Change happens. A wise man (or woman) once said: "The only thing constant in life--is change." Whenever "change" happens, there are always those that OVER-react, OVER-compensate, and OVER-think.
Then, there are others that observe, research, analyze, tinker, and join the party later...with a different version of the new approach.
"First in"...used to win. That hasn't necessarily been the case over the past decade of innovation. In reality, first-in to best match the consumer's needs seems to have greater success. First-in (the hare) usually makes mistakes...the slower to react, (the turtles) have a unique opportunity to quickly seize the moment, make the improvement or adjustment if necessary, and re-position the first-in as missing the mark with the consumer. (Granted, there are still plenty of cases where "first-in" defines the product/service and wins---but, that's because they got it absolutely RIGHT in the first place.)
We've had enough time to observe the lessons being learned in the early-launch PPM markets. There's plenty of analyzing-strategizing-re-organizing already taking place in the programming model of music stations. The primary take-away for music-driven stations from PPM is that the new methodology "loves music". Any interruption to the music causes not just tune-out, but turn-away to another station.
Intuitively, we already knew that unnecessary talk, verbal repetition, and long-winded, lengthy chatter was bad for ratings. We didn't need People Meter to tell us that...but, I guess that we needed PPM to "validate" it. Well...PPM confirmed our suspicions.
So, as predicted a few years ago---long before the first meters were activated---there would be broadcasters that strip away virtually ALL non-musical content and there would be others that would modify their approach. (The OVER-reaction...and the REACTION. The jury is still out on which will be more effective in the long-run)
So, why do we still hear stations that have failed to implement any level of word-economy strategy? Hard to figure. Whether you're in a PPM or diary measurement situation, it would make sense to take what we've learned through actual listener behavior and apply it to your product programming strategy. Heck, even if you were in a non-rated marketplace, you now have a critical piece of information that helps you focus your on-air product to better satisfy listener wants and needs.
Does that mean to strip away all talk? That might not be the correct strategy for your situation. What I'm suggesting to you (as a programming manager or air talent) is that taking the first exit off the talent-speak highway is not just desirable...it's imperative! When working with talent, whether they're in-market or out, whether they're live or voice-tracked, whether they're rookies or broadcast veterans, you must teach, re-teach, guide, and direct them to hit the bulls-eye. The further you get from the center of the target--the more layers of unnecessary talk, redundant un-edited content, and un-filtered filler you hear, the less effective you become in retaining your audience.
For the record, let me repeat what I said: I'm not necessarily advocating a completely stripped down approach. I'm saying that real-time, measured, listener-behavior confirms that even in personality-driven situations, your best approach really is "less is more" when it comes to any kind of talk content. Note: I didn't say "none is more"...
If the air talent doesn't "get it"---doesn't believe that it's beneficial to their long-term future success...if the PD does not see the wisdom in these new PPM strategic discoveries and doesn't insist on enforcement of a more word-economy approach, you've simply witnessed "change" happening all around you--but you've chosen to ostrich the situation by sticking your head in the ground and continuing to do it the OLD way.
As you get ready for the Spring 2009 survey window, it's the ONE thing you can do---that will likely make the greatest difference in your ratings. Change happens...
