Slashdot Log In
Internet Radio Failing to Find Support?
Posted by
Cliff
on Fri Feb 10, 2006 11:28 AM
from the what-a-shame dept.
from the what-a-shame dept.
K Fox asks: "WOXY, one of the Internet's larger radio stations, has announced that it will soon implement a monthly subscription fee, to support operations. When the Cincinnati based station went from terrestrial broadcast 97.7 to Internet only, they vowed to keep their streams free to listers. Now, they are saying that increased broadcast taxes, falling advertising revenue, and the overall uncertainty in the market (local or global?) has pushed them to change their business model. Is this a sign of things to come for the other radio stations, that broadcast over the Internet? Will digital music distribution fall solely to giants like XM and iTunes?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
KCRW (Score:2)
Re:KCRW (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:KCRW (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:5, Insightful)
Also how do you listen to it on the move - I can't listen to it in the car or on my portable device.
Then there's the problem whereby you can't go to your local comet (or other electronics store) and buy a radio for the office that has an ethernet port on the back - and no i'm not going to connect my computer up to the stereo becase evry time someone IM's me or I get an email or windows breaks you get horible alert noises that would drive everyone insane!
Surley these problems are why these broadcasters are having problems.
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:3, Funny)
You need to setup a dedicated computer in the office for that. You don't use your personal system for such things!
And stop calling me Surley!
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:3, Insightful)
> system for such things!
So you're saying that once the problems the OP identified are overcome, on a second system `in the office` (or indeed at home) then you'll have something roughly comparable with a radio costing £/$10?
Ok, but apart from that, why has it failed to take off?
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:2, Interesting)
2. the more listeners, the more expensive it is for the broadcaster. Bandwidth is not free, despite common opinion.
3. internet ad revenue is horrendously bad because internet adverts don't really do much for sales. Advertisers know this and don't pay what they used to.
4. there is a broadcast tax levied now, in addition to royalty costs.
It's possible that it's a simple matter of economics. I love internet radio and listen all the time but I get the feel
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:5, Interesting)
Neither XM nor Sirius are making any money yet so 'surviving as well as they do' doesn't mean much.
I subscribe to Sirius and I'm happy with it. I always hear the argument "why pay to have some stranger play a bunch of songs that he/she selected when you can load playlists on your ipod and play what you like to hear"
The reality is that I hear lots of new music on Sirius that I wouldn't be exposed to if I didn't subscribe. Streaming audio (internet radio) is blocked at work so that option can be ruled out. I can play the thousands of songs I own over and over, but I like to hear new music. Listening to regular FM radio for new music is a horrible experience (littered with annoying ads and stations pushing particular songs because of payola).
Even when Sirius is playing not so new music, I enjoy most of the shows. It's worth the price for now. If I didn't have the money I could easily live without it, but it's a nice convenience that I can afford right now. The only thing I don't like about Sirius is the horrible sound quality of most channels. The classical channels are good and Howard Stern is good, most other music channels are mediocre, and all talk stations (except for Howard Stern) sound worse than AM. I wish they would get rid of twenty or thirty stations that I never listen to and use that bandwidth to improve the quality of their other channels.
Parent
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:2)
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:3, Informative)
Cellular internet is getting faster. Soon we should be able to listen to 128kbps streams while on the move. T-Mobile offers unlimited GPRS for $19.99/mo as do other providers; that's fast enough for a crap-quality stream :)
Sure you can [amazon.com]
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:5, Informative)
Man, slashdotters can be so fucking annoying sometimes...
I'm sorry my initial example was poor. I just grabbed the first link and didn't look at it much. Nonetheless, there are umpteen fucking examples of streaming internet radio devices. Many of them are available on the shelf, even at places like Circuit Shitty. And I've seen several at Fry's, come to think of it.
Parent
Re:I'm not convinced about internet radio... (Score:3, Informative)
Airtunes [apple.com] is your friend. I stream to two stereos from my machine in the office remote controlled [coverbuddy.com] by the PSP [playstation.com] and no alert noises (e.g. incoming email) interferes with this.
If you use Airfoil [rogueamoeba.com] you can use pretty much any application that processes audio.
Internet radio is not radio (Score:5, Insightful)
using wi-fi to listen to the radio station it doesn't have the
flexibility as a normal radio station (can't listen walking down the
street , in the car or anywhere not near a cable or dial up line).
Even with wi-fi , who wants to walk around with a laptop switched on
under their arm?
Internet radio is fine for the home and work markets , but it fails
miserably for the on-the-move market where a large proportion of
people listen to the radio.
Re:Internet radio is not radio (Score:2)
The idea of using it for background noise doesn't work with me for a few reasons.
#1- I hate the idea of wasting all of that bandwidth. If every person started listening to Internet radio, there would be so much traffic that the latest virus wouldn't even be able to spread.
#2- Sound fidelity is usually not very good.
#3- If I am at my computer, I have a huge library of music already available to me. And possibly some standard radio stations if I want somethi
Re:Internet radio is not radio (Score:2, Interesting)
Clearwire is looking pretty good these days (although my house is outside the local coverage area).
Using Wireless internet (not WiFi, not wireless networking but wireless internet service) you can drive around and be connected the whole time...
In fact one of the people signed up for the mailing group of www.bsdg.org was actually broadcasting video from his car just to prove how cool it is.
I'd guess eventually there will be an overlap of services and we may al
Re:Internet radio is not radio (Score:2)
Podcasts are taking that space for many people now.
I know, I hate saying "podcast"--sounds like some bad '60s sci-fi movie--but canned programming distributed over the 'net for consumption on the go in portable players....much more flexible than streaming radio for most users."
Re:Internet radio is not radio (Score:3, Interesting)
At one point I was listening to WOXY in my car. I connected to WOXY via the internet connection available from my cell provider and then hooked that into my PDA. It worked pretty well but took too much effort to set up each time.
Hardly surprising from this end (Score:2, Interesting)
OTOH - I can get XM or local broadcast from my desk just fine, or just use my iPod.
Re:Hardly surprising from this end (Score:2)
Crystal Ball (Score:5, Insightful)
It will if the RIAA has any say in the matter. The last thing they want is Internet radio. Consider that they pay broadcast radio to play songs but demand to be paid for the same songs going over the Internet.
We can speculate on why (greed doesn't explain it, since they don't stand to gain any revenue from strangling the baby.) My own guess is that Internet radio is cheap enough to run that independent artists might build listeners and escape from the RIAA plantation.
Re:Crystal Ball (Score:2)
XM radio, something that a lot of people hail as the "greatest thing", is another medium I just don't care for. I really enjoyed DirecTV's own music stations but when they moved over t
Re:Crystal Ball (Score:5, Informative)
"It will if the RIAA has any say in the matter. The last thing they want is Internet radio. Consider that they pay broadcast radio to play songs but demand to be paid for the same songs going over the Internet."
I am not sure I follow your logic.
With terrestrial radio, licenses are paid only to the societies run by and for the composers and songwriters -- ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and the like -- that is, the representatives of the copyright holders of the words and music. The record companies see none of ths money.
With Internet radio, the RIAA successfully pushed for the owners of the copyright on the recording (that is, the record companies) to get paid, as well.
Here is how the RIAA puts it on their own site:
Terrestrial radio stations don't pay sound recording copyright owners. Why should webcasters be treated any differently?
The lack of a broad sound recording performance right that applies to US terrestrial broadcasts is an historical accident. In almost every other country broadcasters pay for their use of the sound recordings upon which their business is based. For decades, the US recording industry fought unsuccessfully to change this anomaly while broadcasters built very profitable businesses on the creative works of artists and record companies. The broadcasters were simply too strong on Capitol Hill.
However, with the birth of digital transmission technology, Congress understood the importance of establishing a sound recording performance right for digital transmissions, and did so in 1995 with the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act ("DPRA"). In doing so, Congress "grandfathered" the old world of terrestrial broadcasting, but required everyone (including broadcasters) operating in the new world of digital transmissions to pay their fair share for using copyrighted sound recordings in their business.
In short: with Internet broadcasting, the record companies get a cut of the royalties. With traditional radio, they do not. My guess is that they do not want Internet radio stations to go away any time soon.
This gives Slasdotters three groups of people to hate:
Parent
I only listen to radio when driving (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it'll stick around... (Score:3, Insightful)
broadcast taxes? (Score:2)
Re:broadcast taxes? (Score:2)
Nah, it means something else. (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that radio stations have to fool advertisers that people are listening to them with contests and call in campaigns and sheer speculation. There is no way to prove how many people are listening at any given time. Just a big assumuption. With internet streaming, you have stastics and logs of who is actually listening. As with the problem with click through ads, people discovered that people ignore ads and have been for years.
I've personally never bought or been influenced by an add on a TV or radio. Mostly because 99% of the products don't apply to a geek other than laughing at Geico commercials.
However, I have bought plenty of things because of Adsense and searching on google because it interests me or I was actually looking for comparable products. Brute force advertising is just a waste of money.
Re:Nah, it means something else. (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry to break it to you, but advertising influences you, whether you want it to or not, and whether you think it does or not.
Re:Nah, it means something else. (Score:4, Insightful)
Who's your auto/home/life insurer? How did you choose that company?
What kind of car/truck/motorcycle do you drive (if any)? What makes you think that car/whatever is better than another (better enough to buy, at least)?
What's your favorite breakfast cereal?
What kind of shoes are you wearing?
What's your favorite soft drink?
Do you own an iPod?
Chances are, if any of the above apply to you, you've been influenced by advertising, either on the radio or TV or somewhere else.
Parent
Re:Nah, it means something else. (Score:5, Insightful)
While it's possible true, I'd doubt that you've never been influenced by an ad. A ton of money is spent on research and advertising, and it's done because there is a return on investment. Sure some people are affected a lot more by advertisers (just look at QVC and other similar stations) and some are less so. While I can't think of a particular product I've purchased based on an advertisement, there are obvious times when an ad will get an idea in my head. Maybe I'm looking for something that I'd normally buy at Home Depot, but I see an ad for a local hardware store that I didn't know about previously (having just moved to the area). So now knowing about this new store, regardless of the specific item they are advertising, I might check them out. Same thing happens with local restaurants.
Brute force advertising is just a waste of money.
I think you'll find a lot of people who have "wasted" that money who would disagree. There is a reason they advertise. There is a reason why they invest so much to produce and air a commercial. It's for return on investment. Does targetted advertising have a higher return on investment? Probably. But the only way to currently do targetted advertising is on the web (well you could advertise on certain shows/channels/times on tv/radio), whereas the vast majority of people still use the tv and radio for entertainment.
-dave
Parent
This station is great (Score:4, Informative)
WOXY has long been an independant station that played what the DJ's and fans liked. They never sold out to corporate rock, and their motto always has been "Corporate Radio SUCKS!" Their selection varies so widely, and they try their bests to honor requests from everyone. Even when they were on the air and internet at the same time, they took email request around the world.
Gonna have to buy a subscription and support this incredible station.
Learn from your competitors (Score:3, Informative)
DI can support up to 40 to 60 thousand listeners simultaneously during peak loads (thrus afternoon), and still make a profit.
DISCLAIMER: I worked for them previously
Sunny Dubey
Biggest problem is... (Score:4, Insightful)
The only online radio stations I ever listen to, and barely at that, are playlists from David Byrne on his website cast as streaming audio.
Why I stopped listening to any radio IMHO (Score:5, Insightful)
2. The music is the same playlist shuffled differently for each new day
3. There are no deejays that will actually play obscure requests
4. Too many annoying commercials / fake deejays
5. Too many stations are owned by the same companies
6. Companies have been doing 'pay to play' illegally - big surprise
7. I buy my own music to hear the artists I enjoy - I am in control
Not well implemented (Score:2)
My PC at home is in my home office, and I do listen to internet radio when I am working there, but I don't generally spend my entire day there. Internet radio needs to find solutions to make the content available on any home media device.
I am anxiously waiting for the TuneDock from Griffin Technology, which will allow both iPod playback on your home theater system (with on
Simple... (Score:2)
If radio worked Howard Stern wouldn't need to be on Sirius.
And internet radio fails because they don't/won't have Howard Stern.
You can still listen for free (Score:2, Insightful)
From TFA
And for those of you who just can't afford to pay one more bill each month, we're keeping a low bandwidth stream. It may not be the best quality, but you can still tune in for free.
They are only charging for CD quality streams. It seems they're moving more towards a donation (with perks) scheme rather than a subscription only service. And moving to such a system certainly doesn't mean support isn't out there. I'm a fan of KEXP [kexp.org] which has done very well with membership drives while keepi
pirate radio (Score:2)
Cannot listen to Internet Radio in my car (Score:2)
"radio" listening is in my car.
Set up your own radio (Score:2)
Of course that only solves the problem of music, but to each their own.
Uh, no ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh -- no. But internet radio is in its infancy. It will take off with the deployment of wireless broadband and a new class of devices capable of pulling streams without being connected to a computer.
The first show will drop when Apple makes available a wireless version of the iPod. I bet this will happen before Christmas.
After that, it's just a function of wireless rollout. According to Bridge Research, a research company that does most of its work for commercial radio, There will be something on the order of 130 million wireless broadband users in 2010. Wired users will make up another 150 million or so. This should be enough critical mass to make internet radio commercially viable.
Of course, all advertising-supported media is changing. The day of mass-media supremacy is coming to an end, and wirelessly delivered entertainment should further democratize content delivery.
In the meantime, internet broadcasters will have to find clever business models to stay afloat. Applying old-school models to new media won't be effective.
By the way, Bridge projects XM and Sirius to be at a combined market of less than 50 million subscribers in 2010. Sat broadcasting could become quite profitable at that level, but hardly dominant in terms of ears. Look for major satelite entertainment brands to migrate to internet radio as it grows.
WOXY.com "What's next [the long term outlook]?" (Score:3, Interesting)
From the announcement on woxy.com's home page [woxy.com]:
Really it seems their hoping the rest of the world -- advertisers, primarily -- will catch up with what woxy.com is doing.
Basically, woxy.com's business model is: traditional (but independent) commercial radio but over the internet instead of over the air. You would think that advertisers who would be willing to buy commercials on traditional over-the-air radio would be able to easily make the transition to internet-only (especially if they realized that audience measurement online should be much better than the wacky Arbitron [arbitron.com] and other sampling-based metrics for over-the-air radio). Further, it seems that internet radio's audience has to be growing, while over-the-air's audience overall can't be growing -- sure people listen to over-the-air in their cars, but how many people with desk jobs listen to over-the-air radio at work instead of plugging their headphones into their computer? I just don't get it that adevertisers (inc. the agencies) that have dealt with radio for ages just don't seem to understand that commercial internet radio is basically the same thing.
Radio Paradise (Score:4, Informative)
I know this is just one example, but it shows that it's possible to have an internet radio stations with free streams be a successful business.
WOXY, follow Oprah, Howard Stern... (Score:3, Insightful)
Legal issues - Not technical or economic issues... (Score:5, Insightful)
The hard part of Internet radio is dealing with all the legal restrictions, licencing, ASCAP payments, and whatever.
Like all government regulation, the regulations and legal restrictions are designed to create fixed costs such that the barrier to entry is so high that there are only a few large competitors in the industry.
Eliminate all the restrictions and regulations, and Internet radio will take off.
WFMU and the Internet (Score:3, Informative)
From what I understand, the transition to Internet simulcasting was quite successful and led to improved fundraising (now the world funds the station instead of New York City). The station streams in Real, WMA, AAC, Ogg, and two flavors of MP3 (128 Kbps/32 Kbps). Each 128 Kbps MP3 stream (usually 3 hours long) is stored for three weeks, but the Real version is permanently archived.
I've found the WFMU streams to be very reliable. Now I hear that the station is going to be streaming direct to mobile phones. Well, good luck to them 'cause I'm a big fan.
Its a slow, long death (Score:3, Interesting)
1. Podcasting - I can podcast a show to millions of people and they can listen any time they want with a 10th of the bandwidth and equipment.
2. Preimium/Subscriber Based Content - A lot of broadcastors are setting up commercial free broadcasts and podcasts with all the behind the scenes audio in place of the commercials for a price.
3. Cost - It costs a butt-load of money to set up a streaming server and internet connection that can handle then load of any broadcast. If you use someone else to do the streaming for you, it still costs a lot and you loss control of your broadcast. P2P solutions for live broadcasts just don't work now and I'm not sure they ever will.
4. Laws - Its been 2 minutes since you looked at the the FCC/EFF/MPAA/ABCDEF page. Better refresh it to see what the new rules are. Can someone point me to an update set of rules and regulations for broadcasting is?
Just for the mobility factor you need a way to transmit your message over the radio waves. If someone could come up with a simple way for me to broadcast my message to say a five mile radius from my home to some I would love you.
CB sucks. LPFM is dead (thanks to my church). Shortwave/Ham radio requires to many licenses (see #4).
If someone could make a simple transmitter in one of the unlicened bands for $200, and then make a reciever that will re-transmit the signal into FM so my car or home stero could pick it up for $100 or less, I would be eternally greatful. The exact frequency wouldn't matter because the listener would ID themself by a digital call sign that people would find your station.
Re:If your station is good enough... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:If your station is good enough... (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.virginradio.co.uk/thestation/listen/st r eams.html [virginradio.co.uk]
Here's a index list of each of the virgin radio stations that can be heard,
http://www.virginradio.co.uk/thestation/listen/ind ex.html [virginradio.co.uk]
Re:KEXP makes it work (Score:3, Interesting)
Amen. I can't remember the last time I listened to conventional radio (for music at least), and KEXP is the reason for that. Good programming by people who love music: What a concept!
(Attention ClearChannel lurkers: This is the Official Secret Formula (tm) of KEXP. Don't try this at home, or in the studios of your lackeys, I mean, stations. Proper, I mean, incorrect usage of this formula may cause several middle managers' heads within your corporate headquarters to explode. Shhhhhh!)