Tag: country radio programming

Shrinkage

9/29/1995

Short playlists got no reason, short playlists got no reason, short playlists got no reason to be.

It’s got too many Oldies and not enough hits, it’s Recurrent heavy and it’s givin’ me fits.

Well, we don’t want no short playlists…don’t need no short playlist…don’t want no short playlists’ round heah!

Nashville, forever in love with the song, should re-release Randy Newmans’ classic with those new words.  It’s familiar to everyone already.

Two things are being cut in Country music today: playlists and promoters’ wrists.  And there isn’t a lot that can be done about either.

I often say that it’s not enough to define the problem, we must also offer solutions.  I’m afraid I will be guilty of the former in this Editorial.

With few exceptions, Country programmers across the country are shortening their playlists.  Why? There’s not one major reason.  It’s a combination of a lot of little things.  Over the past two weeks, I’ve talked with programmers in major and smaller markets to get their views.  It seems that no matter the market size, their reasons are similar.

Of course, each believes that there is a lack of good product available.  Programmers accuse record companies of producing “cookie-cutter” records by different artists who all sound alike.  While a case can be made for this point, it’s not all the fault of the record companies.  For the most part, programmers are not likely to add records that don’t fit the “sound” of the other records they are playing.  Record companies can’t be faulted for trying to deliver what they believe radio programmers want. They are in the position of being damned if they do and damned if they don’t

Another complaint from programmers is that record companies don’t give records enough time to become hits.  Records by new artists were once worked in smaller markets first, then moved into larger markets as the records proved themselves.  Most records break out of larger markets now.  And there are a couple of reasons for this.

In the late 1980s, as Country music made its way into the mainstream, major and large-market radio stations were dominated by consultants.  Consultants, for their own needs, like to keep playlists short.  It’s a safer position.  Fewer currents and more recurrents make for a more familiar, if less exciting, sound.  The consultant epidemic hadn’t spread to the smaller markets and those programmers were able to take more chances.  Exposing new product worked in those markets and those programmers were able to take more chances.  Exposing new product worked in those markets and record companies recognized that fact.  Records were broken in smaller markets, then moved into the big time with a track record to back them up.

Then came the 1990s.  Major and large-market Country stations began putting more responsibility on individual programmers and in-house research.  Consultants moved to smaller markets and the situation reversed.  Today, It’s easier, in many cases, to get new product exposed in major markets than in smaller markets because no consultant is involved.

Another culprit is SoundScan.  Record companies saw research proving most records were sold in large markets.  Why were they spending so much money servicing and working the smaller markets?  The ends didn’t justify the means.  On paper, that’s accurate.  But those of us in the radio and record industries have the unique ability to reason accurately to an inaccurate conclusion.

That same research also pointed out that the largest portion of the sales market was the combination of all the smaller markets.  If all the smaller markets were successfully programming a record, the possibility of large sales could also exist.  But record companies are often unable to supply the records to the smaller market consumers because records in these markets are ordered and controlled by major racks…who feel more comfortable buying product that has already been established in, more often than not, the larger markets.

So why does radio in smaller markets have to suffer because of an inefficient product delivery system?  That’s the way it is…or has been.  However, that fact of the business is on the verge of a dramatic change…a change spearheaded by Network 40 that will revolutionize product sales.  But that’s for another Editorial.  Just remember “the Diamond Project.”

Because of instant sales reports, record companies are quick to give up on new projects.  If a record by a new artist doesn’t show immediate results, record companies react.  This isn’t the fault of just record companies.  Programmers see this sale information as well.  They are quick to quote sales figures as an excuse to drop a record early.

And then there is the superstar problem.  Everyone knows that record sales for all artists increase when superstars release albums.  The entire industry rides the coattails of major artists with major records.  The problem arises when major stars go months, sometimes years between releases.  This was one of the major factors that chilled Top 40.  In “The Good Old Days,” major recording acts released a single every three months.  It allowed programmers to feature more new artists because the audience was never far away from a big hit by a big group.  The same was true for Country.

Now, it’s a different story.  The Major acts in Top 40 began building tours around album releases.  The tours became longer and so did the time between releases.  It’s hard to work on an album when you’re touring every week.  Major acts began releasing albums every other year.

The same is happening to Country today.

What’s the answer?  To record companies, it’s more new artists.  There’s no choice.  You have to release more product to find the next superstar.  The only way to produce the next superstar is to give those with talent a chance.  The more new product that is exposed, the better the chances.

To programmers, it’s a shortened playlist.  The audience is comfortable with more recurrents and Oldies.  Those songs are familiar.  The audience is confused by new artists who sound alike.  As I’ve pointed out, this is a good policy for the short term, but in the long run, unless Country music produces new stars, the passion will begin to ebb and Country will face the same problems now plaguing Top 40.

Every Country programmer knows this, but as one told me, “Gerry, I want to live to be 60, but first I’ve got to make it to 30.”

Unfortunately, those are the same numbers now being applied to playlists.

Gone Country

3/3/1995

As if you didn’t know it from the shameless promotion of the past few months and by our cover, Network 40 debuts our Country section this week. Pardon the hyperbole. We are famous for beating a dead horse.

Before I get into more shameless hype by explaining our exciting features, on behalf of our entire staff, I want to give a heartfelt “thanks” to those of you in the radio and record industries who have made this dream of ours a reality. Your thoughts have shaped the Country section. As we continue working together in the coming years, time will prove that Network 40 is your publication…not ours.

A special thanks to those in radio who have given their early support, particularly PDs in fringe markets who have done so in spite of the fear of losing their R&R status. Although our problems with R&R’s methodology and dictatorial attitudes have been documented, we hope R&R will not jeopardize the careers of programmers as a way of holding on to their shrinking power base.

We’re a bunch of radio people here. We program our magazine just like a radio station. We’re the new kid in town and we need all the help we can get. Network 40 is radio-friendly. We will validate your support every day by what we do and what we offer.

I would be remiss if I didn’t thank Rusty Walker for his early belief and support of Network 40, long before the Country section became a reality. More than any other person, his enthusiasm got the ball rolling.

And, of course, a special thanks to Alan Jackson for making Network 40’s theme song a smash and for appearing on our first cover. The timing couldn’t have been more perfect.

Now knee-deep in the hoopla, let me explain our new features:

First, the chart. As I’ve explained before, Network 40’s Country Chart is the most accurate in the business. Will it be exact? Of course not. No chart is perfect. Even monitored airplay fails when equipment goes down or songs don’t print. Network 40’s chart is based on computer-generated airplay, an accurate gauge of what stations actually program…not projections. Some questions have been raised regarding reconciliation. Do 100% of our reporters reconcile their logs daily? No. Those who do will provide us with an exact history. Those who don’t reconcile will provide a history that is still much more accurate than projections.

In all other formats, our information mirrors that compiled by BDS stations. Our Country Chart will be just as accurate. And it will be better because our information includes stations not in monitored markets.

Add into this mix Network 40’s exclusive agreement with After Midnight. The Plays Per Week provided by After Midnight will be factored into Network 40’s Country Chart (the only chart with this information), making it even more detailed.

For the first few weeks, until all of our information burns in, every record on the chart will have a bullet. After that, bullets will indicate increased plays.

We’re doing everything possible to make our chart a true representation of actual airplay. No other chart goes to these lengths. And if you know how we can make it even more accurate, let us know.

Other features are designed to provide helpful, timely information. Our Music Meeting offers a thumbnail sketch of records released each week. Music City, written by VP/Country Editor Barry Freeman, keeps you in tune with what’s happening in the music business. Stopset, by Radio Editor Jamie Matteson, does the same for radio.

Out Hot Country Picks page features records that programmers believe have the greatest opportunity to become hits. You can see what other like and compare their favorites with your own. It puts you on the cutting edge in determining what your peers believe are the records destined for success.

We’re also proud to debut our Call-out Chart. According to the PDs with whom we spoke, one of the most important aspects of Country programming is call-out research. Network 40 provides this chart to increase the information PDs can use to determine what records are right for their stations. As a firm believer in accurate research, we acknowledge that any national call-out information should be supplemented with local call-out research for an accurate picture. However, generally , national call-out research on Recurrents and Oldies is basically reflective of overall familiarity. This is why Network 40 prints tests on Recurrents and established songs. No national call-out research can give an accurate read on local acceptance of new records. Anyone who believes it can is foolish. Local call-out research on new records must be tailored specifically for your market and your listeners. Our Call-out Chart will give you a great direction.

Complimenting the Call-out Chart is a column by Jim Woods. Jim is president of his own consultancy and marketing company and was formerly VP or Malrite communications overseeing such stations as Z1—New York, KZLA Los Angeles, KSAN San Francisco and K101 Minneapolis. He will offer programming advice in a variety of areas.

Our regular features including our Promotions page, Station Spotlight, exclusive Interviews, Programmer’s Conference Call and News are the best in the business.

As we continue, we’ll be adding more features in the Country section, including our exclusive Overnight Requests. You can add to your music information every day when you receive an overnight fax featuring the most requested records on stations across the country. And there’s more coming.

But that’s the future. The present is now. You’re reading what you wanted. Can we say “thank you” too much?

We appreciate the early support from the majority of the industry. For those of you who choose to “wait and see,” that’s okay, too. This dance is going to last forever. You’re welcome to join whenever you like the music.

Country State Of Mind

12/9/1994

“I’m just laid up here in a Country state of mind.”

So, when did Country music get to be so popular? It’s a question I’ve been asked more than a couple of times in the past few years. I usually follow that question with a question of my own: Where the hell have you been?

Of course, because I grew up in Mississippi on a steady diet of Hank Williams (that’s Hank Sr. I could only listen to Bocefus when my daddy wasn’t in the house.), country music has always been my music of choice. The again, if you were growing up in Mississippi in the 1960s, you didn’t have a lot of choices. The Deep South has always raised an eyebrow (and an occasional axe handle) at anything that didn’t have a fiddle in the mix. So it wasn’t until I left and got educated that I became aware that there was indeed some other music out there.

As a young’un, I did get a peek or two at the Beatles and the Rolling Stones when they were on the Ed Sullivan Show. If I was real lucky and my daddy went to the bathroom after Topo Gigio or that Russian Circus old Ed was so fond of, I could almost witness the entire appearance before he told me to stop listening to that “crap.” To my everlasting credit, I finally did get my old man to admit that “Act Naturally” wasn’t a bad song, but only because I told him it was written by John D. Loudermilk who, in his opinion, was the “greatest damn writer of all time…next to Hank.” I never could get him to embrace the Stones, even towards the end when he was heavily medicated.

A lot of those who have jumped on the bandwagon recently say Country music finally grew up. With all due respect, maybe it’s the audiences who have grown up.

There are others who say that Country music is well on the way to becoming the Mainstream music of tomorrow. Don’t look now, but with over 5,000 radio stations playing Country music across the country, it’s getting pretty close to Mainstream right now.

Why?

A case could be made for the fact that many of us can’t dance to most of the other music. I just don’t do the “Drop” or the “Slide,” make signs with my hands or jump in a mosh pit. I ain’t no Fred Astaire, but I can two-step. Then again, who can’t? And Country bars are easier to hang in. Oh, a good fight will break out occasionally, but that’s usually what it is…a fight. Very seldom are knives or guns pulled. I mean, you might get your ass kicked, but you probably won’t get killed. I’m no genius. It’s obvious I don’t have the definitive answers. But a couple do stand out.

The music has gotten better. Don’t get me wrong. Country writers were penning standards long before Rock & Roll was named, and Chet Atkins was picking and doubling harmonies before 24-tracks were used. But with the technological boom came a bunch of talented producers who made it possible for Country production to compete with the best of them. In the good ole days, the good ole boys would get a few pickers, rent a studio and cut an album in 12 hours…and that included mixing. The only that that mattered was the song and the beat.

The song is still king in Country, but production and arranging have made the music more acceptable to the fringe consumers. It didn’t hurt when Mainstream began fragmenting into a thousand different definitions. There was a time when you could hear Elton John, Freddie Fender, Al Green and Jimi Hendrix back-to-back on a good Top 40 station. No more. Formats have become too restricted.

And that brings me to the second point: Country radio has gotten better. No format has improved in overall sound, marketing and promotion more than Country. Some of the best radio stations in the country are Country…if you get my drift.

Country programmers are spending more and more time making sure the production of the station is perfect. It’s still the sound that counts to the listeners and Country radio , in many cases, sound best.

Country music, by definition, is much broader than much of the music today. Radio stations and record companies are sometimes too quick to define a song. Not so the audience. They just know if they like it. Country radio allows more of the pieces of the pie onto the plate and it ultimately means more dessert for the listeners.

Country stations are like good Top 40s used to be. You can hear Vince Gill’s “When Love Finds You,” the Tractors’ “Baby Like To Rock It” and George Strait’s “The Big One” and you’ve got Mainstream, Rock & Roll and Country back-to-back. Throw in “Third Rock From The Sun” and you could make a case for psychedelic, but maybe that’s a stretch.

Country music does a great job of pushing the envelope. If someone did a focus group on Mars, most of the aliens would be hard-pressed to make a distinction between half of the songs on Country stations and those claiming to be Mainstream

Of course, there is a dark side to this otherwise bright cloud. The large gains made by Country stations are due in no small part to the success of many new artists. There is so much good music available that PDs are spending time and money determining which records are the best. And they should. However, the danger of over-researching, narrow-casting call-outs and restrictive playlists are real. One only needs to look at what happened to Mainstream Top 40 in the late 1980s to find the end result.

Programmers who have the tendency to put too much emphasis on in-house research can quickly find themselves in the outhouse. The true test of any record is the response of the listeners when they hear it on the radio. Research shows that listeners in all formats…but especially Country…do not tune out new music…even if they don’t like it. They want to hear the latest releases and decide for themselves. It’s only when you continue to play inferior songs does the audience take a hike. So our job as programmers is to expose the right product, test the response and act accordingly.

 

If we’re right…we prosper. If we’re wrong…nobody dies. In the words of Hank Jr., “If the sun don’t come up tomorrow, people I have had a good time. I’m just laid up here in a Country state of mind.”

Of Fish And Trees

12/2/1994

“There are fifteen-hundred-and-thirty-two guitar pickers in Nashville.”

And only one chart. The R&R chart. Quickly becoming referred to in Nashville as “the x@#%-ing R&R chart.”

R&R is hopelessly out of touch with the industries it pretends to serve…radio and records. And the Country chart is a testament to exactly how far out of touch R&R pretends not to be.

To understand the deep resentment harbored for the R&R chart, one must first understand the R&R chart and the methodology behind it.

And therein lies the rub.

There is an ancient Japanese proverb that says in order to win in combat, you must first confuse your opponent. R&R must define its publishing venture as combat and R&R must believe that its opponents are those in the record and radio industries. If those in the radio and record industries are the opponents and confusion is the barometer, then R&R has accomplished its task.

Well, they aren’t and it ain’t. If you get my drift.

First, we must look at R&R’s methodology. And for the sake of time, let’s not get into how R&R chooses its panel of reporters. How a station gets to become an R&R reporter is one of those great mysteries of life. Why one station makes it and another doesn’t is impossible to comprehend. Why some rules are broken on some occasions, yet not on others, seems to be more contingent upon outside forces than on any standard or mathematical equation.

Go figure.

Then again, don’t bother. You can’t.

In a world of reality, where the entire industry is interested in “how many times did the record get played,” R&R has designed a system that is impossible to explain, comprehend or compute…unless you’re one of the guys in the computer room at R&R. But then, you look at the Country chart and you have to ask yourself, “What are these guys doing? Throwing darts?

To confuse its opponents (that’s people in the record and radio businesses), R&R designs a system that boggles the mind.

Total plays. Total spins. That’s what the industry wants.

But R&R doesn’t care about the needs of the industry, does it? If so, perhaps someone from R&R would have conferred with different people in the record and radio industries before coming up with a system that serves only R&R’s needs.

Oh, let’s give R&R a break. After debuting the new charts (and let’s not forget that R&R went kicking and screaming to a Plays Per Week system only after Network 40 and BDS reflected the industry standards for months), R&R changed them several times. Unfortunately for R&R the changes weren’t for the better…only done to pretend that R&R would occasionally listen.

Forget for the moment that R&R’s chart is based on inaccurate representation. We covered projecting Plays Per Week last week. And any final calculations of inaccurate numbers to begin with result in an inaccurate conclusion. Garbage in…R&R chart numbers out. Let’s focus on weighting.

R&R’s weighting system is so out of whack that it’s hard to discuss with any degree of accuracy. Stations are weighted by market size (in some cases) and audience reach determined by Arbitron, the least reliable audience-measuring system known to man. Is there anyone programming a Country radio station anywhere who believes Arbitron accurately reflects the station’s listeners? As programmers, we have to live with Arbitron’s figures because Arbitron is a sales tool Do we have to live with it in a publication that supposedly cares about radio’s realities also?

There’s nothing in the weighting system of R&R’s charts to reflect how a station impacts Country music sales. If you’re a Country PD and you play a record and it sells, doesn’t that count for something? Not with R&R. Country music sales have nothing to do with R&R’s Country charts.

And what, may I ask, is an “Add Factor?”

Don’t answer. No one knows. Not even the people at R&R. If anyone did, they would be able to offer a rational explanation as to how, a few weeks ago, the Rhett Akins song received seven adds, increased in plays by a total of 282, yet went #44 to #44 on the R&R chart with no bullet. Then, the next week, the song got two adds, lost six stations (probably because of the previous week’s chart), increased in plays by 37, yet moved from #44 to #39 with a bullet! And the same week, The Wiggens’ record, ranked #50 the week before, got 15 adds, no drops and fell off the chart!

What’s wrong with this picture? To quote an expression R&R is quite familiar with…the fish are in the trees.

Of course, it’s easy to criticize R&R when we don’t have a chart yet. We’re not worried. It will still be easy to critique them when our chart debuts. The biggest difference between R&R and Network 40 is that we talk with those in the radio and record industries before we debut a chart. We get the industry’s input and design a chart that meets the industry’s needs…not our own.

The Network 40 Country chart will be a reflection of the Country radio and record industries. The Network 40 Country chart will reflect total plays. The Network 40 country chart will be based on accurate Plays Per Week, not projections. The Network 40 Country chart will weight stations based on each station’s ability to impact Country music sales and the Country music audience. Country music is different. It cannot be judged by total sales or total audience.

How do we know this? Because we asked those of you in the Country music and radio industries. And we will continue to ask for your input. Why? Because, unlike those at R&R, we believe you know more than we do. R&R needs to face reality. The industry wants Plays Per Week, not projections. The industry wants a weighting system based on Country music and audience impact, not Add Factors and Points.

It ain’t brain surgery.

Although I did hear two doctors talking before a delicate cranial operation in which the life of the patient was in danger. One doctor patted the other on the back before they entered the operating room and said, “Relax, it’s not like we’re doing R&R’s charts.”