Thursday, August 03, 2006

PRESS TO PLAYShouty's back

Dear 95bFM board,

I love your radio station to bits. It is the one constant media source throughout my adult life. I was a member of your team back in the late 80s, and I have popped back from time to time to give whatever little I could back. These days, I live on the other side of the world - and I still listen.

I am not your target audience, and nor should I be. Nor does it matter. I am, like many of my peers, repelled by most of what radio considers suitable for my demographic.

That said... your decision to put Mikey Havoc back in breakfast is both alarming and deeply disappointing.

I can understand your reasons. Good talent is hard to find. Advertisers are hard to please. Doesn't matter what I think about Mikey on the radio. I'm not your problem. But regardless of his qualities as a broadcaster, the sheer fact of what Mikey represents means that he's not the answer to what genuinely is your problem.

Mikey represents an old solution to what is currently manifesting as an old problem (sagging ratings, loss of advertising), but one whose causes are new. The simple fact is that you're not losing out to other radio. I mean, really - where else on the dial would a disgruntled b-listener head?

You're using traditional radio wisdom - which has always been fairly suspect. Increasingly, in the new media environment, it's absurd nonsense. But your immediate problem, for whatever reason, is talent.

Putting Mikey back in breakfast screams "There's nobody else here who's any good!" - which is both undoubtedly wrong and disastrous for morale. I also don't happen to believe that Mikey's former track record for pulling an audience still holds. Being shouted at that early in the morning has lost much of its appeal.

We already know why advertisers are so hard to please. But do you have any idea why that talent you're clearly crying out for is proving hard to find?

They're out there - but here's the trick: they don't need you.

Some of the best broadcasters - the smart ones, the ones with drive and passion - they're already making radio. They're doing it without your help. They're making their own media. They don't need your transmitter or your advertisers. They don't need your record library or your studio.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if large sections of your voluntary constituency start to figure this out in droves.

But you need them. Boy, do you need them.

You don't necessarily even need to put them on the air - but you sure as hell need to bring them into the fold.

The good news is, there's no scarcity for you any more. You're not bound by schedules. Everybody can have shows. As many as you like. They can exist as podcasts or streams on the website. Broadcast the best of them - or select and compile. But foster, train, encourage. Let them make mistakes, and help them make it better.

And from there - your next breakfast host.

You've still got me for The Wire. Let me know when I can come back for a nice, fresh helping of breakfast.

  • 6 Comments:

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    There is a reason why "new talent" is getting harder to find. To blame it on bfm is hardly fair, the entire radio industry is to blame. Back in the day - making money in radio was a given. No competition meant large audiences which in turn meant large profits. Then the much maligned deregulation allowed more competition - producing smaller audiences and less profit. Then, all the stations were brought back into line by a couple of big players. To make money they had to make the industry more professional, all about the bottom line. Fair enough - it's a business after all. Unfortunately on air talent doesn't tend to be the type that was torn between being a bank teller and a breakfast jock upon leaving school.
    Fun tends to come first. Hence there was a long period of time whereby it was quite acceptable to be payed peanuts because the gig was bigger than that. The gig isn't that big anymore. The salary is still peanuts. The unruly are no longer welcome. Those who study to be broadcasters (this still sounds ridiculous to me) are great at lemming impersonations and thus the powers that be are big fans.
    You want to be a broadcaster? Do mid dawns for next to nothing, hang around afterwards to make the breakfast jock coffee and then head out with promos. That course only takes 6 months to complete and you get to see what radio really is. I digress. Having made it not only undesirable but quite frankly virtually impossible to break into a big radio gig - the industry then bemoans the fact that there is no new talent coming through. What do you do? Easy. Scour the TV channels for the next good looking person (at least the billboards will look hot). One great exception is Iain Stables. This man is as ugly as sin. He pulls all the old stunts. Despite his obvious aesthetic disability he has actually reversed the trend and gone from radio to TV (admittedly on the one of the most shambolic shows ever - karabroke anyone?) He still carries that pioneering "have fun" mentality that radio was built on and I should imagine he gets payed accordingly. Why is there no new talent? Because while the work is just as hard - the rewards are nowhere near as great. A great jock is an entertainer - and an entertainer is an artist... so stop placing restrictions on them and you'll stop placing restrictions on your audience size. By the way... Havoc is genuine talent. Hugh Sundae is not.

    12:27 AM  

    Anonymous Scotty Stevenson wrote:

    Innovative - real innovative. I'm not one to bag Mikey - because he's still a great broadcaster in my books.

    But, man! You mean to tell me that out of all those people who have, or who have had, an association with b over the years, this is all they can come up with?

    Kiwi's looking fresh by comparison, let me just say that.

    Tuned in yet Andrew?

    4:36 AM  

    Blogger Dubber wrote:

    The whole "new talent is hard to find" thing is even more complex than all this. One key ingredient that we've all left out so far is digitalisation of radio studios.

    The idea that somebody can come in and do midnight to dawns and then make coffee for the breakfast jock presupposes that there's a mid-dawn shift to do. Almost without exception now, those things are entirely automated.

    Don't happen to agree with the Iain Stables aesthetics evaluation. He always struck me as looking a bit salt-of-the-earthy and approachable. Ugly's a bit harsh, don't you think? He has more hair than I do and seems to scrub up okay.

    Also not with you on the Hugh thing. But then I also don't agree with you that a radio presenter is purely and simply an entertainer. If that's your definition of morning radio broadcasting professional, then a loud clown is exactly what you need. And there's nothing particularly wrong with being a very talented loud clown. There's a very good and noble tradition of radio clowning. It just strikes me as being very 'of a time'.

    By the way, I also happen to think that Noelle McCarthy is a particularly gifted broadcaster. I don't think she'd call herself a 'jock' or even an entertainer... but there she is each morning, talking into a microphone to very good effect.

    And by the way, can we please use our names when we're going to be criticising individuals - even those in the public eye? Just to be polite - thanks.

    As to Kiwi FM, I have to say - no, I haven't listened yet and I really should. That'll be next week's audio project, I think. I don't have any opinions about it yet and I should really go and sort that out so that I can have some, then come back and report fairly.

    It does look like there might be a hard choice to make at 10am in Auckland, though - doesn't there?

    10:00 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    bFM does not hit automation in the small hours of the morning. The one's who do that shift are live, they aren't paid "peanuts" - they aren't paid at all. They're some of the best shows on the station.

    2:38 AM  

    Anonymous Anonymous wrote:

    Read the blog? Bought the t-shirt? Now you can sign up for the petition...
    www.PetitionOnline.com/RWC1234/petition.html

    3:56 AM  

    Anonymous Rich W wrote:

    hey Dubber, finally found your blog on this after hearing you'd done one.
    I too haven't tuned into Kiwi yet, wonder if they're online? broke me only portable wireless.
    funny how Hocquard was quoted in the Herald story talking about young talent and what have you, then the writer put Havo's age in the next sentence!
    BTW there's a petition, almost 500 signatures now:

    www.petitiononline.com/RWC1234/petition.html

    even some slander in the comments! wonder if the Hav will sue...
    cheers
    Richard

    11:08 PM  

    Post a Comment







    This
page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?