Rebranding? Or, Bull?

Clear Channel has had a lot of success over the years with "The Bull" brand, so I certainly don't  begrudge their decision to change what had been a winning country image in Las Vegas for almost 24 years to be something "new."

Dittos with last January when Alpha converted 98.7 in Portland, due - I assume - that they felt that 1 + 1 didn't add up to "Couple" anymore.

Having worked for those two radio stations for a combined total of more than thirty years starting when they each dominated their markets under those now-ineffective names, I hope no one thinks that what's going on is just renaming a radio station whose ratings aren't what they used to be.

Study how different the programming is under the new brands.  Spend some time listening to Las Vegas' BULL and Portland's BULL.

These days a brand isn't a name or a music position. 

That's the bow on top of the package that may tell the recipient "open me first," but a brand that works is defined by what's inside the package.

A radio station starts to lose, not because it's name wasn't right.  Winning occurs because the radio station consistently engages listeners with talent who not only meets their perceived needs but constantly surprises, wows, by exceeding them.

Otherwise, it's just a bunch of bull.

The Solution To Every Problem

• Dropbox wants "to be your always-on hard drive" and so they're scheduling a developers conference.
• YouSendIt responded to the assault by announcing yesterday that they plan to change their name.

That will certainly make a big difference your users will appreciate.  Ya think?

Makes about as much sense as worrying about which media try to stake their claim on the word "radio."

RadioInfo publisher Michael Harrison nailed it yesterday, “AM and FM broadcasting have never held a monopoly on the word ‘radio.’  I do not recall reading anything in history about Marconi playing records, dropping in jingles, doing the news, taking calls, interviewing guests, doing promotions, scaring people about a Martian invasion, selling advertising, or being involved in the community.  It never occurred to me that a taxi driver calling in to the dispatcher was doing a ‘show.’  I do know, however, that the definition of the term ‘radio’ as it applies to our industry has come to take on a very distinct meaning similar to the way such terms as ‘the theater’ or ‘the movies’ can also be applied to a specific art form and industry.  To me ‘radio’ as we use it in this business is not necessarily limited to AM and FM – but rather to the essence of its purpose and perception.  I define ‘radio’ as being audio-based media utilized for the conveyance of information and entertainment that creates a product significantly greater than the sum of its parts.”

People don't listen to "radio."  They listen to YOU.

The Ribbon On Top? Or, The Contents?

The history of call signs for radio around the world is, to say the very least, fascinating.

Until just a few years ago, in Canada, a commercial broadcaster was not even required to say the legal calls, perhaps because the privately owned commercial broadcast stations use primarily CF and CH through CK. 

So, you don't see anywhere near as many radio stations using just their four letters in their branding.

In the USA, Arbitron's diary asks first for call letters and only after that for dial setting and, third, "station name."  So, as long as diaries are the rating measurement tool, it pays to ingrain your listeners to write that down to be sure you don't lose any listening credit.

With PPM measurement, they don't even need to know your brand name.  They just have to actually use you.

It's axiomatic that every product needs a unique "position" that clearly exists in the mind of the consumer and they also must have an identity to link it with so they can remember where it's located and tell their friends about it.

There was a time when every new country station wanted to be Frogs.  Then, came Cats.  Now, the current flavor of the month appears to be "Bull."

Just how important is it to have "the proper, freshest, brand" (whatever that is) and "the correct position statement for today" (many stations change theirs annually, which leaves listeners confused and often remembering only the original one even from very long ago)?

I learned some lessons about this from three places where I worked.

In the 1970's I was OM of Buck Owens' KUZZ/Bakersfield. which listeners often called "cuz" no matter how much we only used the letters K-U-Z-Z on air.

Then, I went to "Radio KEEN" in San Jose where again I wanted to avoid what seems like a dated 50's word and so we never said "keen," and always used the four letters.  The vast majority of listeners never parroted our letters back to us, preferring to call the station "Radio KEEN," which drove me nuts.  

Finally, in the early 1980's I found myself at what listeners termed "Compass," in spite of the fact that the station had only used K-M-P-S for many years before my arrival as PD.  I'd bet that the current team at the station still hear that dated brand from the folks using it now.

What I learned:

Your brand and position are not words that you can "educate" listeners to adopt.  Those things are just the ribbon on top of the package and yet if you happen to be marketing or creating a product that a already possesses a positive name and message, deeply ingrained, don't fight them.  Creating a powerful identity takes a long time and can be extremely expensive.  Undoing an existing strong one can be next to impossible.

• There is a reason that the word "content" lives inside the word "contents."
• What listeners love that you do is your brand.  How and when they use you is your position, not a lovely logo typeface or costumed mascot.

Market those things.

Magic Moments

Loyalty and engagement with all media are built on powerful positive "magic moments."

That time LinkedIn let you know that a longtime friend just received a big promotion.

When Facebook put you together with a high school buddy you haven't heard from in years.

The instant when Twitter let you know the results of your favorite Olympic sport many hours before the event was replayed on NBC-TV.

The more frequently these kind of moments happen, the closer you feel to the medium, the brand, the personality and the more you "use" them regularly.

Then, there are those other moments.  When you get a LinkinIn email saying a business associate wants to connect with you, but when you click on the link it says that the notice was sent to the wrong email address.  When Facebook keeps wanting to reinstall the Android app you just UNinstalled because it eats up too much memory and is too slow when compared to just using your browser to get onto Facebook.  When NBC-TV edited out the very part of the opening ceremonies you wanted to see the most.

Trust gets betrayed.  Usage decreases.  Brand gets tarnished.

What happens when you ask for "caller #9" and you recognize the voice of the regular winner who always seems to get through and win when you have the best prizes up for grabs?  When hundreds of other people get only a busy signal and mutter under their breath that radio contests are all fixed?

When your info update consists of "the news is coming up on the hour" and the listener looks at their smart phone and realizes that their personal information aggregation app has ALL the news for the refreshing at any instant they want it and that they never have to wait for "the news?"

When a radio station keeps pushing "the most music" and automated song-sweeper-song-jingle-song-sweeper hours when listeners voted in at least four different research projects released since the first of the year, including A&O's Roadmap 2012 perceptual study, for "fun personalities who feel like friends and make me feel better when I listen?"

It's easy to do things the way you've always done them and ignore listener needs. 

There's some "magic" in that too.

It will make your audience disappear.

Does Your Brand And Position Statement Mean Anything Anymore?

(Pictured: what a "Not A Starbucks" looks like) They've done it again. On February 26, 2008, all their stores closed for a day of "training," forcing their local customers to go to the competition for at least one day if they wanted a cup of Joe.

If it improved the Starbuck product even a teeny vente I sure couldn't tell. But, as a publicity stunt, it was amazingly effective, creating buzz both online and in traditional media that would have cost billions to 'buy,' if it had even been possible.

Now, they are doing it again and once again the media is all over it. But, this time, is it something more than a play for publicity?

Unbranding, of course, started with cell phones as techies liked a specific phone and had to tear into it to get it to work with the wireless carrier they prefer. This was the first notice to big corporate brands that the market sees itself in control of your brand, not you. If you do something they don't like in terms of their values, you are toast. Brand names which spend decades creating "unique selling propositions" can lose market share overnight when that USP gets repositioned as obsolete.

Metered TV and radio ratings have meant that listeners and viewers no longer need to remember what programming they used. The emphasis is on great quality of whatever it is the user wants right now instead of brand loyalty.

What does your brand name mean to your listeners? Is it still relevant? Your position statement? Is Starbucks at the cutting edge of de-branding? Or, just another stunt?

A&O is in the business of helping radio stations get those answers before someone next door gets tons of free buzz using clever net marketing, stealing brand assets from you. We are getting our Spring 2009 Arbitron, Eastlan, BBM and Nielsen report cards right now and the results have been extremely gratifying.