Let’s face it: terrestrial radio is going away. When exactly is anybody’s guess, but it certainly seems inevitable. Listening to radio on my commute to and from work, and while traveling to visit family, I’ve grown to despise the radio almost. I always heard the “radio sucks” comments and thought them myself, but I’ve always wondered what the specific reasons were.
Over the last few weeks I’ve jotted down several notes to myself as potential starting points for an article on the matter, and finally on a six-hour drive from Virginia to New York, I decided on the first subject to write about: repetitiveness. Not just repetitiveness of Linkin Park and Three Days Grace over and over (which is annoying too), but old songs from the 90s. I always thought Nirvana, Green Day, and Bush were horribly overplayed in my area (DC area), and always attributed it to just being my area. This last trip up the East Coast revealed that it wasn’t just Maryland and Virginia, it was much larger. How much larger would turn out to be a surprise.
This “study” is hardly scientific, but I feel it gets pretty close. First, I picked 10 cities across the US, and if I didn’t already know the big rock radio station there, I just Googled “city name new rock radio station”. The list I came up with was WWDC – Washington, DC; WXRK – New York, NY; KROQ – Los Angeles, CA; KDGE – Dallas, TX; WZZN – Chicago, IL; KBPI – Denver, CO; WYSP – Philadelphia, PA; KISW – Seattle, WA; WPLA – Jacksonville, FL; and WXZZ – Nashville, TN. After assembling this list of stations, I then took each station’s top 100 most played songs for the week of December 28th to January 3rd and compiled them into one long document, separated by station. In total, I had a list of 1,000 songs.
When I started going through the list, I was almost in shock, and I mean that honestly. I knew it was bad, but seeing my pen markings all over the pages gave a visual indicator of just how bad it really was. I started out by going through all 1,000 songs and circling each one that was more than five years old. For those I was unsure of or was close to five years, I looked it up online to make sure. The results? Well over HALF of the top-100 most-played songs from the last week were over five years old. On average, newer songs filled the top 25-35 spots, with the older songs dominating the higher numbers with new songs scattered about. A lot of those songs were over 10 years old, with of course several older than that.
What I also noticed going through and circling songs was certain names repeating over and over and over again. The number one most played artist? Nirvana. I knew Nirvana would be the most played of the older artists, but they won out overall as well. (Keep in mind that when I say “most played”, I mean number of songs in the stations’ top 100. For example, Linkin Park may only have two songs in rotation on a station, but those two songs are probably played 3:1 over any Nirvana tracks.) Nirvana accounted for 4.2% of the 100 most-played tracks. Interestingly, I was able to make a list of just 10 bands that accounted for over 25% of the list! These 10 bands (in order of most appearances) are Nirvana, Green Day, Stone Temple Pilots, Pearl Jam, Smashing Pumpkins, Sublime, The Offspring, Bush, Alice in Chains, and Soundgarden. (For those in the list that did have music that came out in the past five years, those songs were not counted.)
Another interesting (or disturbing) thing I noticed was the number of oddball songs that made it as most-played. Artists like the Violent Femmes, Harvey Danger, and The Verve. It’s okay to play these one-hit-wonders every few months or something, but one of the 100 most-played? For shame. The Gorillaz and The Beastie Boys also ranked high, and are they even really rock? Amy Winehouse? I digress…
So what happened? Did radio get stuck in the 90s? Are they catering specifically to people in my age group that listened to these bands in high school and/or college? Or is it that the program managers are that age and can’t seem to realize that not everybody wants to hear these bands that often? Whatever it is, it’s a trend that certainly is leading to the demise of radio and ultimately the ability for new rock artists to make anything resembling a living. With over 50% of the most-played music on rock radio being older, and half of that being just 10 bands, where is the room for all the new artists? And when I say new artists, I mean the ones that are lucky enough to have a record deal already. That’s not even counting the thousands, if not tens of thousands, of rock bands that have yet to be signed. I could keep going on and on with this, because with the less than half that make up actual “new” or “modern” rock, you have competition amongst sub-genres like emo, metal, hard rock, melodic rock, hardcore, etc.
So what is the answer? I honestly don’t know. One thing is certain though, and that is that rock radio needs a major overhaul just to start with. The first step needs to be sweeping out some of the dust. I love(d) Nirvana and the like, and enjoy hearing them from time to time, but it just gets old. With satellite radio, iPods, and the like moving in on radio’s turf at full-speed, there may be nothing to save it at this point. Next time you hear an older song on the radio, consider calling up and saying something about it. Or send your station an email asking them to rethink the balance of old and new.
We have put in an interview request with the programming manager of one of the above-mentioned stations, so if he agrees to talk about it, we’ll get his perspective. Leave your thoughts and ideas in the comments. If you have a favorite or friendly DJ in your local area, call them up, ask them to read this, and then let us know their response and what they think.
13 Responses to “Discussing The Downfall Of Radio”
Great article, Jay.
I have to wonder what the thoughts are of the programmers and especially the deejays at these radio stations are. I mean they HAVE to be there and listen to the same stuff every single day and they’re hearing the same stuff repeated constantly. The record that Seether just broke with “Fake It” being on the radio for 19 weeks at #1 is just showing how long they milk these hits while they could be playing other great, lesser known bands. Don’t they deserve air time? Anyways, the deejays are hearing this over and over every day and wouldn’t you go crazy listening to the same set of songs day in and day out? I know I can barely stand it just listening to the radio from time to time while I’m at work or something. It brings me to think about just today listening to an online radio station that even played the same exact songs over and over (seemingly in near the same order even). I finally had to turn it off after about 3 hours of listening and hearing each song in their seemingly small database of music at least twice.
I will most definitely agree there’s got to be a change or the radio is going the way of the dodo bird (and digital music DRM, though that’s a good thing and a totally different subject). I’m not at all surprised by the list of 10 bands that are accounting for 1/4 of the music played. Why are they playing old music that everyone has heard over and over and over….you get my point…again. I bring back my rant about playing lesser known, but just as deserving to be heard bands. Recycled music is not what we want to hear. From time to time I enjoy the older hits from Nirvana and the like, but seriously at least 1 out of every 5 songs on my local station (KDGE in Little Rock, AR — Clear Channel owned, imagine that) is a song by one of those 10 bands you mentioned.
I just don’t get it and apparently they don’t have a clue either until they start to see something along the lines of people really starting to move away from the radio programming. I enjoy hearing new songs on the radio, but then they get overplayed beyond belief and I get sick of them. My radio station is STILL playing “Becoming the Bull” by Atreyu at least once or twice an hour and I want to stab myself in the ear every time it comes on because I’m just so sick and tired of hearing it.
Again, it’d be very interesting to see the thoughts of the programming managers and/or deejays at one of these stations to see what they think, if they feel any urgency to make any kind of changes, or what…
yeah, i think that if i hear rat in a cage by the smashing pumpkins on the radio one more time, my brain may hemmorhage…
One thing that I’ve noticed lately…when Creed got big after ‘My Own Prison’ you hardly ever heard radio play their stuff. Now that they have split they play them quite a bit.
Oh, WXZZ is Lexington, KY. Nashville’s rock station is WBUZ. They just got a new PD, Troy Hanson, formerly with Wild Justice Management (Seether, Days of the New, Smile Empty Soul). Hopefully he can turn things around there, but I almost kind of hate it cause WBXE, I think thats the right call letters, out of Cookeville (about an hour east of Nashville) has been giving them a run for their money lately. I’m hoping they continue doing what they are doing and more concerts will come though Cookeville. I’d much rather drive 30 minutes there opposed to the 1.5~2 hrs to Nashville, Knoxville or Chattanooga.
Take a band like Skindred: They had huge radio success with their debut single “Nobody” and moderate success with “Pressure.” I know there was a 3 year break from their debut to their sophomore release, and they are on an indie label (Bieler Bros.), but their new single “Ratrace” has gotten virtually no radio play at all. How can stations completely ignore a new single from a band who had a successful debut??
Stations need to get more variety overall. Even with the 90s rock they play the same songs over and over, there are so many different 90s songs and artists that they could play. Playing 90s rock is ok, but at least have variety. Playing the same 3 AIC and Soundgarden songs is just rediculous, there are so many other songs even by those same bands that could be played. Instead of “Man In A Box”, just play “Nutshell” or “We Die Young” every once in a while. They also need to stop playing “Pain/The Pretender/Fake It…” every hour and play different new music. There are so many great new bands that cant seem to get any radio play (The Accident Experiment, Hourcast…along with many more).
There are a few stations that still know how to mix it up with a wide variety of great tunes (WCCC in Hartford and WJJO in Madison are 2 examples) but the majority of stations need major reform.
As with all consumer products, playlist choices are extensively researched, focus-group tested and basically calculated to the point of nausea. The goal: to play songs that create the least negative response in the majority of people. (Think of how much testing goes into the marketing of potato chips or beer and you get the idea).
The average radio listener stays with the same station for approx. 15-20 minutes; essentially during their commute. So rotations are frequent, again to play the songs the majority of the target audience would listen to. The days of the PD who actually chooses music based solely on gut instinct are esentially gone, unless you count college and independent radio stations. (Those stations usually have little to no marketing budget, so they don’t have the name recognition needed to show up in a Arbitron survey, which means low ratings and ad revenue.) Big companies utilize research across all formats in their stable, so similar playlists in different markets are no surprise.
A company must be able to make money on it’s product to cover expenses. With the elimination of “pay for play” and access to the deep pockets of the record labels, the only way to make money is to mass market to the widest audience. Deeper rock cuts cater to a niche target, and would therefore cause some listeners to change the channel, lowering ratings and ad prices, and revenue.
Once Arbitron’s new personal people meters are widely in use, the actual listening habits of normal people will be evident and radio formats be created to provide what we really want to listen to, not what a midwestern focus group thinks a 25-54 year old male would like to listen to.
I can’t listen to most modern rock stations anymore. With very few exceptions (WIYY, 98 Rock in Baltimore is one), I don’t hear any new bands for about 18 hours out of a 24-hour day. The graveyard shift is the only time “regular” radio plays anything new (an irritating thought because, of course, graveyard shift = fewer listeners).
Alternative rock stations (the ones that play modern rock with emo/pop-punk/etc.) have succeeded where modern rock has failed. The format may have the same model (corporate-based playlists), but many do play newer artists at the least. Some devote time slots for new bands, obscure songs, local bands, etc.
Satellite radio helps because satellite rock stations will play songs that were never released as singles (as an ironic example, a friend once mentioned how amazing it was to hear Soundgarden’s “Rhinosaur” on Sirius’s Octane).
But satellite still takes its playlist mainly from well-known labels and bands who still have name recognition but are no longer mainstream (Sevendust, Ra for examples).
My main sources to find new music these days are from radio add lists and the Internet.
The add lists will generally show famous bands and then unknown bands* whose songs are either discarded or put on the graveyard shift. (*anyone heard of Fair To Midland, for example?).
It was online that I stumbled on Bipolar, an unsigned New York band who, to me, sounds much better than a lot of new bands to mainstream radio.
The sad truth is: if you want to listen to new music (or “new to you” music), don’t listen to the radio.
Radio stations play the music that their “target demographic” listened to in their late teenage years (the years where most milestones were made). It’s done to bring back the feeling of nostalgia.
There are some stations that do both play the older music and the new music (actual new music)
As an example, listen to LiVE 88.5 – The NEW Alternative.
It’s in Ottawa, Canada.
You can stream it live off the internet, visit http://www.livelifelive.fm
I promise you that you will hear new artists, and new music, as well as some of the older “classic” alternative songs/artists.
The best reason to keep listening to the radio is for the local aspect.
If you tune into your favorite satellite station, you won’t hear the weather, or why certain roads are closed etc.
This is why terrestrial radio will always be a mainstay, if anything, then for the local content.
My eyes and brain hurt from all you writing so damn much.
After reading through this wanted to comment back to ESORICEL & SOX4542…
As far as WCCC goes I agree they are much better than others I’ve heard. I can tell you though that it is not that easy to just call or email & get them to play something new. I also made a suggestion to them to start something new with letting people call in at a certain time & request bands they’ve found on myspace! They said if/when their HOMEGROWN(local bands they play/promo weekly) gets old they will consider it.
They have been playing Fair to Midland for quite sometime now though. The often find a few newer bands & tend to stick with playing them. They are NON CORPORATE!
I agree that BIPOLAR is a great band! I found them/or they found me on myspace. Can’t remember which. Loved them @ first listen.
Dealing with mostly bands & musicians on myspace though…I can say there are many many that aren’t even signed that sound as good or better than what is being played on the radio day in day out.
Nasty Nate and his jungle of love.
It rocks to see people care so much, but honestly, I think a lot of you take radio for granted. How many things in the world are still free? Yeah, Sirius/XM have subscription fees, but terrestrial radio stations are still free. I remember growing up, and the connection you feel to your hometown station is something that was priceless, and now that I’ve gotten old enough to move away from that station (WJJO in Madison), it has changed a bit. The BIG stations in major areas often play the same songs because they are “rock” stations, not “rock/emo/hardcore” stations. A lot of the new bands out are good, but the vast majority of rock band talent/staying power has dropped since the 90s. I happen to work in radio, so if you complain about hearing the same songs, remember that I have to hear them all all the time, not just in the commute to work/school. Some of the “no name bands” that were mentioned above really arent no names, but are more of the one hit wonders that were popular back in the 90s. I saw Fair To Midland mentioned above by esoricel, and those guys had a smash in 2007 with Dance Of The Manatee, which was subsequently overplayed and people got sick of it. If you want a more catered framework, get satellite radio, then you can have a station dedicated to just new rock (remember though, these stations still play a lot of songs constantly. I hear Bad Religion on Faction all the time). If you still want a connection with your local stations, make some noise and let them know. We cater to what people want to hear, and if you want more new bands, for gods sake say something constructive instead of bashing the bands that are currently played. 2008 is going to be a good year for new music, so you can probably expect to hear new stuff.
I agree with Nate. Holy shit i got down to his comment and just stopped. Obviously that shows that this subject reaches just about all of us and we all can relate, so props to jay on the blog. I, myself have been contemplating that topic for months and months now. And what i think is these DJ’s are forced to play these songs. ClearChannel pretty much owns the world and I think they instill the playlists on the DJ’s and make them play what they play. Think about it. No human being could sit there and happily listen to the same songs they play every day. It’s just not sane. Look at how many of us are intolerant of the repetitiveness of all this. Anyways, I better stop before myself or Nate explode.
I havent read all of the responses on here yet so this may have been mentioned once already. I read an article in Blender a couple years ago that started off blaming the downfall of radio on Fred Durst. That was the attention grabber atleast. They proceeded to blame the entire nu-metal scene but ol’ Freddy got the brunt of it. The main reason they came up with was this. Today’s rock is too varied. Its too hard to go from playing Metal to Emo then back to Metal. it jsut doesnt mix well. So instead programmers came up with making pop stations play the emo that mixes better with pop and leave the rock stations to play rock and metal… the problem with that was that there really isnt a whole lot of radio-friendly metal and rock. So instead they have gone back to playing 90’s music.
Another interesting thing mentioned in the article you may want to watch for is how many of the new releases today that are chart topping are from bands that started in the 90’s. At the time the article came out Beck, NIN, and Green Day were all the chart toppers in rock.