The Eternal Breakfast Debate in a New Place

[Ein Heldenleben]

Could be asking focus groups. Could be the fact that audience sizes don't change regardless of whether programmes have been strongly trailed or not.



I had an idea they were more popular with broadcasters than listeners! Logically, if trails (advance information) increase listeners, Radio 3 would announce in advance what music it intended to include in programmes.

I found this in Barwise and Ehrenberg's Television and its Audience (about television and commercial advertising rather than radio and programme trails): "We regard advertising as a weak influence on people's attitudes and behavior..." (p 173)

You should ask Proctor and Gamble rather than Barwise and Ehrenberg about whether TV advertising works. Did you know that many of the programmes on C4 , ITV and C5 are funded directly by advertisers ? I don’t mean funded by the ad breaks - the advertisers pay for the programmes and the broadcasters get them for free. One of Sir Martin Sorrell’s great contributions to modern civilisation .,

[Ein Heldenleben]

Perhaps I need to clarify. I am not saying that trails are ineffective full stop, I am however questioning their effectiveness/relevance on R3. I don't think that what works for visual media is directly applicable or comparable to audio in terms of results and I also think that the way people listen to R3 , the type of programme,(for the most part!) and the content is too different from say R1 and R2 for extrapolation there either.
The R3 presenters flag up concerts, programmes and performers linked to items broadcast in their various programmes which in my view is far more likely to have the result claimed for trails, not least for being immediate - hear the piece/performer then the details then information as to further listening etc. I don't see how blanket repetition of something with no connection to what has been heard is considered preferable to that in terms of results (whether that is listeners, ticket buyers or someone having a Damascene classical moment) - not least as I am not convinced those results exist for R3 specifically.

The irony in all this is despite listening to Radio 3 very often from 09.00 to 22.00 every day I’ve only heard this highly controversial trail once . I don’t know when this concert goes out. I’ve gone right through the schedules and googled Bruckner 9 and can’t find it. If only they’d run that trail a bit more frequently.I mean really….
Ps yes you are right presenter endorsement (research suggests ) is more effective than trailing . Even more effective recommendations from friends through social media or word of mouth . Social media is def not to be trusted esp Instagram ..there’s so much unheralded funded promotion.

[oddoneout]

The irony in all this is despite listening to Radio 3 very often from 09.00 to 22.00 every day I’ve only heard this highly controversial trail once . I don’t know when this concert goes out. I’ve gone right through the schedules and googled Bruckner 9 and can’t find it. If only they’d run that trail a bit more frequently.I mean really….
Ps yes you are right presenter endorsement (research suggests ) is more effective than trailing . Even more effective recommendations from friends through social media or word of mouth . Social media is def not to be trusted esp Instagram ..there’s so much unheralded funded promotion.

So - was it game playing, hornet nest poking or ineptitude I wonder?!

[Ein Heldenleben]

So - was it game playing, hornet nest poking or ineptitude I wonder?!

Not sure what you’re driving at but I honestly believe carefully produced and scheduled trails work and I have seen quite a bit of evidence to suggest they are effective. That is overwhelmingly the evidence from the directly comparable world of advertising and there is little evidence to suggest that the Radio 3 audience is any less susceptible to advertising than any other.
I’ve only heard this Bruckner 9 trail once and would be quite keen in knowing when the concert is so if you know perhaps you could tell me?

[kernelbogey]

Not sure what you’re driving at but I honestly believe carefully produced and scheduled trails work and I have seen quite a bit of evidence to suggest they are effective. That is overwhelmingly the evidence from the directly comparable world of advertising and there is little evidence to suggest that the Radio 3 audience is any less susceptible to advertising than any other.
I’ve only heard this Bruckner 9 trail once and would be quite keen in knowing when the concert is so if you know perhaps you could tell me?

It's on Friday 27/5 at 1930.

Martin's verbal trail for it is here at 1:40:00.

[kernelbogey]

Perhaps I need to clarify. I am not saying that trails are ineffective full stop, I am however questioning their effectiveness/relevance on R3.
The R3 presenters flag up concerts, programmes and performers linked to items broadcast in their various programmes which in my view is far more likely to have the result claimed for trails, not least for being immediate - hear the piece/performer then the details then information as to further listening etc.

Exactly so: thought induced in me by trail "Oh it's a long time since I heard any Ludwig van Hoffmenstal, I'll try to listen on Thursday.'

I don't see how blanket repetition of something with no connection to what has been heard is considered preferable to that in terms of results (whether that is listeners, ticket buyers or someone having a Damascene classical moment) - not least as I am not convinced those results exist for R3 specifically.

The pre-recorded 30-second trailers are clearly produced by a marketing dept (cue superlatives uttered by slightly street-cred voice and musical extract ending with applause and cheers) and obviously with a non-informed, non-regular R3 listener in mind: i.e. they are designed to shift a non-traditional R3 listener from R1/2/4/6 to R3. What many regular R3 listeners object to is their repeated use on R3; here, the presenter-linked 'suggestion' is likely, as Heldenleben says, to be far more effective - and doesn't need a 'bleeding chunk' to be shoe-horned in since we've just heard something else by that composer.

(They are a bit like producing an advert for a Ferrari, pointing out that it has a petrol-driven engine which makes it handy for getting from A to B.)

[oddoneout]

Not sure what you’re driving at but I honestly believe carefully produced and scheduled trails work and I have seen quite a bit of evidence to suggest they are effective. That is overwhelmingly the evidence from the directly comparable world of advertising and there is little evidence to suggest that the Radio 3 audience is any less susceptible to advertising than any other.
I’ve only heard this Bruckner 9 trail once and would be quite keen in knowing when the concert is so if you know perhaps you could tell me?

I have no reason to doubt that, as a general statement, but it isn't what I'm trying to get at. Where is the evidence that R3 listeners respond positively ie take useful action in response to the adverts. More to the point where is the evidence that the positive reaction is sufficient to balance out the negative ie stop listening, whether that is temporary or more permanent. Advertising companies and the managements which buy their products aren't infallible and are quite capable of getting things wrong as we see when ad campaigns are withdrawn. The "no such thing as bad publicity" mantra doesn't always counterbalance the adverse reactions either in such cases I suspect now that social media responses can be whipped up to a frenzy very quickly to push consumer actions.
Glad to see that kb can help with the Bruckner item that kicked this off - asking me is a non-starter as I'm not set up for repeat listening and in any case said composer is very much not on my listening radar so I would have ignored it!

[oddoneout]

Exactly so: thought induced in me by trail "Oh it's a long time since I heard any Ludwig van Hoffmenstal, I'll try to listen on Thursday.'



The pre-recorded 30-second trailers are clearly produced by a marketing dept (cue superlatives uttered by slightly street-cred voice and musical extract ending with applause and cheers) and obviously with a non-informed, non-regular R3 listener in mind: i.e. they are designed to shift a non-traditional R3 listener from R1/2/4/6 to R3. What many regular R3 listeners object to is their repeated use on R3; here, the presenter-linked 'suggestion' is likely, as Heldenleben says, to be far more effective - and doesn't need a 'bleeding chunk' to be shoe-horned in since we've just heard something else by that composer.

(They are a bit like producing an advert for a Ferrari, pointing out that it has a petrol-driven engine which makes it handy for getting from A to B.)

And then targeting it at members of the Green Party...

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I don’t mind the occasional trailer between programmes, as long as they don’t simper too much, but when they appear as a kind of commercial break in the middle of a programme (especially during Record Review) it can be very irritating.

However, when the advert is superimposed over music in an incompetent way (similar to the introduction of “This Classical Life”, then the whole process can be counterproductive. One can decipher neither the message nor the music.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

This was a so-called ‘Written Trail’ when we build script round a musical or verbal clip. The music duration was probably something like 50” - as it would be in a ‘built’ trail where the whole package is prerecorded. So the clip of Bruckner 9 was no different to the musical background in any ‘built’ trail. It’s not a ‘new’ low however you view it. To me it seems a bit extreme to change channels because of a brief trail. If that trail gets anyone to listen to the concert who wouldn’t otherwise have done so, and then maybe introduces them to Bruckner, then surely it will have done the job it’s meant to do…

Good to have you on the forum. I suggest “written trails” can be counterproductive when the music and the script are are competition with one another.

[Ein Heldenleben]

Exactly so: thought induced in me by trail "Oh it's a long time since I heard any Ludwig van Hoffmenstal, I'll try to listen on Thursday.'



The pre-recorded 30-second trailers are clearly produced by a marketing dept (cue superlatives uttered by slightly street-cred voice and musical extract ending with applause and cheers) and obviously with a non-informed, non-regular R3 listener in mind: i.e. they are designed to shift a non-traditional R3 listener from R1/2/4/6 to R3. What many regular R3 listeners object to is their repeated use on R3; here, the presenter-linked 'suggestion' is likely, as Heldenleben says, to be far more effective - and doesn't need a 'bleeding chunk' to be shoe-horned in since we've just heard something else by that composer.

(They are a bit like producing an advert for a Ferrari, pointing out that it has a petrol-driven engine which makes it handy for getting from A to B.)

Yes and right on cue I’ve just heard Stephen Hough playing the slow movement of Rach 2 on Essential Classics. As soon as I heard the opening C minor modulatory passage I thought I bet there’s a plug for the concert at the end . And indeed there was.

[Ein Heldenleben]

I have no reason to doubt that, as a general statement, but it isn't what I'm trying to get at. Where is the evidence that R3 listeners respond positively ie take useful action in response to the adverts. More to the point where is the evidence that the positive reaction is sufficient to balance out the negative ie stop listening, whether that is temporary or more permanent. Advertising companies and the managements which buy their products aren't infallible and are quite capable of getting things wrong as we see when ad campaigns are withdrawn. The "no such thing as bad publicity" mantra doesn't always counterbalance the adverse reactions either in such cases I suspect now that social media responses can be whipped up to a frenzy very quickly to push consumer actions.
Glad to see that kb can help with the Bruckner item that kicked this off - asking me is a non-starter as I'm not set up for repeat listening and in any case said composer is very much not on my listening radar so I would have ignored it!

That is a very good question . Been thinking about just this issue overnight . I know quite a bit about the slightly bogus “ science” of TV trailing but not much about Radio. The problem with demonstrating the effectiveness of Radio trails is that , unlike TV , there are no overnight instant audience figures gathered. The audiences for some Radio shows would be too small to measure accurately . Even on TV once you get below 50,000 viewers you are in margin of error terrority ( or you were when I was in a position to know 10 years ago! )
If you did have an accurate measure of Radio broken down into 15 minute sequence you might have a fighting chance of running a reasonably robust experiment - on Radio that is . The problem with demonstrating whether TV trails work is that you can never be sure whether it was the trail , the subject matter , the myriad competing tv channels offering something better that is having the impact. I had the advantage of working on a very long running series that had relatively stable competing programmes and there were fewer competitors. l could more or less predict what subjects would be a turn off for viewers. I could also see the impact of comprehensive trailing particularly aided by editorial endorsements on other outlets (talk ups in broadcast slang). Series returns were marked by big trail campaigns and they often got the highest audiences - other things remaining equal. Though not as high as when inclement weather forced everyone indoors. TV producers , like farmers , pray for rain - except when they are filming.
Anyway back to Radio . My experiment would be based on the fact that Radio listeners are much more loyal than TV viewers. Many never even move the dial from their station. The audience peaks are 06.30 to 9.30 So the technique on Radio is (or should be ) to run the trails in these peak periods . There’s little point running them after noon when the audience falls away. So if you have a million listening at 08.00 - if you can get just one percent to tune into an evening programme that’s 10,000 people . That might well be 10 per cent of the evening audience .

One experiment would be to take two evening concerts with similar fare ( say relatively popular 19th cent Romantic) on the same day a week apart .Trail one relentlessly with particular emphasis on Sounds Catchup and the other not at all ( sorry musicians and producer). Then look at the Sounds requests. These are very granular to use the jargon - right down to the email addresses of the requests. To complicate matters you would also need to scan the TV schedules to make sure there’s nothing like a major incident on any of the evening soaps or a big sporting event.

The only flaw is that I don’t know how much Sounds catch-up listening there is on Radio 3 and whether it’s an accurate proxy. I see no reason why it shouldn’t be. I listen to it all the time now. One day of course the Sounds audience will be bigger than the live. Then trail makers really will have robust data to play with.

With regard to this Fridays Bruckner concert I see it’s live from the Barbican. I see there are quite a few tickets left. Another “experiment “ would be to see if the trailing shifts any tickets. But sadly I have other things to do this week.

One final thought. During lockdown broadcasters received record numbers of complaints - they were very largely about offensive material, impartiality etc. Very few are about trails - there are more about things like sound levels on dramas - a big bone of contention. There is , believe it not, research evidence that some people like trails.They want to know what’s in the schedule and they don’t have the time to go through the Radio Times and circle programmes with a biro like I used to.
Final, Final thought . Last Bond film ‘ No Time To Die ‘ production cost $250 million . Marketing spend $100 million. The world has gone mad….

[cloughie]

I thought that the version of ‘Spring can really hang you up the most’ by Mark Murphy was a vocal mauling of a really good song - there are many good recordings of this song around and a better choice could have been made. This is a personal view and others may disagree!

[Ein Heldenleben]

I thought that the version of ‘Spring can really hang you up the most’ by Mark Murphy was a vocal mauling of a really good song - there are many good recordings of this song around and a better choice could have been made. This is a personal view and others may disagree!

Blossom Dearie ( appropriately ) does a lovely version of this….

[french frank]

You should ask Proctor and Gamble rather than Barwise and Ehrenberg about whether TV advertising works. Did you know that many of the programmes on C4 , ITV and C5 are funded directly by advertisers ? I don’t mean funded by the ad breaks - the advertisers pay for the programmes and the broadcasters get them for free.

I think there is a difference between advertising a 'brand' - rather like sponsorship of Formula 1 Racing or a football team. It isn't advertising a precise product, especially one on a time-limited offer like a broadcast programme. It's keeping the company name in the public eye and creating a positive response to it. Barwise and Ehreberg have done a great deal of research on radio/television audience attitudes to 'advertising'. They point out that both television and radio are 'low-level involvement' activities, particularly between programmes. What makes BBC trails so insidious is that they occur amid the flow of the programme itself - unlike the commercial breaks on television.

Why do people get so annoyed about trails? Perhaps because it is seen as a monopoly advertiser: the BBC advertising itself. People are annoyed by repetitive trails, Radio 3 listeners seem particularly sensitive to snippets of classical music being included, especially as a bit of background music.

Whether one is personally annoyed or not is irrelevant to the issue: 'people' do get very annoyed. The same 'people' will admit that now and again they are alerted to a programme they are interested in listening to, but it doesn't change their minds about trails. And as I've said, programme information at the junctions between programmes seems a better idea. But then, once you've reduced 'programmes' to long 2-3 hour sequences of presenter-CD-trail-news-listener opinion-presenter-CD-news-trail it's difficult to make them any more annoying … (in my view, of course).