Speech-based radio is the media sector’s Bermuda Triangle.
Speech-based radio outside of the BBC, that is. Not since the earliest
days of breakfast television has a media genre promised so much and
delivered so little. Never have so many high hopes and good ideas
disappeared without trace. When commercial speech-based franchises came
up for grabs a few years ago, radio had really begun to hit its stride -
and the advent of national stations plus opportunities for more
diversity promised to take the medium on to a whole new level.
Granted, some of the franchise applications were wacky, but we seemed to
be witnessing a quantum leap in creativity. We were about to explore an
imaginative new world full of richness and variety. Radio 4 without the
hang-ups, the complacency and the chattering-class smugness. Radio 5
without David Mellor. It hasn’t happened. Not even at Talk Radio, which
seemed to have everything going for it being not just speech-based but
national too. But not only has Talk Radio struggled since its launch in
1995, it has struggled in a pretty unimaginative way.
It has conspicuously failed to challenge the dubious notion that
speech-based means plonky phone-ins. Or the assumption that commercial
radio should largely be seat-of-the-pants, totally unrehearsed and
unstructured. Unless you are blessed by genius, this only works when you
have carefully crafted content - called quality music - around which to
build programming.
The good news is that Kelvin is riding to the rescue. Kelvin, as in
Kelvin MacKenzie, the one-time editor of the Sun and champion of the
News Bunny during a subsequent spell as the boss of Mirror Group’s Live
TV.
Last week, a consortium headed by MacKenzie finalised its pounds 24.7
million acquisition of the station from CLT-UFA, and MacKenzie
immediately started dropping hints about a new dawn. Big names could be
coming on board. Ideas will be imported from the US and Australian
markets. Talk will become more intelligent, chasing a more upmarket
audience. MacKenzie might, despite his natural modesty, be persuaded to
fill the station’s all-important breakfast slot.
Is the advertising market heartened by such notions? Where exactly
should MacKenzie be taking Talk? Yvonne Scullion, the director of radio
at Zenith Media, believes Talk’s biggest problem is that its current
positioning is not particularly well defined. She states: ’It’s not the
station you go to for today’s big news story but it’s not pure
entertainment either.
I’d like to see it adopt a more distinctive style, moving closer to
Radio 5 Live in content but with an edge and attitude which is
definitely non-BBC.
’As part of this, the breakfast segment desperately needs a rethink.
This should be Talk’s flagship show, but it is seriously
under-performing against the competition. Moving in a hard-hitting
presenter with big name guests and giving the whole thing a punchier
journalistic style could give Talk a show that creates the news as well
as reports on it. Overall, I’d like to see significantly fewer phone-ins
and the development of sports as a major strand. Given MacKenzie’s
connection with BSkyB, producing a high quality evening sports magazine
in addition to covering live major events should be possible.’
Many in the market echo these sentiments. Radio 5 should be the basic
inspiration and sport, in particular football, should come courtesy of
Talk’s new links with Rupert Murdoch’s media properties. However, many
are sceptical about any proposition that couples the words
’intelligence’ and ’Kelvin MacKenzie’.
But according to Robert Ray, the joint managing director of MediaVest,
there is still a huge untapped potential for speech-based radio in the
UK. ’Talk was pretty poor at the beginning but it had started to get a
number of elements right. I believe that Kelvin MacKenzie can deliver a
slightly more approachable version of Radio 5 - he has a feel for what
the punters want and he has an incredibly strong journalistic
background.
He needs to attract stronger personalities and he needs to establish a
stronger presence - in the broadest sense - in the breakfast and
drivetime slots.
’I think MacKenzie would be ideal for breakfast time. He has weight and
he delivers a punch. He will make sure he appears on, and gets coverage
from, other media.’
Jonathan Gillespie, the head of radio at BMP Optimum, has a different
take. He thinks Radio 4 should be the main target. He says: ’Kelvin
MacKenzie has arrived at a good time - he has a radio station ready to
start competing for audience and an award-winning sales team. If he
takes the station upmarket, as he has stated he will do, and achieves a
reasonable audience, Talk will be quids in. Advertisers have coveted
Radio 4’s listenership and Radio 4 has taken a fall in the recent Rajar
figures. Inventive programming can guide these disenfranchised listeners
to Talk’s door.’
Gillespie admits there’s one potential snag - none of the parties in the
MacKenzie consortium have experience of quality programming. He’s not
alone in worrying about this. Morag Blazey, the media director at New
PHD, agrees with the widespread view that the breakfast slot is crucial,
but she’s sceptical about rumours that MacKenzie intends to fill it
himself.
’Personalities will pull people in but when the shine goes off, the
audience tends to disappear again. Sustaining it is the difficult thing,
especially when you are not sufficiently differentiated within the
market,’ she says.
’The real question, though, is whether MacKenzie is a big personality.
He may have big ideas but I’m not sure that’s the same thing. If he has
a big programme idea, he should tell people the idea and let them get on
with it. If I were MacKenzie, I wouldn’t change much. Talk has been
improving steadily - it’s certainly better than it was a year ago. The
audiences for radio stations don’t take giant leaps - not ones that can
be sustained. Talk has been taking steps in the right direction. It has
got to keep that going.’
