This article was downloaded by: [University of Windsor]On: 17 November 2014, At: 06:07Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Radio StudiesPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hjrs19

Radio Websites as a Promotional ToolMary Jackson Pitts & Ross HarmsPublished online: 16 Nov 2009.

To cite this article: Mary Jackson Pitts & Ross Harms (2003) Radio Websites as a Promotional Tool, Journal of Radio Studies,10:2, 270-282, DOI: 10.1207/s15506843jrs1002_11

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15506843jrs1002_11

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Radio Websites as a Promotional Tool

Mary Jackson Pitts and Ross Harms

The purpose of this study was to analyze the content of radio station websites to determine how radio stations use the Internet for promotional purposes. The study specifically explores the types of promotional tools used by the national sample of stations, the types of information delivered on the websites, and the interactive capabilities and accessibility of the stations‘ websites. Because of the rapid changes in Internet delivery, use, and technology, the researchers consider the findings to represent a piece of history, where no data are current, but all data are pertinent to the discussion and deliberations about the Internet. The present research provides some understanding of radio stations and their use of the Internet at the start of the 21”‘ century.

INTRODUCTION

The radio broadcast of the Harding-Cox Presidential election returns, marked the birth of the commercial radio industry. From the 1920s forward, the radio industry grew from one station to more than 13,000. However, the radio of today is quite different from radio in the early days. In the 20s, 30s, and 40s, radio programming consisted mainly of news and dramatic programs. How- ever, when television became more prevalent in the late 40s and 50s, these dramatic programs left radio in favor of the new visual medium. Some pre- dicted that radio, faced with the loss of these programs and the advertising revenue from them, would not survive. Instead, the radio industry adapted by switching from dramatic programming to music. This change in direction al- lowed the radio industry to continue to grow and prosper (Campbell, 1998). In the mid-I990s, radio faced a potential new threat, the World Wide Web, and once again radio adapted.

Mary Jackson Pitts (Ph.D., University of Southern Mississippi, 1993) is an associate pro- fessor in the department of radiokelevision at Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR. Her research interests include web-based communication by traditional communi- cation outlets, media effects research, and health communication.

Ross Harms (BA, Arkansas State University, 2002) currently serves as a teaching assis- tant at Arkansas Northeast College. His research interests include web-based communi- cation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Pitts and Harms/RADIO WEBSITES 271

Numerous radio networks such as ABC, CBS, CNN, The Dow Jones Investor Network, and countless others are taking advantage of the opportunities that the Internet offers (Pack, 1997). At the close of the year 2000, the radio adver- tising bureau reported that there were 10,700 stations with a website and 29% of them were streaming their audio (www.rab.com). For the traditional radio station, the World Wide Web (WWW) provides an outlet, which breaks down the barriers caused by spectrum allocations and wattage capabilities. Web sites can be used to promote on-air products and provide an additional means for distributing programming (Morris, 1997).

An audience exists for radio programming. The UCLA Internet study (2003) reported 90.5% of Internet users listen to over-the-air radio broadcasts, and that more than 60% of Americans have Internet access at home. The combination of the two information sources, radio and Internet, successfully generated $1.47 billion in advertising revenue in 2002 (www.iab.com). Through the audio streaming of station signals and the increased number of online audio channels, radio stations can compete globally to obtain an audience. Likewise, global stations can compete with the 250-watt hometown stations around the world. Most noticeable, they can pull listeners away from a hometown station. Lack of innovation at the local radio level is cited as one reason why listeners are moving toward the Internet t o find music. Arbitron numbers serve as a warning to radio programmers that their programming formats are critical to capturing audiences, and that they must consider global competition. The research data in this study reflect how radio stations used the Internet at the beginning of the 21 St century.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Compared to the body of information, which has been collected through the years on other forms of media, data on the World Wide Web is spotty at best. This is due, principally, to the brief amount of time the World Wide Web has been widely available. When it comes to radio, the scarcity of quantitative data is pronounced and even more pronounced when dealing with its relationship to the Internet. This paper examines how radio stations are using their websites as an extra link to the on-air product. The study looks a t the use of traditional and new promotional tools on radio websites, the types of information provided on radio websites, and the types of interactivity and accessibility of radio websites.

Research Questions

RQ 1: How do radio stations use the Internet for promotional purposes?

RQ 2: What types of information do radio stations include on their websites?

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

272 Journal of Radio StudiesIVol. I O , No. 2, 2003

RQ 3: Are radio stations using audio streaming?

RQ 4 What level of interactivity and accessibility is available on the we bsites?

JUSTIFICATION

Radio stations must compete for the attention of media users, with audiences dividing their leisure time between radio, television, movies, video games, the World Wide Web, and various print media (Campbell, 1998; Wicks, 2001). As of July 2001, Arbitron data showed that among those who had access to the Internet, 12% had used audio streaming during that month. And 62% of listeners stated that time spent listening on the web, is in addition to time spent listening over the air (Arbitron, 2001 b).

Radio stations can better serve their audiences and their advertisers by developing websites that provide information to the user and audiences for the advertiser. Bringing in revenue with the over-the-air product and with a website that draws the audience can increase radio station revenue. In the third quarter of 2002, the Interactive Advertising Bureau reported that Internet ad revenue totaled $1.47 billion (www.iab.com). Although these figures include al l types of businesses making money from the web, radio should be no exception. But Ferguson (2000) suggested broadcasters can do more with the Internet to make more money. Early studies show some radio websites as mere electronic billboards (Pack, 1997). Data from this study should be useful in providing a snapshot of how radio stations used their websites as the 21" century began, what radio station managers might need to do to improve existing websites, and how these improvements could generate more ad sales.

RADIO WEB STATISTICS

Arbitron, Inc., in conjunction with Edison Media Research, has extensively examined people's use of the Internet and Internet radio (Arbitron, 1998). Radio owners should examine these studies for guidance for their online presence. The first of seven studies was conducted in 1998. Six percent of Americans were listening to online radio, and nearly 60% of people surveyed reported having heard a radio station talk about its website. Of those surveyed, 64% said they would listen to their current favorite station online, roughly one-half said they would listen online to other local stations, stations with otherwise unavailable music, and stations from other markets (Arbitron, 1998). Six months later, of those who listened, 57% reported listening to stations from other markets, 51% reported listening online to local stations, and 20% reported listening to stations from other countries (Arbitron, 1999a). Thirty-one percent said they had actually visited a station website, up from 25% in the first study (Arbitron, 1999a).

In the third Arbitron and Edison Media Research study, online radio listen- ing had risen to 14% of total Americans (Arbitron, 1999b). More online listening

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Pitts and Harms/RADIO WEBSITES 273

time was devoted to over-the-air broadcast stations than Internet only webcast- ers (Arbitron, 1999b). And 58% of those using online radio were men. By the fourth study, 71% of Americans reported hearing radio stations talk about their websites, and 36% reported actually visiting a station website (Arbitron, 2000a). On the whole, streamies spent more time online and were more likely to buy online than nonstreamies (Arbitron, 2000a). Certainly, these data suggest radio stations should consider these people as a target audience for money-making purposes.

In August 2000,25% of Americans reported listening to either traditional or web-only radio over the Internet (Arbitron, 2000b). Streaming content causes people to spend more time on a radio station's website and to return to that site often (Arbitron, 2000b). Fifty-six percent of streaming radio users prefer to stream stations from their local market rather than stations from other places (Arbitron, 2000b). These data suggest that local stations should actively provide an informational and functional website for its users.

Regular online radio listening showed an increase in 2001 (Arbitron, 2001a). And those using streaming radio continued to listen most to stations from their local area. Thirty-nine percent of streaming listeners said the ability to hear a station online influences them to listen to the same station more over-the-air (Arbitron, 2001a). All variables point the radio stations toward the value of maintaining a well designed website. By the seventh study, 52% of Internet users, 34% of all Americans, reported using streaming media at some point. One out of four Americans use streaming media on a monthly basis (Arbitron, 2001 b). Americans on the whole are spending less time with television and print media, but not with radio, due to Internet usage (Arbitron, 2001 b). Sixty-two percent of those who listen to a favorite over-the-air station over the web indicate that web listening is in addition to over-the-air listening time.

These data suggest that station websites that provide live streaming and local news and information can draw target audiences to their on-air product and the on-air product draws users to the on-line product. The Arbitron surveys identify the trends among users of online radio. The most notable trend is that traditional listeners have moved back to visiting their local over-the-air station website and less toward distant stations. However, Internet only audio service users now equal that of traditional station site users. These data certainly indicate the importance to the local station of using the web as a promotional tool to maintain, retain, and create new audiences.

METHODS OF PROMOTION

Promotion can be used effectively to sell a radio format. Audience promotion is designed to create awareness among potential audiences. And audience pro- motion must maintain and retain old audiences. Radio has used other media to help encourage new listeners to tune in. Advertising on television, in newspa- pers, on billboards, with direct mail, and a variety of remote activities place the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

274 Journal of Radio StudiesIVol. 10, No. 2,2003

radio station in front of a potential audience (Warner & Buchman, 1991). The website can now be included in this list of media that can grab new audiences and recapture old audience members.

One of the most common forms of traditional radio promotions is for the station to promote its format and personalities, the disc jockeys. Stations make money off the celebrity status of DJs and the audience's relationship with these individuals. Interaction with station employees and the capability to request songs allow the individual listener a chance to become a part of the radio station. Online users say they want easy contact with the station through emails, bulletin boards or chat rooms, local weather, news, and community or station events (Arbitron, 2000b, www.arbitron.com).

The distant user and geographically close audience members should be capable of participating in promotions where a contest can lead to winning prizes. Traditional forms of promotions, like information about disc jockeys, interactivity with the station staff to chat or request songs on line, and promo- tion of station format and play lists can be used by station websites to capture, retain, and gain new and distant and geographically close audience members. Providing information about station-sponsored concerts, contests, and live re- motes can maintain consumer interest. Community promotion is also pivotal to the success of local radio. Promoting a station's involvement in community projects on air and online increases a station's visibility in the community and improves the station's image. In the final analogy, image is everything to the radio station. When the audience sees the station working in the community with local causes, gets useful and entertaining content over the air, and finds the same plus more information at the station's online address, the station will generate revenue in both venues.

STREAMING RADIO REGULATION

In 2000, Arbitron found the number one thing that online visitors wanted from radio was live audio streaming. But a U.S. copyright office ruling in December 2000 regarding the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) (Bellin, 2001), changed the way royalties would be collected from radio stations for copy- righted music played online. In addition to broadcast performance-rights fees already paid to ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC, broadcasters must pay fees to record companies and artists for web rebroadcasts as per the DMCA (Lawrence, 2001). The DMCA does offer an alternative to negotiating with each individual com- pany, the statutory license. But this license is very restrictive. Additionally, there are ongoing disputes over advertising spots and who gets paid what if they are used on line.

The data in this study were collected in November and December 2000 and serve to provide a snap shot of how radio stations were using the Internet at that time. Shortly, thereafter, some of the regulatory issues caused some stations to cease providing live streaming.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Pitts and HarmdRADIO WEBSITES 275

METHODOLOGY

In November and December 2000, a sample of 500 commercial radio station web addresses was drawn from the American Journalism Review website (www.ajr.org). This provides a list of television and radio station web addresses and links for every state in the U.S. On the site, radio stations are further subdivided by state and format. From the subdivision, a systematic sample from every state was taken from the stations listed on the site. The initial analysis was conducted in November 2000. Coders made three attempts to link to a station web site. Of the 500 in the sample, 437 websites were coded in the initial collection. Because some links at the AJRwebsite yielded deadlinks to the commercial radio sites, additional attempts were made to link to radio stations in the sample by gathering new addresses from a variety of web locations. An additional 24 stations were located through this method. Hence, the final tally of analyzed station websites was 461 of 500 for 92%.

To insure coder reliability, three one-hour sessions were used to train students in two communication research courses. The 500 sample URL ad- dresses were equally distributed among the coders. Coding was conducted using five areas of focus: station demographics, promotional tools, information delivery, streaming, and interactivity and accessibility. Each website was coded for the presence of 71 variables, which were distributed among the five focus areas used on the coding instrument. Station demographics were examined by using these recording units: station signal modulations, indication of format on web site, call letters, play lists, network affiliation, owner of station, parent company, and general information about the station.

The first research question dealt with how radio stations promote them- selves on the Internet. Typical forms of promotion were identified and used to examine research question one. Twenty-three items were coded to measure the types of promotional information used on the websites. The recording units included concerts promoted, concerts sponsored by the station, concert tickets sold from site, links to sites that sell concert tickets, on-air contests promoted on the website, contests for online consumers, contests for online and over-the-air consumers, contest rules, live-chat room, live chats with station personnel, photos of DJs, information about DJs, online bulletin board, opportunities to request a song on line, how to call to request a song, advertisements, station merchandise for sale, freebies (coupons, bumper stickers), remote dates, live shots of the remote location, identification of remote locations, and identifica- tion of sponsors of remotes.

Research question 2 asked what types of user based information could be found on the website. Variables were: local news, national news, weather information, sports information, daily traffic reports, traffic maps, live shots of traffic bottlenecks, how to purchase an online ad, how to buy an ad for on-air, information about musical artists, details about community projects, and pro- gram log.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

276 Journal of Radio StudieslVol. I O , No. 2,2003

Research question 3 asked whether stations were streaming broadcast. Three variables were included: live streaming of on air product, on demand streaming of individual programs or songs, and music videos of artists.

Research question 4 asked what level of interactivity and accessibility is available on the websites. Of primary concern was whether stations showed how listeners and cyberusers could reach the station through cyberspace. lnteractivity variables included search engine, mailing address, e-mail address for station contact, phone number, fax number, links to other sites, site map, way to contact a webmaster, whether the webmaster was a station employee, privacy statement disclosure, access of user/listener to be placed on a station email list, whether a user could change the language of material presented, presence of play lists for songs on the site, whether listeners/users were al- lowed to provide feedback through listenerhser surveys, whether staff mem- bers were identified, whether job openings were advertised, and could a job application be filled out on line.

Frequencies, percentages, and chi-square were used as methods of analy- sis. The significance level was set at p < .05.

LIMITATIONS

Because the Internet changes so rapidly, and web pages come and go from one second to the next, data collection procedures produce error no matter what collection process is used. The list used in this study to collect web addresses is sure to have not included all radio stations with web sites. Student coders certainly introduce another level of error. Coder reliability was .85, with the use of more than 33 coders. Researchers failed to take into consideration some promotional information tools, which were found to be on the web sites al- though they were not included in the coding instrument. Interactive games are an example.

FINDINGS

Of the 500 stations identified for the sample, coding was completed on 461 stations for a 92% sample rate. With N set at 461, the majority of the sample was FM stations (348,75.5%). No attempt was made to have an equal number of FM and AM stations. The most common format, based on AJRcategorizations, was rock (74, 16.1%), followed by country (68, 14.8%), and a mixture of music styles. Oddly enough only 75.3 % of stations identified their format on the web site, 78.3 % identified their call letters, only 28% had play lists on their sites. FM stations were more likely to include play lists than AM stations (x2 = 35.38, df =

4, p = .OOl), but AM stations were more likely to identify their call letters than FM (x2 = 10.79, df = 4, p = .02). The majority of radio stations (61 .6%) were not affiliated with a network; however, the most common affiliation was with ABC (39, 8.5%). Fewer than 30% of websites listed the owner of the station or a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Pitts and HarmdRADIO WEBSITES 277

corporate parent on the website. A majority of stations (310, 67.2%) listed general information about the station, such as the history of the station, or station mission.

Stations used their websites to promote their disc jockeys more often than any other variable (Table 1). FM stations were more likely to promote concerts on their site than A M stations ( x 2 = 31, df = 4, p = . O l ) , and they were more likely to be a concert sponsor than AM stations (x2 = 13.64, df = 4, p = .01). FM stations used the web site more than AM stations to post contest rules (x2 = 10.95, df = 4, p = .03). FM stations were more likely to provide information about DJs than were AM stations (x2 = 12.55, df = 4, p = .01). Of the small number who allowed online requests of songs, FM stations were more likely to

Table 1 Promotional Tool Usage on Radio Station Websites by Frequency,

Percentage and Ranking

Promotional Tools

DJs with photos Advertisements Information about the DJ Concerts promoted Links to sites that sell concert

tickets Contest Contest rules Online bulletin board Live chat room Contests for online and over the air

consumers Station merchandise for sale Call to request a song Request a song online Remote dates Freebies (coupons, bumper

stickers) Remote locations Concert tickets Contest for online consumers Station sponsors a concert Naming the sponsors of remotes Live chats with station personnel Live shot of an on air remote

N = 461 Frequency Percentage

248 53.8 238 51.6 237 51.4 154 33.4

120 26.0 114 24.7 104 22.6 92 20.0 90 19.5

87 18.9 78 16.9 75 16.3 64 13.9 61 13.2

57 12.4 52 11.3 51 11.1 45 9.9 44 9.5 44 9.5 28 6.1 15 3.3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

278 Journal of Radio StudiesIVol. I O , No. 2, 2003

provide the opportunity than were A M stations (x’ = 24.53, df = 4, p = .001). FM stations gave users more opportunities to purchase station merchandise (x’ = 11.94, df = 4,p = .01). FM did a better job than AM of providing information about remote locations (x’ = 13.51, df = 4, p = .Ol).

Research question two was used to determine the types of information found on the websites. Program logs and weather information were most often found on websites (Table 2). AM and FM stations differed in the type of information variables they included on their websites. AM stations were more likely to provide weather information than FM stations (x’ = 14.169, df = 4, p = .01). AM stations did a far better job of providing local and national news online than did the FM stations (x’ = 16.63, df = 4, p = .01). And AM stations outpaced FM stations in their sports coverage (x’ = 23.66, df = 4, p = .001). A M stations were more likely to give details about how to purchase an on-air ad (x’ = 10.01,df = 4,p = .04) and an online ad (x’ = 12.383, df = 4, p = .02) than were FM stations. FM stations were more likely to share play lists (x2 = 21.64, df = 4, p = .001) and to provide musical artist information than AM stations (x’ = 31.04, df = 4, p = .OOl).

Research question three examined streaming. Only 43.0% of stations did live streaming of over-the-air programming. Even fewer supplied on-demand streaming, 17.8 %. And music video clips were available on only 3.3% of the sites.

Research question four measured the degree of interactivity and accessi- bility of the websites. Links away from the station websites were common among AM and FM stations. Email addresses for station contacts and station

Table 2 Types of User-Based Information Found on Radio Station Websites by

Frequency, Percentage and Ranking ~ ~ ~

User Based Information N = 461 Frequency Percentage

Program log. Weather Community project Local news National news sports Musical artist information How to buy an on air ad How to purchase an online ad Daily traffic report Traffic maps Live shots of traffic bottlenecks

255 220 197 184 181 157 135 95 89 42 13 8

55.3 47.7 42.7 39.9 39.3 34.1 29.3 20.6 19.3 9.1 2.8 1.7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Pitts and Harms/RADIO WEBSITES 279

phone numbers were the most common interactivity and accessibility variables (Table 3). Only one difference existed between AM and FM stations and the interactivity and accessibility variables: FM stations were more likely to list staff than were AM stations (x2 = 9.76, df = 4, p = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

When you compare the amount of information collected on television and radio use through the years, there is almost no information to guide radio station decision makers in their use of the Internet to promote the on-air radio product for the purposes of serving a loyal audience and developing new on air and online audiences. Arbitron provides audience based data support for the irn- portance of tapping into opportunities by delivering traditional news, weather, and sports information to listeners and online users via station websites. Ar- bitron data show a developing relationship between the listener and online user. Data collected in this study of radio station websites reflect the potential

_ _ _ _ ~ ~

Table 3 The Degree of Interactivity and Accessibility of Radio Station Websites by

Frequency, Percentage and Ranking

lnteractivity and Accessibility N = 461 Frequency Percentage

Links to other sites 376 81.6 Email address for station contact 338 73.3 Phone number 327 70.9 Mailing address 31 5 68.3 Staff members identified 306 66.4 Site map 255 55.3 Fax number 230 49.9 Sales rep contact information 199 43.2 Could the webmaster be contacted 189 41 Could userhstener be placed on station

email list 134 29.1

Search engine 86 18.7 Privacy statement disclosure 74 16.1 Listenerhser surveys (feedback) 57 12.4

Job openings listed 100 21.7

Webrnaster a station employee 47 10.2 Play list for songs on the site 43 9.3 Job applications filled out online 27 5.9 Change language of material presented 6 1.3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

280 Journal of Radio StudiesIVol. 10, No. 2,2003

for stations to strengthen this relationship. However, using the traditional items of promotion on the online product would no doubt increase the speed by which this relationship could develop.

Although stations promoted their disc jockeys more often than anything else on the website, it actually only occurred less than 54% of the time. Placing pictures of DJs and general information about them on the web site is one way to generate listener familiarity with the station. It serves as a way to match the DJ's name with the face, so that local listeners are aware of their presence in the community and at local remote locations. They are the station celebrities and should be used by stations to develop loyal listeners. Ask on-air managers about the importance of the disc jockey, and they will say the DJ is on the offensive front line working to capture audience members. Yet, fewer than 20% gave the online user the opportunity to enter into a live chat room and still fewer had the opportunity to chat with an on-air personality. The live chat opens the opportunity to talk to people without tying up the airwaves with such chatter while still gives the listener/online user the opportunity to communicate with the radio celebrity DJ. Arbitron data showed that users tend to stay online longer if there is an element of interactivity on the site and the capability to interact with station personnel. The more time a user spends with a website, the greater the likelihood of the user helping the station make money.

Although stations use on air contest promotions to keep people listening to the station and to promote concerts of musical artists, only a third of websites showed any evidence of using the web in a similar way. Data on remotes are dismal. At best no more than 13% of stations use the website to promote on air remote locations, dates, or live shots of remotes. These opportunities are an untapped area for sales people who could offer these services as a value-added product in the sales package for an on-air event. Although FM stations tended to use promotional information tools more often than AM, AM stations did a better job of using the web to provide news, weather, and sports information to the online user.

Research question 2 was used to evaluate the type of information found on the websites related to news, programming, and sales. Program logs were the most common information found on the sites, but they appeared on only 55% of the sites. With modern technology, it seems that this information could easily be posted; however, many of the sites did not use local employees as their webmasters, which could explain the lack of all forms of information on the web pages. Information about a station's work with community projects was often found on station web pages-in fact, more often than local and national news. In an area where you would expect stations to be aggressively supplying information, only 20% of stations informed an online user how to buy an on-air ad or an online ad.

More than 40% of the stations used live streaming on their sites. Audio streaming gives stations the opportunity to reach outside their geographic area. Arbitron data suggest that hometown listeners are more likely to supplement

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Pitts and HarrndRADIO WEBSITES 281

their radio diet with their favorite radio station. At the same time, the data show that those who stream also are more likely to buy online. Although we have an understanding of domestic online users, global users are an untapped source of audience. Station owners have to weigh the cost of the streaming in relation- ship to the return. In some cases, the return may not manifest itself for some period of time. Station owners should also reflect on the potential to become another video source for users. Most don't see the potential forest for the trees. Only 3% currently see the vision. As broadband access improves and prolifer- ates, video streaming should find its way onto radio websites. Video web coverage of remote events should also be a drawing power for stations. On-air operators need to further embrace the web to remain in the audience race.

The potential for accessibility and interactivity are the Internet's stron- gest points. Yet not all stations post basic information about themselves on the site. No more than 75% of the stations posted email addresses, phone numbers, or fax numbers for ease of contact. Sales people were listed less than 50% of the time. Fewer than 30% of stations kept an email list of users. Fewer than 15% collected information about listener satisfaction with their product. Navigating the site was also cumbersome at times. Search engines were limited, but site maps were available more than half of the time. A global user had virtually no means of changing the language of the page copy to suit their needs.

More than 80% of the sites provided links to other locations on the web. Many of these links may have taken the user to other media products sold by the same people who own the radio stations. Such sites might include places where the user could purchase concert tickets, or come in contact with direct response advertising. With the level of vertical integration of media products across the spectrum, promotion of sister subsidiaries works well on radio websites. Such integrated marketing among shared media interests can and do produce reve- nue streams.

Future study should give consideration to the links found attached to the home page of radio station websites. Learning about this form of media inte- gration would provide the industry with help in determining how best to use these links to generate additional revenue streams. Another direction of study would be to survey station owners and managers about their perception of radio station websites. This data would yield a greater understanding of man- agement philosophies among station owners and would assist other owners in developing models for making management decisions about web based promotion.

References Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (1998). Radio in the new media world [Online].

Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (1999a). lnternet listening survey study /I: Radio Available: http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/iIs.pdf [2002, February 71.

and e-commerce [Online]. Available: http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/ ECommerce.pdf [2002, February 71.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14

282 Journal of Radio StudiesIVol. I O , No. 2,2003

Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (1999b). Internet /I/: Webcasters vs. broadcasters: Which business model will win? [ 0 n I i ne]. Ava i I a b I e: http://www .a rbit ro n .co m/ downloads/lnternetlll.pdf 12002, February 71.

Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (2000a). Internet lV: The buying power of "stream- ies" [Online]. Available: http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/internetstudylVb.pdf [2002, February 71.

Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (2000b). Internet V: Startling new insights about the internet and streaming [Online]. Available: http://www.arbitron.com/downloads/ internet- study-v.pdf. 12002, February 71.

Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (2001a). Internet VI: Streaming at a crossroads [On- line]. Available: http://www.arbitron.com/downIoads/internetvi.pdf [2002, February 11.

Arbitron & Edison Media Research. (2001 b). Internet VI/: The Internet and streaming: What consumers want next [Online]. Available: http://www.arbitron.com/downIoads/ internet7.pdf [2002, January 271.

Bellin, B. (2001, July 6). How the RlAA prevents internet radio's success. Radio & Records, pp. 12-13.

Campbell, R. (1998). Media and culture: An introduction to mass communication. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Ferguson, D.A. (2000, March 31). Program promotion on the Internet. A paper pre- sented at the Southern States Communication Association annual convention in New Orleans, LA.

Lawrence, D. (2001, August IO) . Judge finds radio not exempt from web royalties. Ra- dio & Records, pp. 1, 35.

Morris, G.E. (1997, June 1). Advertising &the Internet radio: The end of the local mar- ket. Advertising & Marketing Review.

Pack, T. (1997). June 30). Radio-activity on the web: Today, radio and the Internet are not. . . . Database,79, 38.

Warner, C., & Buchman, J. (1991). Broadcasting and Cable Selling, (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Wicks, R.H. (2001). Understanding Audiences: Learning to Use the Media Construc- tively. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inds

or]

at 0

6:07

17

Nov

embe

r 20

14