Marketplace Edison Research Poll

Marketplace and Edison Research Reveal a Dramatic Shift in How Partisans Perceive Economic Data

The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan was famously quoted as saying “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” In the case of economic data, however, this may not be true. In the October 2018 edition of the Marketplace/Edison Research Economic Anxiety Index poll, we asked a sample of Americans how much they trusted data about the economy that is reported by the Federal Government. 60% said that they at least “somewhat” trust the data, up from 55% in October 2016. And the most extreme reaction, “Do not trust it at all,” declined from 25% to 14%.

However, if we dig a little deeper into this question, we find something remarkable. The October 2016 survey was, obviously, fielded right before the Presidential Election, in the waning days of Barack Obama’s administration. The competing worldviews in the race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump could not have been more different: while Clinton ran on a platform of continuing the policies of the Obama administration, Trump ran under the argument that America was not, as surveys frequently ask, “on the right track.”

At the time of the October 2016 survey, U.S. unemployment was at roughly 5%, a number which is certainly below average (i.e., more towards full employment) compared to historical trends (by comparison, five years prior to October 2016, the unemployment rate exceeded 9%). So, with the government reporting “good” news, those who were currently aligned with the administration were more likely to believe that news. However, economic prosperity is never evenly distributed, a fact that then-Candidate Trump used to his advantage when he campaigned in pockets of America that had seen significant declines in manufacturing and well-paying jobs. If you lived in Youngstown, Ohio, or Flint, Michigan, your local economy was not doing well, regardless of what the national statistics said.

As a result, there was a sharp disparity between how Clinton supporters felt about government statistics, and how Trump supporters felt, as we reported back in 2016. Then, the 55% trust/45% distrust by the total sample masked a significant partisan divide. While 86% of Clinton supporters trusted government economic statistics, only 31% of Trump supporters felt the same—indeed, 48% of Trump supporters indicated that they didn’t trust these stats at all, compared to 5% of Clinton supporters. With Republicans and Democrats overall, these differences were still highly significant: 78% of Democrats trusted government economic data, compared to 38% of Republicans.

How you interpreted this disparity likely depended on where you personally identified yourself politically. If you were a Democrat, you likely would have been inclined to cite Senator Moynihan’s quote, above. But if you were a Republican, you would likely have made the argument that the facts on the ground are different; that, despite what the national statistics say, there are significant pockets of America that are economically only getting worse. Both sides, in other words, were demanding to be entitled to their own facts.

This year we had a remarkable opportunity to revisit this phenomenon, once again just prior to a significant election, only now under a Republican administration. As noted above, the degree of trust in government statistics did tick up by five percentage points, and it should also be noted that unemployment today is even lower (currently 3.7%) than it was two years ago. While the percentage of those who trust government economic data did rise modestly from 55% to 60%, that rise once again masks a significant partisan divide.

Trust in Economic Data by Party

The October 2018 data show that the “trusters” have completely flipped positions from 2016. Today, 73% of Republicans trust government data (compared to 38% in 2016) and 51% of Democrats trust these data (compared to 78% in 2016.) This is truly a remarkable shift in just a two-year period. The percentage of Republicans who “do not trust [government economic data] at all” declined from 37% to 7%. And the “somewhat distrust” figures for Democrats rose from 12% to 32%, nearly tripling in two years.

The opportunity to revisit this question under a new administration has given us a profound insight into how Americans from either side of the aisle perceive government communications. While one might have been tempted in 2016 to proclaim that Republicans were willfully ignoring “good” economic news, the truth is that both sides are inclined to believe “facts” when they are presented by their party, and less likely when they are presented by the opposition party. Yet, the underlying data is the same: unemployment statistics tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, just as they have been since 1948.

All of which brings us back to Senator Moynihan. Perhaps we are all entitled to our own facts, after all.

Working Moms and the Mental Load

By Nicole Beniamini

Click here to register for our upcoming webinar with the complete results from this study, Moms on the Motherload, Thursday, November 29 at 2pm EST. 

This past August, Edison Research conducted an online national survey of 750 parents of children age 21 and under and asked them to indicate who does what in their household, how they feel about their responsibilities, and how much confidence they have in their child’s other parent to handle these tasks. The survey was asked among all mothers and fathers, but for the purpose of the Working Mother WorkBeyond Summit panel, we looked at the data among full-time working parents, or parents who work 35 hours or more in a typical week.

We asked respondents a long list of parenting tasks and had them indicate who is primarily responsible for each one – either they are, someone else is, or they share the task evenly with someone else. The data revealed that most full-time working mothers are primarily responsible for the vast majority of the tasks involving their children, such as making their kids’ doctors appointments, filling out school forms, or going shopping for their kids.  All these “invisible” tasks that working mothers are doing is also referred to as the “third shift.” Working mothers spend the first shift at the office, the second shift doing household chores, and the last shift planning and organizing for their family. When asked about the overall division of parenting tasks in their household, 81% of full-time working moms said they handle at least the majority of these tasks, with 27% saying they do all of the tasks. When we compared this data to mothers who are not currently employed, we were surprised to discover that it was exactly the same. Most moms are the “default” parent, whether they work or not.

 

Primary responsibilities Mom and Dad

 

So, we know what full-time working moms are doing but how do they feel about this mental load? It’s easy to assume that juggling home, work and family would cause these working mothers to combust, but they’re not! Among full-time working mothers, 66% say they feel confident about their parenting tasks, 60% in control and 59% organized. Among the negative adjectives, “overwhelmed” was the one that resonated most with these working mothers – with a third of working moms saying they felt that way.

Yes, working moms are carrying the mental load, but no, they aren’t necessarily overwhelmed by it.

Click here to register for our upcoming webinar with the complete results from this study, Moms on the Motherload, Thursday, November 29 at 2pm EST. 

New Study: Moms on the MotherLoad

Organizing your daughter’s 5th birthday party. Scheduling your son’s annual physical exam around soccer practice and band rehearsals. Remembering that Tuesday is Picture Day and Wednesday is the plant sale at school. These are just some examples of the mental load, or the behind-the-scenes strategizing that is needed to keep a family running. While household chores are becoming increasingly shared by Mom and Dad, the day-to-day planning, thinking, and organizing of parenting still very much belongs to Mom.

Research Mom Nicole Beniamini will be discussing the mental load of moms at the Working Mother: WorkBeyond Summit on October 8, 2018 in NYC.  Nicole will be joining the research panel, “How the Best Companies are Staying in the Game,” where panelists will discuss the challenges of working parents and how companies can address these considerations in order to retain employees.

For more about moms’ mental load, join The Research Moms from Edison Research as they present the findings from their latest study, “Moms on the MotherLoad” on Thursday, November 29th, at 2 PM Eastern. This study highlights all new data about what’s on Mom’s to-think list, how she feels about her parenting tasks, and why she might be hesitant to delegate to someone else.

Register here for “Moms on the MotherLoad” 

About the Research Moms 
The Research Moms are Edison Research’s team of experienced researchers who also happen to be moms.  Combining a solid platform of market research with real life insight, they are a unique resource for analyzing habits, behaviors and trends among moms.

The Podcast Consumer Canada 2018

Click here to download The Podcast Consumer Canada 2018

Télécharger Le Consommateur Baladodiffusion Canadien 2018 ici

Edison Research and Triton Digital released The Podcast Consumer 2018 earlier this year, marking our 10th year of issuing the most extensive analysis of American podcast listeners available. Today Edison and Triton Digital are proud to release The Podcast Consumer Canada 2018.

This report includes new, unreleased information on the demographics of podcast listeners, frequency and location of podcast consumption, smart speaker ownership, and other podcast listening behaviors in Canada. Data is derived from The Infinite Dial Canada 2018 by Edison Research and Triton Digital.

“All of us here at Edison and Triton are honored to be able to provide our latest data on podcasting to the Canadian public,” said Edison’s Senior Vice President, Tom Webster. “We are also very excited to announce that Edison and Triton will once again collaborate on The Infinite Dial Canada in 2019.”

“We are pleased to continue our collaboration with Edison Research on the Infinite Dial Canada in 2019,” said John Rosso, President of Market Development at Triton Digital. “We look forward to presenting the latest in digital audio consumption and usage, including AM/FM radio, streaming audio, podcasting, the utilization of smart speakers, and more.”

Key findings from The Podcast Consumer Canada 2018 include:

  • 19% of adults are Weekly Podcast Listeners and 28% are Monthly Podcast Listeners
  • Podcast listeners have higher incomes and education levels than the average adult.
  • Weekly podcast listeners spend an average of 6 hours per week listening to podcasts.
  • Weekly podcast listeners listen to an average of 5 podcasts per week.
  • Over half of monthly podcast listeners listen to the entire podcast.
  • In-home is the top listening location for podcasts.
  • Almost half of podcast listeners listen to podcasts from Public Radio producers.
  • Monthly podcast listeners who also own smart speakers are more likely than average to own an Alexa.

Canadians are quite familiar with the term “podcasting,” with 61% of all adults 18+ saying they are familiar with the term. Almost half of Canadians 18+ (47%) have ever listened to a podcast, and the younger the respondent, the more likely they are to have listened. Sixty percent of adults 18-34 have listened to a podcast at some point in time.

Twenty-eight percent of all Canadian adults are monthly podcast listeners, and the younger the listener, the more likely they are to be a monthly or weekly podcast listener. Forty-one percent of those age 18-34 are monthly podcast listeners.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The same holds true for weekly podcast listening, with the younger demos showing a higher concentration of weekly podcast listening. Nineteen percent of adults 18+ have listened to a podcast in the past week, while 27% of 18-34-year-olds are weekly podcast listeners.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Podcast listeners have higher incomes and education levels than the average Canadian 18+. Twenty-nine percent of monthly podcast consumers have an annual household income of $75K-$150K compared with 22% of the total population.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Canadian podcast listeners age 18+ also have higher education levels than the average Canadian adult. One-third of monthly podcast listeners in Canada have at least some graduate school or an advanced degree, and 27% have a four-year degree.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monthly podcast listeners are much less likely to be retired and more likely to be employed full-time or to be a student than the average adult in Canada. Only 13% of Canadian monthly podcast listeners are retired, compared with 24% of the total 18+ market.  Fifty-three percent of podcast listeners are employed full time and 13% are students.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Podcasts can range in length from just a few minutes to well over an hour or even two. Weekly podcast listeners spend an average of six hours and four minutes per week listening to podcasts. Thirty-six percent of weekly podcast listeners spend five hours or more per week with podcasts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weekly podcast listeners listen to an average of five podcasts per week, with 21% listening to six or more in that same period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Over half of monthly podcast listeners say they listen to the entire podcast, while a little over one-third (35%) don’t listen to the entire podcast, but do listen to most of it. Only 10% say they listen to less than half or just the beginning of the podcast.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those who have been listening for the most number of years were more likely to consume podcasts more often. Twenty-eight percent of weekly podcast consumers have been listening to podcasts for five years or more, while 24% of monthly podcast consumers have been listening five years or more.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

At home is the overwhelming top location to listen to podcasts, with 63% of monthly podcast consumers listening most often at home. In-car/truck is a distant second place at 14% and is close to the number of those who listen at work, 11%. Four percent say they listen while walking around.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just under half all podcast listeners (47%), listen to podcasts from Public Radio producers such as CBC, Radio Canada, or NPR.

 

Podcast listeners (10%) are just slightly more likely to own a smart speaker, either an Amazon Alexa or a Google Home device, than the average adult in Canada (8%).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Of the podcast listeners who also own smart speakers, they are more likely to own an Amazon Alexa but no Google Home (37%) than the average adult in Canada. Overall, the Google Home is a more popular choice with 56% of monthly podcast consumers owning a Google and no Alexa compared to 63% of the adult population of Canadian smart speaker owners. When it comes to Amazon Alexa, though, 37% of podcast listener/smart speaker owners have one compared to 30% of the adult smart speaker owners in Canada. Seven percent of both groups own an Amazon Alexa AND a Google Home.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About  The Podcast Consumer Canada 2018:  In Q1 2018, Edison Research conducted a national telephone survey of 1,000 Canadians aged 18 and older, using random digit dialing techniques to both cell phones and landlines. The survey was offered in both English and French, and the data is weighted to national 18+ population figures.

Radio’s Hardware Problem: How does Radio compete if consumers don’t have radios?

Last week at the RAIN Summit Orlando I stood in front of a crowd and presented this video:

The purpose of this awesomely-bad B-movie trailer is to get everyone thinking about a world without radio. As ridiculous as the premise seems, if some catastrophic event took out radio transmitters, what would people do? Well, they would use the digital options they already have. It turns out that no catastrophic event is even necessary to create a shift in listening behavior – because it is already happening. Broadcast radio has a big problem: A hardware problem.

This is a topic that is pretty much never talked about at American radio conferences. Which is crazy to me because – when I think about radio’s hardware problem I picture that B-movie asteroid shooting to earth.

At American radio conferences, we see a million panels about creating great content, so that people, when choosing to listen to radio content, will choose your content.

But no one ever discusses an utterly essential question – what are they going to listen to that content ON?  One of the basic assumptions of the radio industry is that if we put our content out there – if we put our signals out there – people will naturally have a device on which to listen to it. Well – let’s look into that.

Earlier this year Edison published its annual Infinite Dial study. In this study, we asked, “How many radios do you have in your home?”  And by radio we mean – an actual device that picks up AM/FM signal. Conveniently, we had asked this same question one decade earlier – in 2008. At that time, four percent of Americans ages 12 and over said they did not have a single radio in their home, and six percent of 18-34 year olds were in the ‘no radio at home’ category.

Here are the results from this year.

Ten years later, 29 percent of Americans said they do not have a single radio in their homes, and among 18-34-year-olds, half are in that category.  Radio has a hardware problem.  For half of today’s 18-34 year olds, for nearly one-in-three of all Americans, there is no ‘radio’ in their home.  We released this incredible finding earlier this year and almost no one paid attention. Most radio trade publications did not make an issue of it, and I’m not aware any industry associations discussing it. Radio is facing a hardware problem, and yet no one seems to even care.

So I stood up on the RAIN stage on this week and forcefully said, “You need to care about this.”  Among all the issues facing the radio industry – all the opportunities and challenges – nothing might be more important than this hardware problem. Let me make that point as clearly as I can make it. If you take away nothing else from this post, please take this point: No one is loyal to FM.  Nor to AM.

 No one is loyal to FM.

Without a doubt, millions upon millions of people across America are loyal to the content radio produces.  They are loyal to their favorite morning shows, to the music and companionship and news and information and sense of place that radio content provides to them.  But no one cares at all about the method by which that content is transferred to them.  They listen, or listened, to radio via AM or FM all these years not because they cared about AM or FM, but because that just happened to be how it got to them.  It was and is a marvelously efficient manner in which to send content over to these devices that can receive them.

But – these devices.  These receivers.  These ‘radios’.  This hardware. Thirty percent of Americans don’t have a single one in their homes any longer.  And it’s not at all easy to acquire a new radio if you want one. 

A few weeks ago I walked into a Best Buy. I asked the person who greeted me at the door where I could find a radio. He sent me to the ‘speakers and headphones section’ and I found entire aisles of Bluetooth speakers. You could get them in any size and shape imaginable. The prices ranged from very affordable to stupidly expensive. There was also an aisle of smart speakers – new products from brands I had not heard of with Alexa and Google assistant baked in.  None of these speakers had AM/FM. I did eventually find a radio…it was a feature on a CD player that cost $59. $59 dollars! Can you really expect consumers to buy a radio at this point if these are their choices?

In a world without radios, consumers select from what we at Edison have called for years the “Infinite Dial.”  Not a dial that stretches only from 88.1 to 107.9 megahertz.  But one that allows them to listen to pretty much anything they can imagine.  They can listen to ‘radio’ – or at least the streams of pretty much any radio station that is also available in their local markets, but they can also listen to the streams of radio stations from other markets or other countries, or they can listen to what we now think of as ‘pureplays’ like Pandora and Spotify and Apple Music, or hybrid concepts like iHeart Radio, or podcasts, or – essentially anything they might want to

At Edison, we also perform a subscriber-only research series called Share of Ear®.  Among the many amazing things that Share of Ear tells us, it shows what device people listen to radio on. So let’s look at the devices that people consume audio on today.

 

The good news for the radio industry is that the device that gets the most listening today is what I have been talking about today: “A radio”.  42% of all the time spent listening to all the kinds of audio that consumers in America have available today is listened to on an actual radio. And as of today, 24 percent of all audio listening time is spent on a phone.  Fourteen percent of all audio time is from a computer.  And 2 percent of all listening is now on a smart speaker on 2 percent is through an internet-connected TV.

The listening on those four devices combined is equal to the time spent listening on ‘radios’.  Forty-two percent of the time spent listening to audio ALSO goes to these four devices.

So, obviously, ‘radio’ has 100% “Share of Ear” on radios.  But, here is my question: what is AM/FM Radio’s Share of Ear on digital devices? What is radio’s share on phones, computers, smart speakers and internet-connected TVs when combined?

The answer is eight percent. Radio has only an eight percent share on digital devices.  To date, when people are choosing what they want to listen to along the Infinite Dial, they are simply not spending a ton of time with the streams of AM/FM radio.

Now let’s look at radio’s share on individual digital devices:

On internet-connected TV’s, five percent of time spent with audio goes to radio. Out of all our digital devices, this is where radio does the worst. According to the infinite dial, 48% of Americans have an internet-connected TV in their homes. If this is a device that almost half the population owns, and we already know that radio has a hardware problem. This is an area where radio can definitely do better.

On the smartphone, six percent of time spent with audio goes to radio. The smartphone is a great thing for audio in general. I have heard some say it is the golden age of audio, partly because of the unlimited choices and easy access to audio with the assistance of a smartphone. Only, at least on the smartphone, radio is not sharing in this golden age.

Radio’s story is a little – very little – improved on computers. Ten percent of time spent listening to audio goes to radio on computers. But there’s one place that feels like a ray of hope for radio: the smart speaker.

On smart speakers, 21% of audio’s Share of Ear goes to radio. Surely a decent portion of that listening is going to public radio stations, which have jumped onto this technology faster and harder than commercial radio have.

Now to be fair, under the apocalyptic scenario I presented earlier, if every radio in America were wiped out, radio’s Share of Ear on digital devices would assuredly start to rise.  Some significant chunk of the people who are listening to radio now would immediately seek out the streams of the radio stations they are no longer able to listen to on a radio.

But there’s tons of evidence that once people have access to the Infinite Dial, they start to explore many more options.  So what can radio do?  What steps should the American Radio industry take to improve the situation?

Well first, let me cut off any consideration of one idea – That somehow we can get people to start buying radios again. If you gave them away for free, do you think people would choose them over their other beloved devices? No, the answer has to be for radio to put itself in a better position to compete on the ‘Infinite Dial.’

So in order to figure out what to do next, we decided to talk to various people we knew who look at U.S. Radio from the outside.  We contacted various friends from radio throughout the world and we asked them what they would do, and what they are doing, in order to be prepared to compete in this theoretical world where radios don’t exist.  When radio companies have to compete on what is essentially an even playing field with every other option possible.

REIMAGINING RADIO

The first point made by our advisors, rather naturally, is that radio companies have to reimagine themselves beyond ‘radio’:


This is a classic Business School story come to life. The train companies in the middle of the twentieth century, enjoying a near monopoly on the long-haul movement of goods, didn’t see the threat of long-haul trucking. The lesson is that they didn’t define their business correctly. They didn’t understand that they were in the transportation business and not the train business.  So they just watched their share of transport drop and drop.

In some ways, Radio has hardly noticed or even acknowledged its dropping share of audio, or Share of Ear as we call it at Edison Research.  Part of this relates to the business model.  Radio brands in local markets sell their ads against the Nielsen ratings, which only measure ‘radio’ and don’t have everything on a single scale.  On top of that, radio companies in America have actively resisted the measurement of IP-delivered radio or satellite radio or really anything beyond AM and FM and some limited measurement of the streams of AM/FM from Nielsen.  So instead of being able to market a story of a vibrant audio market, it is a story of a declining ‘radio’ market.  Especially as the growth has been coming, to date, from pure-plays such as SiriusXM, Spotify, Apple and Pandora.

Is it too late for American radio companies to back into the “audio” business, instead of just the “radio” business? Has the train already left the station? I hope not.

Let’s move on the next thing our advisors talked about: Content.

CONTENT


So many points of interest here.  Everyone is talking about creating more and more content – about essentially flooding the market.  In particular, podcasting is growing and exciting, but there is actually only so much taste or interest in speech-based content.

Because most people, at most times when they want to consume audio, want to consume music.

So I want to talk about one aspect of what Rüdiger Landgraf was discussing.  There is an irony involved in the fact that the deal that has helped make American Radio billions upon billions of dollars over the last eighty years – not paying for music – may be the biggest threat to radio today.

What do I mean by that?  As most all of you know, radio has essentially not had to pay for the biggest chunk of its content – music – forever.  Music is what most people want, and American Radio can leverage it for free, so of course what happened?  Radio in America has smartly delivered “More Music with Less Talk.”  And boy that has worked great…until it didn’t.

Just like the train companies, radio could carry the music freight until the trucks of Pandora and Spotify and YouTube came along.  And once people enter the digital environment – they expect a level of interactivity that listening to the radio doesn’t currently allow.  So what radio really needs to do is sit down with the music companies and negotiate an entirely new deal.  Maybe – dare I suggest it – give in on a small broadcast performance royalty in exchange for the ability to make radio over the internet interactive.  Let people skip songs they don’t like.  Let radio companies create customized music streaming and put radio in a position to compete with the pure-plays.

HOW CAN RADIO COMPETE?

So how can American Radio compete in a world where everything is digital and radios no longer exist?  Let’s hear one more time from our advisors.


There is one crucial part that I want to emphasize here: this notion of “Agree on technology and compete on content.”

Let’s take our imaginary scenario of a world with no radios and expand it further.  What if radio had simply never existed.  Would we have understood the value that the dial creates?  The radio dial is the perfect example of “agree on technology and compete on content.”  The consumer need only to buy that radio – that single device, to listen to all the content available from it.  Can you imagine instead if it had been set up so that you needed a different radio for every station?  One radio for NBC, a different radio for CBS, another for Mutual?  It is, indeed almost unimaginable.  Surely radio would never have grown into the medium it is today had it not agreed on technology from the beginning?  Instead, radio created the smarter world, one in which a simple turn of the dial quickly allowed one to try to find the content she is seeking.

And yet, think about radio’s digital offerings today.  Many radio stations have their own station-specific apps or you can listen to iHeart Radio stations on iHeart’s app, and now you can only listen to the streams of Entercom’s stations on the Radio.com app.  Changing from Z100 to WCBS-FM, a process that is incredibly easy along the FM Dial, now requires you to close the iHeart app and open Radio.com and only then attempt to navigate to WCBS’s stream.  It’s impossible.

Which should make anyone involved in American Radio quickly understand that beyond all the other reasons people are not choosing the streams of AM/FM Radio in big numbers in the digital sphere, beyond all the content-oriented reasons, the biggest issue is that we have made listening to ‘radio’ on digital, a terrible user experience. We have taken something marvelous, an environment of pre-set buttons and scan and seek and simple easy switching to find preferred content, and made it difficult at best.

So the biggest answer I can give for how ‘radio’ can compete in a world where no one owns a ‘radio’, is for the radio industry in America to unite around this precept of “Agree on technology and compete on content.”  I certainly don’t know how this can be done, as I know almost every big radio company has their own platform. But we simply must take American consumers back to a place where listening to ‘radio’, their beloved, local, in-market, targeted content is easy.  With a single, unified, easy-to-use technology – like the RadioPlayers in place in Canada or the UK or Australia and other countries.

Recently SiriusXM announced that they are acquiring Pandora. When we combine the Share of Ear of Pandora and Sirius XM we see that twelve percent of American’s listening time goes to one of these companies. Radio is competing against this. If your competitors are consolidating, you don’t have a chance without finding a way to work together in the digital sphere.

TAKEAWAYS

So to review – here are my main thoughts on what radio needs to do to win a world with no radios:

  • Redefine your business to all forms of audio – the ‘radio’ business simply can’t fully compete in the on-demand environment of digital
  • Work to renegotiate the relationship with the music companies so that the biggest part of radio programming – music – can be delivered from radio companies in ways modern consumers expect
  • Agree on technology and compete on content.

Again, no one is loyal to FM. If people are loyal – it is to your content and your brand. Every second a new person makes the switch to digital. What will you do to make people choose to listen to you – in a world with no radios?