Producer Survey Results

In order to assess the direct impact of PSD on producer workflow, we contacted 14 program producers (of whom 12 responded).  Our survey questions explored their awareness of PSD, their current use of text content in various formats (web, ID3, DACS, etc), the creation process for text and its distribution path, the kinds of content they would like to provide via PSD, their estimates of PSD deployments effects on their overall workflow, and their overall opinion of the utility of providing text services with their programming. A list of the survey questions can be viewed here (link to Producer_Survey_Questions_final.doc)

Awareness of text services

More than 80 percent of producers surveyed are currently providing some kind of text services along with their program. The majority of producers are distributing text to stations via DACS and to their websites. Some are also providing ID3 tags in podcasts and play-lists to friends or subscribers. This process is done largely by hand, generally by the producer or associate producer after the completion of the program.  While most producers have at least a basic awareness of HD Radio PSD, some have little or no knowledge of this capability. 

Content

Producers of music programs are interested in providing song title and artist information.  Producers of news talk programs are interested in providing topic and guests for each segment (we assume that they would also like their show name to be included).  However, they are only willing to provide this if it involves if the extra work can be kept to a minimum and/or if it could be created simultaneously with the text they are already providing.

Producers have a wide variety of opinions about the prospect of stations inserting local PSD (promos, temp, traffic, station branding, etc.) during their programs. At one extreme are producers who feel that any insertion of text in addition to what they provide should not be allowed. At the other extreme are those who feel that the airwaves belong to the stations and that they should be allowed to do what they want with them. In the middle are those who feel that this would be acceptable under certain conditions:  if local PSD does not interfere with their text content, if this text is restricted to certain kinds of content, or if they are allowed a voice in deciding what is appropriate during their program.

Workflow

Producers are concerned about the extra time, staffing, and budget required to provide PSD text. Their concerns about the impact on their workflow fall into three categories: 

• “Too early to tell.”  This group feels they don’t know enough about what PSD will require to make any kind of educated guess.
• “Minimal impact.”  The producers who estimate only a minimal impact mostly assume that only minimal text will be required (“song and artist” or “show and host”), and/or that this text can be generated in a automated fashion.  Others in this category are already incorporating significant amounts of text as part of their production process and see PSD as only an incremental addition to their workload.
• “Significant impact.” Those who foresee that this would have a significant impact on their workflow feel that it would require the addition of a part-time staff person at approximately $25K/year to manage text services.

It appears that current audio tools do not provide text functionality, or at least that the producers are not aware of them.  A number of producers are adding metadata to the MP3s they create for podcasts.

Conclusions

The majority of producers felt that there was benefit to providing text, as it improved listener service by providing additional context to a program.  They would provide such text if it the process is simple and doesn’t cost much time or money. Given the current state of affairs, it would seem that producers are taking a “wait and see” approach based on potential costs and growth of the installed base of HD Radio receivers.