By Mark Harris - May 9, 2009

We remain unequivocally opposed to the Performance Rights Act. However, we do believe that the radio industry must simultaneously negotiate for the best deal possible while continuing the fight to prevent the pay-for-play measure from becoming law. We also urge the recording industry to reconsider its position - not for our benefit, but for their own.

While both sides battle for a victory for their respective positions, "peace" talks need to be initiated for the eventual legislative outcome, regardless of what it is. Truth be told, each side needs the other. Radio needs the recording companies to supply content; the record industry needs radio to provide exposure for its product. Both sides know it.

Outgoing NAB President & CEO David Rehr reportedly faced internal disagreement over his position on performance royalties. He had said he would not even consider negotiations with the record industry even if lawmakers ultimately pass the performace royalty legislation. Some suggest this was one of several significant "failures" that led to his surprise announcement that he was leaving the broadcasters' association. While we have had great respect and appreciation for Mr Rehr, the radio industry cannot remain completely inflexible.

The recording industry, meanwhile, must seriously consider the potential for negative effects on its own business if it gets what it wants. Without a doubt, stations paying fees to air music will be less likely to offer free airtime to promote newer product -- especially newer artists -- without significant airplay chart activity. The problem is without airplay, the songs won't obtain notable status on radio airplay charts.

Record labels should also remember what happened when they got what they'd long wanted - for iTunes to change its pricing structure for downloads from a one-price-fits-all to a multi-tiered pricing system. When iTunes introduced variable pricing, the "more money" selections lost a third of their sales almost overnight.

Paul Resnikoff reports for Digital Music News, "Major labels are seeing sales decreases following a shift towards variable pricing on iTunes, according to numerous sources to Digital Music News. The sources include executives within the majors, all of whom requested anonymity."

Maybe those anonymous ones need to come out of the closet and speak up publicly before they get what they want with radio royalties -- a "performance tax" as Rehr called it -- and experience further setbacks for their own already troubled industry.

Meanwhile, compromise seems most likely to come from Congress. If the two sides can't agree on something, lawmakers may try to balance the two sides' stands for them. For example, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) has offered an amendment to the Performance Rights Act under which small radio stations would pay only $500 a year for unlimited use of recorded music and performance.

With nearly 47 years of broadcasting background, I as the founder of TPM remain committed to supporting the radio industry in this ongoing warfare. We continue airing spots opposing the Performance Rights Act, and supporting radio's current national promotions (including RadioHeardHere and HD Radio) on this page. But we are also realistic in recognizing the world is changing in many ways. The economy is changing. And the political landscape has definitely changed.

It's one thing to seek to change reality. It's quite another to deny it!

Prior TPM Commentaries Are Available Here.

By Mark Harris - April 16, 2009

If radio loses the battle over pay-to-play, and new royalties fees are imposed as sought by the recording industry -- and if, as a result, new releases from new artists not yet proven successes, have trouble obtaining on-air exposure -- will more artists opt to release material without the backing of a record label? That once may have been almost unthinkable, but now actually appears to be an option. The Los Angeles Times reports on a Canadian foursome, rock act Metric, that has done just that -- with amazing success, landing their new release, the 10-track "Fantasies," in the middle of the U.S. pop chart.

As we read how Metric accomplished this -- thanks in large measure to iTunes and a nonprofit Canadian arts funding entity -- we thought immediately of the problem artists who are not household names might have obtaining radio exposure if stations must pay to give their recordings exposure.

We continue to believe the ideal answer is a legal form of payola, with sponsorship identification, under which the broadcasters would insist on the purchase of airtime for playing songs the labels wanted promoted, at a rate sufficient to pay them their royalty fees. Of course, that is our option if we lose the battle. We still believe just the threat of such action on the part of the radio industry would cause a few lawmakers now supporting the labels in this battle to stop and rethink their current position!

By Mark Harris

David Pogue, the personal-technology columnist for The New York Times, writes that "the HD Radio Alliance has spent millions of dollars on promotion, ads and educational efforts. Yet even after four years of this, most people still don't have any idea what HD radio is." To make his point, he begins with a quick Q & A:

Q: How do you make an HD radio executive bang his head against the wall?
A: Ask him, "What's HD radio?"

He notes that one "can't sum up HD radio in a one-line" pitch, and that it "takes a couple of paragraphs to explain it." Pogue does a good job of listing several reasons the technology has not caught on or is a matter of confusion for most people -- including the name, general confusion about yet another new technology, and just the need for a new special receiver. The Times columnist notes, "as HD radio's tagline puts it, 'If you don't have an HD radio, you're not hearing HD radio.' (Is that an advertisement -- or a disclaimer?)" Good question, Mr. Pogue!

The HD Digital Radio Alliance continues its diligent efforts to get the word out, with spots airing on radio stations nationwide, and an all-out campaign to increase public awareness. But, yes, outside of the broadcast industry, only a small percentage of people are familiar with HD Radio, or even that their favorite analog stations may offer additional digital signals. The proliferation of HD Radio at this point is mainly restricted to new vehicles, with announcements of its inclusion by additional automakers coming regularly. Nevertheless, HD Radio still has a distance to go to become as familiar a choice to audiences as standard FM and AM stations. Something new -- different -- that will generate the buzz that the Internet has created must be forthcoming. Someone needs to develop a new promotion that will have everyone talking at the water cooler about the technology -- and a desire to have it. It's a great advancement, enabling AM stations to sounds as good as FM, and FM to sound even better. So who will come up with the ultimate promotional effort to make it a highly demanded commodity? TotalPopularMusic.com remains committed to doing our part in publicizing HD Radio, as well as Radio Heard Here, and general radio campaigns from the NAB. But for HD (which isn't High Definition) radio, something more than what is now available to promote it must be initiated.

By Mark Harris

We hate to sound like a broken record (does anyone remember vinyl?) -- but we must again repeat what we have said before, and will say again until the issue of royalties paid by radio stations ("pay to play") is settled once and for all to the satisfaction of the broadcast industry at large.

On Tuesday, March 31, at the NAB's 2009 State Leadership Conference in Washington, DC, House Telecom Subcommittee Chairmain Rick Boucher (D-VA) suggested that radio stations should negotiate with record companies on royalties for local radio airplay.

We appreciated the response of NAB Exectutive VP Dennis Wharton who said in a statement, "NAB has great respect for Chairman Boucher, but we would submit that the real negotiation should take place between the record labels and recording artists. After the record labels have renegotiated all the abusive deals they have forced on artists, they should come see us."

But we wish he had added, "Would Rep. Boucher also suggest that record companies negotiate with radio stations to pay them for airing new songs they want promoted by radio?"

We are still awaiting a radio response saying, "What if we, the broadcast industry, begin making the labels and artists pay for the airtime we give them, using the proceeds to pay their fees?" After a dramatic pause, "Does anyone remember payola? What if we comply with the current laws on sponsor identification and institute a legalized form of payola? Does the esteemed Congressman recommend that?"

And so we outright repeat a portion of a previous Commentary:

"Airtime for the preceeding song was purchased by Crappy Records of the San Fernando Valley." Of course, unless Crappy purchased an extra 10-seconds beyond the length of the song itself, there would be no time to ID the artist or the title of the song!

"The preceeding song by Smashing Pumpkins was commercially sponsored by Pumpkins lead vocalist Billy Corgan. Oops, paid time has run out...can't tell you the name of it."

We can forsee a money-pressed radio industry refusing to give airtime exposure to newer songs until they magically reach the top 20 request list (without airplay exposure to get it there), if stations have to pay to play songs. Think Sirius XM "20 On 20" replacing Top 40. Hmmm... will we one day have to identify hit music stations as CHR-Top20?

The record industry may want to taunt us with the Beatles' 1960s song, "We Can Work It Out" (which was on vinyl!), but we still say, that door must swing both ways!

By Mark Harris

Many years ago when I was a beginning broadcaster -- at the age of 16, in 1963, at a small hometown AM radio station -- I was involved in an incident in which some choice profanity accidentally went out over the air. It wasn't a mike accidentally left on, but a live telephone pick-up for an upcoming report.

My first program director, who gave me my start in radio, gave me some good advice at the time, which I've never forgotten: Never, ever, use profanity in a radio studio or control room. That way it will never accidentally be heard by listeners." I've never forgotten that incident or the advice. Now, 46 years later, I repeat that same advice to all radio people.

Why mention this now? A news item caught my attention. It seems that three people have been ousted at Sports Radio KXNO-AM, Des Moines, over a profanity incident.

Clear Channel fired personality Marty Tirrell, who co-hosted "Marty & Miller" along with afternoon host Larry Cotlar and Assistant PD Geoff Conn following a profanity-laced argument broadcast March 20 during a commercial-break when the microphone was accidentally left on. During the argument, Tirrell used the f-word at least a dozen times.

I've heard "that word" over the air more than once. And in the past 40+ years, all of the other words that late comedian George Carlin famously told us can't be aired. All such incidents were indeed accidents. But, as someone once said, "Accidents happen." Some resulted in less serious consequences than the recent incident in Iowa.

Still, to all broadcasters, I pass along some old advice that even after all of the technology advances of the past half century remains as good advice. Don't use those words anywhere near a microphone, and you'll never have that kind of accident occur.

Many times during the years I was on-air daily, I often ran out of the studio, out of the building, and outside -- once sure nobody would hear me -- screamed out some choice profanity! But since 1963 I never again used any of the seven dirty words -- or a myriad of variations which have since been added -- where they could accidentally be aired, and ultimately heard by listeners.

Unless you are on satellite or Internet radio where such words can be aired, don't use them -- even in an angry or frustrated moment -- anywhere they might inadvertently be broadcast. It could prevent the loss of a good job!

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! We sincerely want to hear someone representing the radio industry have the stones to turn the tables on anti-radio members of the House Judiciary Committee, as the debate heats up over performance royalty fees on stations for airing recorded music.

During the March 10th hearing Rep. Brad Sherman, (D-CA) asked broadcasters what they'd think if a band crashed a restaurant ate all the food, then refused to pay, saying that their business model was not to pay, or they are a struggling band and can't afford to pay.

The radio response we'd like to have heard is, "What if we, the broadcast industry, begin making the labels and artists pay for the airtime we give them, using the proceeds to pay their fees?" After a dramatic pause, what could have been added was, "Does anyone remember payola? What if we comply with the current laws on sponsor identification and institute a legalized form of payola? Does the esteemed Congressman recommend that?"

"Airtime for the preceeding song was purchased by Crappy Records of the San Fernando Valley." Of course, unless Crappy purchased an extra 10-seconds beyond the length of the song itself, there would be no time to ID the artist or the title of the song!

"The preceeding song by Smashing Pumpkins was commercially sponsored by Pumpkins lead vocalist Billy Corgan. Oops, paid time has run out...can't tell you the name of it."

We can forsee a money-pressed radio industry refusing to give airtime exposure to newer songs until they magically reach the top 20 request list (without airplay exposure to get it there), if stations have to pay to play songs. Think Sirius XM "20 On 20" replacing Top 40. Hmmm... will we one day have to identify hit music stations as CHR-Top20?

Is that what Congress wants? If it is... Radio, let's give it to them!

TPM COMMENTARY

Reporting a death in the radio family is never a pleasant duty. However, with sadness we must report the death of the MOViN radio format, created by the Alan Burns & Associates radio consultancy. The RhythmicAC format may technically still be on life support, but for all practical purposes the MOViN experiment is dead.

Of the original 13 stations, at least half have either abandoned the brand -- or, while keeping the MOViN identity have ditched the RhythmicAC formula. The latest such defector is MOViN 100.7 (KYMV), Salt Lake City, which retains the branding (for the moment), but flips to CHR-Top40, ditching RhythmicAC.

Although also a satellite offering, the only successful over-the-air MOViN station is KQMV, Seattle, the first station to debut the format.

As we see it, this was a great concept, the branding and its logo and market promotion were excellent. So what went wrong? The music mix for the format itself was never destined to be as successful as Alan Burns believed it would be.

Could MOViN have been a raging success? We believe the answer is a resounding "yes." All that was needed was a "Mass Appeal" formula. Everything else could have been kept as was/is. Had the Total Popular Music concept been adopted, we believe the number of MOViN stations would have multiplied exponentially and each would now be a market leader.

Mr. Burns, contact us! Total Popular Music is the NEXT Number One Radio Format™!!!

TPM COMMENTARY

A recent news item caught the attention of TPM Founder Mark Harris. We reported that Paragon Consulting Network is offering a "radio stimulus packages" of three months of free consulting services, with each customized to the station's needs. Paragon says it's seeking radio's "most compelling challenges in 2009." One winner from commercial radio and one from non-commercial will be chosen. Asked for his reaction to this announcement, Harris said, "I think that's great; however, I have already been offering six weeks of free consulting to all stations signing aboard for Total Popular Music and the related consulting services that I offer. Notice that I said all -- not just a couple of winners in a contest. I believe a propsective client should be able to try before committing to buy. Still, I commend Paragon for their offer. In these difficult times for the economy at large, and especially for the radio industry, we all need to do what we can to save and revive our once thriving broadcasting business." Harris, the Creator of the TPM format, operates Mark Harris Broadcast Consulting, which in turn operates this Website.