Natalie Swed Stone comments on Less is More
I would like to comment on the hoopla surrounding the Less Is More Initiative
1) It is an initiative in a medium that sorely needs revitalizing
2) Clear Channel is responding to widespread press and criticism about the rampant clutter on terrestrial radio
3) Clear Channel is attempting to prepare for the future - - both as it relates to minute by minute ratings and PPM as well as the threat from commercial free music on satellite radio and others
4) Clear Channel has the right to program its stations for maximum audience and attentiveness
5) Advertisers have the right to buy or not buy and negotiate price and position
6) Why is Clear Channel the target of all of this scrutiny while others and their policies, clutter and positioning go left unchallenged?
7) Has anyone decided to dictate commercial length and programming to television broadcasters?
8) In a world where 15s and 30s are the norm, why is radio relegated to 60s? Is this thinking what has been holding radio's growth back?
9) Are we more concerned about the length of the message than we are about making sure listeners are engaged, not tuning out? If the creative were stellar and relevant in all cases, maybe there would be less discussion about all of this, but that is not the case
Assuming the 60 (not stellar) is first as some would have it, and listeners are uninterested and tune out, is it fair to the 2nd in pod whose listenership is even more diminished because of the irrelevance of the first ad?
I believe Clear Channel is attempting to provide maximum listenership to all ads - - and that is in our interest.
Let's not forget that there are buys we make and investments we make.
The buys deliver GRPs (attentiveness doesn't' matter) - - the investments deliver results (attentiveness is everything)
Results will come from understanding consumer behavior and programming both content and commercials to their needs. Consumers want less clutter and more relevant ads (there should be no question about this).
In a rapidly changing and competitive media landscape, Clear Channel needs to serve its audience first, then serve the audience to the advertisers
While Clear Channel does not have all of it right - - they have taken a very large leadership step in the right direction. They deserve our respect, support and guidance - - It is the others that should be challenged to provide their programming vision and quantify their pods, commercial minutes, etc.
Natalie Swed Stone
U.S. Director
National Radio Investment
OMD
Are you reading this from a forwarded email?
