I’ve written about these satellite radio micro-channels before here and here and I hate to sound like a broken record, but I will.

Investing in creative, compelling programming pays off.

Sirius just announced that Coldplay will take over one of their channels (Alt Nation) for ten days beginning Friday, June 13th. The launch of the channel, Coldplay Nation, coincides (shockingly!) with the release of the band’s “Viva La Vida” album which will be during the channel’s 10-day run. As is stated on the Sirius website, Coldplay Nation “celebrates the June 17 release of Coldplay’s new Viva La Vida with Chris Martin and the band’s personal introductions to songs from the new album. You’ll also hear music from throughout their career, artists who influenced the Coldplay sound and current favorites.”

This cuts to the heart of what radio has to do to succeed – create programming that is unique, compelling and exclusive. If listeners are given a compelling reason, they will listen and become fans of a radio station or in the case of the satellite radio providers, subscribe to their service.

Coldplay is one of the biggest bands today with one of the most anticipated new releases on the horizon. If you’re a Coldplay fan, the channel is great news for you because you get to listen to a channel that is running what you consider compelling content. Those who aren’t Coldplay fans may not listen, but they will hear about it (thanks to cross-promotion) and they will get the message. The message being that one of the globe’s biggest artists is doing something big and something exclusive for the service that they subscribe to. Sure, it may not be an artist that they’re particularly interested in, but nonetheless they are once again reminded of the fact that “cool things are always happening here” thus subtly giving them additional justification for subscribing to Sirius – which is critical during this time where every cent of discretionary household spending is analyzed for potential reductions.

With Viva La Vida being their 4th studio album, Coldplay doesn’t have the catalog to support a channel for an extended period of time like Sirius’ other micro-channels, such as Springsteen’s E Street Radio, Jimmy Buffett’s Radio Margariville, Elvis Radio, Siriusly Sinatra or The Grateful Dead channel, but that’s hardly the point. With the announcement and imminent launch of Coldplay Nation, Sirius has scored a coup and like George Bush can proudly say “Mission Accomplished,” although without the irony. They’ve sent the message to fans of Coldplay, to non-fans of Coldplay, to subscribers of Sirius and to potential subscribers of Sirius.

This is nothing earth shattering, in fact it’s extraordinarily simple. But then again, most things are. Invest in programming. Be creative in the programming. Offer something compelling and unique and people will respond, even in this day and age of changing consumer habits, declining radio listenership and of serious questions regarding the relevance of radio to people’s lives.

As he pointed out, now that social engagement is moving from being a destination to a feature, it’s a big opportunity for radio.

Indeed.

Terrestrial radio has done a lot of things wrong in recent years but a way for them to get back in the game and re-establish their relevance is to make sure this is not an opportunity lost. Radio ain’t dead, but it’s broken. It’s critical for radio to re-engage listeners in new (and old!) ways.

And the whole ‘social thing’ is a big opportunity to re-engage.

Back in the day, the great state of New Jersey had an advertising campaign designed to promote tourism (and if there was any U.S. State that needed a campaign to promote tourism, it was New Jersey – Bruce Springsteen and the Jersey Shore not withstanding). The tagline of the campaign was New Jersey and You – Perfect Together! Taking creative license from the Garden State, I propose a slogan which applies to the topic at hand: Radio and Social Networks – Perfect Together!

So let’s get right to it – why are they perfect together? The fact is, at their core radio stations are and have always been social networks. In fact, they are the oldest mass-media social networks. (I’m sure the cavemen had their own version of a social network, but it probably involved cave drawings or something and sure wasn’t powered by technology!). Bound by music, lifestyle or point of view, a good radio station identifies, captures, becomes a source of entertainment and information for, and provides a voice and identity for specific communities of people. They do this by providing these communities of people with content that is important to them. Content that is relevant, interesting and exciting. Listeners to a great radio station feel like they are part of something – something bigger than themselves. They feel like they are part of a larger community of people who like what they like, who feel what they feel and who have similar experiences as they do. They feel connected.

It is about the power of the collective experience.

You know how a song always sounds better when you hear it on the radio as opposed to hearing it off a CD? There are a number of reasons for this, one being due to the serendipitous nature of it; but another is because of that sense of having a common or collective experience. It’s because as you sit there in your car listening to the song, you know that thousands of others – other members of this community – are hearing the exact same thing at the exact same time.

The sense of community is a powerful thing.

Great radio stations are community builders and community leaders. The essence of a station’s community (assuming the station is a music-oriented one) is the music, but it’s more than that. It’s the lifestyle the station portrays, it’s the language, it’s the imaging, and it’s the jocks – their attitude, the things they talk about, the way they talk about them and the points of reference they provide. It’s the whole deal.

Radio stations ain’t supposed to be jukeboxes. In fact there is probably an inverse relationship between the “jukebox-iness” of a station and its relevance and importance to people and how much “connection” they feel towards it. Call it the “sucky” equation.

Great radio stations – those with a low “sucky quotient” – get members of their target communities to place their trust in them by holding up their end of the bargain. Among other things, their end of the bargain consists of the following: providing creative and compelling programming; hiring jocks who know how to relate to and connect with people; creating ways for the listeners to directly interact with the radio station and by becoming vibrant members of the community. The members of the community look towards the great radio stations to be a guide for the community – a guide on musical tastes, on lifestyle on opinions, on trends.

When I think of great radio stations, I think of KROQ in Los Angeles. KROQ plays what would generally be termed as ‘alternative rock’ music, but defining them as purely an ‘alternative rock’ radio station doesn’t do them justice. They’re bigger than that. They’re the self-proclaimed “World Famous KROQ.” KROQ sets trends. KROQ oozes a lifestyle. They reflect the interests of the KROQ community while at the same time leading it. They have street cred. If KROQ says it’s so, it’s so. I remember a day back in the late 90’s when the Kevin and Bean morning show had Snoop on as an in-studio guest. Snoop? On an ‘alternative’ station? Yeah. The thing is, KROQ defines itself by a lifestyle rather than by a ‘format’. There’s a difference. A big one. KROQ understands who their core listeners are and then creates programming that group would appreciate, regardless of any traditional format boundary. That pertains to the music; it pertains to the jocks; it pertains to the imaging and it pertains to the guests they have on the air. Simple. Would the skateboarder kids in Huntington Beach think having Snoop on was cool? Yeah.

The point is, KROQ has made themselves the center of a vibrant community. They have served, led and engaged this community of people remarkably well. Sadly, most terrestrial radio stations aren’t doing this. But they can start. And for their own sake, they better start. The online social media revolution can serve as their wake-up call. The power of the online social networks is undeniable – and as pointed out by Dubber, it’s still evolving. So for radio stations to regain their relevance and importance to people’s lives, they have to figure out their strategy for riding this new media wave. First and foremost they can start by realizing that by having an existing broadcast signal and presumably a great deal of listeners, they already are social networks. Maybe they’re not strong, effective ones at this point, but that’s because their on-air product isn’t engaging their listener base. To improve the strength of the network they have to fix their on-air product. Invest in it, be creative in the programming, and all the rest. Once that is done and the station has an engaged listener base, they can further engage them by utilizing the web. This will require a lot of thinking. And a lot of work. But it has to be done. It’s show time.

But…. it really doesn’t have to be this way. And I’d really like to see the Indies give the BBC a serious run for their money; we’d all benefit. It’s by no means a fair fight, but I really think the Indies have it all to play for – with just a few teeny hurdles to overcome.

Let’s break it down… What has the BBC got that the Indies haven’t? Well… quite a lot, actually. Big name talents, backed by splendid production teams. Fat production budgets, even in these straightened times (and if you think they are generous now, you should have seen them back in the day). Great strategic thinking most of the time. Sensational cross-platform promotion. One hell of a brand. Way fewer format restrictions. Cradle to grave programming offers. Generous advertising budgets (at the movies this month, Radio 1 was in HEAVY rotation). I could go on.

And what have the Indies got that the Beeb hasn’t? BBC readers can stop sniggering; this is a serious question. The answers are diffuse; they vary from group to group and town to town. But even with no money and a looming recession, there is quite a lot to play for and exploit, in a good way. Here goes:

Localness: this is a terrific USP. If you have hot local bands, get them on the air before Radio 1 does. I’ve posted on this, here, here and here. It’s not the be all and end all, but it can really help.

Fresh talent: the indies are where many of us started out. There’s a stream of people at the start of their careers who will run through brick walls to do great things if they are allowed. How about cutting them loose on some off-peak shows?

Great Ideas come for free, you know. You just got to have them. And maybe some guts and imagination and humility.

Realise that you can do it better. Or, do what you are uniquely equipped to do, better than what opposition. Go looking for something, anything, that engages your audience. They’ll thank you for it.

Speed and agility. Indie output is local – well some of it still is – so the Indies can mix it up at speed. That’s a huge asset. You don’t need a committee in Broadcasting House. Just a green light from the PD.

I could go on, but I want to keep this short and to the point. Anyone care to add to the list?

Breaking the output down to work out how they put it together seems to go like this: lots of short, produced speech items, concise studio links, urban music never more than a few minutes way. All local people and local issues, with sympathetic production linked by comfortably confident presenters. To start I was less than impressed with the output – neither Jamiroquai nor Michael Jackson paedo gags would be my first choice – but some punchy social issue audio drama, with live studio commentary and discussion, tightly produced, picked up the pace. And now I don’t want to switch off, because it’s interesting, and I have no idea what’s coming next, and it’s doing what I want my radio to do: painting a picture.

Over on the website, there are loads of archived podcasts – with maybe not quite enough context – and the whole thing looks not unlike a Myspace page, full of graphics and user input. This is probably not the first attempt to mix up web 2.0 with radio stream; clearly they have given it a LOT of thought, and it shows. It’s web first, radio second: the stream idents the website, not the FM frequency.

If this is the new face of public radio in the US – where, according to the New York Times, listenership is up – then there’s grounds for some serious optimism. As long as they’re hitting their audience, not just old hippie liberals from the UK like me, that is. At least they’re not playing the same Amy Winehouse material everyone else is playing. Is this the future of community radio? I bloody well hope so.

What, exactly, do we mean by ‘Radio’?

Is it a stream of music on the net, with no segues, links or context? You can call it that; many excellent net providers do, but I don’t really think that’s it. Is it terrestrial radio streaming? Maybe… but that’s not new, it’s just brand extension, surely. Is it podcasts? Well, for me that’s closer, but I’ve got issues there, to do with timing, spontaneity, and the shared experience, so probably not.

So what is it? Something else, something new?

Here’s a definition I pulled off the web two minutes ago: “The sending or receiving of messages or effects, and especially of sound, by means of electromagnetic waves without a connecting wire” Now, that’s very literal, and very accurate. But that’s not it either, for me.

‘Radio’ has been going since the 20s (here’s details of the first US and the first UK stations, from 1920 ands 1922 repectively). It’s a perfect example of technology enabling a new medium, something we’ve seen a lot of recently. But what started nearly 90 years ago has never stopped evolving. We need to dig a little deeper.

I think a narrower definition most people might generally accept is one centred on music output, with or without speech-based radio for Sport, News, comment and ranting/informed discussion. Implicit in that concept is a relationship, as Billy pointed out. For the most part, it centres on some communication flowing from station to listener. This is almost always passive on the listener’s part, and almost always one-way.

Until now. Here’s where the technology of the web aces the 20th century model. The web has weakened the power of all the traditional media powerhouses of the 20th century.

The web gives you lots of ways to access hot new music – so Radio is no longer the go-to place for hot new songs.

The web allows feedback. Smart cookies like last-FM and Pandora spotted the possibilities of user feedback, and they are reaping the benefits.

Terrestrial Radio is looking hard at ways to fight back, and to offer what they still have – the listener relationship – across multiple platforms.

Radio has one more powerful USP, and Bill spotted that as well. Not everyone wants to spend time messing with configuration settings and preferences. We do enough of that stupid computer stuff already, right? Even geeks like me just want to be blown away by something fresh and new. Asking us to invent, quantify or define that for a Radio service provider is plain stupid. We like stuff, or we don’t. Maybe we can be persuaded something is good. That’s the battleground.

That’s where Radio – on whatever platform it adopts – has the upper hand. It’s a question of offering the listener something they can relate to. It’s a question of trust, dammit. And it should involve feedback. Now if I could put my finger on the way to combine all this stuff, I’d be a very rich man.

Well… not quite. There’s been talk about Ipod fatigue. Recently Emmis noted that Radio’s challenge is to outdo what individuals can set up on their Ipods. I think there’s a point there, but I’d be very interested in the solution. At the same time, check this link for an observation that I agree with. I often find myself dissatisfied with the material I’ve loaded to my Ipod. I find don’t really have the time or inclination to overhaul my active listening library. Part of this must be the way music has been commoditised. We gain ease of access; we lose the thrill of the new. But part of it must be that I really don’t care to do the whole catalogue geek thing with my own record collection. I like surprises. I like new music, and creative use of existing material, and I want that from Radio. Especially since I can’t get wonderful Pandora in the UK now.

Back at the battlefront, I have no problem at all with Radio being able to thrill and excite so it outdoes my Ipod. In fact, I’d love it if Radio did that to me more often than once in a very great while. Sadly, I think most trad Radio does have a problem with just that approach. There is no shame at all in giving the listener what he or she wants to get an audience, and I’ll post on this soon. It’s what else you do in between your tried and tested repertoire that is today’s battleground, and I just feel that stripping libraries back to the same old bones doesn’t cut it with web-savvy 21st century listeners. That’s the challenge, and it calls for different thinking. Right now, Radio is simply handing audiences, especially younger listeners, over to Net Radio and, maybe temporarily, Ipods.

Where do we go from here? Well, I’ve got ideas, but I’d love to hear some suggestions for some added value. I’ve already argued for more local material. But how about new presenter approaches? How about stealing and reworking ideas from thirty and forty years ago when Radio was king? Or should we be like newspapers (here’s a detailed piece from the current New Yorker) and just resign ourselves to a slow death as more and more tech-driven alternatives seduce our listeners away?