper with soulless music can pay to have her song heard? Well, I'd imagine that the media machine behind her would insure that people'd listen to her music regardless.

But seriously, can someone tell me why this is illegal?

Yeah, and...you're one of the reasons payloa laws are needed.

Not saying you're inherently a douche, but your post certainly indicates a certain douchiness.

To give you the benefit of the doubt, and a clue: Airwaves are meant to serve the public.

That was completely unnecessary. Oh well, so is commercial radio. Sorry you three in this thread who work in radio. I wish you all the best in life, but I look forward to that industry's collapse. Perhaps those airwaves can be used for something other than commercials with an occasional bland song thrown in.

Does this explain why Owl City is all the fark over the radio?

John Buck 41: That_Dude: John Buck 41: FTA---"The death of payola is something of a myth," says Rossman. "Payola scandals appear like clockwork every 15 years: 1959, 1974, 1990, 2004.

I guess I'm in the clear; didn't become an MD until '91.

Seriously, this article is so full of shiat I can smell it thru my laptop.

Since I know nothing about the subject at hand, you are (or at least claim to be) an expert, and I am curious, I must ask: How is it bullshiat?

For one thing, it's poorly written; there's no indication whatsoever of how this statistical analysis is arrived at. And furthermore, statistics alone, no matter how they are determined, can't prove payola without, you know, basic proof like...evidence.

The standards at the University of Buffalo's student school newspaper are slipping, for sure - why, they didn't even include the citation for the paper! But here it is, for those wanting to inspect the methodology more closely:

Rossman G, Chiu MM, and Mol JM, 2008, Modeling diffusion of multiple innovations via multilevel diffusion curves: Payola in pop music radio: Sociological Methodology, v. 38, p. 201-230.

The abstract doesn't say much more than TFA (which might have been cribbed from a press release, anyway), but it does say: "To substantively illustrative this technique, we use data on bribery in pop radio as an example of exogenous influence on diffusion." TFA also mentions that they used data published by the NYS Attorney General's office from a prosecuted case ... you know, evidence... to test their technique.

One case study doesn't make this a sure-fire technique, but it does appear to have some legs.

aurorous:

"Radio is dying and it fully deserves to DIE! And I will happily cheer on the day it dies!"

I'm sure the many people who work in radio across the country would be doing the happy dance in the unemployment line, too. Not to mention the people who still rely on radio for information, weather announcements, emergencies, etc.

Small market radio is still an important part of small town America. And I'm pretty confident it will remain so. Where else are people going to hear their local news, local sports, and other local programming? Nowhere.

Don't like it? - Don't listen to it.

dogbone: Does this explain why Owl City is all the fark over the radio?

What the fark is an Owl City?
/gonna go check, BRB.

Baldanders: dam: Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?


Unless you're living in an area with a good college station, or God forbid a station that plays indie stuff BEFORE it blows up, there is absolutely no reason to listen to regular radio. Except, like I said, the classic rock station.

So those indie songs are good before they blow up but are bad afterwards? Isn't it the same song? Or is it that you pick your music based on popularity rather than how good it is to make yourself look cool and unique? Like the kids in my high school that were obsessed with good charlotte before there were popular than claimed they sucked when everyone else caught on despite the fact that they had produced no new music.

Magorn: Baldanders: I never got why payola is such a big deal. Perhaps I just don't understand the radio industry...in fact, I'm sure I don't.

Why can't radio stations be paid to play stuff? Are they not owned by private corporations? I thought they were. Wouldn't the first amendment require that they be able play whatever they like for whatever reason they like?

I can accept this reasoning because, like any person actually interested in music, I do not listen to the vast majority of radio stations (and none in my area, save the classic rock station). Really, who cares? It seems to me that the bands who have the money to pay for such a thing would be the type that mainstream radio would play anyway. Taylor Swift or...I dunno, some other teenie bopper with soulless music can pay to have her song heard? Well, I'd imagine that the media machine behind her would insure that people'd listen to her music regardless.

But seriously, can someone tell me why this is illegal?

The idea behind banning payloa springs from two sources, one is the potnetital for monoplistic and anti-comptetitve practices, where it become so expensive to get a signle played on the radio that only a few record labels can afford to do it, and even then only with a handful of their blandest artists with the widest popular appeal. Thanks to Clear Channel, this has actually happened (payola is only illegal if it comes directly fromt he record label to the station; thnaks to a loophole in the law, middlemen called Independent promoters or "indies" can take the money from the label and funnel it to the radio station (taking thier cut off the top) perfectly legally even when, as is the case with Clear Channel, the same parent company owns the Indie and the station)

The other anti-payola theory is that the radio frequencies are a public resource and stations are only granted a license to broadcast so long as they serve a communty's interest. Allowing them to take money to decide their playlists turns their programming, effectively, into a 24-hour long infomercial; which is arguably not in the public's best interest.

is both one of anti-competitve practice

That makes me feel even worse realizing that all the shiatty playlists in America were chosen as being "in the public's best interest."

CWeinerWV: Baldanders: dam: Pope George Ringo: People still listen to music on the radio?


Unless you're living in an area with a good college station, or God forbid a station that plays indie stuff BEFORE it blows up, there is absolutely no reason to listen to regular radio. Except, like I said, the classic rock station.

So those indie songs are good before they blow up but are bad afterwards? Isn't it the same song? Or is it that you pick your music based on popularity rather than how good it is to make yourself look cool and unique? Like the kids in my high school that were obsessed with good charlotte before there were popular than claimed they sucked when everyone else caught on despite the fact that they had produced no new music.

Sigh. No. I would prefer to listen to a station where a DJ plays a song because he, a DJ, whose profession it is to bring music to people, likes it. Then, if other people like it, he can play it more. Instead, it's a very cold, soulless business, where DJs play music not because they think its good, but because, as the gentleman above says, they're being paid. I'm not saying popular music shouldn't be played. I do like some popular music...I rock out to some Lady GaGa every now and again (shut up).

I'm not defending the practice of payola. I think it's horrible. I do not, however, think that it's possible to bring the radio back from where it's gone. I have no idea why so many people are defending this industry.

GibbyTheMole: aurorous:

"Radio is dying and it fully deserves to DIE! And I will happily cheer on the day it dies!"

I'm sure the many people who work in radio across the country would be doing the happy dance in the unemployment line, too. Not to mention the people who still rely on radio for information, weather announcements, emergencies, etc.

Small market radio is still an important part of small town America. And I'm pretty confident it will remain so. Where else are people going to hear their local news, local sports, and other local programming? Nowhere.

Don't like it? - Don't listen to it.

It's called National Public Radio, which has national and regional beuros, and mostly has little to do with music.

As for the people that lose their jobs...look, I'm sorry whenever anyone loses their job. I feel bad for, say, the people that worked at the Saturn plants, but the fact is they made a sub par product. Radio today is a sub par product, and the only reason anyone still listens to it is they don't have the means for an alternative, i.e. satellite radio or Pandora or Slacker on an iPhone.

FTFA: "Songs, like other products and ideas, spread through a population in two ways," says Gabriel. "It's either external diffusion-by an external agent, for example, record company payola-or internal diffusion-by word of mouth from current users to new users. External diffusion has a large initial effect and then tapers off. When many radio stations take payola, for example, they play a specific song in one week, with fewer additional radio stations playing the song in later weeks."

On the other hand, Ming says, word of mouth or internal diffusion starts small, grows over time and then tapers off, resembling an S-shaped growth curve.

"For example, one radio station disc jockey initially plays a song, tells another DJ about it and then both DJs play it," Ming says. "Next, both DJs talk with a few more DJs who play it, and so on, increasing the rate of growth.

"When lots of DJs are spreading the song, the number of new DJs playing the song skyrockets, similar to Malcolm Gladwell's tipping point. Eventually, they run out of DJs who might play this song, so growth slows."

Now while reading this did anyone else picture these people discussing this...

Three points:
-Author of TFA is clueless. However,
-payola will become the norm under a different name if performance fees come around. Example, "oh, sorry record label, we don't play current music on our station. However, if you'd like to buy a "commercial" to advertise your song, it just so happens that 3 minutes and 56 seconds of our air time will cost-wow, look here-just the same as what you would have charged us for a performance fee. What a coincidence, huh?"
-The corporate mess that is radio 2009 will eventually collapse under its own weight and suckage. It's gonna take a while though for it to collapse and then reform under local ownership and operation again.

/in radio programming for 25+ years, PD/OM 15+
//for independent, non-corporate ownership
///will be done with the radio thing long before the recovery happens

Baldanders

Re: National Public Radio (NPR)

I'm familiar with it & I listen to it. I don't know how it is where you live, but here in Iowa, there are no local sports at all on NPR. Local news consists of larger, statewide news stories. Stuff like local city council decisions, local town functions, etc., get no airtime. They have NPR affiliates in 9 towns in Iowa. There are a lot more towns in Iowa than nine.

"As for the people that lose their jobs...look, I'm sorry whenever anyone loses their job. I feel bad for, say, the people that worked at the Saturn plants, but the fact is they made a sub par product. Radio today is a sub par product, and the only reason anyone still listens to it is they don't have the means for an alternative, i.e. satellite radio or Pandora or Slacker on an iPhone."

The reason Saturn went under is because they weren't making money. The owners of the company made the decision to kill the company. A lot of radio stations are still making money because they are getting advertising. And they have advertisers because people are listening. Maybe not you, but others.

I'll agree that the music you hear on the radio is mostly uninvolving, mass appeal drivel. But the fact remains that there is a market for it because people listen to it. Radio plays the music they do because that's what people want. Sure, we could play more substantial, artistically valid music. But we'd lose most of our listeners. I know from experience. We've added such songs to our repitoire, and inevitably it's rejected by the public in favor of the mass-appeal dreck.

The idea that if you don't like something, it should cease to exist makes no sense at all to me. It's like saying "I don't like hot dogs, so they should stop making them." If you don't like it, don't consume it. Simple.

FeedTheCollapse:

Being fun at parties and agreeing with an idiotic statement are two different things.

I do agree with you, though. Music radio is mostly crap. But it's mostly crap because that's what's popular.