I’m a big fan of Larry Rosin and his blog “The Infinite Dial” (see links to his three latest entries in the “Blogroll” section of the RAIN homepage), and he offered some creative thinking this week on what broadcasters could do with their HD Radio sidechannels.

Specifically, Larry proposed that broadcasters abandon their current approach of uninteresting, automated, locally-produced niche channels and instead consider rebroadcasting great radio stations from other markets like WSIX/Nashville and KROQ/Los Angeles.

I see, however, two problems with this direction:

Too radio consultant-centric

In my opinion, even great radio stations don’t “work” for people who didn’t grow up with them. Do you remember the first couple of hours you tried listening to Rick Dees on KIIS or Jonathon Brandmeier on WLUP — or the music on WXRT? You don’t get it! You lack context.

And while all of us in the radio industry have at least heard of those stations, normal consumers haven’t. They may be legendary to us, but they’re meaningless to them.

Competitive pressures

Would Emmis, which owns alternative-rock Q101/Chicago, want alternative-rock KROQ on anyone’s HD-2 channel Chicago? Would CBS, which owns country-music WUSN/Chicago, want WSIX country-music on anyone’s HD-2 channel in Chicago? On the general level, the plan might be appealing to broadcast groups, but once it got down to market-by-market-level specifics, I think it competitive concerns would make it unworkable.

You’ve got to find a workable tactic before you can “believe”

But I don’t believe it makes sense to “believe in it” unless one can find a workable tactic — i.e., one that will drive consumer acceptance at a reasonable-enough speed to satisfy device manufacturers, the auto industry, stock analysts, and others.

This particular idea is going in the right direction… but I don’t think it’s it yet.

Your thoughts?

Comment

1. A couple thoughts come to mind regarding Larry Rosin’s “go national” concept:

   1. I wonder what the NAB thinks about this? Staying locally-focused would better support their anti-satellite radio agenda. Once the Sirius/XM merger decision has been made (shouldn’t be long now), this may become less of an issue but – for now at least – wouldn’t “going national” undermine their arguments? I can hear it now – “Hey, terrestrial radio is abandoning local content; we’re just filling the void! And now they’re trying to invade our national radio turf, so let us merge so we can better compete!”

   2. How effective will this be in addressing the inevitable tsunami of internet radio, assuming (as I do) that WiMax and other wireless technologies will soon bring broadband to the car – the last stronghold of traditional radio?

   A handful of national HD choices (ok, maybe 20-50 some day?) would be dwarfed by the hundreds of internet choices available. Can they compete? Unlikely.

   The optimal strategy may be to combine national syndicated content with local elements (news, weather, sports, even – cherish the thought – local on-air talent). i.e. Take advantage of the local differentiation made possible by radio instead of abandoning one of the best competitive tools terrestrial radio has to offer.

   I agree with Larry about the shortcomings of current HD content. Hopefully a healthy dialogue will continue regarding how HD can be leveraged. Surely there are plenty of other ideas out there, and with luck enough may reach the airwaves to save terrestrial radio. Clearly time is of the essence. I just wonder whether the Clear Channels can find the guts and creative juices to step on the gas. If not, their fate seems fairly clear.

   Larry Greenfield
   CEO
   NewForm Media

   — Larry Greenfield · Jan 30, 12:54 PM · #

2. “Will Small Markets Convert to HD Radio? Survey Suggests Not Soon”

   “Of the 100, he received 50 surveys back. Of those, only one station had converted to HD-R. Eighty-six percent of the remaining respondents indicated it would be highly unlikely or somewhat unlikely they would convert their stations over the next 12 months, according to his report. Six percent indicated it would be neither likely nor unlikely, and only 6% indicated it would be likely, he told me. Most respondents cited cost as the main factor prohibiting conversion; others felt the technology had been overhyped and that FM analog is good enough in the listeners’ minds, McIntyre says.”

   http://www.rwonline.com/leslie_report/

   “Where is the Cool, the Content, the Charge?”

   “Here is another bad sign: almost every time I speak with a GM or PD about HD Radio, they say, …it’s a non-starter, isn’t it? If we don’t believe in HD Radio, who will?”

   http://www.paragonmediastrategies.com/theblog/?p=222#comments

   “Clear Channel’s murky future”

   “Sad because eliminating new hires (including sellers), failing to replace those who leave, stopping all investment in the future, and halting all advertising and research is the equivalent of saying that necessity requires us to strangle the goose that lays the golden eggs, even as the goose is up for sale.”

   http://www.hear2.com/2008/01/clear-channels.html

   How ironic – HD/IBOC jams distant stations, yet they want to “nationalize” HD Radio. There is not enough interest, or resources by broadcasters to do much of anything with HD Radio. Most major broadcasters’ stocks are down 90% and in the penny-stock range – HD Radio is just out of desperation, hoping consumers will prop-up a decining radio industry with purchases of expensive, empty HD radios.

   — PocketRadio · Feb 4, 01:51 PM · #

3. I think most importantly is to remember the fact that HD radio is unknown except to probably even less than the .000001% of people you mention who know these legendary radio stations. Why waste time with IBOC radio which cuts reception to 1/4 that of an analog radio, has MP3 sound which is worse than normal analog FM and interferes with it’s adjacents when there is nothing wrong with analog radio? In fact if it were the opposite, if analog radio was a new alternative to HD which had been the norm for 100 years, with it’s improved range and less interference to it’s adjacent stations, do you think that perhaps it would have caught on by now as HD hasn’t?
   Why don’t you guys think of ways to improve programming on radio the way it is now? It is obvious to all but a few that HD is dead in the water, in fact it was never alive, so why waste time with it? Most people are completely satisfied with FM as it now stands, in fact Germany just got rid of it after a ten year experiment with DAB, one of the reasons mentioned was that people there were satisfied with analog FM. They found it was a non answer to a non problem.

   — bobyoung · Feb 4, 06:22 PM · #

Other blog entries
Kurt's summary of the Internet radio royalty dispute
iPhone's radio apps are a canary in a coal mine
Part 2: DI's Ari Shohat on how to grow audience
Digitially Imported's Ari Shohat reveals how he built a huge global audience
Emmis's Jeff Smulyan responds re: FM in cell phones
Ramsey: "Broadcasters don't understand the radio 'experience'"
Honolulu's Brock Whaley: "I have heard the future in my car"
Newspaper seems intent on driving print subscribers away
CBS Radio gets it; Mason and Goodman appear in Chicago
Radio Heard Here is a misguided campaign