LIVING THE PLAYBOY LIFESTYLE?

The guys that subscribe to Playboy - they don't live the Playboy lifestyle. Nobody lives the Playboy lifestyle accept Hugh Hefner. Most guys probably don't even really want to. That's not the point. The Playboy lifestyle - enjoying every moment to the fullest, devoting yourself to "the finer things", going through life in your designer robe and slippers, in a palacial grown-up playground of a house, surrounded by playmates, high end electronics and every gadget imaginable, garage full of stellar cars, fine food, fine wine, world travel...it's a nice escape from reality, huh?

You don't have to actually crave it. It doesn't have to consume you. But don't overlook the critical importance of the Playboy lifestyle. Without it, Hugh's rag is just another softcore collection of pictures of naked ladies. Reading the magazine, maybe even being a fan of Hef, gives the readers a connection to a world that often seems a lot cooler, a lot easier and stress free, than their reality. Note - this doesn't even mean these guys would trade their reality for Hef's. But that vicarious connection to a different world packs a mean punch. That's what seperates Playboy from a host of forgettable competitors.

Think about it. Hef's readers don't drive the cars they write about. They don't own the electronics the magazine raves about. They don't read the books or listen to the music reviewed in the periodical. They certainly don't have access to Hef's "girls next door". Sure, they may dabble in it - a few songs on their IPod that they first read about in Playboy, a book or two on their bookshelf. But they're more likely to talk about those cars, toys, music and books than actually indulge in them. But through the magazine, that world is opened up to them. And don't think Hefner doesn't know it. That was the plan all along. The lifestyle. It's the difference between Playboy and every other magazine you've ever seen that was trying to be like Playboy. It's the difference between Hefner's brand, and his competitor's commodities.

This is a lesson too many of us in radio have never learned. We don't think of our stations as brands, as a lifestyle, as standing for some things and standing against some things. We don't place a premium on "cool". We don't develop air talent to be advocates for the listener and representatives of the station lifestyle. We don't embrace the things we should with the passion we should, to become something more than just a source of background music for our listeners.

If we don't evoke the passion, if we don't create the consistent image, if we don't convey something they want to vicariously connect to, we complete miss the power of a great medium. And, worse, we fail to capitalize on a unique strength of radio that most of our new competitors don't have. There's never going to be an IPod lifestyle. The Internet isn't poised to connect with people on this emotional scale. This goes beyond the music. In fact, it mostly happens outside the music, between songs or off the air entirely. In fact, the music becomes just one more element of the lifestyle, of the cool.

But like Playboy, you've got to define the lifestyle, the image, and you've got to consistently reinforce it with every fiber of your being - the music, the talent, the morning show, the promotions, the marketing, the website, the events, even the commercials. Yes, the commercials! No inconsistencies. No contradictions. Ever seen a budget beer ad in Playboy? Every read an article defending traditional marriage? (Trust me, most guys who read Playboy want a traditional marriage...but not in "that" part of their lives.

Never let reality intrude on the perception. Never take the lifestyle for granted. Never send mixed messages.

That said, understand that you only get to dictate the attitude, the lifestyle, the image, when you're brand new. After that, it's set. The best you can do is identify what it is (the listeners will tell you) and live up to it. You can't change it once it's set. But you can still capitalize on it. And never be distracted by some clueless guy in a suit who says "yeah, but your listener doesn't really live this lifestyle".

THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL

We've all heard the old line - be careful that the light at the end of the tunnel isn't a train bearing down on you. Sometimes the very thing you think is coming to the rescue is what do

Does HD Radio have the potential to be that sort of locomotive, bearing down on a desperate medium that so needs a knight in shining armor? I fear it does, but it doesn't have to.

HD Radio gives us the technology to keep up, audio-wise, with digital satellite radio. It gives us a cutting edge technology on par, potentially, with HD TV. It opens the door for us to add multiple side channels, to give the listener more options and give our companies more outlets to monetize.

But it's a technology no one is asking for. There's no listener demand. In a world of IPods, digital satellite radio, social networking, the Internet, hundreds of digital television channels and so on and so forth, no one is complaining there aren't enough radio stations.

No, as our listening declines both in time spent listening and raw numbers of listeners, the driving complaint has been that we've become boring and irrelevant. We've allowed our brands to become commodities - merely the rock station, or the top 40 station, or the at-work station, or the country station (so on and so forth) in a given market; pretty much the same as all the other rock stations, or top 40 stations, or at-work stations, or country stations. We've homogenized our stations and playlists, defanged our personalities, and become so adept at imitating one another that we all use the same positioning statements, promotions, ad campaigns, features and, increasingly, even the same morning shows (Hello, Bob & Tom, or John Boy, or Mark & Brian, or Howard!)

Meanwhile, we've cut our manpower. Our Program Directors are overseeing multiple stations and doing airshifts, with no time or creative juice left to devote to their most important task, the long-term strategic planning and brand-management that makes great radio stations. They're too tied up doing their own airshifts and handling day-to-day tactical duties like scheduling music and executing the current on-air promotions to do the stuff that will really make their stations unique and compelling.

Our airstaffs are voicetracking shows on multiple stations in multiple markets or, worse yet, in the same market. Hard to have any credibility with your listener when you're on another station in town playing other music with just as much "passion" as you show on their favorite station. Impossible to be the face of one radio station at the same time you're on two others in the same metro. And show prep is out the window when you're doing that many shows. Just stick to the liners.

If HD Radio means these same strapped programmers are going to be charged with even more formats to oversee, and if these same worn-out disc jockeys (dont' even pretend their personalities at this point) have yet another show to do each day, do you really think we're going to be putting on new stations that anyone will want to hear?

If we're going to limit the creative, strategic process to a board meeting (death by committee) where we make sure we're doing the same variations that all the other stations are doing - the deep cuts format, the continuous morning show loop, etc. - well, who cares?

Hey, if we free up our best people to give us their best. If we arm them with realistic budgets and talented teams, if we quit smothering the passion with endless committees committed to playing it safe (nothing's more dangerous than playing it safe) we could start creating fresh, compelling radio again - thinks like Gordon McClendon & Todd Storz's top 40 format, Tom Donaghue's progressive rock, Bill Drake's Boss Radio, or Lee Abrams' Superstars stations. We could develop the next generation of Howard Sterns and Rick Dees' and Greasemans. We could quit being interchangeable commodities and build great brands, like the old WABC, WMMR, WLS, KFOG, WBCN, Q105 or WCMS of yesterday. And, if we can do that on the FM dial, we can do it on our respective HD channels as well.

We can create titillating radio and passionate followings, and play to our strengths. Then the superior sound quality and multiple frequencies of HD Radio can really be the light at the end of the tunnel. But if we're going to pretend like the technological breakthrough alone is the savoir, and we're going to let it even further strap our already overworked programming and marketing talent, then it's not a locomotive headed our way, it's a bullet train at top speed!

WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US

That was Pogo's line, right? How did one line from a newspaper comic strip become such a part of the shared cultural body of knowledge in America? And it lives on almost thirty-five-years after Walt Kelly's strip's run ended. "We have met the enemy and he is us".

As a media professional watching an onslaught of interactive, empowering media catch up and pass traditional media, I'm not only struck by how ineffective the responses of the old guard is, I'm totally floored by the pie-in-the-sky attitudes many of my peers take regarding our collective future.

Arrogance, bias, unrealistic expectations for new technologies, poor product management, dismissive attitudes, and a steadfast determination, in a changing world, to bear down, redouble our efforts and ever more diligently stick to the path that our readers/viewers/listeners are abandoning in droves for greener pastures.

Arrogance - We ignore the new threats until they're overtaking us. We ignore or, worse yet, abuse our most important customers - not the advertisers that support us but the audiences that the advertisers are trying to reach. We use our bully pulpits to demonize foes, build up friends, and pursue our own agendas.

Bias - We surround ourselves with like-minded individuals, lose perspective on how the real world (our audiences) see things, and treat our ideology as reality. In this one we're guilty of both sins of commission and ommision - giving warped perspectives on the things we do present, and choosing to present only things that work to back up our idealogy.

Unrealistic Expectations for new Technology - Everyone wants a savior, but we're too willing to see them in technological breakthroughs that are usually stopgap responses to the threats that are over-taking us. We build stopgap technical "solutions" so that we can say "me, too"...AM Stereo, Digital TV, Newspaper Websites, HD Radio...and expect a public already abandoning us to come running back because of our pale imitations of what they've abandoned us for. Instead of focusing on content and creating a demand for our brands, we keep running out new technology that no one but us cares about.

Poor Product Management - When the going gets tough, you can count on us to make it even tougher. As new competition exploits our already homogenized brands, we protect the bottom line by cutting the quality and originality of the content even more. As former readers/viewers/listeners abandon us as boring and irrelevant, we further streamline, eliminating compelling product, effective marketing, and strive to hasten the decline.

Dismissive Attitudes - Ahhh, our first response to every new threat. Dismiss it as a fad. Look how big we are. Look how small they are. Who cares? And, indeed, many of the new threats are fads. Some aren't. But those shaky starts don't mean anything. Historically most new media goes through a shaky launch, too closely imitating the established media, going through its own "me, too" phase. Then, after the initial failure, the bright kids figure out how to treat the new medium like a new medium, and the race is on. Most of them succeed after they've been discarded as dead. Newspaper dismissed radio as a fad. Radio dismissed TV as a fad. AM Radio dismissed FM radio. Over-the-air TV dismissed Cable. Cable dimsissed Satellite TV. And as we dismiss them we also comfort ourselves with the thought that we've always been here, as if somehow a long past insures our future.

Sticking to the path that got us here - All traditional media is intrusive. All new media is inherently interactive. While new media is still figuring this out, often doing more intrusive stuff than they should (banner ads, spam, etc.) we have a window of opportunity to figure out how to make our old school media more interactive. But I don't see us doing that. I see us racheting up the intrusiveness, to counter for the fact that it's just not as effective as it used to be. Let's run more commercials, and yell louder in them, and match them up by sponsoring everything on the radio and TV, so nothing is done simply for the benefit of the viewer/listener anymore. My morning newspaper, more often than not, has a sticker with an advertising message above the fold on the front page. Sometimes when I peel it off the newsprint underneath comes off, too. 'Love that! We give advertisers access to our databases, selling out our audience and subjecting them to more spam. As our audience gains more and more choices everyday, we act like they have no choice at all but to put up with whatever we throw at them.

I don't think all traditional media has to fade away, but I think if we don't change the way we think, it's destined to happen in this generation! It's going to take innovative thinking, a commitment to our audiences, a bold new approach to both product management and marketing, and a lot of trial and error. We've got to get down in the trenches and fight for our place in the media spectrum, in the hearts of people. We've got to make our brands something worth getting excited about again. We've got to generate some passion. First, we have to admit that we're not on the right track.

It's interesting, that Pogo comic strip of yesteryear. It had a three-decade run in the nation's newspapers, home delivery to just about every family in the nation day-after-day. We all knew that guy. But I never knew Pogo worked in traditional media until now. Indeed, "We have met the enemy, and he is us!"

SAVE MY LIFE, I'M GOING DOWN FOR THE LAST TIME

Lately, it seems like all of us in traditional media have an increasing sense of treading water, as if we're drowning, fighting, coming up for a quick gasp of air only to sink below the surface again.

Like all traditional media, radio has been looking for a savior for a long time now. Lately, some of us optimistically think the savior has arrived. We're all excited about IPhone's FM radio app, and HD radio, and every other technological breakthrough that seems to benefit radio. But as thrilling as it is to have some breakthroughs that will help this wonderful old medium be able to move into the brave, new world from a technological point of view, left alone they're going to do as much for FM radio as the Motorola Stereo System did for the AM dial. Nothing!

We can make FM radio available on every new media platform the world has to offer and it won't matter. We can increase the audio quality immeasurably and, in the process, launch tens of thousands of new side stations, and no one will care. The history of the world is littered with great technological breakthroughs, truly brilliant discoveries, that never amounted to anything. Why? No one cared. Why didn't they? Why should they?

We've homogenized, researched, boiled down, tightened up and focused radio to the point that it's totally, completely, boring. All over the country, all over the dial, we've become the new Muzak. Boring! A souless, devoid of attitude or personality music delivery service, offering the best testing titles in mind-numbing rotation, delivering the hits and little else.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm all for science and research in radio. Heaven help us if we think self-indulgent jocks trying to turn the listener on to their personal music taste is the answer. That's an approach I'd like my competitors to adopt. But the great radio stations, the stations we remember and look up to, were all about the listener, and they were relevant. They were compelling. They had an attitude and personality of their own. Great radio stations are brands.

Brands! One of the most misused, most misunderstood terms in marketing today. Your logo isn't your brand. Your station name isn't your brand. What your logo and your station name mean to your listeners is your brand. And if all it means is a music format, they can program circles around you (to their taste) with an IPod every day of the week. You lose! We all lose!

The great radio stations (of yesteryear and of today) all stand for something. And they stand against something. Always! No exceptions! They know what "cool" is to their listener and they deliver. And they know what makes their listener roll his or her eyes, and they don't do that! Ever! They're advocates for the listener. They're interesting, unique and fun, never boring. They're not self-indulgent, they're not long-winded, they're not unfocused - those things are never part of the recipe for success. But they're not so buttoned down as to be predictable and boring.

It's going to take innovative, compelling content to make radio vibrant. Which, coincidentally, is what makes a website, a magazine, a smartphone, and even your best friends, vibrant! No formula. No easy answers. No file emailed from corporate. It's going to take an ear to the street, a team that thinks on it's feet, and a real commitment to creating engaging radio for the listener, first and foremost. What works for me isn't going to work for you, and vice-versa.

We've got more competition than ever before, and most of it is more interactive and responsive to the listener we're pursuing than we've been inclined to be. Anything a person can spent their time with, including reading this blog, is a competitor to radio. And you think some technological breakthrough is going to let you clear this hurdle? Please!

Hey, we've got some great strengths. We're still free. We're as portable as the air. We have the potential to be incredibly local, incredibly focused on one lifestyle or another, and incredibly quick to react. There's no better medium during times of extreme weather or other emergency situations. And unlike the new media, everyone knows about us. Which is good and bad, considering how far from compelling most radio stations have become. We have a real image problem, and the truth is, we deserve it.

So, what do we do to fix it. Want to sit around and wait for the new technologies to save us? HD Radio is pointless to an audience that doesn't own HD receivers. Why are they going to rush out to buy them? So they can hear our modern-day muzak in pristine digital quality, along with three other boring, poorly thought-out versions. (Ooh, we'll do a Deep Cuts station...because not hearing "Ozone Baby" from Led Zeppelin's "Coda" has been the problem all along). And the IPhone App? I've got a smartphone packed with apps that I ignore all the time, so what's going to make me use this one?

We've got to get back to the lost art of making good radio. And that doesn't mean revisiting the "formulas" of the great radio stations of the past, because there never was a formula, and each scenario is different. You've got to get to the streets and figure out your listener's lifestyle and attitudes. You've got to do more than make a palatable station for them. You've got to give them the station they can really sink their teeth into, a station they can get excited about. You've got to give them a brand. A real, strong, vibrant brand! It's not easy. But it beats drowning!

HOW ABOUT A NICE HEAPING BOWL OF LOGO SOUP?

(Reposted from Bassman's Blog http://basscave.blogspot.com/)

How often have you had some entity - charities are particular good for this - call you up, try to get you involved in some event, and offer as some great value to include your logo in the print ads, the t-shirt, the poster, whatever? It happens all the time, and most of us jump at the offer. Especially when it's an established, well-attended event? "You know how many people are going to see our logo? That's great branding!"

I believe there are two issues with being an ingredient in this logo soup. First, people seeing your logo IS NOT BRANDING! Branding is when you manage to associate your name with a word, an attribute, in people's minds. I say hamburgers, you say Mcdonalds; I say soda, you sayCoke; I say toothpaste, you say Crest; I say beer, you say Budweiser - that's branding! (and you have to ask the question that way - it's the first thing that comes to mind when you mention the service or attribute, not what service or attribute you associate with the business name. I could whip out most any fast food joint and you'd associate them with hamburgers, but when you just say hamburgers, it's amazing how many people's instintive response is "McDonalds".

The other issue is, even if being part of the soup was branding (and it isn't!), how valuable is it. When your logo is spotlighted it may stand out. Many who look will actually see it. But the last time you had a piping hot bowl of seafood gumbo, did you notice all the ingredients - every single one? Or did you just see the soup as a single entity, noticing a couple of key ingredients (hard to miss the jumbo shrimp, right?) but instinctively letting the bulk of the "stuff" blur into one?

So the next time someone pitches including you in the print ad, the t-shirt, the poster for their big event and you excitedly state to your peers "You know how many people are going to see our logo?" the answer well may be darn near zero, and, futhermore, so what if they do?