Does Imaging Still Matter?

“‘Imaging’ as we know it doesn’t matter in a PPM world. To those of us who grew up with radio, it matters deeply. To our ears, it’s 90% of the total package. But to a generation who is accustomed to hearing their music without hype in-between (iPod, etc.), it matters little. Now if [you're] saying that the message between the songs needs to change to suit this new environment (both in quality and quantity) then I wholeheartedly agree.”
That’s a comment that was left on Edison’s Infinite Dial blog a few weeks ago. The author, Joe Greenlagh, was responding to veteran programmer Michael Steele’s disappointment with the imaging on Los Angeles radio. The role of imaging is a longstanding debate, but it’s one that has taken on a new currency with the decidedly more streamlined presentation now audible on most Clear Channel music FMs. (Neither comment mentions Clear Channel explicitly but many other recent posters on this topic do address those changes specifically and sometimes vehemently.
Greenlagh is right that imaging — usually of the more aggressive variety — was very much a part of the radio that today’s managers and programmers grew up with, whether it’s the Bill Drake-era legal ID (“And now, ladies and gentlemen …”) of the ’60s or the “Lock it in and rip the knob off” sweepers of the ’80s. Any composite aircheck put together by a radio station production director is likely to be 70% imaging, 20% morning show, and 10% anything else. So there is a certain amount of unavoidable nostalgia in this debate. And after a decade of being told to focus on what goes between the records, it’s hard to accept that what goes between the records should be so minimal.
There are really two questions here: “Does imaging still matter?” and, if so, “What kind of imaging?” The first one is a little easier to figure out when you consider that even a minimally produced radio station can be heavily imaged. And one clue is to look at the imaging on WRFF (Radio 104.5) Philadelphia, the Clear Channel Modern Rocker that has become a showplace both for its new streamlining and for how to program in a PPM world. WRFF isn’t strictly jockless; it has brief, unobtrusive backsells. But imaging plays a heavy role in explaining what the station is and how to use it.
On Radio 104.5, very conversational imaging is used to thank the listener for trying the station (something most stations should do but don’t), to point out the shorter stopsets, to billboard the “oh wow” songs, to point out that the Alternative format is back in the market (“something’s been missing from Philadelphia radio–was that you?”), and even to position the station as an answer to satellite radio and iPods (“why pay for music?”).
Radio 104.5 even goes as far as one drop that says, “We’re not going to explain Radio 104-5. If you like it, that’s explanation enough, isn’t it?” That may be a little coy, given that many of the station’s best selling points (a lot of uninterrupted music, playlist depth, etc.), are indeed discussed on the air. But there is indeed no traditional attempt to explain the station in one slogan, possibly because “Mass-Appeal Alternative Rock Of The ’70s, ’80s, ’90s and Now with a Lot of Music and Some Hot AC Functionality” would be as long as some of the songs.
In that regard, Radio 104.5 is doing the same thing that the jockless, American versions of Bob- and Jack-FM did so prominently for a while, using imaging both to explain the station and, at the same time, place the station above anything as mundane as radio positioning. It’s the radio equivalent of Bud Dry’s “Why Ask Why” — which was still an advertising slogan. Jocklessness and being less produced are often thought of as a similar aesthetic, but regardless of how a station is produced, if you’re not letting the jocks do a lot, you’re probably relying on imaging even more.
It is worth noting that, ultimately, both the staffed and jockless versions of Bob- and Jack- had similar ratings peaks and life-cycles. You can look at either jockless KCBS-FM (Jack FM) Los Angeles or the higher-profile WARH (the Arch) St. Louis as “the right way” to do the format. And given the hole for both an Alternative and a Modern AC station in Philadelphia, it’s possible to argue that presentation is secondary to whether there’s a hole in the market for the music in question. That said, Radio 104.5 also came along at a time when another music-intensive station (WBEN) had added jocks. And it’s hard to imagine WRFF now with any other presentation.
As for the second question, about what type of imaging can still work in 2008, there are very few briefs filed on behalf of “hype.” It’s a sufficiently tempting target that every now and then, radio stations go after it, whether it’s WCGY Boston’s “no hype” automated Top 40 format in the ’70s or KRBE Houston’s “Hits without the Hype” in the early ’90s. In those periods when “hype” is out of favor, it’s hard to imagine that anybody is going to want to hear high-energy DJs or in-your-face production or jingles between every record again.
But it has often happened in radio that when “clean” is in — unobtrusive imaging and formatics — “hype” is waiting in the wings. The most influential radio station of 1980 was AOR WLLZ (Wheels 98.7) Detroit with its low-profile “first name only” jocks that wouldn’t be out of place on Radio 104.5. But the most influential station of 1981 was its polar opposite, Mike Joseph’s “Hot Hits” Top 40 WCAU-FM. And KRBE eventually evolved very successfully to an innovative, highly-produced presentation that still didn’t sound cheesy to anybody who had liked the “no hype” version.
You don’t have to deny the appeal of WRFF to suggest that listeners might also respond to another way of doing radio as well. There is certainly a case to be made that what will set radio apart from iPod and barely-produced Internet radio is to do something different by sounding big and exciting again. Both imaging styles have a place on the radio, and as history shows, when you hear too much of one, you eventually need the other as a change of pace.
So then the question becomes who would be willing to go first? Clear Channel’s existing large-market Top 40s usually cover the franchise to the extent where no operator is eager to go after them; (Pittsburgh is a recent exception). Even if WXKS-FM (Kiss 108) Boston is more streamlined these days, you’d probably need more than just a presentational difference to take on the station with the Kiss Concert. But if I were going to launch a Mainstream Top 40 station in Denver or Las Vegas or Baltimore, markets that haven’t embraced the format in a while, I’d go the foreground route. And if I could play a lot of music that I knew the market wanted, that would be good, too.

23 replies
  1. greg gillispie
    greg gillispie says:

    imaging your station is part of your “product.”
    too many stations – and it seems to be clear channel – have very very few pieces about the product. sometimes 2 or 3 songs in a row seems a bit odd. and hearing no more than the frequency and station slogan seems even more odd.
    sure, ppm devices may actually detect what a person is listening to…but there must be something there to attract the person.
    let’s face it…radio is (or at least should still be) entertainment…now how are you going to entertain them so they know what you are?

    Reply
  2. Phil Wilson
    Phil Wilson says:

    Sean,
    As always, great stuff. Indeed, there are varying levels of imaging depending on the reason for it. If you want to compete with the ipod, online, or any other of the multiple ways you can hear music only clearly it should be lower key.
    However, imaging is more than just a way to identify your station. It’s about setting a tone. It’s about highlighting all elements of the station. In a world where I can hear “jukeboxes” everywhere radio needs to create entertaining and compelling content and showcase it in an entertaining and compelling way. Let’s not forget…this is show biz.
    As far as imaging for the PPM, outside of the top 50 markets (and at the rate it’s going, the top 10) it isn’t relevant.

    Reply
  3. The Infinite Dial
    The Infinite Dial says:

    Do Believe In Hype

    A few weeks ago, the comments in our series on the Ten Best Markets For Radio Listeners sidetracked into a discussion on the importance of imaging and whether it will matter to iPod-era listeners in a PPM world. Some thoughts…

    Reply
  4. Ed Hill
    Ed Hill says:

    Imaging is the message you are sending to your listener to elicit an emotional response to your station. Whatever that message is it needs to be creative,entertaining and strategically correct.
    Can you imagine the success of the IPOD without those “cool” black sillouettes of Bono and Eminem?
    That was their imaging. Lose that and you lose sales.
    Lose it and you lose listeners. Clear Channel is not trying to eliminate this. They are trying to get everyone else to eliminate it thus making it easier for them to succeed.
    Listen to WEBN in Cincy. Awesome imaging.

    Reply
  5. Mark Jeffries
    Mark Jeffries says:

    I think that there has to be a happy medium between barely any imaging at all and the overdone, ram the positioning statements down the throat imaging that too many stations were doing, particularly ACs (if I never have to hear again “favorites of the 90s and today with no rap, no hard rock and no lite ‘n’ sleepy elevator music” again, especially with the lasers in the background, I’ll be very happy).
    And if we can get out of the new stations slamming the competition, I’ll also be happy, especially when they’re lying (Fresh 105.9 Chicago, uh, WLIT hasn’t played John Denver or Gordon Lightfoot in over a decade). Does competition-slamming ever made a difference, other than the Power Pig in Tampa in 1990? It sure didn’t make a difference when Michaels tried it in Chicago in 1991.

    Reply
  6. Buzz Jackson
    Buzz Jackson says:

    1) What Ed Hill said.
    2) The old mechanics of calls and dial position will become unnecessary in the PPM-world, but I think there will always be imaging. You gotta set yourself apart. We’ll just be freed from the boundaries of having to say the call letters and dial position all the time.
    Buzz @ KIIM Tucson

    Reply
  7. Chad Rufer
    Chad Rufer says:

    Does imaging matter these days? The simple answer is to some programming leaders it does and to some it doesn?t. As a programmer and former imaging geek, the promos and stationality that stick out in my mind are the ones that were written in creative manner and were not over produced. When Wired 96.5 in Philly received a C&D from Clear Channel for using the name “Wild,” Jerry Clifton voiced a promo that made the audience feel sorry for what this “poor little station” was going through. When the NFL first cracked down on radio stations for using the word “Super Bowl,” I remember hearing a promo on Wild 98.7 in Tampa that made fun of that fact. Think about the “I am 99X” campaign from Atlanta; it was about making the audience part of something, not a piece of overproduced imaging. Simple imaging has always existed. Don’t get me wrong, there were many nights where as a producer I heard something that Eric Chase or Jeff Thomas had produced and I ran in to the studio trying to mimic it (with NO success). Bottom line, if what the imaging says connects on an emotional level with your audience (just like Ed Hill said above) you’ve done a great piece of imaging.

    Reply
  8. Steve Butler
    Steve Butler says:

    Well, it’s taken me most of our first PPM year in Philadelphia to figure it out, but in the all-news world, imaging is not only important but has to evolve in an important way.
    KYW Newsradio is probably one of the best-branded products in Philadelphia, but in a world where a moment can mean a sudden, measurable influx of thousands of listeners who could sway your PPM rating dramatically, you need to be steering your listeners.
    Probably the most important adjustment we’ve made is to be more topical in our imaging, making sure we’re promoting snow storm coverage heavily the moment it gets chilly, etc. And we’ve concentrated on imaging the “always changing” nature of what we’re doing. In other words, what you heard this morning will be different than what you’ll hear this afternoon.
    The moment a rumor of breaking news creates a need to learn more, you’ve imaged your station as the place to be — immediately. I’ve never been a big fan of “proof of performance.” Just tell me how you can help me learn more when I need it.

    Reply
  9. Joe Cool
    Joe Cool says:

    If a listener wanted to be entertained by something more like her iPod – then she would listen to her iPod more. Radio has to set itself APART from all the choices people have today by bringing energy, relevancy, trained communicators and compelling content. More segues are a sell out.
    But “content” costs money to produce…

    Reply
  10. Greg Williams
    Greg Williams says:

    Ditto for Ed.
    Free music to the public, aka broadcast radio, is in a tailspin as a business, but the question is, will it completely die out as an entertainment platform? Should we, the Old Guard, keep alive the “sound” of radio, or fall on our swords and say we put up a good fight?

    Reply
  11. E. Curtis Johnson
    E. Curtis Johnson says:

    After 31 years in radio I got out in February of 2007. I didn’t listen to any station until September of 2007. I felt like Rip Van Winkle, the guy from the fable that slept for 100 years. When I turned the radio on again it was like someone had castrated the entire industry.
    Hearing he lack of any meaningful imaging was like eating a meal without salt; flat, bland and boring.
    In my opinion radio has once again thrown the baby out with the bath water by swinging the pendulum too far to one side. Imaging does not equal hype. Hype equals hype. Imaging is as important to differentuating a station from it’s competition as is the music and the on-air personalities. They’re all part of a three legged stool. Cut one leg off and someone’s going to fall flat on their butt.

    Reply
  12. Dave Anthony
    Dave Anthony says:

    If imaging is dead, so will be the stations that eliminate it. Successful radio has never been a jukebox except in markets where there was no competition. Likewise today, successful stations aren’t merely mp3 players. Here are a few things that imaging accomplishes:
    1) Mentions benefits that the listener cares about and is likely to recall
    2) Drives Web traffic
    3) Helps make promotions successful
    4) Assists word-of-mouth
    5) Identifies your station to non-listeners who, once exposed, may decide they like what they hear
    Imaging isn’t bad. BAD imaging is bad. Music alone won’t win; entertainment does.

    Reply
  13. Ashley Banas
    Ashley Banas says:

    If everything is loud nothing is loud.
    If everything is quiet nothing is quiet.
    Breadth in the self indulgent world of myspace, youtube, ipod and every other me me trend would be refreshing. Making thoughtful provocative imaging that is relevant to the demographic a station appeals to – yes this is important. Saying flat across the board that jockless will work for all formats, or a whisper only format will work – is cutting short your expectations.
    The imaging on an oldies station, a chr, ac, classic rock, and alternative station should all be different, because different formats have different listener bases. Perhaps the challenge more people in radio need to think about is what is relevant to their audience for each particular station. Considering who you work for and with – if you’re outside of your stations demographic, research or bringing on someone who can relate may be a step in the right direction. Learn what’s relevant and how to appease each stations core audience instead of trying to keep up with different forms of media.
    Radio is not tv, radio is not a computer, radio is not a news paper. Radio is radio, listeners understand this concept….no comment on those who don’t.

    Reply
  14. Chuck Geiger
    Chuck Geiger says:

    Station imaging has to be re-thought. Every element has to sell the difference between your station and the competitor. The days of “prowlin’ and growlin’ from the top of Misletoe Mountain” are over. Sell HD and web along with the personality of your station versus the competitor. Ed talks about WEBN, I always thought KROQ was the defining station for how imaging should be applied to the product. In Country radio most of the material was and still is cookie-cutter with no regard to the copy and waht the message is. Part of the Clear Channel “RADIO” or “MY” concept is to apply listeners talking about the station. This has been around since the old WQAM air check of 1976 that went around in the day where listeners shouting the calls were used to post songs after the jock sold the song.

    Reply
  15. Mike McGough
    Mike McGough says:

    Ditto, Ashley! (Here I scrolled all the way down thinking I had a fresh thought to contribute. Damn)!
    “Imaging” has always meant very different things in each format, because each audience group has identified themselves by their varying tastes.
    Eighties-style Top 40 imaging remains relevant in Hot AC, its cultural successor, much the same way that the anti-imaging (anti-format) style of today’s indie radio mirrors Progressive Rock of the late sixties, its cultural ancestor.
    And there remain some great “imaging artists” in radio today, but they aren’t the One Trick Ponies. They’re the chameleons.

    Reply
  16. Jordan
    Jordan says:

    So then the question becomes who would be willing to go first? Clear Channel’s existing large-market Top 40s usually cover the franchise to the extent where no operator is eager to go after them; (Pittsburgh is a recent exception).
    I dont get that comment. Can someone explain?

    Reply
  17. Sean Ross
    Sean Ross says:

    I baffled a few people in-house with that line as well. What I meant is that in markets where a CHR already exists, few operators have wanted to launch a second Top 40 station. Even if the existing Top 40 has a six share, it’s rarely tempting to have half of that. Even if you look at a four-share Top 40 and think, “I can do the format better,” you pretty much have to set out with the goal of eliminating the other station. And few broadcasters are willing to do that for a younger targeted format.

    Reply
  18. Drew Hall
    Drew Hall says:

    Guys, come on. If any of this surprised you, you’ve been stuck in the prod room too long.
    So we’re lamenting the loss of ‘hype’ and wishing for its re-introduction? It’s never really left us in the CHR realm, has it? The music is what it is (85% of your music station product), and the image presentation may have changed slightly, but the jocks still for the most part sound the same as they did in the 90s, and maybe even the 80s, and the basic tenets of the presentation haven’t changed in my lifetime.
    Let’s take this off the “national” level though, cause ultimately we’re about “live and local,” right?
    I was born the year MTV signed on. 90% of my peers, both in my hometown and where I live and work, don’t remember radio as ever having been “cool.” They see it as a utility that they can sometimes get concert tickets or cash from, and that plays annoying commercials their iPods don’t. Is it entertaining to them? Outside of morning drive, usually no, occasionally yes. Sometimes it makes them laugh. Most of the time it’s not giving them they can’t get somewhere else, without interruptions.
    Oh, I mentioned MTV up there? While almost universally they lament that MTV has “fallen off” when it comes to showing music videos, my peers still watch The Hills and The Real World and, God forbid, Shot At Love with Tila Tequila. Hell, our morning shows are TALKING about The Hills, and not only so they can get interviews with the stars of the shows, but because it’s a hot button with their audience. MTV might not show videos anymore, but they DO supply content their audience will ingest.
    Note the key word there. CONTENT. Their “imaging” has always been weird, and it’s obvious that some clicks and some doesn’t. But the imaging on MTV only really stuck out when it was new. It’s just like a station launch. I’d bet all of us remember the Moon Man from 1985. Very few of us remember Poop Hat from 2005.
    And back to my peers: when they’re looking for music, they’ve got their iPod (yes, you’re more than likely giving away your competition to your listeners). The more adventurous/traveled of them have tried XM or Sirius (and hats off to them on calling attention to everything that is/was wrong with terrestrial radio). They can burn their own CDs, and most of them have more than one 10-slot holster on their car visor full of burnt CDs. And even in my own building, some of them listen to Pandora or last.fm while at work (!).
    I’m a 25 year old male, and my most listened to radio station, besides my own, is Radio 538. In the Netherlands. Granted the image presentation is neither appealing (circa 1994) nor understandable (Dutch) to me, but the CONTENT is why I go. It plays what I like (and yes I’m not “normal” but none of us reading this are), and it has specialty programming I enjoy.
    Sorry kids, but it’s not entirely the imaging, or lack thereof, that has caused radio to blow. The industry’s had bigger problems for years. How about giving them a reason to listen? Giving them CONTENT that they react to PASSIONATELY?
    Who’s gonna take THAT on?

    Reply
  19. Mark Lillie
    Mark Lillie says:

    In listening to Clear Channel’s UAC 95.7 The Party in Denver, I find myself wanting to hear some compelling content between the songs as opposed to a barage of back to back segues. Where is the emotion? The passion? The desire to stay locked into 95.7 rather than punching up Alice 105.9 or KS 107.5? While I strongly believe in embracing new concepts in this ever changing industry, I agree with the comment made by E. Curtis Johnson on the Edison Blog “Imaging is as important to differentuating a station from it’s competition as is the music and the on-air personalities. They’re all part of a three legged stool. Cut one leg off and someone’s going to fall flat on their butt.” And while Imaging may not matter in the PPM world, how am I going to tell a friend about this radio station when I can’t even recall the station I’m listening to?

    Reply
  20. JJ Duling
    JJ Duling says:

    All interesting comments. I would add that they are all from a “radio person” point of view and not from our listeners.
    I’ll disclaimer what I’m about to write by saying I am a child of 70s and 80s Top 40…a student of radio- there are few things from the past I love hearing more than classic CKLW and WCFL/WLS airchecks or pulling out a legendary Drake jingle package…they really cooked and are a wonderful part of our radio history.
    “History” being the key word. I’m definitely not for no-imaging-at-all; concise, brief Imaging messages written FOR THE LISTENER and how they live their lives can still be powerful and effective. Yet, for years, we’ve been really good at telling and selling listeners what WE’RE all about and how great we think we are. The good news is: they get it.
    The “if we build it they WILL come” mindset of radio is arrogant and archaic. Our listeners have lots of choices and that number is increasing every day. The question is, “are we prepared to adapt to THEIR lifestyle and expectations” or will we continue to shove what WE think sounds best down their throats?
    I believe many radio stations have largely dumbed-down their talent and let their Imaging say it all. There are wonderful radio talent all around us if we’re willing to scout them out and hunt them down and then give them the platform to create that “radio magic” we’ve too often depended on flashy imaging to do. Finding great talent, teaching and coaching them about the vision and goals for the sounds of our stations and helping them paint the picture will help keep radio topical, relevant, entertaining and refreshing a lot longer than Imaging pieces that may win your Creative Services Guy an Addy Award but have become, in the end, mostly “noise” to your listeners.

    Reply
  21. Tom Kent
    Tom Kent says:

    No offense and with all due respect to the distinquished panel of “experts” above but the one idea that cuts through the most, in my most humble opinion, is the comment above from JJ Duling. All are excellent points from everyone but it seems like once again, “we” as an industry just keep staying inside this “box” we’ve created that says that anything outside of that box isn’t good for whatever reason. Imaging is important but I agree with JJ. It’s not the thing that will bring listeners to your radio station and it’s not the thing that will keep them interested. The only thing that will do that is talent…real talent. Not some disc-jockey trying to imulate what radio sounded like back in the day but true “personality”. Where do you find those? Just like any great treasure, it takes time, effort and a lot of hard work but they’re out there if we just look. Too often radio has been afraid of personality for whatever reason and just like JJ says, the programming eggs have been placed inside the imaging and music baskets leaving the listeners with nothing more than a jukebox. How many stations today are nothing more than imaging and music?
    I would argue since the imaging pretty much sounds the same for every format. Yes indeed, imaging has been “dummied down”, and therefore doesn’t really cut through with the listeners anymore. Do phrases like “greatest hits of all time”, “the home of rock and roll”, “your favorites songs of yesterday and today”, “another 10 in a row with less talk”…do they still have any impact after millions of impressions? Radio people on the other hand are getting a woody every time we hear some great jingle or imaging piece. Who cares other than us? The listeners don’t. Like JJ says, it’s become noise and research is showing this. I’m not a fan of the “Jack” format but one thing they did right was to pretty much throw out all that cookie cutter crap and thank God! We’re still holding on to our CKLW and WLS airchecks thinking that was “magic”. Well yes, it was “magic” back in 1975 but come on people, it’s 2008…can’t we continue to move the ball down the field instead of losing yards? We’re not scoring any touchdowns here!
    The listeners want to be entertained when they turn on the radio. Do great jingles entertain them? In the words of Borat…”not so much”. Does great imaging entertain them? Come on now..stop thinking like a DJ! The only thing that the listener wants is to be entertained. What’s left…the music? Well of course silly but they can get that anywhere. Just like a great hit song, it’s what’s between the grooves that makes it a hit. With great radio, it’s what’s between the songs that make it great and I’m not talking about imaging or anything else other than great personalities. Everything else is secondary.
    Great radio is a balance of both art and science and the pendulum sadly for great radio has swung too far over to the science and sales side. Don’t get me started on sales! That’s a whole other can of worms. In the words of my friend Dan Mason, it’s all very simple. At the end of the day, it all comes down to the three R’s…ratings, revenue, and return and in that order. Programming must come first i.e. ratings and the rest will follow. Too often in today’s radio, the paradigm has shifted.
    The best news of all is that our industry is resilliant and nimble and it to will survive. The future couldn’t be brighter. I look at all the great minds who’ve responded here and that is just a glimpse of hope and light in what many nay sayers have dimissed as a lost and dying medium. That couldn’t be any further from the truth. My prediction and my hope is that radio will not only survive but it will thrive because it attracts passionate creative people. The only fly in the ointment is this little thing called ego. It’s always been an ego driven business. I watched the ego driven music industry die because they refused to change. Radio needs to stay humble because that humility will be the fuel for continued change. That change is happening right now. We’re an industry that’s embracing future technoligies and we’re realizing that we need more than just our great science to make great radio. The show must still be the first word in “show business”. Yes, we’re a business but not before the show.

    Reply
  22. M Singleton
    M Singleton says:

    Sean, I am sitting hear laughing about the debate of imaging. One of the pioneers of carving out your station from the others was the legendary “Frankie Crocker”. Urban jocks, PD’s and consultants would try to emulate his signature warm sounding “Stereo effects” along with the left-right ping/pongs. While providing me with an education of a lifetime about what he did at radio and why, the image piece comes to mind.
    This was his thought, if I’m playing the same songs as KTU I want people to know that they are listening to WBLS or me. There should be “no doubt” as to what the product is.
    I was so amazed by the passion he had about the imaging conversation I went as far as meeting with the studio owner/engineer who recorded the infamous ping/pong (by the way it’s still on the air 26 years after it was created). The engineer informed me that to produce those pieces Frankie spent countless hours setting up the exact sound that he wanted via a 48 track recording. So important was the sound that he used every available piece of equipment, talked to countless singers and studio musicians and had it mixed several times in his mind before he put it on the air.
    Astounded by the response of the engineer I went back to Frankie and asked; why did you put so much work into a couple of 8 second pieces? His response was, listen to the drops and tell me if you were confused or absolutely sure about what you were listening to. Yeah he was right because as soon as you hear the “W” you already knew it was BLS.
    Image is not everything its the “only thing”, think about this what is an IPOD?

    Reply
  23. Steve Lushbaugh
    Steve Lushbaugh says:

    Of course imaging is important, especially on personality radio stations. It is part of the identity of the station, just like hair styles and fashion choices are part of a person’s personality. These things tell people you meet a lot about you. You probably befriend people who share tastes similar to your own. How people choose to express their identity is wildly variable. You might have a shaved head, or purple hair, or a crew cut. You might wear a 3 piece suit, or used military clothing, or low rise jeans and a tube top. Radio stations express their identity in many ways. Imaging is an important one. It can be loud and complex, soft and understated, funny, modern, old fashioned, clean, dirty, conformist, or rebellious. But if you want to attract people, you need to give them some information to tell them a little about yourself. Imaging does that. The personalities and the music are more like a persons politics, philosophy, opinions and character. They embody the true values and the soul.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>