http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-radio22jun22,1,5678695.story
EDITORIAL
Pay-to-Play vs. 'Neo-Radio'

June 22, 2004

Ever wondered why some radio stations sound like echo chambers, with the same songs spinning again and again? As Times staffer Jeff Leeds recently reported, in some cases it's because record companies are buying advertising time in which the stations play their songs. The deep-pockets approach helped Canadian pop rocker Avril Lavigne's "Don't Tell Me" win more than 100 spins during a recent week on a Nashville radio station.

The practice isn't illegal, Leeds reported, as long as stations include an introduction along the lines of: "And now, Avril Lavigne's 'Don't Tell Me,' presented by Arista Records." The fuzzy disclosure undoubtedly goes in one ear of Lavigne's preteen audience and out the other.

Record labels buy airtime for selected songs — often in the bargain-rate early morning hours when few people are listening — to deceive radio tracking services that monitor the number of times songs are played across the country. Billboard and other industry publications use this information to set their lists of most-played songs, which heavily influence programming decisions. Because tracking services don't distinguish between normal spins and commercial ones, record labels again have found a way to use their wallets to influence playlists.

During the 1950s it was payola; record promoters passed cash under the table to influence what disc jockeys played. Either way, the intent is the same — to dupe listeners into believing that what's played on the radio accurately reflects what people want to hear. Additional spins won't turn a terrible tune into a smash, but they can nudge a song into the top 10 or extend its stay at the top for a few lucrative weeks.

Contrast this pay-for-play approach with what the industry calls "neo-radio," an increasingly popular, and by many accounts profitable, programming concept. It has spread to stations across the country, including Los Angeles' Indie 103.1 FM (formerly known as KDL-FM). This twist on alternative rock programming produces playlists that cater to local listeners — say, more grunge sounds for Seattle listeners and a heavier dose of Alice in Chains for Los Angeles. The stations keep in touch with listeners over phone lines and through the Internet. A leading radio trade journal describes the programming as "listener-responsive, genuine and unpredictable." In short, it's the kind of radio programming that money can't buy. Listening to the customer … what will they think of next?

^_^... saaaa

Welcome back, tomsong. I used to think Avril was a pretty good role model for my 13-year-old daughter--I don't believe she displays her personal attributes as often or as obviously as the other female singers I've seen lately. Then something like this happens and I'm reminded once again not to push the hero label...It seems to me that these record labels are violating the spirit of the law, if not the letter. Another legal loophole to close, I guess.

Avril Sucks, however there are many streaming stations that are totally request powered, being my favourite. If a song is good, then it'll be requested more BY THE LISTENERS.

that would explain the constant play of bad songs on pittsburgs 96.1 kiss fm or B 93.7

yeah- that can be a downer if the users are not into ur kinda stuff

CD101 101.1 FM in Columbus is one of the radio stations still paying attention to their listeners. They pride themselves as locally owned and locally operated. They send out a weekly survey to listeners who sign up to rate the songs that they play. Then on Thursdays, they have a no repeat thursdays for 12 hours, and that always makes for good radio.

That probably explains why my local independent station, 107.5 WKZL, plays mostly rap and J-Lo music these days. I used to remember talking with the nighttime DJ and kids were calling in asking for stuff I'd never even heard of and which he wasn't allowed to play.

So I stopped listening to them. The alternative is unfortunately a Clear Channel station, but at least they don't play as much crap as the independent station.

I could be a better DJ 7 days a week than anything Clear Channel has to offer. Of course, I can't afford to pay the compulsory licensing fee to play any artists/record companies that require it. Until then, I groove on SomaFM and Winamp stations and argue with the boyfriend over what gets played in the truck. (I swear someday I'm gonna commit homocide over his love affair with Avril and her sound alike friends.)

"Because tracking services don't distinguish between normal spins and commercial ones, record labels again have found a way to use their wallets to influence playlists".

But hold on here ..... what exactly is a 'normal' spin? I suspect that a lot (probably the vast majority) of so-called 'normal' spins are in fact aired tunes which were on the playlist of a radio promotor - who "contributes" hundreds of thousands of dollars to stations in exchange for air-play of songs which appear on the promotors play list.

Frankly, the idea of artists and labels being able to pay for a single song may not be so bad, since it would in theory allow smaller labels to get a few hit songs on the radio and thus more exposure. Sure, I realize that there are folks who claim that radio should only play what people want to hear, but remember - people have to hear it first before they can decide if they want to hear it some more.

Bufo, be careful what you say. If payola were an accepted practice, only the songs being promoted by the deepest pockets would get any airtime. (In fact, even with payola being illegal, this is STILL what happens.)

Perhaps if there was an (also affordable to non-RIAA) limit on how many spins a day a song could recieve and a limit on how much money could be spent "buying" those slots...

I've been hearing a lot about "Neo-Radio," it sounds like a cool and interesting idea for music programming. Does any know of any other Neo-Radio stations around the U.S. or on the east coast. I heard it's spreading out east.