Sponsor (July-Sept 1962)

THE RENAISSANCE IN RADIO ^ Leading advertising spokesman gives new views on obstacles in radio and how to speed np radio's rebirth; illuminates some 'back-biting' comments in industry i John Crichton, president of American Association of idvertising Agencies, sets forth important questions in a speech recently presented at the 1962 annual convention of the Colorado Broadcasters Association. The text of the address is reprinted here for the benefit of SPONSOR readers. For a profile of Crichton see 21 May issue. Ladies and Gentlemen: As you have heard, I'm a Colorado hoy, and I was reared on Colorado radio. I built a crystal set and a ..in tube set, and the object was to bring in KOA, KLZ. and KFEL loud and clear. 1 think I was lucky, in* a way, because 30 years ago all radio was conscious of its cultural mission. Networks and stations were vying to bring to their audiences the finest in art and entertainment which was available to them. In my day, school children grouped in classrooms to listen to Walter Damrosch explain the background and detail of the music he conducted. And for many people, their first contact with the world of classical music and the great drama, came through radio. It was radio which pioneered the minute-by-minute reporting of sports and politics, which originated the public events forum. I am, in short, one of that generation of Americans who has every reason to be grateful to radio, because it did so much to enrich our lives and to make life more meaningful. Today I shall be talking primarily about radio. Many advertising agency men today believe that radio is in the midst of renaissance. They believe it for a variety of reasons. Most of my talk today will deal with the obstacles to that renaissance, and suggestions as to how the renaissance might be accelerated. The examples and quotes are drawn from member agencies active in radio. First, let me make a very general statement. Radio is a great medium of communication, probably the closest thing to a truly universal medium that exists. There are radio station? in towns which can support no daily newspaper; there arc radio stations in towns where the total laydown of national magazines is a handful: there are radio stations in towns unreached by television. If the mosi baleful prophets of L950 had been completely right, ami networking had ended forever in radio, it is quite possible that some government service misiht have had to be organized. There is no question of the great national service radio performs, or of its contribution to the indi\ iilnal local conimunit\ . \..i is there am question of it* unique adaptability. About a month ago, when Astronaut Scott Carpenter was flung into orbit, men who lived in the commuting areas of New York could be seen clutching their transistor radios on the trains, following his epic flight. They had left their television sets, where they saw the preliminaries or the actual blast-off; on their laps, still folded in many cases, were newspapers printed several hours earlier which detailed the background of the new Project Mercury shot; but the medium able to adapt to the problem of supplying the latest news was the radio. Second, I don't plan to talk about the rate problems of radio. Because I don't talk about them doesn't mean there aren't problems. The lack of definition in rate cards as to what constitutes a local advertiser, or a regional advertiser, or a retail advertiser, or a national advertiser, makes selling difficult for vou. makes estimating difficult for agencies, and makes buyers extremely skeptical. In the belief that radio rates are totally unfathomable, many advertisers and agencies have written radio off. I would like to cover five major points: 1. The problems of too many radio stations 2. The problems of too many commercials 3. The problems of inadequate research 4. The problems of automated buying 5. The problems of ill-advised selling If any one comment runs through the views of major broadcast agencies, it is that radio suffers from too many stations and too many commercials. Obviously, neither of us can do anything about the number of stations. But Chairman Minow has now indicated that the FCC has recognized the problem, which presumably represents some kind of progress, and perhaps if the problem won't get better, it will get no worse. The number of stations means fractionated audiences. The fragmentation of the audience makes radio less attractive as an advertising medium. It makes it difficult for any broadcast measurement service to provide a service acceptable to most of the industry. The "num bers'' related to individual components of an over-all radio purchase are so small b) comparison to television todayr or radio in its heydev that thev are subject to serious question based on measurement tolerances alone. Also, measuring out-of-home listening is most difficult. To say it simply, audiences to one commercial are relative!) small. With audiences spread out over manv sta lions, high-frequency, multi-station purchases are generall) needed to obtain satisfactory market coverage. This had led some agencies to conclude that radio can onlj he cffectiveK used in massive quantities. Others sa\ flat!) that the) now consider radio as a supplemental Hi Sl'OVsOli 2 JULY 1962