DAN O’DAY TALKS ABOUT RADIO

This is from a large Los Angeles radio station, owned by a very large radio group.

Is it just me, or….?

That was logged both as an “information” break and as a paid radio advertisement.

Would you say listeners received any value from the “information”?

Did the advertiser receive any value?

I originally shared this in the early days of this radio blog. If you weren’t a loyal reader then, probably you never saw it.

Rune Dahl of Radio Norge made me aware of this radio phone bit (I hate the term “prank call”) by Bård and Vegard Ylvisaaker, aka the Ylvis Brothers.

The Ylvis Brothers

A phone bit? What could anyone possibly do that’s new?

The set-up is the guy is too nervous to talk on the telephone, so he sings instead. Give it a listen:

The Back Story

I asked Bård how they came up with this concept….

This was actually made on the last day on air {at NRK — Dan} for us. We needed something that could make us leave the air with a blast, and we were really quite desperate.

We’d been thinking about making a phone call as an improvised musical for a long time, but actually found the idea a bit cheesy — or cheap. But since we had no other idea, we tried it — and it turned out to work better than we imagined.

My brother, Vegard, played the piano in studio, while I was singing. We didn’t rehearse anything, just gave each other some signs to hint what moods we wanted for the separate parts.

Every now and then I hear something that’s both creative and new, and it gives me hope.

Greg Lowe of CKBW/CJHK writes:

“Our sales department really enjoyed Tuesday’s’s radio branding seminar. We actually started branding for many of our clients a couple of years ago. More and more seem to be going in that direction. Here’s one that just hit our airwaves last month….It’s one of our best. What do you think?”

It’s a lovely, genuinely moving radio advertisement.

Here are a few things that could improve it.

1.  If you’re locked into a 30-second spot, you need to edit more. “Branding” requires more than sticking your name somewhere on the commercial. This needs some sort of Call To Action — even if it’s only implied (e.g., by including the Web address, if that’s the most common first contact for prospects, or by alluding to the physical location).

If there were more time, you could tell the story and then invite the targeted listener to respond:

“Provincial Hearing Services, on Hillcrest at Dufferin.” (Thanks, Google Maps.)

But I’d hate to lose the emotional impact at the end of the commercial.

Solution?

(WOMAN) And tears started rolling down her face.

(ANNOUNCER) Provincial Hearing Services, on Hillcrest at Dufferin. Enhancing people’s lives.

(OPERA VOICE — the one note that ends the original version of the spot)

If you move the announcer tag to the end and have the opera singer’s solo note as the last sound in the commercial, that sung note punctuates both the “sales message” and the emotional thread of the story.

Also, placing the advertiser’s name at the end would tie it in to the emotional connection the story has established. Saying it 2 seconds into the advertisement, however, squanders the time because at that point there is no emotional experience to be associated with the advertiser.

2. By following the standard (and usually ineffectual) structure of having an announcer interrupt the storyteller to identify the person who’s speaking, you also interrupt the very story you’re attempting to tell.

In the original version, the placement of the announcer’s voice immediately dampens the listener’s memory of the story’s opening line.

Notice how much stronger it is if you just let her tell her story:

Here’s a quickly edited version of the story you just heard:

I removed 5 seconds from the story, thereby freeing up an additional 5 seconds for the announcer to make the connection at the end.

That’s 5 seconds of a 30-second radio commercial. Did the story sound weaker? Did you miss anything that had been in the original version?

3.  If you ignore all of the advice I’ve given so far, at least do this one thing: Replace the “Radio DJ” voice with a gentle (not faked sincere, but honestly gentle and respectful) voice.

I know the jock who voiced the part is wincing now. I’m not saying he shouldn’t be on the spot. In fact, I’m saying the opposite: Those words should be spoken by the genuine human being I’m sure that announcer really is.

 

P.S. Registration for the world’s most advanced radio copywriting course now is open.

Each year I publish a version of this birthday greeting to one of the most creative, most talented and nicest radio people ever, Terry Moss.

Terrry’s biggest contribution to radio personalities around the world continues to bring smiles to DJs and listeners alike: Cheap Radio Thrills — the best and best-selling radio production library of all time.

As any old American DJ will confirm, for many years radio stations were required to broadcast periodic tests of the Emergency Broadcast System. Here’s what the listener would hear:

For the next 60 seconds, this station will conduct a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. The following is only a test.

That would be followed by this test tone:

Then the announcer would return to say:

This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. The broadcasters of your area in voluntary cooperation with the FCC and federal, state, and local authorities have developed this system to keep you informed in the event of an emergency. If this had been an actual emergency, the Attention Signal you just heard would have been followed by official information, news, or instructions. This station serves the [ ] area. This concludes this test of the Emergency Broadcast System.

Invariably the jock would read that copy in a monotone, there’d be silence, then the test tone, then the jock would return to read the close with the same disinterested inflection.

Terry decided to change all that — with these two cuts from Cheap Radio Thrills. Here’s the introduction:

After the intro, the test tone would be broadcast. Then this cut would be played, complete with a donut for the announcer to read the boilerplate copy that begins, “The broadcasters of your area…”

Question: As a listener, which test would you be more likely to pay attention to? The one delivered in the bored monotone, or the musical version?

Clearly far more people would actually listen to the musical rendition — which really upset the FCC. People actually paying attention to the E.B.S. tests??

So in its infinite wisdom, the FCC decreed that the Emergency Broadcast System test could not be sung.

Bored monotone that no one listens to = Good.

Entertaining version that many people listen to = Bad.

Happy birthday, Terry. I was a few days late this year, but I know you’ll forgive my tardiness.