BLOG

Radio Needs more “Strategy” in its “Digital Strategy”

The single biggest mistake radio broadcasters make as we devise our digital strategies is this:

We assume it's all about us.

It's not at ALL about us.  It's all about your audience and what they want – as individuals – in their interactions online (and I used that term intentionally because of the root word "interact") with each other and with wherever your brand takes them.

Yesterday I got a peek at the traffic many radio station sites were receiving – and I was shocked. Shocked at how LOW it was, relative to the power of any given station in its market.

Digital And the reason that it was lower than I expected is that too many broadcasters don't have digital strategies.  We have websites – digital Christmas trees for our radio stations, ornamented with this banner ad and that bauble.

When you plow a bunch of tactics into a pile, it doesn't necessarily form a strategy.  And when you dump a slew of widgets on a website it doesn't constitute a digital strategy.

And it's all because it's not about who we are and what we want – it's about who the audience is and what they want in a digital space.

The medium – to paraphrase Marshall McLuhan – is the message.  Contrary to what the NAB and RAB tell you, online is not a "new distribution channel" for your "platform-agnostic" over-the-air content, it's a different medium altogether – as different from radio as radio is from TV. Even more so, in fact.

And the consequence of that is that you must not think of an online space as a redistribution portal for your content.  You must think of it as an extension of your audience and/or your content which may have common threads but are not carbon copies.  Consumers will participate in your digital strategies for their reasons, not yours.

For example, why oh why do the vast majority of stations stream ONLY their over-the-air content?  Isn't this – by definition – the LAST thing you should stream, since it's universally available to everyone in the market for free via easy-to-use radios – five of them in every home, work and car?  Isn't the stream virtually redundant?  And if it's redundant, why should the listener use it?  And if its purpose is to allow folks to hear the station in spots the signal can't penetrate, isn't that a rather weak motivation to stream content?

These are questions of strategy, not tactics.

And radio would be well-served to spend more time on the former and less on the latter.

View Comments
  • Jim Ryan
    Cynic or pragmatic?
  • Jim R,
    Jim Kerr isn't going to lay all his cards on the table, nor am I.
    The intriguing thoughts on solutions are always available for the asking.
    I agree with most of your points, by the way, Jim. Except for the cynic's intro ;-).
  • Jim Ryan
    Here we go again - "same old" digital topics, same key challenges, no intriguing thoughts on solutions - this same subject has been commented on so many times. First of all radio competes in the same pool of total local advertiser ad spend. Current Radio sites will never compete effectively against TV and Newspaper sites (in fact they are completely dwarfed) because those sites are very effective "brand extensions" of local media brands that are already associated and well positioned for top-of-mind content that drives eyeballs. National, regional and local news, high end Doppler weather, entertainment, etc, and done so at a high level of presentation and execution including but not limited to video feed. Once again, if radio wants to compete in the digital local ad spend space, they have to build something entirely different rather than inferior "mirrors" of their stations. But that means starting over as a new local internet business and where their existing radio brands will have little supportive value to the new Internet offerings to advertisers
  • Hi Jim!
    To be clear, I'm not questioning the wisdom of streaming our over the air signal, I'm questioning streaming ONLY that.
    Owning the "megaphone" means we can deliver whatever the audience wants - especially if it adds value to the existing brand and doesn't simply repurpose it.
    I agree with you!
  • Mark, I love that you question a fundamental strategy that you have adamantly supported--streaming the terrestrial signal. It tells me that you aren't afraid to continue to assess your positions. Of course it is important to do that, but to question why or what the strategy is behind it is more important.
    As to strategy itself, radio has yet to figure out how to take their huge reach and limited media (audio- and generally local-only) and turn it into a huge reach with rich media (text, video, audio, interactivity, and even national). As you say, it requires new thinking. You are no longer a "radio" program director, you're a television producer, a newspaper editor, a radio programmer, and--in this day and age--a social network builder.
    Those are all pieces that combine to create compelling online engagement, but you need to think of them as more than just pieces. I spend half my time looking for new pieces and the other half looking at how they can all work together. I agree that radio tends to spend too much time on the former and not enough on the latter.
    Jim Kerr
    VP/Strategy
    Triton Media
blog comments powered by Disqus

Sign Up For Blog Email Updates

About

MRM President Mark Ramsey has worked with innumerable television and radio broadcasters over his career, including all the biggest names, from Clear Channel, CBS, Bonneville, Sirius XM...

Mark Ramsey