A Good Sign for Future CBS Radio Growth: Bringing Dan Mason Back
Labels: brand building, CBS Radio, Change, Dan Mason, growth, Media Trend Watching, Move Forward, Sirius, Stern, Traditional Media
Experience from someone who's been there is a tremendous asset...especially after having a chance to step away, learn and view changes impartially for a fresh perspective.
CBS Radio needed fresh prespective.
CBS Radio needed fresh leadership.
CBS Radio needed "been there" experience from someone who knows how to get "it" done.
And CBS Radio got it.
Bringing Dan Mason back to CBS Radio looks like the right decision. CBS Radio's 7% drop in year-to-year revenue for 2006 was a direct end-product of industry, listener and customer perceptual losses in branding trust.
How?
From bold format changes across the nation (in the spirit of innovation) that failed to connect with new audiences.
From poor decisions handling the entire Howard Stern transition to Sirius satellite radio, messing up millions of listener's morning routines...especially after CBS Radio tired to fill the programming vacuum unsuccessfully.
Worst of all, from breaking "brand trusts" with listeners through perceived manipulation...and not delivering better products; the quality level of radio stations CBS Radio listeners have long expected from CBS Radio.
This change is an important step in rebuilding trust.
Before they brought back the CBS Radio name, they were Infinity Broadcasting -- the company that invested in radio's best talent, best programming, best leadership, best sales teams, the best radio market's. Before Infinity, it was Westinghouse. And before Westinghouse, it was CBS Radio.
CBS Radio has long been radio's crown jewel...with the exception of the last few years. Perhaps it is coincidence that CBS Radio's performance and perceptions changed after 2002 when Dan Mason "retired" to begin consulting. Perhaps not. Perhaps CBS Radio was just a victim of traditional media losing out to new media. Perhaps not.
The fact Dan Mason is coming back is a good sign for returned CBS Radio growth. Dan's been there. He'll debunk myths and move the group forward. He knows what it felt like within Infinity during its "championship" years, its legacy years as radio grew through the 70s, the 80s, and the 90s. And he's largely consulted new media (such as Sirius) through SaboMason since leaving CBS Radio/Infinity in 2002 (while also consulting CBS Radio).
One of Walter Sabo's respected strengths is his passionate viewpoints on creativity for radio, regardless of format. No doubt CBS Radio will benefit from Dan's recent experiences with Sabo.
New ideas and fresh perspective to the table...while also bringing "been there" assets.
Things seem to be looking up for CBS Radio again. And that's a good thing for all of radio.
posted by Unknown @ Tuesday, March 27, 2007,
,
Content Matters...But Distribution Rules In Media
Labels: Big Media, Content, Distribution, Google, Jointblog, Media Trend Watching, New Media, Time, Traditional Media, Viacom, What's Next, YouTube
Distributors are the ultimate media gatekeeper.
When Time magazine named "You" as its 2006 Person of the Year, it attracted mixed critical response. Some thought it was brilliant, others thought it was a cop out. Whatever. That editorial decision did announce something fresh: one of traditional media's pillars of print media acknowledged the cultural significance of today's digital new media reality.
2007 has delivered major changes within Time, including mass job cuts, retirements and restructuring as well as a new delivery date (Fridays instead of Mondays). It's also brought about many design updates and content adjustments, intended to tighten up the partnership between the weekly magazine and the daily updates of Time.com.
Among the subjects Time features more is a regular look at "what's next" in consumer tech and media, which grabs this media trend watcher's attention.
This week's "Curious Capitalist" writes that "Google Gooses Big Media" (wha?...what exactly does that mean?...has Big Media's butt been pinched?). For a traditional (mainstream, or MSM) print media publication to say "The search giant rewrote the rules of distribution and selling ads...The big movie, TV and print outfits may never catch up" is startling.
Why?
Well, first of all, they're admitting Google is now the leader steering media's growth -- not the TV, Print or Movie industries (and, by its absence, certainly not radio).
Secondly, while it's good news one of the biggest mainstream media publications in the world acknowledges new media's (and specifically Google's) importance in the total media mix...this "news" arrives several years late.
Lastly, Time Inc's viewpoint seems completely opposite of Viacom's effort to turn YouTube into SueTube.
The article does drive home excellent points, especially how it puncture's the tired adage that "content is king"."Content is king." It's a phrase uttered repeatedly by media executives making the case that the movies, music, TV shows, books and journalism their companies produce are the core of their business.
Yes, content matters...but that's a bit of a smoke screen. Distribution of content is what's always mattered. The owners of printing presses since the 17th century. The owners of radio towers and transmitters throughout the 20th century. The same has been true for the record/music industry, the TV industry, the cable industry...and now the top domains online.
It happens to be a dubious claim. Sure, movies, music and TV shows have value...But they alone have never generated the huge, reliable profits that keep investors happy and pay for midtown-Manhattan skyscrapers. No, the big money in media has always been in distribution.
Sometimes the media companies do this distributing themselves -- big media have long been defined by their ability to make sure their products are displayed prominently there. "The historical media play," says consultant John Hagel, "is having privileged access to limited shelf space."
Extending content value through syndication rights and efficient distribution "pipelines" (or "networks" or high-speed wireless linkages, etc.) is really where it's at. Always has been...and it continues to be that way.
The trend: Mainstream media is still slowly figuring out new, better ways to marry its traditional media distribution system with its online distribution opportunities. As archaic copyright rules over content control evolve (such as DRM), will regulations tighten or relax? The battle over the next 5 years will be fierce and worth watching.
What do you think?
posted by Unknown @ Sunday, March 18, 2007,
,
