You Don't Know Sh!t About Your Audience

At the recent British Columbia Broadcasters Association conference, Mark Ramsey captured a few snippets of media pundit Bob Garfield's brash explanation for why broadcast media is in trouble (Bob used a more graphic term). 

The line that caught my ear:

"You don't know shit about your audience."

While Bob went on to offer something of a prescription for broadcasters, the reality is that on that point, he is correct.   I'm not crass or smart enough to tell you what you need to do in order to win in this new environment.  But I do know this - most broadcasters simply do not have the necessary information to craft out viable strategies in this crazy environment.  And because the competition has now expanded exponentially, knowing what consumers are thinking is the most valuable commodity of them all.

The radio industry spends millions of dollars on ratings to simply tell us who's listening and when.  Today's Media Monitors married with PPM data now graphically show us when meters are migrating based presumably on what a station is doing at that precise moment in time.  But if most of what you know about your audience is coming only from Arbitron and Nielsen...

You don't know shit about your audience.

That's because ratings merely tell you who and what but never why.  The understanding comes from learning the perceptual and behavior reasons why consumers tune in (and out) stations.  Is it the brand, does it make them happy or angry, does it make them smarter, or is it just fun?

If you're now hooked on the immediacy and accuracy of streaming data from sources like Google Analytics or Ando Media...

You don't know shit about your audience.

It is not enough to know how Pandora has lapped the field or whether your mobile app has been downloaded more often this month than last.  If you don't understand the motivations that are driving these behaviors, you're missing the rationale and emotion behind these usage patterns.

If you're continuing to traipse to Hiltons and Marriotts to play 600 hooks to 90 people in a meeting room, you're testing lots of songs, but...

You don't know shit about your audience.

The challenge goes well beyond what songs they like.  We're now dealing in choice, access, variety, and the barriers (commercials, fees, etc.) that consumers must wade through in order to get the music they enjoy.  Anybody can learn that "Won't Get Fooled Again" tests while "Slip Kid" doesn't.  It's the rest of the information about how music is discovered and consumed - as well as where - that is the Holy Grail.

Much of the perceptual work that stations commission merely scratches the surface of true listener tastes.  That's because we continue to ask the same questions:

Which station plays too many bad songs along with the good ones?

Which station is the concert authority?

If WAAA went off the air, which station would be your next choice?

If those are the questions you're continuing to ask in those $30,000 perceptual studies...

You don't know shit about your audience. 

Learning about what consumers do when they're not listening to the radio - assuming they still are - is just part of solving the Rubik's Cube that is media behavior.  The digital and entertainment worlds have rapidly expanded and in the process, have become more complex.  Just as consumers aren't enjoying the same media and gadgets as they did twenty years ago, using the same old research tools can't possibly measure the scope of what they're using now.  And instead of asking the questions, we would all do well to listen to consumers tell us their stories about how media and technology are changing in their lives.  And how we might be able to still make a difference and provide something additive to the experience.

Learning the motivation behind behavior is key.  That's why many of the free, open source studies that are conducted in and around the radio industry are important, especially when they tell us more about why consumers do the things they do.  "The Bedroom Project" that we conducted with Arbitron is a great case in point.  While three years old, that study clearly showed where the puck was moving, using breakthrough ethnographic research instead of the usual Q&A format. 

Similarly, those Arbitron/Edison "Infinite Dial" studies longitudinally tell important stories about trends relating to media, gadgets, and how consumers feel about them.  Like our Technology Surveys - now in their sixth consecutive year - they are designed to help broadcasters understand the lay of the new land, going well beyond their favorite morning shows and prizes they want to win.  Say what you will about Arbitron - they have funded much of the research that benefits all of us.

It is difficult for programmers and managers fighting the ratings and sales battles on the streets of cities and towns everywhere to be able to think big enough to have this perspective.  So it becomes the onus and the responsibility of broadcast companies, the RAB, and the NAB to make these R&D investments that can inform their employees of the mega-trends that are impacting radio and the rest of the media pie. 

The pundits, know-it-alls, frustrated cynics, and false prophets don't have any more answers than you do.  If you want to learn about your audience, you have to invest in information.  And you have to ask the right questions.  

It has never been more important that you DO know shit about consumers, whether they're still listening to the radio or not.

The truth is out there.

Comments

[Dick Taylor, CRMC]

Just saw Jeffrey Hayzlett, CMO of Kodak speak last night at a BMA meeting. Kodak had to change or die. Five years ago they made $500 Billion in film sales. Today its around $200 million. Jeff said the game today is about QUALITY vs. the game of yesterday which was QUANTITY. Social Media is the quality path. Mass Media is the quantity path. Engagement is the new ROI. How does a voice tracked personality move radio in the direction of engagement? I'm concerned that a very powerful form of communication is being misdirected. The things we have always measured don't count and the things that count we don't measure (or give much thought to). This was an excellent blog post to hopefully get radio folks thinking about working ON their industry rather than just IN it.

[Fred]

Dick, thanks for the comment. I believe you hit the nail on the head. We are locked in a mentality where we're testing perceptions and behaviors that count for US, but not necessarily consumers. Much of the research that radio condcuts hasn't changed since the days when I worked for Frank Magid back in the '70s. We recently ran a post about Hayzlett is doing dynamic things for a company that could have gone the way of buggy whips. He has totally rethought Kodak.