Yesterday, Michael Sansolo wrote a column about how he felt a Mike Bloomberg campaign ad aimed at young people but played on a rock oldies terrestrial radio station seemingly aimed at Baby Boomers was an example of not knowing the audience.
Which prompted one MNB reader to write:
I saw your piece titled on Know Thy Audience!
As someone who works in the media industry, I always find it industry to hear other people's perspectives on radio – especially when it relates to how younger generations consume radio and its reach.
Candidly, both your points …
1. A classic rock station isn’t a place to target millennials and adults under 45 years old.
2. Young people don’t use radio.
… are completely false. Your perception is clouded and I’d like to take second to stand up for the radio industry which quite frankly doesn’t get its fair share.
For reference, I consider Millennials 25-40 (people born 1980-1995).
1. As an example let’s use Chicago as our market. Looking at Nielsen data in the Chicago DMA demos adults 25-34 and 18-44. The top-rated radio station in Chicago during prime listening hours (6a-7p) is WDRV-FM a CLASSIC ROCK Station. (Source: This report was created using the following information: CHICAGO; JAN20 / DEC19 / NOV19; Metro; Multiple Dayparts Used; Multiple Demos Used; See Detailed Sourcing Page for Complete Details. Copyright © 2020 The Nielsen Company. All rights reserved.) I understand that every market is different and music preference varies across the country but I would be cautious before making a blanketed, un-researched statement as you did.
2. Radio is America’s #1 Reach Medium. 229 million listeners tune in to radio each week – that’s 92% of all people, surpassing TV in scale mass reach. When looking at younger people whom you say don’t use radio, you may be surprised to know that radio reaches 86% of teens 12-17 and 90% of adults 18-34.
I could go on and on about the power of radio but I’ll stop here so you can continue to sing along with Bohemian Rhapsody. Just remember…Know Thy Facts before writing.
We had a piece yesterday questioning whether the magic is less at Whole Foods since its acquisition by Amazon.
MNB reader Clay Hoerauf wrote:
I recently stopped at Milwaukee’s original Whole Foods, which used to be a nearly Disneyworld experience for foodies. Now it is just a grocery store stripped of its soul. Gone is the in store smoke house where you could always get excellent ribs brisket and pulled pork, not to a dozen local and imported beers on tap to enjoy while shopping (Hey that’s important in Wisconsin). I ended up leaving without buying a thing. I drove a mile or so to the Kroger/ Pick & Save Metro Market and fortunately they still know how to wow the customer. Excellent customer focused shopping experience. I doubt Jeff Bezos needed that $100 bucks I dropped but a couple years ago I never would have even gone into the Metro Market.
There is no compelling reason to ever go back to Whole Paycheck.
MNB reader Olivier Kielwasser chimed in:
The thrill left Whole Foods long ago. The reason? Turnover, complacency, lower team member productivity. Twenty years ago, living in Houston and shopping at Whole Foods, a growing chain at the time, I was delighted by the products but shocked by the slowness of store associates… A year ago in Fayetteville, AR, and today in the San Francisco Bay Area, at Whole Foods the assortment remains a step up from the rest of the supermarket channel, while freshness has declined, large swaths of shelving (mostly in Perishables and Dairy) often are OOS or not faced correctly, and employee productivity remains unchanged at its abysmal low with people taking their time accomplishing repetitive tasks that other people would take personal pride in accomplishing faster.
A Kroger, Walmart or Safeway store associate is generally faster and more productive, than a higher paid Whole Foods team member. How good are their store managers, to allow this type of complacency? Their district/regional managers? Their VP of Operations? At the end of the day, these are the ones to blame.
Yesterday, as part of our coronavirus coverage, I referenced a Sacramento Bee story:
"A prominent Northern California mega-church whose members believe their prayers heal the sick and raise the dead is advising the faithful to wash their hands, urging those who feel sick to stay home, canceling missionary trips and advising its faith healers to stay away from local hospitals.
"Bethel Church leaders say they’re in close contact with local health officials, but they’re not yet canceling services for the 6,300 people who attend services each week in Redding, one of the largest regular gatherings in far Northern California."
I commented:
Really? Because you'd think that battling a little coronavirus wouldn't be such a big deal for a sect that believes it can raise the dead. It's enough to shake my faith in their belief.
Not a comment that went over well in all quarters.
One MNB reader wrote:
Your comments about Bethel Church were in bad taste. I live in Arizona so I have no affiliation to the church. I believe peoples faith, how they worship and who they worship should be off limits. Did you really need to poke fun at their believe that they can “heal the sick and raise the dead”? What good did it serve? What value did you bring to the conversation by poking fun?
Respect and civility has been lost around the world. Your comments were intended to tear down not build up.
Shame on you!
And another MNB reader wrote:
I thought your comment this morning regarding Bethel Church’s religious doctrine, as it applied to healing was not needed. If it was meant in humor, I did not think it was very funny. Not really showing your finer side.
MNB reader Jeff Gartner, however, wrote:
Loved reading about Bethel church that can raise the dead but refuses to lend their healing powers to covid-19 victims. The headline should be “The irony, oh the irony.”
So you’re sh** out of luck if you get the virus, but you can then just wait until you die and you’ll be fine.
It is entirely fair to tell me that my little joke wasn't funny. I have an entire family that believes I am only about half as funny as I think I am.
But … I must admit that there are few things about which I won't crack a joke. I wasn't being disrespectful … just pointing out an irony that struck me as funny. Maybe I shouldn't have said it … but I've sort of made a career out of saying stuff that a lot of people won't say.
