A large Christian music station in the Midwest just played a song by Chris Tomlin.
Listeners all over town heard it. Some were at the office, others were in the car or the minivan. Some know all the words, so they were singing along. Others were hearing the song for the first time. None, however, realized that the playing of that song, that one song, was the result of months of effort, research, and consternation by people not just at that radio station, but far beyond.
The decision to play certain songs on the radio does not typically rest with the disc jockey spinning the CDs—or, more accurately, playing digital versions of the songs off of a computer. (And “disc jockey” is even a misnomer these days; most are now called “on-air personalities.”)
The vast majority of the songs played, the order in which they are played, and the time at which they are played are all dictated in advance. It’s the deejay’s job not just to play the music, but to give the songs, promotions, events, and the entire station a human voice.
So, if the deejay isn’t choosing the music, who is?
The decision makers
Large stations have two important people who are involved in deciding what songs are played: the Music Director and the Program Director (PD).
These individuals, who often have an on-air shift as well, start by developing a finite list of songs from which to choose a play rotation. This list, called the “playlist,” is a bit like a football field. Just like the superstar athletes are always on the field, there are a few very familiar artists whose songs are almost always on the playlist. On the sidelines, there are second-string athletes, energetic and aspiring rookies, and veterans hoping to make a comeback—to make it onto the field. Musicians in each category seek the same hallowed ground.
A commercial station can play about 12-14 songs per hour, considering that traffic, weather, news, promos, commercials, and deejay spots take up about 15 minutes per hour. The numbers vary depending on time of day, song length, and how many commercials a station plays, but a typical 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. broadcast has slots for about 200 songs—but that doesn’t mean that 200 different songs get played every day.
The playlist is divided into categories of heavy, medium, and light rotation. A song in heavy rotation is repeated several times throughout the day, while a light rotation tune might not get played at all. The heavy rotation category is fiercely competitive because it translates into enhanced exposure for an artist—and that can mean both expanded ministry and more CD and concert ticket sales.
Landing a spot on the playlist—called an “add” in industry parlance—and, in particular, the heavy rotation category, is a formidable task; Derek Webb likens it to “trying to break into Fort Knox.”
A program director may receive 200 new singles every week to consider for only 1 or 2 slots. And the playlist is finite, so when one song is added, another must be dropped.
“A song has to win its way onto the playlist,” notes Scott Lindy of Sirius Satellite Radio. Sirius selects songs at a music meeting each week. Individuals tend to campaign for certain songs, but PDs look for more than just unbridled passion for a particular song.
“You must bring warranted unbridled passion into the music meeting,” says Lindy. “You’re making a decision not just for yourself, but for your entire audience.”
Tim McDermott, President and General Manager of Houston’s KSBJ, concurs with a simple formula: “Adds must be better than or as good as what we’re already playing.”
Limited hours, shrinking playlists
Some might suggest simply expanding the playlist. That’s certainly feasible, but what cannot be expanded is the number of hours available for music in a day. So, larger playlists mean each song gets played less frequently.
Instead of playlist expansion, many in the industry have noted that playlists are shrinking.
“Radio playlists in general are restrictive because they have gotten smaller,” notes Steve Strout, Director of National Promotion for Rocketown/RKT Records. “Stations have found that playing fewer songs more often results in higher cume [“cumulative audience,” or how many people tune in for at least 5 minutes on a given day].
“Retail is also carrying less music and giving that shelf space to books, DVDs and video games. So all of those factors make it as difficult as it has ever been to break artists [i.e., to get them exposure].”
Testing, testing
Recognizing the import of the decision to add a song, most stations have expanded efforts in music research and testing.
“Testing has changed everything,” notes an anonymous industry veteran. “A music director who is a 28-year-old guy, early in his career, probably won’t pick the right music for a 34-to-38-year-old soccer mom. But the music director can easily say ‘That song didn’t test well with that audience.'”
KSBJ’s McDermott calls testing “wonderful,” noting that the data help him know if the station is on target; he thus observes an overall “much higher percent of quality Christian radio broadcasting than a few years ago.” PDs also like to use testing results as a defense when labels come calling, asking why a song was not added.
Testing is sometimes as simple as the posting of song clips on a website, where listeners vote for which songs they like—and which they don’t. Or it can be as involved as an auditorium full of folks who represent the station’s target audience—potentially a room full of Beckys!—listening to clips of songs while they hold a dial in their hand used to rate each track.
Research considers how much an individual likes a song, whether or not she is already familiar with the song, and whether or not she has grown tired of hearing the song. As more and more stations turn to research, “testing well” has become the real key to airplay.
For example, consider an established artist like Chris Tomlin. His hit, “How Great Is Our God,” was the second-highest testing song during the last week of September, according to Hit Music Research. In the AC format among women 35-44 years old, the song scored 4.45 out of 5. Ninety-nine percent of respondents were familiar with the song, but 24 percent rated it high in the “Burn” category, suggesting they may be growing tired of the song.
The same week, Tomlin’s “Made to Worship” also tested well, with a 4.18 score, but only 10 percent burn. It would seem to make sense for a PD who has not yet added the new song to consider adding it. Indeed, “Made to Worship” topped the Radio and Records Christian AC chart the same week. Nine of the top ten songs that week tested with a score of 4.0 or higher, demonstrating that the songs that are played more frequently are almost always those that test well.
The trouble with tests
Testing does have its detractors, whose criticisms are two-fold. Some disapprove of the research methods, suggesting that the 15-second clip used in several testing formats is not long enough for listeners to form a realistic opinion about a song. Others note a tendency in this type of research for listeners to approve of songs they’ve already heard.
Bob Thornton, Senior PD of Tulsa’s KXOJ, believes songs should be played on the air first, then tested. He cites examples of songs that failed miserably the first time they were tested and went on to become major successes. “Look at someone like Rich Mullins. He didn’t fit the mold. He played instruments like the dulcimer, and radio wouldn’t touch him. Now ‘Awesome God’ is the number one testing song of all time.”
Thornton therefore employs a different strategy. “Any research we do should be looked at as the tiniest screwdriver in the toolbox. The only truly good way to know what your audience wants is to truly get to know them, face-to-face.”
Frank Bell of mainstream Keymarket Communications was quoted in Billboard Radio Monitor with this startling epithet: “Radio research is like making sausage. In most cases, you really don’t want to know how it’s done, or you’ll get sick to your stomach.”
Writing for radio
If landing a spot on the playlist is the goal for so many artists, one wonders how much that goal affects the songwriting and recording process.
MercyMe‘s Nathan Cochran is honest when he describes the influence. “I wince when I say this, because some people are adamant about doing only what they want to do. But when it comes down to it, you’re making music for people to hear, so you consider, ‘Is this radio-friendly?'”
Chris Rice observes a struggle between what he calls “the creative side vs. the marketing side. You anticipate your label needing something to play on radio.”
Aaron Shust notes similarities in the radio single and the song used to lead a congregation in worship. “All of our songs are written with the intention of wanting a congregation to sing along. Basic melodies enable people to sing along right away. Hidden complexity might come out in the studio, complex guitar riffs that a church worship band might not play on a Sunday morning.”
Other artists basically throw up their hands at the radio single process, and just write their music the way they want to.
Michael Card has had radio success, but says, “Every time I’ve ever tried to shape a song for radio, it never hit.”
Andrew Peterson shares Card’s bewilderment. “With every record there are a few songs that you hope will get played on the radio. They seldom are, though radio’s reasoning for that is always a mystery to me. After a while, I just stopped thinking about it so much and started just trying to make the songs as good as I could. If radio ends up liking one of them, all the better.”
The label’s role
If some artists express nonchalance about radio airplay, their labels certainly do not. It is the job of labels and promoters to navigate the radio and retail waters to obtain exposure for their artists.
The first step is the selection of singles from a new album that will be released to radio. This inexact science is practiced a bit differently by each label, but certain strategies have proven effective.
Shust’s label called on industry veterans in Nashville to help with single selection. “Matchless” was chosen as the first single, not because the experts thought it was the strongest single, but because they knew they had a real gem elsewhere on the album, and they needed a “sacrificial lamb” to prepare stations for this new artist. The strategy worked: “Matchless” was followed by that gem, “My Savior My God,” a number one song that remained in the top five after 38 weeks on the AC chart.
The choice of a single is sometimes a collaboration between the artist and the label, but many artists note that the label essentially tells them which singles they’ve chosen. And once they’ve made that choice, the label’s work slips into high gear.
Rocketown’s Steve Strout explains: “Once the single is picked, we select a national add date. We will then ship out the single three weeks prior to the add date and also will deliver the single digitally to radio stations. Our team is on the phones ideally every week to AC and CHR stations. Our goal is that each station has at least listened to the song prior to the add date. Then we just continue to try to sell them on the merits of the song for the next few months. If a single is successful it should have a shelf life of about six months.”
All this effort to build a list of songs might seem extraordinary, but deejays have said that these processes have developed to the point that when a listener calls to make a request, it’s usually already in the queue on the playlist.
Still, the most often-heard complaint about Christian radio is a lack of variety on that very playlist. If listeners clamor for variety, then why do they contribute to this perceived sameness through their research opinions? We’ll explore the answer to that, and more, in the fourth and final article in this series.
Next week in Part 4: More on how research affects what gets played on the air, and a glimpse into the future of Christian radio.
Mark Geil is a freelance writer andthe director of the Biomechanics program at Georgia State University in Atlanta. He lives in Kennesaw, Georgia with his wife and three daughters.
Copyright © 2007 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.
