Clear Channel Suing a Community It Serves

Cumulus CEO Lew Dickey called me yesterday to say why don't you write about Clear Channel once in a while -- after all, they are more evil than we are.

Alright, I'm lying.

Dickey didn't call but I'll bet you he's praying we write about some other consolidator's evil actions today after all the apparent misery Cumulus is causing its loyal employees.

In fact, things have been so intense at Cumulus lately that in our ongoing Inside Music Media poll of Radio's Best and Worst Groups, Cumulus has pulled ahead of Clear Channel (see for yourself by clicking here and scrolling down the right hand side -- you can even cast a vote).

It seems there is no shortage of missteps conducted by consolidators these days, but we have a whopper for you this morning.

Believe it or not, the geniuses at Clear Channel are suing a local community group in Philadelphia to halt their annual Unity Day festivities.

Why?

Because Clear Channel has pulled out of the event this year -- probably due to money -- and (please sit down and don't hurt yourself) Clear Channel says it owns the term "Unity Day".

I wonder if they trademarked the term "Evil Empire" because now they sure own it in Philly.

So Philadelphia, the community they are licensed to serve, can't use "Unity Day".

Watch out for Clear Channel filing trademark rights for "Martin Luther King Day" next

Perhaps nobody told Clear Channel's brain trust in San Antonio that it is not nice -- nor is it good business -- to sue a community group in a public trademark fight.

Unity Day on the Parkway, Inc. is getting its butt sued by Clear Channel which goes to show it's not easy being a black station in a black market when your owners are seeing green in San Antonio.

This group wants to put on a Unity Day event.

The city and the community want this event.

Clear Channel actually loved this event when they could afford to be part of it. If you're not already sick to your stomach, here is how Clear Channel spun their public service spirit in the past, read this.

Of course, that was then and this is -- well, now.

Today, Clear Channel wants this community group to cease and desist.

There I've said it!

Clear Channel's three favorite words: cease and desist.

Instead of creating goodwill for its local Black-oriented stations, Clear Channel is forcing the community to rise up with Save Unity Day in Philly. See their war literature here.

Hogan is in trouble.

So much for localism.

But then again localism to Clear Channel is running a local public service spot in nationally syndicated, networked or voice tracked Repeater Radio. At least, if Clear Channel Community Service Director John Slogan Hogan has his way.

And speaking of Hogan's ineptitude at community service, betcha if his local management caused this PR stink, their sorry asses would have been fired already.

So now Clear Channel is playing hardball with a group that actually wants to do good in the community and has widespread support. A former partner. Hey, radio is not that beloved that it can win an unpopular war with their own listeners and community.

Clear Channel lawyer Matthew Jennings, carpet bagging from San Antonio argues:

"It is Clear Channel’s policy to enforce its intellectual property rights vigorously. In that regard, this letter serves as formal notice that your use of the UNITY DAY Mark, in any manner, is wholly unauthorized, is likely to cause confusion, and constitutes trademark infringement, cybersquatting, and unfair competition in violation of federal and state law. While Clear Channel does not wish to engage in a protracted legal dispute, we simply cannot allow continued infringement of the UNITY DAY Mark or statements implying an affiliation with Clear Channel’s past festivals..."

Say what?

These are your listeners for God sakes -- the community you are licensed to serve here -- is this gobbledygook any way to talk to them?

A representative from Unity Day on the Parkway, Kyle Davis argues:

"...that once Clear Channel cancelled the event for 2009, it was our responsibility to protect a (30) year heritage that been adopted by the Communities of Philadelphia as their own. A lawsuit is forthcoming against Clear Channel, and it is unacceptable for Big Business to bully the Little People, when clearly, the law is on our side".

I'm on their side -- The Little Engine That Could vs. The Big Stuffy, Puffy Steam Engine from San Antonio.

So let's get this right.

Clear Channel cancels the event and screws the Black community.

Doesn't want the group with the same name to continue the popular event because its lawyers in Texas just have to defend their trademarks. You understand.

Can't we invite everyone to Scottsdale to have a beer with me on my patio overlooking the 8th of the Lakes Course? Can't we all get along when Clear Channel decides to impose budget cuts?

Talk about taking your eye off the ball.

Radio used to serve the community -- some stations still do. Their employees are only too happy to get involved -- on their own time. It's what we do -- and we do it well. I lived in the Philadelphia area most of my life and I can tell you WDAS-FM is a big part of the African-American Community. Why not help them succeed with an event that they obviously think is worth fighting for?

Lend them the name, alright? Be a good neighbor.

I can't speak for WDAS but I suspect WDAS-FM employees are ready to jump to it and be a part of this thing.

Betcha it's John Slogan Hogan who is the problem -- again.

Who appointed him boss anyway?

If Unity Day was such a great idea---and it appeared to be judging by the crowds it drew to the Parkway in previous years -- shouldn't Clear Channel use the money it will spend on a cadre of lawyers for a donation so Unity Day can go on?

If I were running a competing station, I'd go pay the group's legal fees against Clear Channel and let them hang themselves on this stupid move.

Where are the competing stations? Afraid of Clear Channel or too cheap to step up?

I know money is hard to come by but it also takes money to sue your local community groups. It's a matter of priorities.

And, Clear Channel's return on its "legal fee investment" is going to be some unfavorable footage on "Action News" at 5, 6 and 11.

Is it me or is this another example of how consolidation enabled large owners to take their eyes off the reason they exist -- to serve their cities of license?

And will you agree that if Clear Channel had to ascertain community needs to petition for its next license renewal instead of get automatic renewals, they wouldn't bully community leaders and rain on their Unity Day parade.

Imagine who might file for the WDAS-FM license if Clear Channel can't operate in the public interest?

A lot of radio folks don't want to wake up the federal bureaucracy and invite more regulation back into the industry.

Isn't that what Clear Channel just did when it sued the community it serves?

Hello Commissioner Copps!

And you wonder why radio is in trouble.

How it has lost its mojo.

It's not the people who work at the stations. They know what is the right thing to do.

I've fought the Evil Empire in a $100 million lawsuit and while I am not an expert on when bad things happen to good people, I came out okay. They are the ones on the brink of bankruptcy.

So this time let me give the Evil Empire a little free advice that they will not take:

Settle this now and let your great station people do what is right and serve their city of license.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Your subscription will not become “active” until you open an email from Feedburner immediately sent to your email inbox or spam filter.

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Radio According to a 15-Year Old

I thought you might be interested in what Morgan Stanley did recently in the UK.

They offered a two-week internship to a 15-year old to critique the media business and write a report called How Teenagers Consume Media. In it, Matthew Robson believes he is speaking for over 200 other teens.

And if he is, we may want to listen up.

First, he proclaims Twitter for old people.

Stop and think about it. My young friends and former students are not all that enamored of Twitter. My older friends are in love with it.

Maybe Matthew is right.

And we know that only about 9% of the people who have Twitter accounts -- no matter what their age -- tweet daily.

Young people have Facebook but perhaps even more significant is that they have text messaging and there is nothing more critical to young folks today than texting.

In class.

At the dinner table.

While driving (yes, that's right -- many if not most texters admit to texting while driving which is thought to be more deadly than driving under the influence). Here's more on the dangers of texting and driving if you're interested.

More revelations:

1. “You use a mobile phone if you want to talk to girls,” as “only about one in fifty girls plays computer games.”

2. Girls are more into social networking -- at least in the UK and according to this 15-year old. Twitter is for adults. Facebook is for teens (and adults, I might add).

3. Eight out of ten teenagers don't buy music -- they steal it or get it through bit torrent sites. But then again, my readers already knew that, right?

4. Radio is a loser with teens. They can listen to Last.FM in the UK (or I might add, Pandora here) and eliminate commercials. They can choose the songs they want instead of having to listen to what a station features. And those in tune with generational media and have heard me talk about the importance of understanding the sociology of media know that an on-demand generation wants to be their own PD. And social networking buzz about music means more to the next generation than anything a dj can say -- assuming stations still have djs.

5. "No teenager that I know of regularly reads a newspaper, as most do not have the time and cannot be bothered to read pages and pages of text while they could watch the news summarised on the Internet or on TV".

6. With regard to viral marketing, "Most teenagers enjoy and support viral marketing... Teenagers see adverts on websites (pop-ups, banner ads) as extremely annoying and pointless...they are portrayed in such a negative light that no one follows them.” Wake up, America. We don't just simply have a radio crisis, there is an advertising crisis.

Here's the full report. I think you'll find it fascinating.

But that leaves folks in traditional media such as radio, with not a lot of good news.

The reason is that radio companies make decisions based on their perception of how consumers use or could use their services. Infrequently, if ever, do they study what consumers actually want based on generational considerations.

A few observations:

1. Radio is hell bent to cram towers and transmitters (or at the very least what they are broadcasting from their towers rerouted to the Internet) on young listeners. It has no growth potential. Look at Microsoft deciding to get into the Apple retail store business -- many, many years late. Betcha it fails. The market doesn't need or want a Microsoft retail store as much as Microsoft needs and wants it. That's what radio is forgetting -- the next generation doesn't want radio anywhere.

2. This doesn't mean they don't want content -- and radio talent can provide that content. But first, radio industry types have to stop making everything turn into radio. I can tell you that if you listen to a radio station podcast it is radio on a mobile device. No growth there, either. I work with clients to concentrate on the mouth-to-ear part of the relationship they are building in podcasting. This used to be what radio had with its listeners on-air. Podcasting is simply the next radio on devices the next generation cherish.

3. Audio alone is so 1920's -- if you want to be part of future revenue streams audio must have video and text capability along side it. That is, a podcast in the future will have all these things. If you accept that the next generation will not revert back to terrestrial radio, then you must consider that they are used to seeing, hearing and reading as one step. Think this way and crack the mind jam that radio people typically have.

4. The Apple Tablet -- which I tipped you about last Spring -- is on the way and will be the must have device for reading, listening and watching. Therefore, the media business has an opportunity to rethink delivery. Of course, in radio the content these days is threadbare. We think of new programming as The Sarah Palin Show. The Apple Tablet (or whatever cool name they call it) will be as significant as the iPod and maybe eventually as significant as the television. Today, we watch TV for content, listen to radio for content, read for content. The next generation will have a master controller in their hands (maybe the Apple Tablet) and they will project video onto screens that will be slaves to their devices. This is all good because radio companies can get back into the game again. Their record shows, however, that they are hell bent on doing just audio and will miss this revenue stream, too. Oddly enough, radio won't work without pictures and text.

5. Radio would have died a decade ago if not for availability of radio sets in cars. That's where listeners hear it and as the industry's own RADAR study recently reported, there are slightly more listeners who spend less time with radio. Not a growth business.

6. Music and radio are tied together. Mark my words, Apple is making nice to the labels because the tablet is coming. Where once radio was necessary for the music industry to thrive, iTunes will be increasingly critical to the music industry. Radio standing around and thinking voice tracked music will ignite the next generation is pure folly.

7. Radio's best bet for surviving new media is the exact opposite thing it is currently doing -- personality. On-air for now. Hundreds of local niche podcasts (and repeat after me -- that do not sound like radio). Music intensive in spite of the royalty problems. I'd like to sit down with the music industry and radio and negotiate a royalty rate that would include new media -- obviously, I believe there is no radio without new media. The labels will eventually win the repeal of performance tax exemption -- they're very close now. If I'm radio, I'm giving a bit up to get an agreement for new media projects that could be my future. Instead, they are fighting a losing battle here as well. They are going to wind up paying an added performance tax and will not have a sweet deal upon which to launch music podcasts.

You don't need a 15-year old to tell you the radio industry is missing the next media wave.

But you have to see the future to pursue it -- and we could all do a better job of doing that.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Your subscription will not become “active” until you open an email from Feedburner immediately sent to your email inbox or spam filter.

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Laughable Radio Recruiting Tactics

Citadel and Cumulus, your market leaders on bankruptcy potential, have fired a lot of talent in the past year -- including valuable sales people.

Now, they are apparently hiring again.

No, not hiring back.

Hiring new.

And to listen to the way they are selling the open positions, you'd think Capital Cities/ABC had come back from the dead to run these help wanted programs.

So, let me set the stage.

Among Clear Channel, Citadel and Cumulus alone -- not to mention the bottom feeder consolidators -- there are enough so-called "laid off" account execs ready to work again to help these bumbling radio companies.

Instead, look what they have come up with to attract "more qualified" prospects:

• Citadel is running a "Can You Sell -- Win the Job of a Lifetime" working in radio contest

You've got to go to this site right now before they take it down -- you won't believe it.

In case they do, here's the pitch:

"92 PRO-FM & HOT 106 are teaming up with Newport Creamery to find our next great radio and Interactive sales person! We have your chance to win the job of a lifetime - working in radio! If you are outgoing, creative, savvy - and never take "NO" for an answer, then we want you. We will be choosing 100 applicants for the ultimate job interview. Over four weeks, we will determine who REALLY can SELL - through various tasks and tests - plus, we'll be broadcasting the highlights online! The one person left standing at the end will be offered a full time job with 92 PRO-FM & HOT 106 (Citadel Broadcasting)! Fill out the application below - don't forget to include a photo and/or video to get your foot in the door. Hurry up - we're waiting for you to impress us! We strongly encourage you to send in a short video of why we should hire you here at the station...be creative...it'll help!"

The Citadel video portrays good seller vs. a bad seller and if this is what radio advertising has become, we're all in trouble.

This is how one of my Repeater Reporters assesses the prospect of a juvenile sales contest to sell an industry in which young people do not want to work:

1. "We think we can look good to our community in tough times", when in fact it's just the obvious. Finding a job, from first hand experience, is not funny, not a contest, and not a stunt.

2. "We need to look like we're doing something proactive in our recruitment process." What we're really seeing is a group of managers who, bogged down by endless and meaningless reports and directives (just like Cumulost) they don't have time to recruit...and if they did, they wouldn't know what to do.

3. "It will be fun and instructive to put candidates through a set of tasks to see who can really do this job." What is this...an episode of The Apprentice? Setting up artificial tasks and competition to find a "winner" is so far from a predictor of future success it's embarrassing.

4. "A radio sales job is something people are really going to want to fight for." Really? I haven't been able to convince my daughter, nephews, nieces, or any of my friend's kids to go into radio and I wonder why? 100% commission. No training. No laptop or cellphone. No management support or development. No salary. No car. No gas money. And if Dad "who's such a great Dad/Uncle can't get hired because he's not a corporate lackey then "what's up with that?"

5. "I used to think Radio had become a parody of itself then a tragedy. Instead we've become a farce."

6. "The contest will receive glowing trade press and a special award at the RAB convention...to a standing ovation...of the 34 people in attendance."

Thanks to my razor sharp reader for that.

Look, I can tell you from experience as a college professor at USC that students don't want to listen to radio let alone have a career in it. Nothing I see in the Citadel ad is going to change their minds.

Not even invading social networking.

Over the weekend, among the five followers of this contest on Twitter (They have a Twitter page for "Can You Sell?") were the promo director/dj, both radio stations, and Evan, the CEO of Twitter. Pretty underwhelming for the press it received.

No job candidates were following the Twitter feed.

Respectfully, rehire some of the qualified people you've been methodically "laying off" and get on with it. There was nothing wrong with their performance, experience or know-how.

You're the ones making radio an impossible sell.

• Cumulus as a cutting-edge sales operation

Another reader thinks he can make you laugh at this legitimate Cumulus job posting for a Wilmington sales opening.

Description: We are looking for an experienced radio manager for our 5 station, market leading cluster. If you would like to get your hands on the most cutting edge sales operating system and a top notch sales team to execute it, then you need to look into this position.

STOP!

Where's the part about the spy cameras at the weekly sales meetings?

Or the threats to take accounts away if you don't perform -- right there during the video sessions?

Or the rigidity of forcing salespeople to make tons of calls to come up with a few sales?

Or pricing sales higher for existing clients than new ones?

Sorry, I digress ...

It is a demanding, structured and process oriented system with clear expectations and the tools with which you can succeed.

Give them credit for at least saying "demanding". Boy, these candidates ain't seen nothin' yet.

If you're ready for the challenge, send your resume to Jon.Pinch@cumulus.com. EOE. Posted 7/20/09

I wish I was making this stuff up, but you almost can't. It's that unbelievable.

There are still good radio groups -- let's not forget that (see my Best/Worst Radio Groups poll on my website InsideMusicMedia.com and scroll down the right hand side to see the updated tallies).

Emmis has a lot of financial problems but you never see them sinking to desperate measures when it comes to employees. And in good times and bad, Emmis treats its people well.

As does Bonneville.

And Lincoln Financial.

And Greater Media.

And Cox.

And hundreds of smaller owners who know the value of local radio and the importance of treating people with dignity.

Forgive me for making a mockery out of some owners but they are making a mockery out of themselves and this once proud industry.

I just think you have to call out this foolishness for what it is -- incompetence.

Let me go back to my earlier reference about that outstanding broadcast company Cap Cities/ABC and let me leave you with this question.

Would Citadel's Fagreed Suleman or Cumulus' Lew Tricky Dickey or Clear Channel's John Slogan Hogan ever get hired to run the much smaller but better Cap Cities/ABC group in the day?

What about just one of their stations?

Any one?

And they are running hundreds and hundreds of consolidated stations today.

I rest my case.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Your subscription will not become “active” until you open an email from Feedburner immediately sent to your email inbox or spam filter.

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Cumulus Is the New Clear Channel

Don't worry, Clear Channel is still the "Evil Empire".

But Cumulus under the leadership of the Dickey boys is more like the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, the fictional Marvel Comics super villain team devoted to mutant superiority over normal humans.

Of course I am poking fun at the Dickey brothers because as they have been tightening the noose on their talented and able Cumulus employees, they have also been tightening the noose on themselves.

It is unthinkable that a radio group could spy on employees using cameras installed at their stations, punish salespeople who can't meet corporate goals in a brutal recession and continue to pay the founding brothers excessive compensation without much corporate oversight.

And to coincide with this harsh approach to operating a radio company, the Dickey boys led by CEO Lew Tricky Dickey have driven the stock price down to about two quarters, run amuck of their loan covenants and have failed to prove old Lew Dickey, Sr was right in installing his carefully educated sons to run one of the biggest radio groups.

We're doing a Best Group/Worst Group poll on my website InsideMusicMedia.com between now and the end of the year. Early voting has started (you'll find the poll in the right hand column if you're interested). Look at it and you'll see my point about how people feel about Cumulus being the new Clear Channel. But you don't need a poll to tell you Lew Tricky Dickey's apparent draconian methods in dealing with employees is coming home to roost.

We're all entitled to an opinion and this is a free country -- so while Cumulus employees must swallow their tongues to keep their jobs, others can call it like it is -- which is -- a travesty.

An unnecessary travesty.

Back when Clear Channel was dubbed the Evil Empire, the largest radio group was suing people left and right, bullying everyone in sight and using its heft and power to gain what should have amounted to unfair advantage or as I call it -- a monopoly.

But absolute power absolutely corrupted at least their power and Clear Channel eventually imploded. Today they fight to avoid bankruptcy.

There are a lot of Clear Channel wannabes including Citadel which is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy with Clear Channel.

Eric Boehlert, the talented reporter and writer slapped the term "Evil Empire" on Clear Channel and I assume he came up with the description because Clear Channel was and is mean.

That's why I say Cumulus is the new Clear Channel.

Their employees think the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants are evil and hardly a day goes by without more corroborating evidence:

1. One reader reveals, "I personally witnessed employees performing a morning ritual of facing west toward the corporate office and flipping them off to start their days. That’s a team building activity that pulled people together in their misery. Every decision was based on How would Clear Channel do it? And as we all know that does not lead to good decision making".

2. An ex-Cumulus employee writes, "In order to avoid cuts, all non-sales staffers are required to make over an hour worth of calls each day to set up appointments for the sales department..who are also making their own calls. That's wasted time that keeps programming and promotions staff from programming and marketing the stations".

3. Employees make fun of the camera that the Dickeys have creepily placed in the meeting rooms where corporate conducts their spy-in-the-sky sales meetings from Atlanta -- meetings in which some attendees have reported punitive tactics disguised as Cumulus sales "motivation".

4. The pressure is apparently being applied so tight that one Cumulus employee blames what he alleges as the recent death rumor of a Missouri employee on it. While we have no way to corroborate the accusations at the very least this is representative of what some Cumulus employees think: "An unreported story is the business manager in Missouri who was allegedly so upset and stressed out by the verbal beatings they get on their weekly beating conference calls, so upset and stressed by deadlines that are shortened, staff eliminated, computer programs that don't do as promised, and reports that were do (sic) yesterday, that she quietly left the office a few weeks ago. Drove to her house, parked the car in the garage, closed the garage, while the car was still running, and ended her life. She didn't believe she had the choice to quit, she had bills to pay, and clearly she felt death was a better answer than another day at Cumulus. Tragic". Again, that's one person's account but when it launches talk -- right or wrong -- that the stress is so great that employees can't take it any more -- that's a problem for the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants.

So, the point -- Cumulus is apparently stepping on the throats of its employees and answering discontent with harsher measures (monitoring emails, blocking some email communication, threatening to take accounts away from salespeople who don't meet goals, etc).

It's even worse than that -- and I'll pass the latest abuses along to you in a future piece. You see, they can block their employees email, but they let their fingers do the talking from their unmonitored personal accounts when it comes to unhappy Cumulus employees looking to out the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants.

But I've got what I think is a great answer.

And, ironically, it comes out of the mouth of Chief Other Brother John Dickey.

Other Brother was quoted in the trades recently on the topic of ratings -- and there it was in all its eloquence -- John Dickey's answer to all Cumulus employee problems:

"Cumulus COO John Dickey says tumultuous debate over ratings the last two years has led him to believe there should be a single point person to represent radio owners to research companies. He says an ombudsman could "keep everybody honest and make recommendations."

That's such a great idea for ratings, John, why not appoint an ombudsman to oversee management-employee relations since the board of directors is apparently not interested in this topic?

An ombudsman is "an official appointed to investigate individuals' complaints against maladministration, especially that of public authorities".

And it would keep everybody honest and make recommendations just as John Dickey wants the ratings ombudsman to do for the industry.

If it's good enough to keep Arbitron honest, why shouldn't it be good enough to keep Cumulus honest?

None of us can know if there are human rights abuses in China -- I mean, Atlanta -- without an ombudsman.

Let's take an idea from John Dickey and run with it or maybe we'll just watch John Dickey run away from it.

Look, our great industry is being reduced to one big sweat shop by failed radio consolidators.

Let's at least speak out for them and hope sooner or later all of us can either help misguided radio CEOs find their way again or at least let me "keep everybody honest and make recommendations."

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Your subscription will not become “active” until you open an email from Feedburner immediately sent to your email inbox or spam filter.

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Sabbatical

‘All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy’, as the saying goes. Well I’m in the middle of a period of doing absolutely no work, having secluded myself in rural France – seriously rural France – Aveyron. Aveyron is allegedly the last ‘undiscovered’ part of France and I must say from the evidence I’ve seen it deserves that moniker. There really is nobody here. Of course the people who live here permanently are here – farmers to a man, and woman – but there are almost no tourists and you can literally drive the roads for dozens of kilometres before meeting another car. The pace of life here is incredibly sedate and this is a perfect oasis of calm for me – I get to read lots of books, eat stupid amounts of great French food and drive aimlessly around the countryside stopping wherever and whenever I want, for a coffee, for a look at the beautiful scenery or to eat even more food.

In recent years, as my life has become busier and busier, I’ve found the need to do things like this more and more. The need to reconnect with the idea of guilt-free leisure time has been something I’ve been aware of for the past while, and last January I took the entire month off to do things unrelated to work – I read books, I took a French course in Paris, I took an Asian cookery course etc. etc. It was great, and it’s something I intend to do in the future – and need to do. Because there’s no doubt I have a tendency to be a workaholic and I think a lot of musicians have become workaholics. As we take control of our own destinies in this self-sufficient technology driven age, we also take responsibility for lots of areas that were formerly taken care of by publicists, recording engineers, managers and even - with the advent of Youtube – film makers! And with the portable nature of the technology (I’m writing to you from a rural farmhouse 5 Km from the nearest town), we are able to take our work with us wherever we go. And so as we service our websites, our Myspace pages, our Youtube channels, answer our emails etc. we spend huge amounts of time that would have previously been either devoted to leisure time or practice, (remember THAT concept!) working, working working. And when we’re not working there’s a low-level chatter going on in the back of our minds concerning work - ‘must send X that email’, didn’t hear from Y about that gig’, ‘must update my website’, ‘must email the guys about the rehearsal’ etc. etc. It’s a workaholics charter!

And so I came here without my bass and with a determination to do no work at all. The fact that I don’t have a cellphone in real life (no really, it’s true!), means that I’m even less contactable by phone out here then I am at home, where the landline is my only means of telephonic communication. The only leeway I’ve allowed myself in doing stuff that I do at home is in writing my blog – hence the preponderance of posts this month! Blogging is something I find quite therapeutic anyway, I find writing to be a bit of an escapist thing rather than a work thing, and I’m allowing myself the luxury of doing a fair bit of blog activity on the grounds that when I get back the work shit will hit the fan in no uncertain terms and I’ll have little or no time for blogging or other fripperies for a while.

One great thing about travelling without the instrument and being without it for a while, is that it makes me miss it! ‘Absence makes the heart grow fonder’ (I’m big on aphorisms in this post, amn’t I?), and that’s certainly true in this case. As the fortnight of the holiday progresses my fingers start twitching in anticipation, and in a direct correlation to the speed my calluses begin to soften. I have a bunch of gigs a week after I go back and I’m really looking forward to playing again, but I’ll have to try and get my chops back to some kind of working order. So I’ve a week of practicing lined up and as the effects of the enforced bass absence takes hold here, the thought of this upcoming time with the instrument is becoming more and more attractive. One of the things I’ll be doing when I get back is playing with a group called Electric Miles which plays the music from the Bitches Brew period – music that’s rarely played and that, because it’s so loosely structured, gives the group great freedom to explore. With his band I get to play electric bass, something that’s very rare for me and enjoy very much – but those round wound strings definitely put the calluses to the test, so bring on the practice room!

Recently I’ve been involved in something which typifies the way we jazz musicians have become taken away from the actual act of playing and into other worlds. The critic Nate Chinen did a blog about the rights and wrongs of grant aiding jazz, and there was a very enthusiastic response, (including several from yours truly). It was a fascinating discussion, and one that attracted many heavy hitters in the jazz world. But though this was a subject concerning our livelihood and how the jazz world works etc., I couldn’t help thinking, as I contemplated the hours we all spent on writing back and forth, shouldn’t we all be practicing.....................?

Disney's New Radio Killer

Disney's ESPN is up to something big that radio and new media interests should keep a close eye on because they are about to steal local listeners away from radio and move them to the Internet.

A number of months ago ESPN the sports giant (television, radio, publishing, online, mobile) began testing a concept that is reminiscent of local radio when radio was in fact local.

Three months ago in Chicago, the test site, ESPN began digging down deep into local communities in an effort to create total domination of all things sports. In Chicago, ESPN is up against Randy Michaels and Tribune. So far ESPN is leading the race for faces with 590,000 unique visitors in June beating the locally-oriented Chicago Tribune with 455,000.

These numbers are very impressive in and of themselves after such a short period of time, but what is more significant is the ESPN strategy.

It goes beyond the major sports teams.

ESPN, the brand, is now moving to penetrate local sports -- high school football, baseball, hockey, basketball, soccer -- you name it. They are not too proud to include middle school, either. The idea is for students and parents to find sports schedules and scores on their ESPN site.

In addition, they could have game summaries, statistics -- and the starting point for conversation in a social networking setting.

It's all on the ESPN site and on their mobile products.

ESPN can use all its media operations to drive visitors to their new local sites and that includes ESPN radio. You'll see ESPN launch its local web branding in New York, Los Angeles and Dallas in the near future.

And eventually, ESPN will cover every market worth owning with sports from pro to little league. In other words, ESPN will get bigger by thinking smaller.

Smaller teams.

Local focus.

All this may be boring to Lew Dickey, Cumulus and Dickey Broadcasting which just signed a five-year contract to air the Atlanta Braves. Clear Channel is giving up the broadcasts.

And that's what traditional radio calls sports -- either play-by-play of the major sports or talk about sports. Sometimes there is college sports talk but high school info -- especially in the detail that ESPN is obviously going -- is ignored.

Look for the Dickeys to put the Braves on their AM and FM in Atlanta and on some nearby market stations as part of a network. Imagine all the money they will save from airing the Braves everywhere.

Don't put it past the Dickeys to get the rights to Atlanta's favorite sports team and then fire the radio play-by-play announcers. That's happening right now on Long Island where the hockey Islanders wasted their two play-by-play announcers so they can save money by simulcasting the TV audio.

Any hockey fan can tell you the level of description needed to enjoy a hockey game on radio. The TV simulcast will not suffice.

Radio has been ruining a lot of formats for itself in the past 13 years of consolidation, but I chose the ESPN example because if they succeed, they will be doing what radio should routinely be doing -- building local brands on multi-media.

Young people -- 80 million of whom are of age or coming of age now -- are happy to subscribe to Major League Baseball on their computers or NFL goodies on their cell phones. They don't need radio here, either.

Disney-owned ESPN gets an "A" in my book for reading radio's potential or lack of it and the same grade for innovating.

I take you to Radio Disney, the kid's channel that plays more new music than any traditional terrestrial radio station. Their production is more appealing to youth. All of this was done on crappy stations (I'm being unfair using that description but I'm trying to convey that Disney didn't buy great signals).

Many radio executives laughed when Disney fired up Radio Disney for kids, but who is laughing now?

Disney stuck Citadel with its ABC operation -- just at the peak of its value -- and Citadel is currently dismantling everything good about the previously excellent ABC stations.

Interesting -- Disney didn't sell Radio Disney (those "crappy" signals).

And they continued to buy outlets for its ESPN venture almost as if they knew what they were doing -- an oddity for media companies these days.

Now, you can see what Disney is up to.

ESPN, one of its strongest and most dominant brands, will seek to become all things to all people on a local level using not just radio but everything technology can bring its way.

Haven't I been saying radio should have done this when it had all that investment capital?

But consolidation CEOs never could see the future. Hell, they can't even see the present.

You'll note that ESPN's local sports initiative is not repeater radio or national syndication. They are hiring -- that's right, hiring -- real people. You know, the kind who breathe, work, make good content.

Meanwhile radio groups come up with asinine ways to cut costs, fire people, take their eyes off the future and they are failing even before this new challenge from ESPN comes along.

Tribune is not a radio company, and Randy Michaels is not going to let ESPN take his bacon without a fight -- I can promise you that. Of course he's working for a bankrupt company owned by Sam Zell so his resources are more limited than ESPN with the backing of Disney.

Look, radio knows how to do what ESPN is taking to the next level.

It's called being local.

I remember observing the hardest working dj I have ever known, George Michael of WFIL, Philadelphia and WABC, New York who later went on to sports fame in Washington and nationally.

As a young jock doing a teen radio show, George visited virtually ever school in the listening area, called his contacts and taped high school news and sports on a daily basis. I don't supposed you'd be surprised if I told you his show was far and away number one for years with that formula.

Imagine what a George Michael would have done if he had the Internet, iPhone, iPods, Facebook, Twitter and all the rest of today's new-age tools available to him then.

Other stations and formats have also made it good business to be part of their communities and offer things listeners crave.

Over the years radio people got to believe traffic and weather was the reason for existence even though audiences had changed and found other ways to get that information. Radio has become more national for at least the last 20 years in slow and painful steps.

The last real local format was all-news developed by an appliance and light bulb company named Westinghouse that also owned a few big city radio and TV stations.

Even local talk didn't last long when greedy managers figured out that syndicated political talk could get ratings and give them low cost content to sell. In the process, they set up their own eventual demise as social networking has become the new talk radio to the next generation.

Talk radio has become a bloated, aged imitation of its former greatness.

And herein lies the magic of what ESPN is doing:

1. It isn't about terrestrial radio right now or for that matter only TV or print or online -- it's all of that being employed to drive a multi-media local brand.

2. Just because websites reside on the world wide web does not mean that national trumps local. In fact, ESPN is going to show radio and print what happens when you build a brand from national to local and even micro-local (including children's sports).

3. The mission going forward is to nurture the brand, enhance it, hire talent locally to make it compelling and then embrace every technological way to distribute that content.

Go back and review 1, 2 and 3.

Radio could have and should have done all of this.

Instead, it got into a pissing match with satellite radio -- a medium that doesn't matter.

Caught up in cost-cutting that has not insulated them from the bankruptcy they now face.

Fooled itself into thinking they could get away with cheap radio that is increasingly national.

No Internet, mobile or social strategy in site even in this day and age.

So, closely watch ESPN teach the radio industry a lesson that it should have learned in its illustrious 75 plus year history.

It's not about AM or FM or XM or PM or iPods and iPhones and Macs -- it's about all those things where applicable.

To survive -- radio must take strong brands and build them across all technological platforms and concentrate on every sociological area at the same time.

It takes money this industry doesn't apparently have.

So watch the outsiders come in and clean the clocks of all broadcasters who try to just do terrestrial radio in an era of great change.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Service cannot start until you verify an email from "Feedburner" immediately after you sign up (You may have to check your filtered mail).

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Musicians on Music

One of the reasons I started this blog in the first place was because I’ve always liked reading musicians writing about music and I’ve always felt that there wasn’t enough of this kind of writing out there. There are lots of text books and educational books, and technical treatise kind of books and all of these are of course written by musicians. But of the other kind of writing – music criticism and analysis, opinion, musings on the philosophy and history of music – nearly all of this kind of writing is done by non-musicians – professional critics and writers. Musicians writing on this more non-technical level is still rare, unfortunately.

It was coming across an essay by Ethan Iverson from his blog ‘Do the Math’ on the subject of Lennie Tristano - a model of its kind in my opinion - that inspired me to get into the blog thing myself. I’ve written musical essays from time to time in the past, usually for music magazines or more latterly for inclusion on my website. With the advent of Blogging it seemed a natural home for these occasional essays.

But apart from wanting to keep writing occasional essays on stuff that interests me, I also wanted to try and add to the all too rare places where musicians write about the job they do, their work, how they view the music and its place in their lives and society in general. There is no question in my mind that no matter how good a non-musician critic or writer may be, in the end they have to have a different perspective on the music than that of somebody who not only makes their living from playing the music, but also knows how it works. A musician knows the real nuts and bolts of music – knows the trade and the craft as well as the art. And they know this in a way that’s just not possible for a non-musician – no matter how much music they may listen to, or how much they may read about it. Without wishing to be offensive to anyone – because there are some really good jazz writers out there, especially these days – there is still a certain truth to the adage that ‘a critic is someone who knows the way but can’t drive the car’. This ability to drive the car gives the working musician an insight to music that’s just not available otherwise.

Of course not all musicians wish to, or even have the ability to write about music. But I know from my professional life that I’ve been involved in many conversations – nearly always casual, on the road, in restaurants, hanging out etc. - with musicians in which the music and its history and practitioners was discussed at a depth and a level that’s almost entirely absent from most jazz writing. I’ve often thought, while involved in these conversations, that it would be great if more people, from outside the circle of the musicians themselves, could be privy to these discussions – how much more illuminating that would be to the general public regarding the real world of playing creative improvised music. Instead the general public has for the most part been served – sometimes very well, sometimes incredibly badly – by the writing of non-musicians, many of whom don’t know anything about the structural and technical aspects of the music they’re writing about.

This lack of technical knowledge has unfortunately been a feature of much jazz writing in the past and, equally unfortunately, is still with us. I remember at one point several years ago, when I was trying to expand my knowledge of the classical music world, reading the English classical music magazine ‘Gramophone’, and being struck by the clear erudition of the critics and reviewers. Whether one agreed or not with their opinions, you could always see that the writers had a clear understanding of the technical facets of the music they were writing about. In one edition the magazine gave potted biographies of their writers and every one of them had been to music school to a relatively high level. This gave their opinions a certain foundation that I as a reader found to be very helpful when reading about unfamiliar music.

Then when I would pick up Downbeat, or one of the other mainstream jazz periodicals and read Gramophone’s jazz counterparts, the comparison was often depressing, with not only much garbled English on display, but often an additional lack of understanding of the music and its history and repertoire. The phenomenon of the ‘fan with typewriter’ was rampant in the pages of the mainstream jazz media. I remember one reviewer in Downbeat referring to Chick Corea as a ‘chopsmeister’ and another reviewer in Jazz Times describing McCoy Tyner’s performance of Monk’s ‘Little Tutti Frutti’ (sic) at a festival in Lisbon. The fact that a reviewer in a respected jazz magazine not only didn’t know the title of a classic Monk piece (‘tutti frutti’ is probably how he heard it over the mic), but that the sub editor obviously didn’t know it either made it depressing enough, but what made it even more depressing was that the dedicatee of the original piece – T.S. ‘Tootie’ Monk – was the featured cover artist of that edition of the magazine!

Things have improved somewhat in recent years, but this kind of sloppy ill-informed writing is still with is – here are a few quotes from reviews that I’ve taken from respected jazz blogs that have appeared in the last two weeks. I’ve not appended the culprits’ names – this is more to make a general point than to do any personal online flogging:

‘The duo play back and forth between each other with Hancock dominating the sonic spectrum of the song with low bass thuds and high register melodic runs.’

‘this is still a fantastic three minutes of interaction from one of the best to have ever done it and one of the most promising talents of the future.’

‘I am not sure who is playing percussion behind Loueke but it's a nice addition, giving the track some much needed flare (sic).’

‘However, it’s Baron who is the biggest star of this show. He propulses this song into a wide orbit with shimmering cymbals, subtle fills, well-timed rumbles and bombs.’

‘Potter re-enters with bass clarinet in hand, playing skronky high notes in a manner that I’ve never heard the instrument being played before’

‘Propulses’ the song? Much needed ‘flare’!? ‘Skronky’ high notes!!? Are there no editorial standards on these blogs? What criteria do the reviewers have to have in order to make the cut onto the reviewing team? Even the English is terrible, never mind the musical descriptions. ‘Low bass thuds’, ‘well timed rumbles and bombs’, and ‘skronky high notes’ are classic examples of the kind of ‘fan with typewriter’ jazz writing that has bedevilled attempts to have serious and informed discussions about musical issues in the jazz media. We have little enough opportunity to get the message out there in print (or now in online print) it’s a shame to have this kind of writing take up any part of that.

But as I said, things have also improved with the advent of blogging – some very fine writers are in action, some of whom are musicians, some not. I would never claim that you have to be a musician to write well on jazz – there are several writers out there whom I don’t think are musicians (though I could be wrong) whose writing I enjoy very much, such as Nate Chinen and Patrick Jarenwattananon, and of course writers such as Nat Hentoff have made great contributions to jazz journalism. And then there are writers whose activities, these days at least, seem to be largely in the literary field but who are also musicians – Ted Gioia (who has written a marvellous history of jazz), Bill Kirchner and Lewis Porter spring to mind. I find in their pieces that the musical knowledge they have illuminates their writing.


But it’s still rare to find musicians, whose primary activity is playing and composing, writing about music – and I think this is a shame because when they do apply themselves to it, the results are often startlingly good and refreshingly different. Ethan Iverson’s blog is probably the best known current example of this ‘musician as writer’ genre and his imaginative ways of approaching music criticism, reviews, musings and interviews has really set a benchmark for how good this kind of writing can be. There’s an insider knowledge here that gives the writing the edge I mentioned earlier – that extra spin that only an accomplished practitioner can add to a piece. There are several others I enjoy – Darcy James Argue’s blog for example and the blog of the Australian pianist and composer Mark Hannaford would be another. Another blog well worth checking out is the English composer Graham Collier's blog - there's always something of interest there.

And one of the earliest ‘bloggers’ is still going – Dave Liebman! I remember back in the 80’s Dave used to send out a printed ‘newsletter’ that was to all intents and purposes a blog – it contained information on his doings and opinions on various musical and extra-musical topics. This is now hosted on his website under the heading ‘Intervals’ and I’d highly recommend it if you haven’t checked it out already.


And I recently discovered some fantastic writing on jazz by jazz musicians from over fifty years ago – from the pages of a magazine called ‘The Jazz Review’. This was a magazine founded by Nat Hentoff, Martin Williams, and Hsio Wen Shih in New York in 1958 and the standard of writing in it is of an extraordinarily high level. One of its innovations was to invite jazz musicians to review the work of other jazz musicians. So far I’ve only worked my way through Volume Two, Number Two, but there’s so much great stuff in that edition alone – bassist Bill Crow on Cannonball’s ‘Somethin’ Else’ album, the Belgian saxophonist Bobby Jaspar on Elvin Jones’ style, and Cannonball writing about Ahmad Jamal and Tony Scott!

One thing that’s fascinating about their writing is how frank they are about the work of other musicians with whom they must also have been meeting on a social level in the New York scene at the time – yet they pull no punches when describing what they like and what they don’t like. For example Cannonball’s description of what he sees as Tony Scott’s strengths and weaknesses is of a level of outspokenness that you’d never see today, since we now all love each other – at least in print!

Here are several example of the kind of insider stuff you can only get when a musician, who knows how music works, listens to music. Here’s Cannonball on the difference between Milt Hinton and Henry Grimes on Tony Scott’s album:

The rhythm section on this record is beautiful. Paul Motian is one of the steadiest drummers around. Paul and Bill Evans work very well on this. The rhythm section plays better when Grimes rather than Hinton is the bassist because Milt's beat is so dominant. Henry has a tendency to sit down on the beat so that it's there when the soloist arrives.

And here’s Bill Crow on the recorded sound on Cannonball’s album:

I wish engineers would stop adding all that echo to the horns. Both Miles and Julian sound like they are playing in a large hall, but the rhythm section is recorded flat. The resulting illusion is that the horns have a built-in resonance that continues even when the note is stopped. I know this is done to satisfy the hifi fan, but this sort of distortion strikes me as a far cry from "fidelity."

And finally Bobby Jaspar on Elvin – I find this particularly fascinating since Elvin was in the process of developing his style at the time this was written, so you’re reading an analysis of Elvin’s style from someone who was playing with him on a nightly basis (In JJ’s band) at the time – and it’s a brilliant essay too:

I must especially emphasize the absence of the afterbeat accent on the high-hat. When one is not used to its absence, one feels a sensation of freedom, as though floating in a void with no point of reference. Actually this kind of freedom is a trademark of the greatest jazzmen. Charlie Parker carried this kind of floating on top of the time the farthest, I think"; and the great soloists at their best moments seem completely free of the alternation of "strong-weak, strong-weak" that some people mistakenly call swing.

I would highly recommend that you check out the issues of this magazine that are now available online – you can see them Here

And the issue in particular that I’ve mentioned is Here

At the beginning of this post I stated that one of the reasons I got into this blogging game was to be able to add to the places where jazz musicians talk about music - among other things I wanted the blog to be a place where music could be discussed at a maybe less general level than is often the case. But this does not always meet with the approval of other jazz bloggers as evidenced by this post by UK jazz blogger Sebastian Scotney about my essay on the nature of rhythm - ’The Art and Science of Time’:

If you like what Ronan Guilfoyle is saying , then be my guest, and try The Art and Science of Time...and I will give a prize for the best explanation in no more than 50 words of what it means.

50 words or less – that sounds about right for what’s considered to be in-depth jazz writing sometimes............






PS Found this very witty letter to the editor printed in the 2nd edition of above-mentioned ‘The Jazz Review”

Congratulations on the publication of your first issue . . . I am . . . enclosing a money order for $4.50 for a year's subscription. I have thought about saving $3.50 by taking a three year subscription but have decided that with the wonderful advances in ballistic missiles and automobiles, it is unwise to commit yourself for more than a year in advance.

David Givner, New York

The Cumulus War Against Itself

Cumulus Media -- the 64 cent stock is all Harvard grad Lew Dickey, Jr. has to show for 13 consolidated years of radio -- is at war with itself.

This is my opinion.

When a company has to revert to tactics that inhibit productivity at a crucial time and dissipate the good will of their employees, it can only be due to desperation.

Cumulus is in free fall.

The stock price is in the toilet. The value of the company worth less than ever. The future mortgaged by overspending and now the employees in a sense pistol whipped because they need their jobs and the ruling Dickey family needs cheap labor.

It's not just about Cumulus or the Dickeys for that matter.

Clear Channel does the same thing. You don't earn the name "Evil Empire" by handing out gold watches. Hell, Clear Channel doesn't even give out Timex's when they're kicking employees to the street.

Citadel has flushed so much talent out of its company that it has no choice but to recycle its programming and run infomercials.

There's also a group of what I call bottom feeders who want to be Clear Channel and get their mean off by playing John "Slogan" Hogan (heaven forbid!).

Let me put my Dr. Phil hat on for a second.

These failed CEOs have self-esteem problems.

They must because they don't seem to like the people they hired (unless in Cumulus' case, they previously worked for a uniform company).

They are cruel -- cutting off lives, livings, careers - hurting families. You might counter that they really have no choice but to let these folks go and I would add, "but they do have a choice as to whether they take raises, bonuses, perks and the others things they all do even while they are firing employees".

They have anger issues -- I'm still being Dr. Phil here -- because why would you continue to hurt careers and families when you don't have to -- and when you absolutely don't have another option but to dismiss employees, compassion is missing in action.

My point is that most consolidation CEOs have run their companies from the beginning. Had virtually all the power. Puppet boards of directors. Until now, money flowed in from Wall Street banks to refinance and cover up the suspiciously overvalued prices they paid for their assets.

Clear Channel people are ticked that the founding Mays family took the money and ran -- twice -- while mixing the Kool-Aid employees were asked to drink.

Citadel employees have complained to me (and I've documented it in this space) that their leader Farid "Fagreed" Suleman was getting rich while the company was tanking and that his minion, Judy Ellis, was more than tough in her dealings with fellow humans.

Saga CEO Ed Christian -- although brilliant for avoiding running up company debt -- is criticized by some of his employees for making them take a 5% pay cut while he takes a pay raise.

What the hell is going on here?

But the Dickeys are presently number one with a bullet (to borrow a Billboard term) when it comes to waging war against itself.

You already know they "spy" on their employees with cameras installed at their radio stations. The sales meetings conducted via Skype appear to discourage the attendees more than inspire them to higher sales.

The Dickeys are being aggressive in trying to put down the employee unrest that threatens the company’s financial production at a critical time.

Here are their latest tactics:

1. Email surveillance
One employee reports “on the just completed Market Manager weekly beating conference call, John Dickey of the Dickey Ding Dong management team informed us all that Richard Denning the corporate counsel was creating a disclaimer for the bottom of all corporate emails, that prohibits them from being forwarded and or copied.” By the way, to show you how well watching employee email has worked, you’ll note all the corroboration from Cumulus workers in this piece are presumably from personal email accounts. Guess you can't keep people behind the Berlin Wall try as you may.

2. Sales meetings that employees fear
Cumulus employees that have contacted me definitely don’t appreciate the tenor and tone of the weekly half-hour spy sales meetings. Some say these meetings are enough to make you cry. Meanwhile, it never occurred to the Harvard-trained Lew Dickey that the best sales meeting may be no sales meeting at all. When I worked for the Dale Carnegie organization, they taught a meeting concept where all participants remained standing and the “business” was conducted more swiftly with less time wasted. Hey, it’s an idea.

3. Gaining needless unfair advantage with non-competes
It’s bad enough that Cumulus has every advantage over its employees -- a bad economy, a declining radio industry with fewer jobs available at other companies, etc. But it continues to make employees sign non-competes sometime up to one year making leaving even harder if they could find a job in the media business. It’s arguable as to whether these non-competes would even stand up in court but who has the money for court? Everything is stacked in the favor of Cumulus.

4. Romper room sales tactics
Here’s how a Cumulus salesperson describes the situation: “No one should be allowed to speak to their employees the way they do. It's never enough ... and the big wheels in Atlanta can't figure out why we are not closing 4 new accounts a month. Lets see, make 80 calls, 40 contacts, 20 appointments and close 4. That's the formula. With 12-18 sales people tripping over themselves calling the same people who are screaming at us to take them off our "list" ... try to find a number not called … and, oh, make sure to find elephant accounts ... is this a safari? Oh, and how (a) … veteran who is subjected to managers listening to their calls and evaluating them? If I don't know how to prospect by now, I should not be doing this.. I was told I said too many ummms, and not following the script to the letter .. lets see, for years a million dollar plus a year in sales with great client relationships, and doing all the things it takes to be a good account exec but suddenly I need to be re-trained?”

5. Commission cuts
One Repeater Radio Reporter checked in to say, “I have a friend who sells advertising for Cumulus, and she is severely suffering financially since the most recent pay cut where 'corporate' took 4 clients off her list. (This equals about $1200 a month off her commission.) Also, a couple of months ago, 'corporate' fired 7 people in the Savannah office. This is a travesty, and I truly feel that this company is EVIL!” When the seven people in the Savannah office were fired, it was actually 7% of the entire Cumulus workforce. Furthermore, they cut back all part time employees to minimum wage and cut out their benefits. Lew Dickey then awarded himself the half mil... and his BROTHER was given a bonus of 150,000 dollars!”

This is war.

Not with new media.

Not with Google.

Not with competitors.

Civil war within the borders of Cumulus.

The generals have dug in for the long haul – if from now until the next broken bank loan covenant is what you call the long haul.

The loyal soldiers have nowhere to turn but the unemployment line.

Every once in a while someone will say why do we care so much about the way consolidators run their companies?

Radio CEOs have had all the power they could ask for and now look where it got them.

There are lots of ways to look at the results of radio consolidation.

Penny stocks.

Loss of local radio.

Mass exodus of talented radio people.

Inability to keep up with generational preferences for new media.

Handful of CEOs dominating the markets like dictators.

Mortgaging the future of radio to investment banks.

But the sorriest, saddest and most representative indicator of just how far radio CEOs have fallen is to see this and other examples of how they routinely get away with abusing their employees and creating toxic workplaces.

Radio people know the industry's problems and know how to get started solving them.

It's employers like Cumulus who are standing in the way of their own survival.

Wall Street couldn't save a consolidator.

But radio people can't save radio CEOs from themselves.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Service cannot start until you verify an email from "Feedburner" immediately after you sign up (You may have to check your filtered mail).

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Iverson interviews Jarrett

Very interesting BBC online interview with Keith Jarrett by Ethan Iverson available for the next few days. You can listen to it for the next five days, after which it will be available as a transcript on Ethan’s blog


It’s fascinating in particular to hear Jarrett talk about his early days and his work with the American Quartet. For someone so famously temperamental Jarrett sounds very relaxed and it’s definitely one of the best and most lucid interviews of his that I’ve heard. I’m sure he was aware that he was being interviewed by a high level musician rather than the usual jazz journalist type and he responds very well to a discussion about music as opposed to being questioned about things peripheral to the music itself.

For me, I enjoyed the first part of the conversation more than when it got into a discussion of Jarrett’s own solo concerts. After a while I just find Jarrett’s self-absorption to be wearing. He seems to have little or no interest in anything or anyone outside his own music and his now tiny musical circle, and as you can hear in the interview, he never lets a compliment go unaccepted! That’s why I found the earlier part of the interview so much more enjoyable, his discussion of his interaction with others and with the music of others just seems so much more interesting than than his fascination with his own doings. For example he describes in the interview how he discussed with DeJohnette and Gary Peacock the ‘privilege’ of being a sideman – yet as far as I can tell the last time he indulged himself in this ‘privilege’ - even on record – would be in 1975 when he played on Kenny Wheeler’s wonderful ‘Gnu High’, a recording he subsequently completely dismissed and was very scathing about in his biography. As far as I know that’s the last time, bar one recording with Paul Motian on drums instead of DeJohnette, he’s played with anybody outside his own European Quartet and his Standards Trio. As far as I can recall his European Quartet disbanded in 1979, so for the past thirty years he has only played with two other people – DeJohnette and Peacock - an extraordinary piece of self-isolation for a jazz musician.

Undoubtedly his discussion of his solo work also has musical interest, but I found it so wrapped up in his own self-regard that it made it a bit off-putting. Of course he is a genius, and I number several of his recordings as being personal ‘desert island discs’ and he’s certainly got no reason to believe anything other than the fact that he is one of the greatest living pianists and improvisers on the planet. And maybe (or perhaps certainly) he needs this isolation and self-absorption to do what he does, but still it would have been nice to learn that his musical view and interests went a bit further than the four walls of his studio and the three corners of his trio.

One final thing I noticed about the interview was the almost complete airbrushing out of existence of the European Quartet Jarrett had with Jan Garbarek. For some reason the only mention they get is when Ethan, in discussion about the interview with the BBC’s Jez Nelson, imagines how a piece played by the American Quartet would have sounded if the European Quartet had played it - he describes it as probably sounding like ‘Smooth Jazz’ (!). In the interview, as far as I can tell (I was listening on a dodgy online connection in rural France) Ethan never questions Jarrett about this band, nor does Jarrett mention it. Whether this is by accident or design – or maybe lack of space – is hard to tell. In the interview the American group is lauded to the heavens as being very influential and one of the greatest modern jazz groups, but the European Quartet was also highly influential – especially in Europe. That group had a way of playing rubato together, through changes, that has never been equalled in my opinion, and there are some incredible recordings like ‘Belonging’ which surely deserve a mention in any overview of Jarrett’s work? And in the retelling of the story of Jarrett’s own groups I can’t imagine any history that doesn’t include the American Quartet, the European Quartet and the Standards Trio. It’ll be interesting to see if Ethan mentions the group in his blog, and why they were not mentioned when he posts the transcript of the interview. Did Jarrett not want to discuss them? Did Ethan prefer not to ask about them? Or was there just not enough time?

One amusing sideline to the interview – Jez Nelson, several times in the interview, thanks Ethan for taking the trouble to go to see Jarrett and interview him for the BBC. I know of very few jazz musicians anywhere who wouldn’t give their eye teeth to have a chance to meet Jarrett, let alone have the opportunity to go to his house and talk music with him!

More on Jazz Education

I've been amazed at the huge response to my post on jazz education. Not only has there been direct responses in the comments section to the blog, but there’s also been an avalanche of responses to my various email addresses, website etc. I really didn’t know that this subject would elicit such a reaction, but I’ve been amazed....

I got one very irate response from the writer Stuart Nicholson concerning the quote from his book Is Jazz Dead? (or Has it Moved to a New Address) that I used in the post. An argument I’ve often heard by boosters of European jazz is that American jazz has been ruined at least in part by jazz education – an argument which ignores the fact that most European jazz schools are very similar to their American counterparts. However Stuart has pointed out to me that the quote I used from his book to make this point is a misrepresentation of his position and he sent me other quotes from the book to show how I had erred in using the quote in that way. And he’s right - so my apologies to him for that – I’ve removed the quote from the post and rephrased it so that it has no reference to his position on this subject.

The purpose of these posts is always to discuss the ins and outs of creative improvised music, they’re never meant to personally offend people. I remember meeting Stuart several years ago and found him to be a very nice man who was kind enough to later send me a copy of his excellent biography of Duke Ellington which I enjoyed very much so I hope he’s not too offended.

Several other reactions have suggested other aspects of the whole jazz education thing which deserve further exploration, and I’ll come back to them in a subsequent post. Thanks for all the interest and reaction – of all kinds!

Options Ahead for FM Radio

It doesn't take long to conclude that the radio industry has a big problem.

Not the recession.

Or owing too much debt to repay it.

The listener problem.

Radio groups find themselves in an impossible position these days -- a sad situation of their own making.

You might argue that there was nothing they could do about the Internet, iPods, social networking, music discovery through bit torrent sites or the popularity of cell phones and text messaging.

Then again, radio CEOs could have seen these new technological and sociological trends as opportunities.

Nonetheless, the question of what shall become of FM radio as we now know it is a valid pursuit because operating radio stations as repeaters -- or cheaply voice tracked music machines is not very compelling, not even necessary given the alternatives and certainly is not a growth business.

One of my new media clients pitching a traditional radio client just two days ago was taken aback when the advertiser said they didn't want to buy radio and when asked why the response was that it doesn't sound interesting anymore. They must be hiring inexperienced people.

This is not good.

History allows us to take some context from what happened to AM radio when FM came into prominence in the 1970's.

What's AM radio?

Well, if you're under the age of 30 you know what I am saying. AM hasn't had much to do with your life.

AM was where the action was in music, talk, news, full-service entertainment -- you name it.

Until ... FM came along.

And while the FM band had better fidelity and stereo, consumers have long proven to be creatures of convenience not audiophiles.

FM radio originally had -- dare I say it -- fewer commercials.

No clutter.

No profit even -- at least at first.

Different kinds of jocks, production values and sometimes even longer playlists back in the beginning.

The radio industry liked to think it was FM's stereo capability that was the attraction. Ask my talented friend Mike Anderson what Stereo 92 meant to a Philly station we both worked at together called WIFI (really -- they were the call letters -- who knew).

It sure as hell wasn't the stereo in spite of how we rammed that "advantage" into our listeners ears.

It is significant that talk and news didn't start to migrate to FM until FM had long matured. And even at that -- AM is where the old people are (forgive me for that). But talk radio listeners are deep into their 60's. Gen Y doesn't do talk radio -- and there is 80 million of them coming of age.

They do new media. We keep wanting to make them radio listeners and they so don't need us to do that.

Then, once FM took off, radio worked its voodoo -- that is, cut the playlists, add AM top 40 formatics and there you have it -- too many commercials, no music variety and less music. Of course, we all knew how to handle that little problem: tell the listeners we played more music, fewer commercials and greater variety.

You wonder why radio is in a mess right now with listeners -- kind of a listening recession.

I got a kick out of the trades the other day when they reported new RADAR results as indicating that although there are more radio listeners, they listen for less time.

Radio was/is stuck with a diary ratings system that never fully reported the mediums full reach and now has to settle for the People Meter, a device you would never wear, that picks up any noise and reports it as listening.

PPM is better, but far from perfect.

Oh, and over all those decades when the industry could have pressured for a better audience measurement service, it failed to support even one adequately enough to survive which is why late in the game Nielsen will find out its chances of making it are slim to none with "slim" on vacation while his show is being voice tracked.

And, for decades while radio was red hot, it dropped its collective drawers and sold air time on the cheap -- a tactic it is paying for dearly right now when radio is not hot.

All of that is behind us.

Looking ahead then, what are the viable options for FM radio over the next five years? Beyond that I am unwilling to project for reasons I will disclose in a moment. Here's a sampling:=

1. Talk on FM.
Turns out Walter Sabo was right whether you like it or not. But instead of bringing over all those over 60 year olds (sorry, again!) try for some 40 year olds. To do that politics is going to have to get a rest. You're going to have to know your local region better. Abortion is not in the "A" list rotation. Nor are the usual political topics. But texting while operating a commuter train in your market -- notice how I said your market -- could be the replacement topic. Then, shorter discussions as all of our attention spans have shrunk. Add top 40 formatics and there you have it.

2. Local news.
This is a smash hit waiting to happen but it costs so damn much money. If you do it, it has to be local and live all the time and any shortcuts will not be appreciated. Stop with the garden reports and feature stuff -- make it compelling, now, cutting-edge. Live & Local 102 sounds compelling. You can no longer say, give us 22 minutes and we'll give you the world. You'll have to say, give us 2 minutes and we'll give you your world. I wanted to include this although slim to none is back again on this option.

3. Discovery channel.
That's a name radio should have thought of first before TV claimed it. Except we were busy stroking the record labels and showing them how big our --- well, our -- egos were in return for all those gold records on the wall. We created the short tail theory -- after all, radio stations played very little new music. Same today. But if you're going to be in the hit music business on FM, realize that you will likely not be the first choice of listeners for music but will hope to be picked up on People Meters everywhere. Thus, you will have to channel your deepest urges to actually discover artists and bands -- local artists and bands. There is some growth potential here, but remember no young person is trading in a mobile device for a radio even if you put the radio into that device.

4. Help.
When I worked for the legendary Dick Carr at WIP in Philadelphia, we had a great afternoon personality, Dick Clayton, who did a humorous feature called "Mr. Help Me" which he ended by saying, "tune in tomorrow and let Mr. Help Me help you". Who knew that Dick was light years ahead of even his great self? There is a place for "help" radio if it isn't done in long shows. I'm hearing it in segments -- a few minutes long -- on different topics with referrals to listeners' phones to pick up more info, to your website to see a YouTube video and lots and lots of sponsorship possibilities. Steal this idea, please!

5. Sports.
Why do you think CBS Radio President Dan Mason is going crazy building sports stations where there once was music (think WBCN in Boston for example). But play-by-play sports is not necessarily the ticket. Big Tom Bigby is the expert on this -- as good a programmer as I know of in the area of Guy Talk (also known as sports talk). His top 40 formatics are incurable which is why Bigby's stations sound so good and make money. But where there is Guy Talk there can be Gal Talk someday. Sports and the lifestyle it embraces is still a good short-term use of FM radio.

Now rest assured that I am not saying all other successful FM stations should abandon their formats.

Far from it.

There is still some juice left in them. You see what B101 does in the Philly PPM and WCBS-FM's oldies station is truly on everywhere in New York (as everyone but former CBS Radio head Joel Hollander believed). CBS-FM is number two in PPM.

But here's the gut check.

You can't have a growth industry without the next generation.

Please re-read that line.

And you can't have the generation radio neglected now that their sociological needs are satisfied by new technology.

Therefore, consider using FM in the ways I described above or continue your successful live and local format as long as you can.

Do not voice track.

Voice track at your own peril. Only you and your accountant will like it.

Advertisers, as I pointed out earlier, are figuring this out.

You are hastening the demise of radio when you continue to water it down, make it less local, less connected, devoid of personalities.

And if all of this isn't resonating, please keep in mind that my clients, the former Grand Rapids number one radio team Dave & Geri -- fired and left for dead by their consolidator owners who worship the wrong numbers -- are within striking distance of equaling their radio quarter hour numbers after only five weeks of podcasting!

Never forget where the future of entertainment is headed -- and get there early.

Or at least before it is too late.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Service cannot start until you verify an email from "Feedburner" immediately after you sign up (You may have to check your filtered mail).

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.

Pandora Radio's Box of Royalties

According to Greek mythology, Pandora opened a jar referred to as "Pandora's box", releasing all the evils of mankind.

But recently, Pandora Radio released all the evils of the music industry upon the radio industry.

Pandora Radio CEO Tim Westergren surprisingly opened Pandora Radio's box for his competitors in terrestrial radio when he came out publicly for the repeal of radio's performance tax exemption.

The record industry is pushing for the ability to tax radio further for helping them sell music. Go figure.

I have known Westergren to be a good man and he's a musician so you can tell where his sympathies lie.

Nonetheless, the way Westergren did it and the timing appear suspect to some.

You may remember that Pandora Radio itself -- wildly popular among consumers -- came this close to having to shut down.

Westergren can thank the record labels for that. They wanted to tax him into oblivion along with other webcasters. In fact the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) decree was tantamount to 100% taxation just for the right to play music online.

Of course, Westergren and other webcasters cried foul.

A group led by my friend Kurt Hanson (AccuRadio and RAIN) went to bat for them and came up with an improved if not very imperfect plan to pay money they really don't have to the labels for use of their music. But it saved Pandora's bacon for sure.

Westergren was mum on whether radio should be subject to more music taxes until last week.

That's when he issued his very own fatwa on what's fair is fair.

Disappointingly, Westergren backed the artists once he had his deal in hand and he was quoted in Taylor On Radio-Info as saying: “We, along with the artists whose music we play, strongly support the establishment of a level playing field, a truly fair system, as articulated in the Performance Rights Act, H. R. 848.”

What's worse, Westergren issued a jihad (sorry about all the militant Muslim imagery) for his Pandora Radio listeners -- who number more than Sirius and XM together -- to flood House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office and fight for what is right, gosh darn it.

The timing is suspicious but he tells me his motivation is pure. Here is Westergren's rationale:

1. It’s right and fair for artists to get paid.

"In spite of the difficult negotiation we’ve had, we have never advocated that Pandora not pay royalties; only that the amount be reasonable and sustainable. You’re right, they did have us for lunch – might even say we got regurgitated! But we’ve never quarreled with the fundamental notion that performance fees are fair – even though we provide a tremendous promotional benefit to musicians. I’m a long time working musician myself, so this is near and dear to me (as it is to the other working musicians at Pandora)".

2. The bill addresses the parity issue which remains a serious problem.

"I know you know all about this structural problem, but it’s still seriously unfair. The bill contains language that would hold Pandora to the same standard in rate setting as other forms for radio. We compete, as you have written about ad nauseam, with broadcast radio everywhere. There’s no reason we should pay so much when satellite and broadcast pay so little... Or nothing".

Westergren is aware that it may appear as if Pandora is trying to hurt broadcast radio, but he insists it is really not the case.

Now that he can see Pandora's performance payment schedule for years to come, Westergren's main competitor -- radio -- would be hurt by imposition of more music taxes. That's like kicking an industry when it is down -- which is fair, I guess, in a capitalistic world -- but disappointing to those who hold Pandora to a higher standard.

When I was a professor at USC, Pandora was revered as Westergren well knew. He visited several times and felt their adoration. Since many music students attended his sessions, I suspect they might agree with his stance even if they noted that the timing is sketchy.

You hear me talk about the importance of generational media and this is a good lesson.

The next generation looks up to Pandora and expects that Pandora would do what is right -- which on the surface could appear to be -- help those poor starving musicians.

They probably would not like that Pandora decided to stick up for the artists only after it had its only deal safe and secure.

By the way, we know that the starving musicians will continue to starve because of the record labels, but it sounds better than "help those starving record execs".

What won't sit well with the next generation -- if and when they figure it out -- is any perceived ulterior motive, a quid pro quo, if you will, where Pandora gets its deal and radio gets kicked while Pandora is trying to compete with them.

The timing couldn't be better for Pandora.

Pandora Radio is trying to monetize its mass audience posting its best quarter in history and now that royalties are not going to shut it down, I guess Westergren is playing hardball with its competitor.

Except he didn't need to.

Radio is its own worst enemy.

He's making a serious strategic mistake to bloody his hands with the terrestrial radio performance tax repeal issue.

All he needs to do is let radio execs kill their own business off -- as they are currently doing.

The best thing radio stations can do is stop playing so much licensed music.

They don't have the guts. Not even, a little bit. Radio execs could announce their stations will respond to local interests by adding non-published artists and bands to their playlists and that effective immediately they are adding 15% of unlicensed music to their playlists and playing 15% less of licensed music.

That would send a message loud and clear.

Not just to the labels and SoundExchange, but to radio listeners bored with the same old same old. There's a lot of good music out there besides the handful of things radio plays over and over again -- irritating their listeners.

So in the end, it's certainly Westergren's right to get tough with radio although in my opinion it is none of his business.

Pandora made it by being one step above everything else in quality and concept.

Fortunately, Westergren alone does not have the heft to swing momentum to the label's side on repealing radio's royalty exemption, but nonetheless you'd expect better from a great guy with a great product.

What's tragic about all this is that John Simson, the SoundExchange head negotiating for the labels, Westergren and many artists just don't get that they owe radio as much as radio owes them.

The radio position is -- we played the songs that made the record labels rich.

The labels position is -- that they provide the free music that allows the stations to get rich.

Both sides will go down in flames until they sit down and sincerely learn to see things from the other's point of view.

Then compromise until it hurts -- not one side, but both -- because right now radio and the music industry can't live with each other but can't exist without each other.

For those of you who would prefer to get Jerry's daily posts by email for free, please click here. IMPORTANT: Service cannot start until you verify an email from "Feedburner" immediately after you sign up (You may have to check your filtered mail).

Thanks for forwarding my pieces to your friends and linking to your websites and boards.