Hear 2.0

At Ford, Windows is Job One

I am taking an unexpected and brief break from my vacation because when I saw this headline I knew it would have implications for the radio industry which are vast.

None of this is surprising, of course. I - and others - have been saying that the Internet is coming to a car near you for some time now.

But here - for the first time - is proof positive:

In what might be the start of an exciting technological future for cars and trucks, Ford Motor Co. and software giant Microsoft Corp. are expected to jointly announce soon that new Windows Automotive software soon will be available in Ford vehicles.

The new technology -- dubbed "Sync" -- will finally bring together two industries that have long been expected to cross paths, allowing consumers to use their vehicles as computers in key ways, such as hands-free cell phone calls or downloading music or receiving e-mail.

If you can use your car to download music, you can also use it to stream music. And if you can stream music then you can do so from any number of music providers, not just your radio station.

And also this:

Microsoft is looking to move into the vehicle market to take advantage of the growing trend toward smart cars, said Jeff Varick, president of Ann Arbor-based Brand Motion, an aftermarket telematics firm.

"People spend an hour or more in their car everyday," he said. "They want to be productive and entertained."

That entertainment time comes, in part, from the primary in-car entertainer, and that, my friends, is YOU.

What is YOUR group doing to be in front of this trend? What is YOUR group doing to be in every car in every way in 2007 and beyond? What content do you have that every Ford will want to stream?

And where does this leave satellite radio and especially HD radio?

Happy Holidays, all

As another year draws to a close I want to thank all of you who read these ramblings so regularly.

The strength of radio, like any industry, is rooted in the strength of its people. Again this year I've had the opportunity to work with some wonderful and talented broadcasters. To them and to you I say Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

And I'll see you in 2007!

And here's a little parting gift - unless the Google copyright hounds sniff it out first:

Will the Internet kill DJ's?

Can an automated technology that supports Internet radio actually create a listening experience which is deeper and more personal between the records than what any human jock is capable of?

I'm skeptical, but I'd sure like to hear this when it's fully baked.

Because, after all, listeners generally don't mind talk between the songs if its the kind of talk that's relevant and personal.

That said, something tells me that Kidd Kraddick and his kind are safe and secure.

The dangers of "too much choice"

Words of warning for those who think a zillion channels of anything - satellite, hd, or Internet radio stations - will give more people more of what they want and make them happier as a result.

Too much choice is a turn-off.

Read this piece from Australian TV (or see the Windows Media version of the TV story)

How do we cope with too much choice?

Simple.

We avoid the options.

So when you hear marketers - especially marketers in the audio information and entertainment (a.k.a. radio) space tell you a piece of technology is good because it offers up "a lot more choice," tell them to do their homework.

Or wonder why consumers stay away in droves.

Is "contest" a dirty word?

A view from outside radio:

You're invited to participate in an online evaluation that will help make MercuryVehicles.com even better. As a thank you for your participation to the entire evaluation, you will be entered to our promotion for a chance to win one of two 30GB iPods ($250 value). To view the promotion details, please....

"Entered to our promotion."

"Promotion," not "contest."

Is "promotion" a more attractive proposition than "contest"?

Somebody should research this.

Words to live by in 2007

From MediaPost:

"We really need to think about what it means to be in an interactive environment and have an audience that wants to communicate with us," says Michael Rogers, a media consultant and "futurist-in-residence" at The New York Times. "When these new ideas come along, things become polarized very quickly - it's newspapers versus bloggers, user-generated content versus network television." The challenge for media companies, Rogers says, is to figure out how to "keep the necessary authority that's taken many decades to establish, but still have our audience participate."

How "interactive" is your user experience? And not just for some listeners (i.e., callers) but for all of them. Do you have a database or a "community"?

In my experience, most radio stations barely have a listener database let alone any significant stab at community. There are exceptions, and I could probably count them on one hand - or one finger.

Google Audio shifts gears

It seems probable that Google will soon announce a deal with CBS that would provide it a ton of advertising time in major markets. This is outside my area of expertise, but I'm guessing it would provide a cut to CBS while getting Google the inventory it desperately needs to test Google Audio for a list of waiting advertisers.

The NYT story (linked above) suggests that sales staff layoffs at CBS would ensue. And that would mean a long term deal, wouldn't it?

But check out the pitch for Google Audio - because it's not only audio:

Google radio ad sales executives recently changed their approach in meetings with potential clients....Sales executives now laud the positives of combined radio and Internet ad campaign, rather than strictly just the "efficiency and efficacy" of Google Audio.

That is, one of the big competitive advantages of Google Audio is that it's not only audio - it's audio plus adwords.

Google, in other words, views themselves as the mediators of advertising via technology across as many distribution channels as possible. This is an advantage over any one distribution channel (e.g., radio) viewing itself in the business of that channel alone.

From the perspective of advertisers there is no "radio business." There's only the business of connecting consumers with products and services.

[Postscript: Sign up to test Google Audio yourself here]

Google's plot to change the way agencies work

From the World Advertising Research Center [via Tom Asacker]:

Google's ultimate goal, [CEO Eric] Schmidt revealed, is to enable the buying of radio slots via a broad menu of ad types distributed via Google's single web-based interface.

"The long-term fantasy is we walk up to you and you give us, say, $10 million and we'll completely allocate it for you" across different media and ad types, said Schmidt in an interview.

"All types of ads can be made more effective, for instance by targeting them to consumers more likely to be interested in them," he hyped.

Agencies are understandably less than enthused by Google's offering - pointing to its elimination of the personal relationship between buyers and sellers, seen as a key element in effective negotiating. There is also growing concern that Google's ultimate goal is to persuade large advertisers to bypass agencies and channel all sectors of media buying and selling via Google.

Google insists that such worries are unfounded. "Five years from now there will be more work done by those agencies," ripostes Google's vp of advertising sales Tim Armstrong.

However, Schmidt, his boss, is more pragmatic and concedes that some types of work undertaken by ad agencies "could change". As to which types and what extent, he diplomatically failed to elaborate.

WiFi-Fo-Fum!

See if this message comes through on your HD radio:

For many people, satellite radio is the latest thing in audio....Over the past year or so, however, there has been talk about a new take on another technology -- Internet radio -- that has the potential to disrupt both the world of satellite radio and good old terrestrial radio. It's called WiFi radio, or wireless Internet radio, and some say its time could be coming soon, thanks to cheaper radio chips and the increasing penetration of public wireless networks.

Satellite radio is already keenly aware of this threat and/or opportunity on the horizon (and I'd call it an opportunity).

But how much of your future is an Internet radio one?

Do you know another name for "wireless Internet radio"?

"Radio."

It was the radio, after all, that was originally called "wireless."

On your mark, get set....

Goodbye under-25's

Nothing inspires radio industry self-flagellation like the topic of abandoning under-25's.

Check out this conversation at Arbitron's recent consultant fly-in where at least two panel members chided radio for forsaking the tastes of at least one and maybe two generations.

Said the extremely smart Fred Jacobs:

We got away with ignoring them because there was no money there. Since we were the only game in town, they wound up eventually finding us. But today, ere are all kinds of places for them to go. If they don't grow up with us, why would they come to us?...We are kind of screwed. We stand to lose a couple of generations.

Fred's right.

In reality, as Fred suggests, the advertising community has never rewarded radio stations for being "bottom-heavy" with under-25's. Not ever.

What's different now is that tight advertising markets, intense competitive pressure, and demographic realities (both the aging of the baby boom and the splintering of under-25's into ethnic and lifestyle fragments who agree more and more on less and less) have conspired to make under-25's less attractive to broadcasters than ever. And this is happening just as under-25's have more substitutes to radio than before.

But I'm not sure how we can point the finger of blame at ourselves. Because what can we really do?

Do we take a financial bullet for under-25's?

Do we deliberately look the other way as our competitors rack up bigger numbers targeting bigger - and older - audiences?

Do we fancy that this "participation generation" - this cohort that values user-generated content and user-generated music choice above all else - can even be effectively targeted by one or more radio stations? What exactly is this format that we're giving up so as to worship the aging demographic gods?

No, this change in the nature of things - and in our future - was inevitable.

Our challenge now is to create and target audiences in whatever media they want to be created and targeted in. Our challenge is to build audiences, young and old, and link them to advertisers. That challenge will never change.

But nobody ever said we'd be meeting that challenge by using a radio tower.