Americana Music

What is Americana music?  The station I work at is about to turn to this format.  Could you describe it? - Kelly

 

Kelly:  The Americana Music Association describes the format as, “roots Country, bluegrass & new grass, alternative Country, honky-tonk troubadours, and insurgent Country all combined.”  An article published in 2000 from The Tennessean says:

 

“The Americana moniker was born six years ago [1994] when radio promoter Jon Grimson and other industry insiders decided the various strains of American roots music being neglected by mainstream radio needed a common name.”

 

Americana Music is a classic example of radio programmers finally listening to Country music listeners.  For many years, Country listeners have asked (begged) radio stations to play a variety of Country music, not just Modern Country, Young Country, or whatever other name is used to describe new Country music.  They asked for the “twangy” music, they asked for “music my parents listened to,” and more.

 

Finally, someone listened and put a label (“Americana”) on the music that many (not all) Country listeners want to hear.  This is a classic example of: Find out what they want, give it to them, and tell them that you gave it to them.  While the Americana label may be new to radio, the music that comprises the format is not new to the Country listeners who have voiced their opinions in Country music research during the past several years.

 

You can find out more about the format if you search the Internet for americana music, americana radio, and americana music association.

Amount of Music

We are new player in our market (on air 8 months). We are a CHR/Rhythmic station running 2 commercial stopdowns per hour plus a stopdown at the top of the hour for 90 seconds of news. (Generally we'll do 6 songs/spots/4 songs/spots/3 songs/news).


Our main competitor runs a 30-minute music sweep plus 3 stopdowns in the hour (one with ads and 2 minutes news).


We are considering doing 40 minutes non-stop during work hours with one of our stopdowns placed next to our news. Do you think this will help build hours during the day? Or will it be a stunt that wears off quickly? - BB


BB: Let me first say that I can’t answer for your audience. I don’t know what they like or dislike in reference to music sweeps. I assume that you have found that they prefer 40 minutes of non-stop music as opposed to 30 minutes or something else. If you haven’t found out, then you’re obviously taking a guess. And personally, when it comes to multi-million dollar properties, I get nervous with guessing.


Be that as it may, your last sentence summarizes what I have seen over and over again. The battle for the most songs in a row is one that no station ever seems to win because the competitor always adds another song. It is also a battle that the listeners don’t care about. From all the listener comments I have seen, they care more about the quality of music, not quantity.


A good question to ask listeners is this: "Assume there are two stations in your city that play the same type of music that you like. Station A plays 30 minutes of music in a row and Station B plays 40 minutes of music in a row. Which one would you choose?" The typical answer from listeners is: "Depends on what they play."


The amount of music says nothing about the quality of music, and I have seen that selling quality is more powerful than selling quantity. In addition, there is more to a great radio station than the amount of music it plays in a row.

Angels

Doc:  How many angels can stand on the head of a pin? - Anonymous

 

Anon:  You must be in a philosophy class or something, but that’s OK.  Here’s your answer:  Give me an operational definition of an angel and I’ll tell you how many can stand on a pin.

 

Note: An operational definition is a definition that provides specific directions (characteristics or qualities) for finding something and measuring it.

Announcing Songs

I’m at the R & R Convention 2001 in Los Angeles. I attended a session by Larry Rosin from Edison Media where he presented the results of a study called "Ultimate Record Buyer Study." He said the study shows that 62% of respondents want every song announced and 33% want only the new songs announced. He said something like, "If this were any other industry, it would have been fixed immediately.  Are you surprised at the results? - Anonymous

 

Anon: Yes, I’m simply astonished, probably on par with the astonishment I would have with a new study reporting that automobiles turn more efficiently with a steering wheel.

 

As I recall, the question of announcing song titles and artists was first asked in about 1982, and the results in every study I have conducted or seen since then (thousands of studies) have said the same thing: Listeners want to know the titles and artists of songs they hear on the radio.

 

I just looked at the results from 50 studies from the past few decades. The average percentage of people who want to hear artists and titles mentioned is about 75% . . . higher than the study reported at the convention. I’ll go with the results of 50 studies over the results of one study.

 

As far as "fixing the problem immediately," this same problem has existed at least as far back as 1982, so I don’t think things will change much. Things won’t change until program directors and others in charge of what goes on the air give the listeners what they want.

Announcing Songs - 2

I find this "announcing songs" topic interesting as a PD. While listeners say they want to hear titles, they don’t want the music to stop. If it did to announce the song, they punch the button. They hate DJ’s talking over the music.

 

And never have I heard the question asked, "Would you listen more to the radio station that announces songs?" because that’s the ultimate goal. With all the research done by you and others on this topic, has anybody asked the question "how?" Should it be at the end of a long sweep of music, or after every song?

 

Isn’t this analogous to asking the question, "Wouldn’t you like to have your favorite station play one or two commercials per hour?" Everyone says yes, but have a reasonable expectation it’s not going to happen.

 

What’s your take, Doc? And in the words of Jim Rome, don’t suck. - Anonymous

 

Anon: For those who don’t know, Jim Rome is a sport talk show host. I’ll try not to suck.

 

I find the announcing songs topic very interesting too. I have found it interesting for the past 19 years. Why do I find it interesting? Because for the past 19 years, listeners have been saying that they want to hear artists and titles of songs that radio stations play, but for the past 19 years radio stations (many of them) don’t do it. Why? "Because we play the same songs all the time and the listeners know the artists and titles." "Because listeners only want to hear music and don’t want DJs talking." And on and on and on. All "it seems like" statements that totally ignore what the listeners say.

 

First, let me set you straight on something. Listen to me now and believe me later. Listeners do not consider artists and titles as talk (unnecessary talk). Listeners perceive artists and titles and relevant information; information that adds to their enjoyment of the radio. After many hundreds of thousands of interviews, I have never heard one…not one listener say that they consider a stop in the music to tell artists and titles is a bad thing. Never. Not once. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Got it?

 

I have also never heard a listener say that he/she hits the radio button if the DJ is telling the artists and titles. Never. Not once. Zero. Nada. Zilch. What I have heard many thousands of times is that listeners will hit the radio button if the DJ does not give the artists and titles. Why? Because the listeners want to know the information and the DJ doesn’t give it to them.

 

Remember now, I have seen listeners ask for this for 19 years. Not in just one study, not with just one format, and not with only one demographic. It’s across the board for all formats and demographics. So what do radio stations do? They ignore the requests and don’t give the information for one reason or another. I don’t get it and never will. I have been involved in this discussion for 19 years and my response is always the same, "Ask the listeners what they want, give it to them, and tell them that you gave it to them."

 

Now, you say that you have never heard the question asked, " "Would you listen more to the radio station that announces songs?" I don’t know how to say this politely, but the research you have seen "don’t be right," or isn’t complete, or is conducted by someone who doesn’t know how to ask questions. Or something.

 

I have seen the question asked thousands of times and the answer from listeners is always the same—"yes." In addition, if you ask how important it is to listeners that radio stations tell artists and titles, it almost always ranks in the top three elements. Every time. Every format. Every demographic. No exceptions. None.

 

And no, the artist and titles question is not analogous to asking the question, "Wouldn’t you like to have your favorite station play one or two commercials per hour?" The two questions aren’t in the same category. That is an incorrect analogy. Plus, I can’t imagine any researcher ever asking such a question. It’s leading, misleading, hypothetical, and would never happen in the real world.

 

Finally, listeners don’t care when the artists and titles are mentioned. They don’t care if it’s before, during, or after a set of songs. However, I will say this: For years, listeners have said that 10 in-a-row (or any other long set) followed by artists and titles is too much. They prefer, and don’t think that it’s a "break" in the music if, during a 10-song set, that the radio station tells the artists and titles and the first three songs, the second three, and after the final four songs. Listeners do not consider this a break in the music, unnecessary talk, or any other complaint you can think of. As I mentioned, the listeners perceive artists and titles as important information. Only radio PDs (and others who control the content) believe this information creates problems. "It doesn’t flow." I have never heard a listeners complain or even mention anything about flow. That’s a radio term and irrelevant to radio listeners.

 

In addition, you mention talking over the music. You are correct. Listeners don’t like. So what should you do? The answer is simple: don’t do it!

 

Let me say that again so I don’t suck, as you requested…Listeners do not perceive artists and titles (and radio station slogans, call letters, and frequency) as unnecessary (and therefore, unwanted) talk. Write that down on a 3 x 5 note card and put it on your desk. It’s the truth. Again, listen to me now and believe me later.

 

One of the most frustrating things about being a researcher is that I’m hired to find out what listeners want. I do that and tell the radio station decision-makers. Then I hear things like, "Well that can’t be right," or "We’re not going to do that." And so on. Well if that’s the case, then why ask the listeners in the first place?

 

If you ask the listeners (in a scientifically-based research study) what they want and decision makers ignore the information, then they—the decision-makers suck.

 

I don’t have opinions about this and other topics in radio. What I rely on is what listeners say. If they want artists and titles, then it makes sense to give them the information. Why put a radio station on the air and give people what we think they need? You know what? If you do, then the listeners say, "You suck" and they go to another radio station that provides what they’re looking for.

 

Case closed. And you’ll never, not in one million years change my mind because I just report what the listeners want.

 

If you want to run your radio station without giving the artists and titles, then go ahead. You’re in charge. Just don’t be surprised when listeners complain. And they will.

Antenna Booster - Cell Phone

Doc:  Have you ever seen those little cell antenna boosters?  There are little metal "plates" that you attach to your cell phone.  I was thinking about buying one (for $19.99), but I thought I'd ask you before I made the purchase. - Jason

 

Jason:  Sorry it took a while to answer your question, but I wanted to get one of the things so I could better understand what you're talking about (I got mine free).  For those who don't know about this product, click here for an explanation.

  1. There are several types of antenna boosters, but none that I have seen show a manufacturer's name on the package.  The only information shown is "Made in China."  Why no manufacturer name?  I don't know.

  2. There is no legitimate research about the effectiveness of the antenna booster.  There are a few "studies" on the Internet, but none is conducted according to scientific principles.  The studies I saw are simply anecdotal evidence and that type of information is useless.

  3. No cell phone manufacturer offers the stick-on antenna booster.  If the booster actually worked, it's logical to expect that the manufacturers would include the device in their phones, or at least sell it in an after-market package.

  4. The antenna booster isn't connected to a phone's antenna.  The directions on the booster I have say this: (1) Remove the battery from your phone.  (2) Wipe the battery compartment with a clean dry cloth to remove any fingerprints or dirt.  (3) Remove the yellow backing from the internal antenna, being careful not to leave fingerprints.  You may find tweezers helpful in this process.  (4) Press the Internal Antenna onto the body of the phone toward the side that the fixed antenna enters the phone.  BE CAREFUL when installing the Internal Antenna in the battery compartment not to let it touch any circuit boards or metal contacts on the body of the phone.  (5) Replace the battery.  Understand?  The antenna merely sticks to the inside of the phone and is not connected in any way to the phone's existing antenna.  Oh, please.

  5. There are dozens and dozens of articles on the Internet lambasting the antenna booster (the stick-on type, not the home or car booster that includes a cable) as a useless item.  Most suggest that the booster is a fraud and/or scam that should be investigated by the Federal Trade Commission.  One person suggested that it would be better to put duct tape around your cell phone.

  6. The suggested retail price for the antenna booster is $19.99.  However, if you look on eBay, you can buy one for 1¢.

Is this enough information for you to make a decision?  When I showed the antenna booster to my wife, she asked if it worked.  My comment to her was, "Yes, it works with stupidity."

 

In other words, Jason, save your money, even if it's only one penny.

AOL Keyword

When I watch HBO and the Turner TV channels, I often see the website for the channel and then AOL Keyword, such as “AOL Keyword: HBO.”  Why is that and what is a “keyword.” - Mike

 

Mike:  It’s called cross-promotion.  As you may know, AOL and Time Warner merged in 2001, which means that one company (AOL Time Warner), according to the company website, owns:

In reference to the “keyword” thing…that’s just shorthand.  When you type in “HBO,” the AOL software adds http://www to the beginning and .com to the end.  You can accomplish the same thing on Microsoft’s Internet Explorer—just type in “HBO” in the Address bar, hold the Control (CTRL) key down, and hit “Enter.”  The other information is automatically added.  (Holding the Shift key will add .net to the end.)  This AOL and Microsoft shortcut works only for .com sites.

 

Anyway…that’s why you’ll see all the cross-promoting (Keyword) on TV channels and it’s also why you’ll see so many AOL links on things like hbo.com and timeinc.com.

Apartment Entry

I just moved into a new apartment, and got a notice today that the owner is going to be entering each apartment in the complex for "inspection."  Now, I'm not sure what he's inspecting (although I can imagine), but I was wondering about the legality of that.  Is he allowed to enter the apartments at his discretion without some kind of warrant or written consent from the tenant?  Is he only legally required to give notice before entering?  Thanks, Doc! - Anonymous
 

Anon:  I'm not a real estate expert, nor an attorney, so don't interpret my comments as legally correct.  However . . .

 

I checked with a few people in the real estate business and also read several things on the Internet, and all of the sources suggest that it's usually OK for the owner or manager of an apartment complex to enter your apartment as long as you are given adequate notice—usually 24 or 48 hours.  (This should be stated in your lease.)

 

From what I understand, the owner or manager can only "inspect" the apartment structure, appliances, bathroom and kitchen facilities, and other apartment-related items.  The person does not have authority to "inspect" your personal property.

 

If you have additional questions, I suggest that you call an attorney—check the telephone business pages for your area.

Apartment Question – Another One

The question about an apartment owner entering an apartment for "inspection" prompted me to write and ask another apartment question that I have.  Here's the deal:  The apartment I live in is not what I would call luxurious.  In fact, there are problems with many things like the plumbing, doors that don't lock, and more.  I don't want to bore you with all the details.

 

I have written to the landlord four times asking for these items to be fixed, and he has done nothing.  My lease says that my apartment will be maintained in a habitable condition, but my place in not habitable.  It's a dump.  Is there any way I can break my lease?  I have about 10 months left. - Anonymous

 

Anon:  As I told the person who asked about owners "inspecting" an apartment, I am not a real estate expert, nor an attorney.  Do not interpret my comments as legally advice.  If you want more information, contact an attorney.

 

With that said, here is what I know . . . Most leases say, in one way or another, that the owner will keep an apartment (or house) in an habitable condition.  Leases also usually include statements about what you, the lessee, must do in order to maintain the condition of the property.

 

If you do something contrary to the conditions described in your lease, such as not pay your rent, the owner has the right to evict you.  But it doesn't sound like you're the problem.  It sounds as though the owner isn't keeping up with his part of the deal.  In this situation, you probably have the legal right to break your lease under what is known as constructive eviction.

 

Here is one good definition of constructive eviction from Nolo.com . . .

 

When a landlord provides housing that is so substandard that a landlord has legally evicted the tenant.  For example, if the landlord refuses to provide heat or water or refuses to clean up an environmental health hazard, the tenant has the right to move out and stop paying rent, without incurring legal liability for breaking the lease.

 

There are hundreds of articles on the Internet about this constructive eviction—click here.

 

You may want to get an attorney, but this is what needs to be done.  Write a letter to the owner detailing the problems you have, making sure to include that you have already sent four letters to him and nothing has been corrected.  Be sure to include the dates when you sent the letters.

 

In that letter, you will explain that your apartment is not habitable, that you have tried to have the problems corrected/fixed, but nothing has been done.  Therefore, you consider yourself constructively evicted.  In other words, you classify yourself as evicted because the apartment is not in habitable condition.

 

Constructive eviction is a powerful tool that most renters know nothing about.  If you have the facts on your side, you can break almost any lease.

 

One more thing . . . if you do have significant problems with the residence you are renting and either want the problems fixed or want support to break your lease, a very powerful way to get this done is to have a city inspector check your residence.  If you don't know the number for the inspection office in your town/city, call the main number and explain your problem.  You will be connected with the correct person.  Tell the inspector that you have questions about the health/safety of your residence and would like to schedule an appointment for a review.

Apostrophe and Lil’ Kim

The rap artist, Lil’ Kim has been in the news recently and I have a question about her name.  What does Lil’ mean?  By that, I mean, what is the apostrophe for?  I know this isn’t a really significant question, but I wondered about it. - Anonymous

 

Anon:  Well, you aren’t the only person who has questioned the Lil’ Kim’s use of the apostrophe in her name, so don’t feel badly about it.

 

I can’t answer why Lil’ Kim (real name Kimberly Jones) presents her name in that manner.  In the English language, the apostrophe is used to express possession (Jim’s hat), or it’s used to indicate a missing letter or letters (called a “placeholder”), such as it’s for it is, or they’re for they are.

 

Is Lil’ supposed to be short for “Little?”  I don’t know, but the way it’s written is not a short form of Little.  If she wanted to use apostrophes in “Little,” then it should be…Li’l’ or Li’le or Lit’le or L’e or even L’.  As her name is written now, her name could be almost anything, including, but not limited to, things like: Lilburn, Lilliputian, Lillian, Lilac, Lila, Lile, or Lilo.

 

However, Lil’ Kim isn't the only person (or company) that misuses the apostrophe.  I’m amazed at how many times each day I see the apostrophe misused, even by large companies.  For example, the slogan for Winchell’s Donuts:

 

Home of the Warm ‘n Fresh Donut

 OK, so we know that the apostrophe isn’t used here to signify possession.  It’s used to indicate a missing letter or letters.  If ’n is intended mean “and,” then it should be Home of the Warm ‘n’ Fresh Donut.  Or maybe ‘n stand for “an,” but that’s rather stupid:  Home of the Warm an Fresh Donut?

 

As the slogan reads, the ‘n can stand for any word that ends with the letter “n.”

 

Home of the Warm Common Fresh Donut

Home of the Warm German Fresh Donut

Home of the Warm Martian Fresh Donut

 

OK, enough.  Lil’ Kim isn’t the first person to the apostrophe in this way—there are several examples.  In the grand scheme of things, Lil’ Kim’s use of the apostrophe isn’t significant, and it’s easier to pronounce than this.

 

I have seen the English language butchered in many ways, but one that always comes to mind is a sign I once saw in a restaurant:  Please Seat Yourself’s.

 

Note: The apostrophe is also used in surnames, such as O'Grady and O'Leary.  In these cases, the name is a shortened from "of Grady," or "of Leary," which means that a person named James O'Grady is the "son of Grady."

Apostrophe and Music Descriptions

Doc: If a radio stations plays music from the 70s and 80s, what is the correct way to write (or type) that?  Is it "Music from the 70s and 80s" or "Music from the 70's and 80's?"  I see it written several ways and don't know which one is correct.  Where does the apostrophe go?  Thanks. - Anonymous

 

Anon:  I have seen the same problem.  Many radio stations that play music from specific decades incorrectly identify their format.  I think the best way to answer your question is to show the variety of ways an apostrophe can be used when describing decades of music.  I'll use the 1970 decade as an example.
 

  1. Music from the 70's.  Incorrect.  This means nothing because the apostrophe is used incorrectly.

  2. Music from the 70s.  Correct because the "s" indicates that music from all the years in the decade are played (plural form of 70).

  3. 70s Music.  Incorrect.  An apostrophe is needed to indicate a possessive.

  4. 70's Music.  Correct if the intent is to indicate that only music from 1970 is played.  Incorrect if the intent is to indicate that music from all the decade is played.

  5. 70s' Music.  Correct if the intent is to indicate that music from all the years in the decade are played.

OK, those are the basic rules.  Here are some options:

  1. WAAA: Best of the 70's, 80's, 90's.  Incorrect.

  2. WAAA: Best of the 70s, 80s, 90s.  Correct.

  3. WAAA: Best of the '70's, '80's, '90's.  Incorrect, although apostrophe to indicate missing "19" is correct.

  4. WAAA: Best of the '70s, '80s, '90s.  Correct.

  5. 70s, 80s, 90s Music: WAAA.  Incorrect.

  6. 70's, 80's, 90's Music: WAAA.  Incorrect., unless the radio station plays only music from 1970, 1980, and 1990.

  7. 70s', 80s', 90s' Music: WAAA.  Correct.

  8. '70s', '80s', '90s' Music: WAAA.  Correct.
     

Percentage of the population that knows the difference between all these choices:    Very small.

 

Click Here for Additional A Questions

 

A Arbitron B C D E F G H I J K-L M
Music-Callout Music-Auditorium N O P Q R S T U V W-X-Z Home

All Content © 2011 - Wimmer Research   All Rights Reserved