Howard Stern is going to satellite radio. Does that mean there’ll be a rush to subscribe?
by Frank Absher

From the November 2004 Issue of the St. Louis Journalism Review
Reprinted with permission
© 2004 Frank Absher

            Sirius Satellite Radio certainly hopes so, but don’t rush out to buy stock in the company. The self-proclaimed “King of All Media” won’t have a daily show on Sirius until January, 2006. That’s a long time to wait for all those new monthly subscription payments.

            So why would listeners want to pony up monthly payments now to the likes of XM or Sirius? Each boasts of 100+ static-free channels of niche entertainment, ranging from ‘70s & ‘80s alternative rock to mellow alternative, the music of Africa, music of the ‘50s, all Elvis, ‘80s hair bands, outlaw country, and island vacation music. There are also numerous channels of music that you can hear on your regular radio. The cost: $9.99 to $12.99 per month, along with the equipment to receive the satellite signal.         

            The two services churn out press releases touting subscriber numbers and are quick to assure investors that they’re on target to meet projections. If you accept the subscription numbers they’re giving out, the two services combined have fewer than 3.5 million people paying monthly fees. Admittedly this is a lot of people, but it’s just a smattering of the US population who could subscribe. Divide that number of subscribers among the 200 or so channels offered by satellite and you’re looking at an average of 17,500 people per channel. That’s a smaller number than the total audience listening to KSHE during an average quarter hour in the last Arbitron survey.

            Publicly, the major radio station owners say they’re not concerned about XM and Sirius, but that hasn’t stopped Clear Channel from taking an investment position in Sirius. The bigger question is, should radio stations be worried?

            In the strict terms of programming, satellite radio gives listeners music with voice-tracked announcers, just like many radio stations. The announcers are extremely knowledgeable, unlike many people heard on music radio stations. Some of the channels have commercials, but most don’t. There are plenty of talk channels and sports channels and, in theory, the announcers aren’t governed the same rules of common sense that are supposed to be applied to announcers on F.C.C. licensed stations. This, of course, is one reason satellite has some appeal for Stern. If the F.C.C. can’t fine him for using foul language, Stern can be even more “creative” than he is now.

            John Greenwald, writing in the Waterbury, Connecticut Republican-American, says the Stern move is just one more indication that terrestrial radio has a lot of problems. “Broadcast radio deserves its troubles. It’s boring! Most stations belong to a few conglomerates and are programmed from a central office. Many have the same disc jockeys feeding their patter to a dozen different stations, where the songs are inserted for broadcast…No wonder radio stock prices have fallen so sharply this year.”

            Dan Gillmor, writing in the San Jose, California Mercury News, said “Radio today has sunk into stagnant mediocrity. It’s not all wasteland, but genuine choices have narrowed.”       

            Radio stations still have one asset in their corner – localism. Disc jockeys can talk about local events, the local weather, local personalities, even local news (shudder!). They could even give time checks once in awhile or the current temperature. When severe weather threatens, your radio station lets you know. Right?

            Well, it could if there were actually an announcer in the studio. But many local stations voice track, so the announcer’s voice is in the computer. He/she recorded those drop-ins hours, or even days, earlier, so there’s no way you’ll hear about that weather, or the temperature, or the time. But the company bean counters are laughing all the way to the bank, proud of the money they’re saving with voice tracking. If the audience goes wanting, there’s no one to blame except station management.

            Given the choice, will listeners stay with terrestrial radio or opt for the sterile, non-local programming offered by satellite radio? It’s only a guess, but, if the recent past is any indication, more people will seek out something other than local stations to avoid the long clusters of commercials and the mediocrity of local voice tracked disc jockeys. When was the last time you heard anyone talking about how “great” radio is today? The ball is in the local managers’ court.

Frank Absher

e-mail Frank   fabsher@stlradio.com