Bullshit

4/15/1994

Radio stations across the country received letters from R&R this week describing the new Plays Per Week reporting system set to go into effect with the next issue. Just what Top 40 needs. Another “Dear Joel” letter.

Bullshit!

R&R has made many blunders in the past year as it has gamely tried to dictate to radio, but these latest edicts may very well be the worst ever. This editorial space always tries to reflect the opinions prevalent in our industry. Sometimes the opinions are offered by a few. This week, the industry as a whole seems to have reached a breaking point with R&R.

Joel Denver’s letter to all reporters opens with the following statement: “After years of planning and months of exhaustive testing, R&R’s dynamic new music information gathering system is ready to go! We’re convinced that it will provide the industry with the most comprehensive and accurate national airplay information.”

Bullshit.

I guess what Joel is trying to say is that he’s been reading The Network Forty for the past two years. That’s how long we’ve been producing and printing Plays Per Week. We gave the term “Plays Per Week” to the industry to use. And now R&R wants the industry to believe that R&R has spent years developing a “dynamic new system.”

All together now…Bullshit.

R&R’s latest system has a lot of problems, not the least of which is their decision to break Top 40 into two subformats: 12-24 CHR/Top 40 and 18-34 CHR/Top 40. Radio stations are once again being categorized by R&R based on what R&R decides. Top 40 radio faces enough problems trying to sell their audience to advertisers without R&R diminishing its importance by placing “stigmas” that have nothing to do with the individual station’s own positioning. Why is R&R doing this?

Checking through the breakouts, R&R seems to have decided that all radio stations playing a heavy mixture of Urban or Dance music automatically qualify for inclusion in the 12-24 category…regardless of demographic dominance. This means that a station like WPGC in Washington D.C. will be listed in R&R’s 12-24 category even though WPGC is #1 25-54! And a station like KSFM in Sacramento, ranked #1 18-34, will be listed by R&R in the 12-24 category!

What is wrong with this picture? The fish are definitely in the trees!

Who in our industry wants two separate charts, broken into these demographics? There isn’t a radio station in the world that wants its advertisers to believe they appeal only to the 12-24 year-old audience. There certainly isn’t a Top 40 station anywhere that wants its competition to have a national magazine identifying it as a 12-24 station. The format is hard enough to sell as it is. Do we need R&R further diluting Top 40’s sales picture by incorrectly defining a station’s format and downgrading its influence in the upper demos?

Say it again…Bullshit.

How can R&R misread the concerns of radio so badly? How could R&R announce these changes without first researching radios’ reaction?

To quote a programmer, “R&R is like AM radio and the latest attempts at change are like AM stereo. Nobody’s listening anymore.”

Radio’s response to R&R’s latest dictates have been immediate and harsh. Many radio stations that have been classified as 12-24 area seriously reconsidering the value of reporting PPWs to R&R. All radio stations should do the same.

The Network Forty believes that all trade magazines owe a debt of gratitude to radio stations because radio provides the information. All trade magazines should reflect the needs and wants of the radio and record industries. If any trade magazine does not reflect a constructive position for your radio station, why give it information?

The Network Forty is dedicated to helping both the radio and record industries discover new and innovative ways that will ensure a successful future. The Network Forty has championed Top 40 radio since our inception and will continue to do that.

The fact that R&R continues to apply restrictions and arbitrary judgments that are detrimental to Top 40 specifically, and radio in general, is appalling. R&R does not ask the industry what the industry needs, it tells the industry what R&R needs.

What’s that smell? Bullshit.

There are other problems with R&R’s “new” and “innovative” system. R&R will only take PPW information over the phone. This allows too much room for manipulation, something that R&R seems reluctant to discourage. The Network Forty accepts only computer-generated PPW information via fax. This makes The Network Forty PPW information harder to manipulate; and our additional checks against computer-generated daily music logs makes manipulation impossible. Simply put, despite R&R’s hollow claims, The Network Forty’s PPW information is the most comprehensive and accurate barometer of actual airplay available.

No bullshit.

Joel’s letter also states that “Maintaining R&R status is more important than ever, since only our reporters have access to R&R ONLINE.” Access? Didn’t R&R promise five computers and software to all reporters a while back? Is R&R now only offering access?

How long will radio continue to pander to a trade magazine like R&R? R&R continues to make promises it doesn’t keep.

Radio deserves better.

At one time, R&R status was meaningful to radio. It isn’t any longer. It’s time for radio to decide whether or not to continue to provide information to a trade magazine that doesn’t serve radio’s best interests.

If you, like many other programmers, believe that R&R’s latest demands aren’t in your best interest, the answer is simple.

Don’t report.

It’s my guess that R&R will change its terminology when radio refuses to participate in the latest “innovation.” This won’t be the first time R&R has proposed a “new” system, only to have it show down by radio. Remember the initial R&R PPW pitch? Top 40 was to supply predicted plays for the upcoming week. That dog didn’t hunt, either.

The bigger question is: When will R&R consult with the industry it claims to serve before instituting new procedures? How many mistakes will R&R make before the industry turns its back on them completely? And how long in the future will it be until radio flatly rejects R&R as a positive influence on its livelihood?

The future is now.