Raptivity

10/12/1993

I received several disturbing phone calls last week. (No, they weren’t from Joel Denver. He never calls…he never writes…) The calls were from three program directors in different parts of the country. All shared basically the same story.

Their General Managers told each to play no more Rap music.

Their sentiments have been echoed by many more program directors over the past few months. It’s a situation any of you who program Rap music may have to deal with in the near future.

Hopefully, it will be a discussion, not an edict. One progam director objected to the “suggestion” was told, “If you can’t do it, I’ll bring someone in who can.”

Because of the nature of the music, it’s easy to say this is a racist reaction. Although racism, in some cases, may play a part, history proves it cuts much deeper than that. In some instances, it’s an emotional decision. In more, it’s economics.

It’s a classic contradiction: art and business. And this confrontation, although disturbing, isn’t new. It’s been with us since radio began programming popular music.

In the ‘40s, it was that psychotic revolutionary, Frank Sinatra, who shook the mainstream consciousness with “controversial” lyrics that drove teenagers crazy. Many radio stations banned his music.

In the ‘50s, it was the icon Elvis Presley who scared mothers and fathers nationwide with his “suggestive” lyrics and gyrations. Elvis was allowed to appear on The Ed Sullivan show only when he agreed to be filmed from the waist up. Stations banned his music.

In the ‘60s, we had two causes for alarm among the “suits.” Up until the early ‘60s, Black music was heard only on Black radio stations. The success of Elvis changed that and Mainstream stations made Black music a part of their playlists. Many listeners, particularly in the South, objected strenuously. I got the message up close and personal in Jackson, Mississippi when the KKK burned a cross on the lawn while I was on the air at WRBC. Other, less visible reactions, caused rumbles across the country. Then came the Beatles and John Lennon’s statement that they were more popular than Jesus. Beatle records were smashed and burned and banned nationwide.

The ‘70s saw a backlash against songs containing lyrics that advocated the use of drugs. (Wait a minute…you’re telling me Pusherman was about drugs?)

In the ‘80s, Tipper “Gored” the industry with her proposed ban against songs with lyrics advocating sex.

Now, it’s Rap music and more particularly, “Gangster” and “Street” Rap music.

Where to draw the line has always been a particular problem for programmers. We, as a group, make our living by accurately “reflecting” the culture to which we program. Radio doesn’t make music. We play what is popular. Successful programmers don’t choose music. We research what our listeners like and play it back to them. Our problem is that the line keeps moving.

In the early ‘70s, I caused a huge problem within the RKO chain when I refused to edit the word “crap” out of Paul Simon’s “Kodachrome.” Sounds tame today, but most of the other stations across the country had edited that word out of the single. Eventually, they relented and most played the song unedited. But the same problem, with different variations, remains today.

If your manager brings up this topic, hopefully, it’s for discussion and not a mandate. If it’s a mandate, you should resign on the spot. Not because of a moralistic high ground, but because the reality is that you’ll wind up being fired in the end. If you depend on a large portion of your audience that likes Rap music and you stop playing it, you’re going to lose that audience. When the audience is gone, so are you. You have a better chance finding another job if you leave with good ratings than looking for an opening when you lose. blaming it on the manager after the ratings won’t fly.

If you are fortunate and it is a discussion, you need answers for the questions you’ll be asked.

Is the station losing revenue because of your playlist? The big question: Is it perceived lost revenue or actual lost revenue? Many advertisers complain about the music on stations that carry their advertising. Whether or not these advertisers will really cancel is the key. If the advertisers who comoplain actually cancel, will the revenue be off-set by the dollars received from the ratings generated by the ratings? If these advertisers don’t cancel because you change the playlist, will they guarantee to continue advertising if the ratings go down? Wioll the local advertising (and these discussions are almost always driven by statements and threats made by local advertisers) off-set the national buys that are precipitated by ratings alone?

A general manager hires a program director to increase ratings. Ratings mean dollars. Short-term decisions effect long-term profitability. Deleting certain types of music changes the face of the radio station. It is repositioning. Taking certain types of songs off the air makes other changes inevitable. It is a change of format…however slight. It should be thought out before it is done.

If the change is suggest from a moralistic viewpoint, your answers will be much more complicated and might not matter in the end. Let’s face it. None of us is comfortable with all of the music we play. For whatever reason, every song is a turn-off to certain segments of the audience. Our job, as programmers, is to program the most music that is acceptable to the largest portion of hte audience at any given time. We don’t have to like every song. We certainly don’t have to agree with every lyric. But our job is to accurately “reflect” the appetite of our audience.

It is a fact that some of the artist featured on radio are not upstanding citizens. This is nothing new. Most artists, by their nature, are outlaws in some sense of the word. Should we not play music that is written and performed by those who have been imprisoned or in trouble with the law? That would cut out a good portion of the Country playlist in one fell swoop. Or maybe we should define our playlists by degree. The bigger the crime, the fewer times we will play the song.

None of us wants to program material that advocates rape, child molestation, murders, etc. It is somewhat easy to draw that line. But what about other subjects that might make portions of the audience uncomfortable? Do we throw those out also.

Because we play it, does that mean we promote doing what the lyrics say? Should w play songs that advocate sex? Should we play songs that advocate drugs? Should we lay songs that advocate violence?

Songs are poems set to music that reflect our times. They are written by people with different fiews and perceived just as differently by listeners.

Did “The Battle Of The Green Berets” make everyone who heard it joing the Armed Forces? Did “War” make everyone object to the Vietnam War? Did “Cocaine” make everyone who heard it a drug addict? Did “Mercy Mercy Me” make everyone an environmentalist? Did “Just The Way You Are” make everyone who heard it remain the same?

The answer, of course, is no. Music effects everyone differently. Tastes are radically opposite within the same demographic and psychographic sample. I have two daughers who are only three years apart. They were raised in the same house adn exposed to the same environment. One loves alternaive music and can’t stand Rap. The other loves Rap and can’t stand Alternative. Go figure.

The argument has gone on for generations. Does art cause those who view, read or listen to react according to the message? those who are offended by the art form, in spite of all evidence contrary to the fact, will say yes. Those who aren’t offended will say no.

To quote that contemporary of William Shakespeare, Burt Reynolds, in Smokey And The Bandit, “More often than not, you perception is dictated by what part of the country you’re standing in.”

The bottom line is this: Music affects different people in different ways. Music on radio causes people to do one of two things: Keep listening or switch stations.

That’s a fact.

And one that should be contemplated long and hard before playlist alterations are begun.