Is over-the-air radio that afraid of satellite radio

[Matt Hazuda]

So I'm in my parents car today, sans my XM radio, when I hear the tail end of some commercial on whatever station it was on. anyways, the gist of the ad was that "Radio should be free!" without naming satellite radio as the problem, they basically slam it as hard as they could.

Is over-the-air that afraid of satellite service that they ahve to run this? Between Sirius and XM, there's maybe like 14 million total people subscribing to either service, barely a dent in the radio-listening public.

If radio wants to avoid losing more people, thy should be more concerned about improving their quality, rather than slamming the competition. This campaign solidified my stance against over-the-air radio if anything due to the shameful tactics they'll go to keep their captive audience while spewing out the continued ear sh*t that they call "radio."

[peacebyanymeans]

there's maybe like 14 million total people subscribing to either service More like... 9 million people, probablly.

If radio wants to avoid losing more people, thy should be more concerned about improving their quality, rather than slamming the competition. This campaign solidified my stance against over-the-air radio if anything due to the shameful tactics they'll go to keep their captive audience while spewing out the continued ear sh*t that they call "radio." MORE INDEPENDENT RADIO STATIONS!

... to be honest, I enjoy internet radio more. Perhaps they could invent away to bring that mobile... ;)

[SirLemming]

With all this internet music stuff going on nowadays, I think radio in general is getting less and less popular. Thus I feel like paid radio won't ever really make it big. I just don't see it happening.

[Enrique]

Broadcast radio is quickly losing steam, and it has little to do with program quality.

Satellite has 3 things going for it: specialized channels, no (or fewer) commercials, and the ability to hear it from anywhere in the country.

What broadcast is worried about is that people are willing to pay the $10-$20 per month for these features, because quite frankly, lately there've been more commercials, longer commercial breaks. I was once listening to the Howard Stern show and they had a 10 minute break.

Another thing broadcast is worried about is that their talent is jumping ship to satellite because of the fewer restrictions. Stern is the perfect example; he's willing to lose up to 80% of his audience in order to create the show as he wants, without company or government rules. I don't really know of other shows switching to satellite but I have to imagine there are some.

And even then, if satellite doesn't have ex-broadcast shows, they have new shows or stations with celebrity names like Eminem, Snoop Dogg or David Bowie, something I don't think broadcast could ever offer.

[EinBebop]

So how does this no-commercial thing work? Does Stern really do his show three-four hours straight without taking a break? Does he start 'spinning records' again? Or does he do more pre-recorded skits, which would probably require a dedicated group in itself?

[Matt Hazuda]

So how does this no-commercial thing work? Does Stern really do his show three-four hours straight without taking a break? Does he start 'spinning records' again? Or does he do more pre-recorded skits, which would probably require a dedicated group in itself?THey talk-radio programs still have commercials, they're just not as intrusive and overbearing as over-the-air has been with 10 minutes of show, 20 minutes of ads. I can't speak for Sirius, but when I listen to Opie and Anothny on XM, they can go 40 minutes and up without a commercial because they get into a topic and then remember they need to do some ads. They breaks are needed so they can use the bathroom, set up the next part of the show or whatever.

The music channels have commercials, but only to remind you what station you're listening to or to promote something coming up as a special.

It's great to just hear music and not have to do the commercial shuffle and change the station when the commercials start.

[SonGoku V3]

The truth is, and this is what I've learned from industry professionals, is that radio has been consistently losing its audience for years. Thanks to downloading (be it legal or illegal), internet radio, the iPod/mp3 players, podcasting, and now Stern's move to Satellite, the loss of an audience is being accelerated due to other outlets for its former audience.

Terrestrial radio is afraid and quite frankly should be afraid. One of the many commercials I've heard since Howard's last show went along the lines of "...radio should be free". The commercial sounds cheesy and is obviously a last ditch effort to turn people away from paying for a luxury item, but it's really just trying to run away from the inevitable. Like the rise of cable in the television world, I can only see good things in satellite's future. That doesn't mean that FM is going to just die out, because over the air Television didn't, but like over the air TV, terrestrial radio's audience will just continue to decline while lifestyles and technology changes.

[Carolina Red]

Censorship has become a serious problem. I think that satellite radio is advancing because people want something where they can listen to stuff uninterrupted and unedited. But I don't think regular radio is too concerned about the satellite stuff because not everyone is going to be willing to pay for radio, or maybe not everyone has the time to listen to radio.

I don't think all of Howard Stern's audience will get Sirius, but if a good portion of it does then Sirius will be on top of the world. Whether or not others will follow is beyond me. I certainly doubt that Bob and Tom would move to satellite, they don't have any serious concerns, but I'd probably get whatever satellite radio package they are on if it came to that.

And I have noticed that satellite radio has been working hard to get new listeners by using them on satellite television packages. Dish Network has Sirius, and DirecTV has XM. It's probably to encourage people to buy this stuff for their own car or whatever they want, but maybe people might not do that because they can just listen to it on their satellite box. Only time will tell.

By the way, I have been listening to the XM stuff on Direct TV, and it's nothing too exciting but it does have some nice stuff. The Boneyard, Ethel and Music Lab channels are my favorites. (you know, with all these specialized stations maybe there will be commercial stations devoted to heavy metal or prog rock or something)

[Martianinvader]

In the 80's network television used to run ads similar to what radio is running now....where people would say "How nice it is to have free, advertiser-supported television!" One ad went so far as to say that free television would cease to exist if we all didn't stop buying cable.

It didn't happen, and neither will the "death" of radio. But....

The problem with radio is that it hasn't fixed the main reasons why it can be annoying--frequent ads and the same ten songs played ad nauseum. Now that we can program our Pods to act as our own radio DJs, with a playlist dwarfing the size of what a radio station will be willing to play, they better shape up.

[Dirtbag]

I love how scared broadcast radio is getting of satellite radio. There was a day when regular radio would actually sell ad time to satellite companies. One of Opie & Anthony's favorite thing to do is play Howard Stern reading an ad for XM that's 2-3 years old now.

It is unfortunate that regular radio will never go away though. If broadcast TV hasn't been killed off by cable by now then radio isn't going anywhere. There are still people that aren't willing to shell out $12 a month for a vastly superior product.

[Supernovametalstar]

I love technology :D. I am actually considering getting one of those satellite radios but I haven't done any research on it yet. These are my requirements:

1. An anime or j-pop/rock station.
2. Portable satellite radios that I can take with me (I think they already have these). Can you record on these portable radios?
3. Can you pay for service on a month to month basis, or do you have to subscribe for a full year.

I predict that most over the air radio stations will compete with satellite by having some of their on air talent host portions of their shows or even do seperate shows on satellite radio. For example, someone like that jackass Mancow will do his show from 6 to 9 and then do another hour on a satellite station owned by the terrestial station.

[Duke]

There are still people that aren't willing to shell out $12 a month for a vastly superior product.Neither I nor my mom have satallite radio, nor will we anytime soon. Whenever I'm in the car I put in CDs, as I never listen to the radio anyways, and my mom just has it on as background filler, except in the mornings, as she likes the one local morning show.

Neither of us have any need for satallite radio. After all, why pay money for something we're not going to use?

[Dark Fact]

So I'm in my parents car today, sans my XM radio, when I hear the tail end of some commercial on whatever station it was on. anyways, the gist of the ad was that "Radio should be free!" without naming satellite radio as the problem, they basically slam it as hard as they could.
So why are they pleading to us? The FCC is what's causing more DJ's to go satellite. Are the ads pleading that we should enjoy free regulated radio?

[Wounded_Dragon]

Radio has one real use for me: weather advisories.

And with the Internet and television (as well as the newspaper)...not that much of a need for even that.

[PeppeRaskell1]

I love technology :D. I am actually considering getting one of those satellite radios but I haven't done any research on it yet. These are my requirements:

1. An anime or j-pop/rock station.
2. Portable satellite radios that I can take with me (I think they already have these). Can you record on these portable radios?
3. Can you pay for service on a month to month basis, or do you have to subscribe for a full year.

I predict that most over the air radio stations will compete with satellite by having some of their on air talent host portions of their shows or even do seperate shows on satellite radio. For example, someone like that jackass Mancow will do his show from 6 to 9 and then do another hour on a satellite station owned by the terrestial station.
I'd like a satellite radio system....a CHEAP one!
And if I feel like listening to Anime Music or WQXR-FM, I'll just listen to Radio@Netscape. AM radio is hard to listen to in my apartment building, and FM is great for listening to the local news and weather reports. Also, can satellite radio tell you what schools will be closed or on a two-hour delay if the weather is bad?

[Matt Hazuda]

These are my requirements:

1. An anime or j-pop/rock station.No
2. Portable satellite radios that I can take with me (I think they already have these). Can you record on these portable radios?Yes and yes. The XM MyFi (http://www.xmradio.com/myfi/index.jsp) unit allows you to do both as do several other units.
3. Can you pay for service on a month to month basis, or do you have to subscribe for a full year.You can pay month-to-month.

Radio has one real use for me: weather advisories.

And with the Internet and television (as well as the newspaper)...not that much of a need for even that.XM provides weather and traffic for the top 20 markets already. I don't imagine it'd be hard to add more.

[Chris Wood]

Paying for radio sounds pretty lame to me, unless it's cheaply bundled into a cable TV package.

And who would really pay to hear Stern? He's OK for free, but any more than that would be a rip-off. It's no great loss.

[livingfruitvirus]

Yes, terrestrial radio is scared of satellite radio......at least when they want to be, then other times they talk about how it isn't a threat, and then afterwards they petition the FCC to have satellite censored. AM/FM radio will be around for a long, long time, just like terrestrial television. I'm an XM subscriber, and I've been a traditional radio fan for a while too. I've always enjoyed scanning the dial looking for music that I like, and now with XM I can do that and not be bombarded with ads. I also enjoy a couple of their talk shows, as well as their complete coverage of Major League Baseball. I can go anywhere and listen to ANY game without worrying about losing the signal. Their NHL coverage is also decent, but it favors more to Canada.

FM music radio however is in big trouble. This was terrestrial radio's worst financial year ever, and it all began around 1999 when the radio companies finished swallowing each other up. All of a sudden advertising revenue became top priority and all the stations became slaves to ads. See folks, there was a time when radio stations were a magical place where listeners wanted to be. It's where they could just hang out and listen to music with their DJ buddies. Nowadays the human touch of radio is going away (in addition to a ton of other things). We have voicetracking so that companies can hire less talent by taping a DJ in Dallas and playing it later in Macon, GA. DJs no longer pick their own songs, the program director does it for him/her based on some research data. Now with the digital age, there are actually jockless stations that are nothing more than an iTunes playlist (really, they use iTunes) on shuffle. And the biggest offender: there are more commercials than EVER now. Some stations (AM talk is extremely guilty of this) have 22 minutes of commercials AN HOUR! FM radio has become so ridiculously homogonized with its similar playlists and pandering to advertisers and focus testing. No one takes chances in commercial radio anymore. Speaking of which, the recent format fad Adult Hits is everything but daring and risk taking. IT'S THE HITS! So what if it's a wide playlist from the past 50 years? It's not taking a chance if your whole playlist made the Billboard Top 100. Format changes happen more frequently than ever these days because God forbid a station is allowed time to build an audience.

And on Howard Stern, I really don't like all the attention he's been getting lately as if he's been relevant recently. That guy piqued around 1996, and IMO satellite radio isn't going to make his show that much better than it is now. It's funny how he thinks he has the whole medium figured out ( http://www.howard100channelguide.com ), but it looks like he has no clue what he's getting into. Tissue Time? Ooo, I can't wait :shrug:. Superfan Round Table? Looks like a huge kisass fest. Really, I just dislike Howard Stern as a person because he's so petrified of new talent taking the spotlight from him. He claims to be a pioneer of free speech, but when his co-workers make jokes about him, he has his bosses force them to stop under threat of being fired. So much for being a radio tough guy.

I'll add on. About internet radio, I don't see that taking off too much. It doesn't have the draw power or the talent or the money that professional radio seems to have. I predict it'll stay mainly confined to the internet and to people who use the internet often. It'll be like PBS for radio.

Paying for radio sounds pretty lame to me
It's not lame if you don't want to sit through all those stupid commercials, repetitive sweepers, and crap like "Rocktober."

[sdp]

I personally don't like radio, and would not like satellite radio either, i like to find my own music, i dont' enjoy listening to the way radio is. talk shows also have no interest for me My personal thought is in a few years wifi is going to be available EVERYWHERE so if you want radio your internet radio station will do.

but with satellite radio, i also think terrestial radio will never die, most people only listen to the radio in their cars, they won't shell out money for that, I can see satellite radio becoming more than just a niche market, but both will survive. What i wonder is for how long will satellite radio be ad free? When cable started one of the features were that you payed so you could see tv shows without ads, and now cable/satellite comes with ads as well.

[Chris Wood]

It's not lame if you don't want to sit through all those stupid commercials, repetitive sweepers, and crap like "Rocktober."

I never listen to radio commercials. I just change the station or pop in a CD/tape.

For me to pay for radio they'd have to have some pretty amazing content, and I can't imagine what that might be. CDs and Internet radio are fine for music, and broadcast radio has plenty of talk options.

[EinBebop]

And the biggest offender: there are more commercials than EVER now. Some stations (AM talk is extremely guilty of this) have 22 minutes of commercials AN HOUR!About ten years ago, I lived in Southern California working graveyard shift. By 3am, I was struggling to stay awake. At that time, the Stern station would start playing his show live from New York, and talk radio was the only thing that would keep me from falling asleep. But before six am, they couldn't even sell enough commercials to fill the breaks, and they would play music until he returned.

But at about ten minutes until six, they would cut the broadcast off so that they could replay it sorta like a live show. Sometimes they would be in the middle of something really interesting, so rather than going home and going to bed, I would try to stay up until they got to the part where I was.

But I wasn't staying up until 9 o'clock. Oh, no. Because THEY WERE CRAMMING AN EXTRA TWENTY MINUTES OF COMMERCIALS INTO EVERY HOUR, ON TOP OF WHAT THEY WERE ALREADY GIVEN SPACE FOR! Yep, what you heard at nine o'clock in New York wouldn't happen until ten o'clock in Los Angeles. It was actually kind of funny on the rare occasions that the show did mention the time.

[Enrique]

I never listen to radio commercials. I just change the station or pop in a CD/tape.

For me to pay for radio they'd have to have some pretty amazing content, and I can't imagine what that might be. CDs and Internet radio are fine for music, and broadcast radio has plenty of talk options.You're missing the point. People aren't paying only to reduce commercials, they're paying for better content and the CONVENIENCE of reduced commercials, i.e. not having to change stations or "pop in a CD/tape".

For example, when watching movies or other long-form programming on cable or satellite, there's little or no commercials. It's the EXACT SAME movie as they show on broadcast (albeit 2-3 years earlier), but with the added convenience of little or no commercials.

Now, as for the "pretty amazing content", well, that's the whole point of satellite radio, that their content is better than broadcast radio not only because of fewer restrictions but because they have money to hire talent. Because they don't rely on ads, satellite stations can afford to either pay current talent for more pay, or pay for talent that would otherwise never be on radio (such as David Bowie, Snoop Dogg, Eminem, etc.)

[SonGoku V3]

Paying for radio sounds pretty lame to meIt was only a little more than two decades ago did paying for TV sound pretty lame. That's one of the biggest connections I see with people against satellite radio; they're repeating history making the same exact arguments people had when cable was a new medium. People are paying for better quality in their radio. Both XM and Sirius provide WAY more options (in terms of talk, music, and sports) than terrestrial, both XM and Sirius are allowed - and do - play more than just a certain top 40 list of songs, quality of sound is better from what I hear from friends who have it, and as mentioned above, there are fewer restrictions in the medium. No, that doesn't mean that all the DJs are going to do is cuss and tell "lowbrow" jokes, but they too have a little more power in the type of music they're playing where as terrestrial DJs have to listen to a program director that might not even be working in their city.

I think what people are getting out of this medium is well worth the price, and as technology changes and develops, it can only get better (and probably more expensive too, but that's another discussion).

[Master Moron]

It was only a little more than two decades ago did paying for TV sound pretty lame. That's one of the biggest connections I see with people against satellite radio; they're repeating history making the same exact arguments people had when cable was a new medium. People are paying for better quality in their radio. Both XM and Sirius provide WAY more options (in terms of talk, music, and sports) than terrestrial, both XM and Sirius are allowed - and do - play more than just a certain top 40 list of songs, quality of sound is better from what I hear from friends who have it, and as mentioned above, there are fewer restrictions in the medium. No, that doesn't mean that all the DJs are going to do is cuss and tell "lowbrow" jokes, but they too have a little more power in the type of music they're playing where as terrestrial DJs have to listen to a program director that might not even be working in their city.

I think what people are getting out of this medium is well worth the price, and as technology changes and develops, it can only get better (and probably more expensive too, but that's another discussion).

Well, I assume when cable first started that people watched TV somewhat frequently. From looking at this thread, it seems a lot of people just don't listen to the radio all that often. I haven't listened to the radio for a year. I can't say I'd never be interested in Satellite radio. If they actually came out with a station that catered to my interests I'm sure I'd be more interested, but I doubt that would happen.

[Dirtbag]

Well, I assume when cable first started that people watched TV somewhat frequently. From looking at this thread, it seems a lot of people just don't listen to the radio all that often. I haven't listened to the radio for a year. I can't say I'd never be interested in Satellite radio. If they actually came out with a station that catered to my interests I'm sure I'd be more interested, but I doubt that would happen. You must not have a car. I've been an XM subscriber for about a year and a half now and when I'm in someone else's car with regular radio I'm about ready to throw myself out the door. I'm aware my town's a bad example (3 stations. One pop, one country, one easy listening) but even if they had anything worth listening to, the f'ing commercials make it absolutely unbearable. When I was without my XM more often than not I'd make the drive to work without hearing a single song. While the talk stations are much more entertaining, they're just as bad. If someone does a three hour talk show, they're maybe giving you two hours of show.

[Mackaybear]

Well the interesting thing here is that we're only about a year or so away from the start of Digital radio broadcasting. While this will be better sounding to me the question will be if they take the right lessons from XM and Sirius. If they just air radio as it is now. It will turn out to be worthless. If they take the best ideas from Satellite radio then it would be really successful.

[Alex Toon]

And who would really pay to hear Stern? He's OK for free, but any more than that would be a rip-off. It's no great loss.The move to Sirius was probably to reach a wider audience,even though many radio stations country-wide carry his show.
My dad has Sirius himself,mainly because of the discount for it at RadioShack. I like listening to regular radio,even with all the ads and repeats. I hope satellite radio doesn't become like cable with 5 good stations, 20 so-so, a couple bad, and the rest in Spanish.:)

[livingfruitvirus]

Well, I assume when cable first started that people watched TV somewhat frequently. From looking at this thread, it seems a lot of people just don't listen to the radio all that often. I haven't listened to the radio for a year. I can't say I'd never be interested in Satellite radio. If they actually came out with a station that catered to my interests I'm sure I'd be more interested, but I doubt that would happen.
People watch TV more frequently because watching TV is more of an experience to people. When it comes to radio, it's really more like background noise/music. That's why people are wondering how big satrad will be.

The move to Sirius was probably to reach a wider audience,even though many radio stations country-wide carry his show.
My dad has Sirius himself,mainly because of the discount for it at RadioShack. I like listening to regular radio,even with all the ads and repeats. I hope satellite radio doesn't become like cable with 5 good stations, 20 so-so, a couple bad, and the rest in Spanish.:)
Technically his audience won't be wider. His show at the end of his terrestrial radio run had about 8 million listeners. Sirius has 3 million subscribers, and a couple hundred thousand of them are empty cars on lots.

[Dirtbag]

I hope satellite radio doesn't become like cable with 5 good stations, 20 so-so, a couple bad, and the rest in Spanish.:)Other than the spanish, it kind of already is. Most of the music channels are either very broad or very niche. If that's what you're looking for just stick to your CD player. The news, talk, and sports options are much more wide open.

[Chris Wood]

People watch TV more frequently because watching TV is more of an experience to people. When it comes to radio, it's really more like background noise/music. That's why people are wondering how big satrad will be.



Exactly, it makes sense to pay for cable because it offers a wide variety of entertainment. But music is more ambience than entertainment, and thus not as valuable.