A loyal reader writes from the UK:
I have a difference of opinion with a colleague regarding the positioning statement, “Commercial Free” — as in “40 minutes commercial free.”
Can you please explain the reason so many U.S. stations use this statement? Is it not raising too many questions about the amount of commercials there usually are? Would it not be better using “40 minutes nonstop music” instead?
Here are the arguments on both sides.
“Commercial Free”: You’re telling listeners, “We know you’d rather not have your music interrupted by commercials. For the next 40 minutes, you’ll hear only music, no commercials.”
“Nonstop Music”: 1) That’s really what we’re selling, isn’t it? Nonstop music? 2) We don’t want to imply that commercials have any sort of negative connotation. 3) We don’t want to offend our advertisers (by implying that commercials have some sort of negative connotation).
My opinion:
I can argue both sides, but “Commercial Free” is stronger.
To music station listeners, commercials are interruptions. To listeners, “Commercial Free” = “It’s safe to keep this station on for the next 40 minutes without hearing any commercials.”
Some people, of course, will argue that you shouldn’t promote what people won’t be hearing (commercials) but what they will be hearing (nonstop music). But promising not to inflict a negative in a situation where people otherwise would expect it can be effective.
“Painless dentistry” (dentistry without pain) for example, will attract more patients than “neutral experience dentistry.”
You’ve heard TiVo users say they like “being able to skip past the commercials,” right? But I doubt you’ve heard even one of them say, “I like being able to enjoy the programs nonstop.”
But what about your advertisers?
They know that, in general, people don’t enjoy having their favorite music interrupted by commercials. (The exception, of course, being each advertiser’s own commercial, which is a timeless work of art.)
Meanwhile, for the audience it goes beyond which pair of words you choose to describe your programming. The station in my market that boasts “another half hour of nonstop music” and runs 10-second promos before and after every song reminding people that they’re hearing 30 minutes of nonstop music:
1. Doesn’t get it.
2. Is lying.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Does even promoting that you have 40 mins. of non-stop music coming up do anything? Wouldn’t a station do better if the jock used that precious, limited airtime to talk about something LOCAL? And why promote 40 mins. of non-stop music within the 40 mins. of non-stop music? The listener just DOESN’T CARE. They’re listening…and that’s what’s important. Play a jingle or quick burst to ID your station and keep the music rolling. And when you have a long song intro perhaps find a way to LOCALIZE your show/station.
Ok, I’ll bite. Trying to turn a radio station into a jukebox ignors the power and strength of the human voice. In my humble opinion, when music stations started the ‘more music’ wars with each other, eventually they would get to the point that one would win (yex XYZ does play more music) only to discover that they are not playing enough commercials to be a viable business.
If you were an advertiser, would you want your commercial to be inside a six minute non-stop spot cluster? Of course not.
Ipods have already been invented. Turning a radio station into an endless source of music will not be as good as listening to songs you’ve selected yourself with no commercials ever. That is, if that’s what you want to hear.
Here’s a revolutionary idea: how about radio becoming a source of information and entertainment that doesn’t apologize for airing commercials? Produce commercials that are effective for the advertiser, so much so that they’re happy to sign long term contracts. If the sales staff isn’t exhausting themselves trying to find the next new cusomer, they would have time to ‘service’ those long term accounts.
As a business model, which would you rather have: new clients each month that go away because they were unhappy with the results, or an operation that determined the right balance between programming and commercials, that did such a great job of entertaining the audience and promoting their advertisers interests that there would be a ‘waiting list’ to get on the air?
Yes, it may cost more to produce programming on a very effective station. Yet it should be possible to do well and still take in more than you spend.
Simple concept, be the best at what you are, don’t spin your wheels trying to be what you’re not.
Very good points here. Especially the last paragraph… Hummm..
Nonstop music. Commercial free tells listeners that there are commercials and they are missing them. Now tell a listener to be the 10th caller for a free commercial, and they will JAM the phone lines!
Freedom feels better.
We have 97 minutes of commercial free music…brought to you by Cypess Motors, your family ford dealer, take advantage of Ford Employee Pricing…ends soon.
I’m not even joking.
“more of what you’re here for” without time period mention serves everyone’s interests better.
Personally, I think we’ve gotten so into micro-programming that we’ve all lost touch with what’s compelling to listeners. Commercial Free…Non-Stop…..blah.
1. Tell the Jock to have something meaningful to say, or shut up.
2. Keep your spot sets limited to 12 minutes per hour, 3 times per hour.
3. Tell your sales department to GROW A SET, hold your rate and let your station be something that advertisers NEED, not the other way around.
4. HERE’S THE BIGGIE….
3 :60 second commercials sound like 3 commercials to a listener. 6 :30’s sound like 6 commercials. They don’t have a stopwatch, and really they DON’T CARE. They just know they either heard an @ZZLOAD of commercials, or “Wow…only 3 and back to music”….
If someone would TRY THAT, and quit trying to re-invent the wheel I think they would see amazing results.
Ted’s right. It has been over 20 years since research first showed that: 1. Listeners don’t care about “commercial free/non-stop music” slogans, and: 2. Listeners don’t believe such claims anyway. PDs know this, so I can only assume management insists on such nonsense. And we wonder why the next generation finds radio irrelevant. Play great music and hire jocks who can present it in a compelling manner–PPM will reward you!
since WE can’t listen objectively, poll your friends and ask them EXACTLY WHEN the hit the button…it’s NOT when the jock starts talking..it NEVER HAS BEEN, unless it’s some guy who’s not prepped and is just all over the road.
It’s when the commercial start. BUT…Consultants (no offense to present company) have pitched to station management that if you shut the jock up there’s more room for revenue generating commercials.
Great. But MORE COMMERCIALS run the listeners off QUICKER. You SIT THROUGH commericals on TV because the programming is something you care about. (I’m not talking about people that can TiVo or any of that)
The other issues is more and more the jocks are not local and if they don’t localize there is no tie to the community. People want that -especially in a down economy. I don’t care what people say.
gain, everything we’re saying goes hand in hand w/ the other. Managers and Owners (here’s where I’ll never get another gig again in my life) have become SO GREEDY that they’ve sacrificed all that was good in radio.
It used to mean something to be the part-time weekend weather reader board op, because that meant your foot was in the door and you could one day be ON THE AIR if you tried.
Now, who wants THAT job? You’re just gonna be done in by some outta market VT guy…GREAT for the guy that has the gig…when I was at CC in Corpus, I was also in Albequerque NM and Jonesboro Arkansas…loved the spare dough, but that was a mid-day guy and a weekender that couldn’t have a job…
I’ll put a local, compelling jock that can work the community, be seen and touched and HIS numbers up against some tracked guy from Seattle any day.
Money and greed have killed radio, and I’ve just assured that I’ll never be in the majors again. 🙂
“More Music” or “The MOST Music”. “Commercial Free is a negative against the revenue stream. Make the spot entertaining or interesting, and they’re not so negative. On the other hand, “Non Stop Music” sounds good in a jingle…
Less chatter and more platter baby!!
Wow Ted – you are so on the money here – in fact – are you channelling my thoughts?
But here is something a PD once said to me – which might(or might not) be relevant … Music is the reason they listen – we try to make money while they listen – they don’t care about the money making they only want the music. Soon as we get over this simple fact – the better. Large music blocks are great if your working – not if you are trying to make money – but – give a jock a voice inbetween songs and they can deliver more localism and more sales my just being themselves – a jock is a personality – and people buy into that personality – but not if it’s done from 1000 miles away – people aren’t stupid. treat your listeners with the respect that they deserve and maybe, just maybe you’ll make some sales along the way.
People want to be entertained. And as Dan points out daily, this applies to EVERYTHING we do on air, especially the commercials. Granted, we can only be responsible for the content we produce. But the term “Commercial Free” implies to your customers (the listeners) that commercials are a negative.
This also sends the message to your advertisers “Yeah, we’ll gladly take your money, but we’re gonna do everything we can to NOT promote your business.” Especially when that dreaded commercial set arrives and the jock or the imaging says something like, “Don’t go away, it’s back to the music in X minutes.” You might as well be saying, ” Here’s a bunch of crap we gotta do because some idiot paid for the time.” The sales rep went out and busted his hump to sell that spot, to sell the daypart placement of that spot, and then when it’s on air we essentially tell the audience, “Hey! Don’t listen to this.”
To the client it’s like getting a date with someone really hot, but they take you to some out of the way place because they don’t really want to be seen with you.
I’ve always been told that as Production Director I’m essentially the program director three times an hour. It was my job to make sure that those 12 minutes an hour (ah, the good old days) were as entertaining as everything else we did on air. At least as entertaining as we could possibly make it.
For the longest time WE’VE created the perception that commercials are bad. We treat commercial breaks as if they’re not part of our programming, but something tacked on, alien and completely out of our control like “pop up” ads online.
And, just for the sake of argument, if commercials ARE a negative, what’s the logic of playing 45 minutes of music/content and then programming 15 minutes of “negative” elements? You’re essentially sending your audience away for one quarter hour EVERY hour.
As for “Non-stop” – unless you actually play X amount of music/content non-stop, without produced imaging telling the listener you’re “non-stop” – you’re lying to them.
And as the “Dingo and The Baby” episode of “Family Guy” so shrewdly pointed out, the public is on to our BS.
Hey Mike – you know what – that is possibly the best bit of advice I have ever heard for production types … “I’m essentially the program director three times an hour. It was my job to make sure that those 12 minutes an hour (ah, the good old days) were as entertaining as everything else we did on air. At least as entertaining as we could possibly make it.”
I’m making a sign up and putting it in our production booths this instance with that on it (and your name on it too!)
Earl, ditto to what you said to Mike. What great observations. I believe I’ve heard Dan say that if given two stations who are otherwise equal, but one has lousy commercials and the other has spiffy ones, which station is going to the most listenership? Why doesn’t this simple truth occur to program directors? I also believe I’ve heard Dan say that sales managers will spend lots of money sending their staffs to seminars to teach them how to sell more time, but ignore teaching them how to write good commercials. How incredibly unfair to their clients, whose money they’re taking.
The stations get away with it because most clients do not understand what the difference between announcements and real commercials. The former do not work, the latter actually perform for the client.
Dan says, in this thread, “[Advertisers] know that, in general, people don’t enjoy having their favorite music interrupted by commercials. (The exception, of course, being each advertiser’s own commercial, which is a timeless work of art.)” This hit me like a Warner Brothers cartoon anvil. Advertisers are so thrilled to hear their names on the air that they believe others must be also thrilled. That’s how stations get away with writing such useless advertising.
The sole thing I can say in their defense is that too many stations themselves don’t know what good advertising is. It’s so great to tune in to ones that do!
@Mike Holmes :
U just nailed it: “Advertisers are so thrilled to hear their names on the air that they believe others must be also thrilled. That’s how stations get away with writing such useless advertising.” + “The sole thing I can say in their defense is that too many stations themselves don’t know what good advertising is.”
That is going to our inspiration wall, with your name on it ;)))
I teach radio sales and marketing people and believe me, when it was time to analyze a radio ad, they were numb. all they could say is: I don’t like or I like it”.
And these are the people who are given someone’s future into their hands?
Simple.
Make the commercials as entertaining as the program ‘content’.
And, this is HUGE, get into the stop set so seamlessly that the listener doesn’t even realize she is hearing commercials….no..’After This’…
or…’when we come back’…..Its an entire entertainment package.
Dont be lazy. Be talented. Commercial creation is the ONE area where we can really show our stuff. Why don’t more ‘talents’ take advantage of that?