Testing the Strength of the Radio 3 Community

Those of you who aren't Radio 3 listeners and weren't Fuse Listeners will likely get sick of hearing about this but what's the point of having your own website if you can't rant about whatever you like.

One of the things that has always drawn me to Radio 3 is the radio by community concept. I sorta laid all this out back in July of 2007 in the communications by talking to people post:

Radio 3 through their Blog, Facebook Group and on air is building a community. Many of the people at R3 are active participants in an ongoing discussion, along with musicians and fans, about music. Think of it as a 24 hour phone-in show, without call screeners or tape delay. True, occasionally people will be rude and you'll have to cut them off, but they won't hurt you. R3 listeners (however they listen) feel like participants rather than spectators and that is how you build an audience for the million channel universe. It is the difference between friends and fans.

Fans may like a program, channel etc., but ultimately they know that if they switch the channel no one will know, or really care. Friends feel more of a sense of ownership. They feel some responsibility for the well being of the program and they feel that they are participants and part of a larger community - that their involvement and participation are important. Notice the groups I started on MySpace, Facebook etc., are called 'Friends of the CBC'.

Steve Pratt, head honcho at R3 apparently agrees with this assessment.

So how does today’s branding work?  You actually have to provide value for your audience or your customers.  If you give them a stellar experience, they will tell others.  If you give them a bad experience, they will also tell others.   The word of mouth about your content or product IS your brand...The point is, you don’t get to choose. The audience creates your brand with every click of a mouse, every content rating tool they use, every comment they make about your content, and every link they send to their friends.

The departure of Amanda Putz was a blow to that community. After all, as a regular host she was one of the community leaders and I feel safe in saying that the 'community' wants her back where she was - on the morning show, on Radio 3 and it is not just me. As I said yesterday Said the Whale has weighed in. Casey Laforest of Elliott Brood weighed in back in November though he may not have known what he was weighing in on.

Best Radio Personality:
Amanda Putz (CBC) She started out with Fuse and is a huge part of Radio 3's success. My guess is she will be a household name in the near future. Watch out for this one!

. There is this person in Ottawa as well. I've talked to others, some you will have heard of and some you won't but I won't post anything here until/unless they are ready to speak for themselves. I will say that after just three days the Amanda Putz Fan Page has 127 fans and there are more every time I check the number. The Radio 3 Fan Page up for considerably longer than 3 days has 1,101. So again, what I'm saying is that the community - the audience is sending a message. This is something of a test of the 'community building' / 'the audience is in charge' approach.

I do not envy the people who have to make these decisions but making those decisions is the job they applied for. I do not envy Vish Khanna who has taken over from a very popular host and, though he may be very good, cannot be Amanda Putz. I bear none of these people any ill will, but I can also say that this isn't going away. I'm contemplating ideas to ratchet things up a notch - I've talked to alot of people who are pretty angry about it and have actually had to calm people down.

So, for now, I'm going to guess that anyone reading this to this point has already sent an email to feedback@cbcradio3.com, I'd also urge you to contact CBC Audience Services http://www.cbc.ca/contact/ and let them know you want Amanda back on the air where she belongs.

I'm sure there will be more next week. Stay tuned.

CRTC Reprimands Bankers/Marketers over Telemarketing

Awhile back I told you about ioptout.ca - a website started by Dr. Michael Geist to close a loophole in Canada's new "Do Not Call" list. I Opt Out gives you the opportunity to tell a bunch of companies at once that you don't want them to call you any more.

Predictably the Canadian Marketing Association (CMA) and the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA) bitched to the CRTC about the site, arguing that their competitors could fraudulently use it to keep them away from customers. Fortunately the CRTC wasn't buying it:

"..any such issues that arise could be dealt with by Canada's competition laws, the Criminal Code and the Privacy Commissioner.

He [CRTC chairman Konrad von Finckenstein] also suggested the CMA and CBA work with Geist to smooth out any technical or operational problems."

Personally I'm pleased with the CRTC on this one. Telemarketing, to me, says nothing except that the company obviously doesn't respect you but would like your money anyway. The very nature of telemarketing says that they do not respect your privacy. The way telemarketing is carried out - a quick sales pitch with few details and barely a chance to say no - says that they don't respect your intelligence. Finally the recent trend toward using recorded messages rather than actual people to make the pitch says that the company doesn't believe that your time is worth enough that they can have a real person talk to you. Fortunately all of this comes to an end on September 30, when you can sign up for the do not call list. Dr. Geist's ioptout.ca is merely a convenient way to close a loophole and tell companies that the government left out of its 'do not call' legislation that they can back off too - without your having to contact them all individually.

Blogging the CBC and the Charter

Awhile back when the CBC introduced it's new blogging policy I was one of the few people who still objected to it (compared to the old one). You see, even the new policy attempts to restrict the free speech of employees? What's wrong with that you ask? Just this: the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail, CTV, City and other news organizations and especially the CBC (a crown corporation) do not enjoy freedom of the press. But the people who work for them do. That is to say that these organizations have the protection of freedom of the press only through their employees.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is very clear.

 2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association.

Freedom of "the press and other media of communication" is not granted to institutions but to individuals. Just as the CBC does not enjoy "freedom of religion" (management could not decide tomorrow that the CBC was a Jewish or Muslim organization and start acting accordingly) the CBC as an institution does not enjoy 'Freedom of the Press'. It is only the individuals who work for the CBC that have that freedom.

When people sign up to work for the CBC, or any other institution, they do not give up or transfer their charter freedoms to that organization, so any attempt to curtail freedom of the press ( or other media of communication) for individuals is contrary to the charter.

It is true that people who publicly publish material that violates non-disclosure agreements, gives away company secrets, or falls under libel or slander would be in some trouble, but other than that a free press is a free press.

Having said all of that I am delighted that the whole 'blogging policy' thing appears to be over. Recently, new CBC President and CEO Hubert T. Lacroix began commenting on the long running and anonymous CBC management blog the TeaMakers which ultimately led to an appearance by both on the CBC Radio program and podcast Search Engine CBC. Mr. Lacroix essentially said that he didn't mind. That as long as commentary was responsible and constructive that it was welcomed.

You can listen to a podcast of the Search Engine Canada program here

Crossposted to democraticmedia.ca

Communications By Talking To People II: The End of Advertising

In the first post on this topic I talked a big about 'friends vs. fans': "Fans may like a program, channel etc., but ultimately they know that if they switch the channel no one will know, or really care. Friends feel more of a sense of ownership. They feel some responsibility for the well being of the program and they feel that they are participants and part of a larger community - that their involvement and participation are important. Notice the groups I started on MySpace, Facebook etc., are called 'Friends of the CBC'." I think that I need to go a bit further into that because so few people really seem to grasp it, or they think that it's undoable.

First of all I need to say that this will apply to virtually everyone, in virtually every business, not just the CBC and not just in media. Second, if you think it's undoable then chances are your business (whatever it is) is going to be undoable as well - at least if it relies on advertising or marketing. Advertising and marketing, in the sense we know them now, are sinking fast in terms of their effectiveness.

Spend a day in a North American city and count the number of ads you see, be vigilant, there are probably several hundred you wouldn't normally notice - tv ads, radio ads, internet ads, newspaper and magazine ads, junk mail, telemarketing, billboards, buildings and sports venues named after companies, flyers nailed or taped to everything that will hold still, ads in the subway, on the streetcar, even in the bathroom, door to door salespeople, people handing out samples or trying to sign you up for things in the mall and grocery store, ads packed in the envelope with your bills ...

Searching the phrase Advertising Losing Effectiveness on Google and you will get 1,640,000 results. Search the phrase Advertising Overload and you will get 1,850,000 results. Advertisers know this is happening, but rather than collectively cut back on advertising to try to make it more effective and make sure the message gets through, they are going into hyperdrive snapping up ad space anywhere they can find it and even willingly and knowingly breaking the law to try to grab a few eyeballs for a few seconds.

Here are a few statistics from the advertising industry itself:

From What's Your Brand Mantra:

• 60% of consumers have a much more negative opinion of marketing and advertising now than a few years ago
• 61% feel the amount of marketing and advertising is out of control
• 65% feel constantly bombarded with too much marketing and advertising
• 53% of consumers polled said that spam had turned them off to all forms of marketing and advertising
• 36% of consumers polled said that the shopping experience is less enjoyable because of pressure to buy
• 53% said that for the most part, marketing and advertising does not help them shop better.
• 59% feel that most marketing and advertising has very little relevance to them
• 64% are concerned about practices and motives of marketers and advertisers
• 61% feel that marketers and advertisers don't treat consumers with respect
• 65% think there should be more limits and regulations on marketing and advertising
• 69% are interested in products and services that would help them skip or block marketing
• 33% would be willing to have a slightly lower standard of living to live in a society without marketing and advertising

and from BigResearch

Recognizing that the customer is boss is a requirement for success in today's marketplace. Nowhere is this more apparent than in targeting consumers via advertising, especially since 92.5% of them say they are regularly or occasionally avoiding advertising, according to BIGresearch's latest Simultaneous Media Survey (SIMM VIII). Over 15,000 consumers 18 years or older participated in the survey and for those who plan on making a purchase of a durable product, such as a car, computer, furniture, appliance, major home improvement or TV, the number is even higher for avoiding advertising at 93%.

The BigResearch piece goes on to say that when asked consumers top methods of finding out about products were "Word of Mouth" and "Read Article on Product". Needless to say, it will raise the bar considerably on what is commercially viable when commercials are no longer commercially viable. This brings us back to my point. People now find out about new things - whether it be music, a web site, a television program or a blender, toaster or laptop not by advertising but by talking to their friends and doing their own research.

So, for those of you who think building a base of friends is undoable, this is your new advertising. It can't be fake, it can't be bought. You actually have to get to know your customers/audience, you have to talk to them, listen to them and treat them with respect. You have to be open and honest and straightforward and you have to have a good product to begin with (advertising will no longer be able to move a mediocre product). Even with all of that, whatever your industry or niche with all of the different 'channels' out there and the internet tearing down international barriers, the competition for your 'friends' is going to be intense. Ultimately, if your friends don't speak highly of you to their friends, write nice things about you on the internet and bring new friends to your community, no one will ever hear about your great new product (even if it is in fact great).

One of the things I love about Radio 3 is that they honestly seem to get this, but they are very nearly alone. There are a few companies that seem to be catching on, and some indie media people have always understood it, but the vast majority of media (big and small), and the vast majority of companies in every industry haven't got an inkling yet. A few are trying to buy 'friends' (which ultimately won't work either) and companies for years have been pushing 'loyalty programs' but these have become a product in and of themselves, with their own advertising. Not everyone has to really understand all of this though. People go out of business all the time, it won't be anything new.

Radio 3: Communication By Talking to People

Paul Gorbould posted a note today on Inside the CBC wondering why the CBC's online promotion efforts, generally, have been less enthusiastically received than the unofficial CBC related groups. This comes hard on the heals of Tea Makers post about CBC blog hits and misses.

One of the reasons that I'm so fond of Radio 3 despite not owning at satellite radio, is because Radio 3 practices something I've been preaching for years - communication by talking to people. This, to most communications people I've talked to (not just CBC people) is too alien to be understood. It goes something like this - you start a conversation, other people join in the conversation, and then you continue to participate in the conversation. It's the difference between talking to people and broadcasting (or talking at) people.

Zed did an exceptionally good job of this - building a large online community around user generated content long before those words meant anything to most people. But about the time MySpace was building up speed the CBC castrated Zed and then, just about the time YouTube took off, the CBC killed Zed. Radio 3 though has followed in Zed's footsteps admirably.

Radio 3 through their Blog, Facebook Group and on air is building a community. Many of the people at R3 are active participants in an ongoing discussion, along with musicians and fans, about music. Think of it as a 24 hour phone-in show, without call screeners or tape delay. True, occasionally people will be rude and you'll have to cut them off, but they won't hurt you. R3 listeners (however they listen) feel like participants rather than spectators and that is how you build an audience for the million channel universe. It is the difference between friends and fans.

Fans may like a program, channel etc., but ultimately they know that if they switch the channel no one will know, or really care. Friends feel more of a sense of ownership. They feel some responsibility for the well being of the program and they feel that they are participants and part of a larger community - that their involvement and participation are important. Notice the groups I started on MySpace, Facebook etc., are called 'Friends of the CBC'.

This is what seems to be lacking in the CBC's communications and publicity efforts. Outside of Zed (R.I.P.) and Radio 3 - this is not something the CBC seems to do very actively. But, Radio 3 is not doing anything that can't be done. They found a topic that a certain segment of the population care about, independent music, found a staff that cares just as much about independent music and started a conversation. This could just as easily be done around film, literature, other forms of music, business, politics, current events, cooking, travel, parenting ......

True, some of it is generational but only to an extent. When people say 'our demographic is older' the programming they produce seems to target an audience that doesn't even exist anymore. The 'older' audience is not the same 'older' audience that existed in 1970. Even many of todays seniors grew up on Rock and Roll, the Woodstock generation is getting ready to retire and even the 'Independent Music' that is Radio 3's specialty has it's roots in the 1960s, not the 1990s - many of the early indie rock fans are now contemplating retirement. Some are already there.

If the CBC truly wants to compete for viewers, it needs to focus on tearing down barriers between producers and viewers , on talking to people and not just at them, and on building communities for the long term rather than being satisfied with short term ratings numbers. In the mean time, put radio 3 on television and learn from them.