Re: RE: Re: Non-comm rankings

["A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@attorneyross.com>]

On 4 Mar 2003 at 20:25, Dan Billings wrote:

> Most people listen to the radio for short periods.  During those short
> periods spent listening, they want to hear the recognizable songs they
> like. If they don't, they turn the dial.  That is why stations have
> limited playlists of a few songs that test very well.  It doesn't make for
> lots of repetition if you listen for long periods (or work there), but
> most people don't listen for long.  Complaining about tight playlists is
> like asking "Why does WBZ do the same news and weather every 10 minutes." 
> Radio is a business, it's not art.  By the way: Top 40 stations in the
> glory days of AM radio had even tighetr playlists than stations have
> today.
 
Classical music listeners listen for much longer periods, and they don't appreciate hearing 
the same things too often.

I don't think Top 40 stations in the "glory days of AM radio" had tighter playlists than stations 
today.  Besides the Top 40 -- 40 songs, mind you -- they also played new records not yet on 
the charts and often a smattering of oldies, "blasts from the past," or "from the WKBR-
chives," etc.  And the DJs had a certain amount of freedom in choosing these, I hear.

-- 
A. Joseph Ross, J.D.                           617.367.0468
 15 Court Square, Suite 210                 lawyer@attorneyross.com
Boston, MA 02108-2503           	         http://www.attorneyross.com