The Current State of Country Radio / Sexism in Country Music

[14887fan]

I think it's time this topic receives its own thread instead of it getting continuously argued about in each and every single thread that's created. If there's any major discussions that get brought up in certain threads and the topics of the threads begin to get derailed, feel free to redirect any and all conversation back here. 

I'll go ahead and start off the discussion. 

[kanimal]

Whenever I think about this topic, two things come up:

1) The songs are good. Let's face it - there is a significant portion of the audience that does not even pay attention to lyrics. Only a handful actually scrutinize them. If the lyrics are fun, repeatable and support a catchy beat and melody, they work for most listeners. And no matter how much we want to criticize the shallow, trite material, if it's written over songs that are fun and catchy, it is not going to turn off the majority of radio fans.

A song like "Ready Set Roll," in my opinion, is more terrible because of how awful Chase Rice's voice sounds than the lyrics. And Luke Bryan's songs can have pretty awful lyrics but are uniformly catchy - and always feature his very appealing voice. Florida Georgia Line has scored with some pretty awful songs, but Cruise was SUCH a perfect radio song that I'm okay with them riding that cred.

2) The guys are so charismatic and, seemingly, nice. I'm sure there are some anomalies and skeletons you can bring up, but someone like Luke Bryan SEEMS like a genuinely good guy. He's charismatic on hell on stage (he even makes those cheesy twirls and dances work), he seems really likable when interacting with people and he's great in all his appearances. The same goes for a lot of "bros" -- pretty much anyone rundown in the Maddie and Tae song. They come off like GOOD guys.

They also come off as very female-friendly guys--and not just to girls in their teens and twenties. Because they're generally older than their pop, and because they project that "country boy southern charm," they tend to be very popular with the "mom" crowd. Seriously, look at the people who Tweet excitement when something good happens to a Chris Young or Jake Owen. Plenty of women in their 30s and 40s are getting involved.

And that helps soften the image. If they're mom-friendly AND have that whole southern thing going on, they can't possibly be sleazy (note that, for whatever reason, America tend to look at the positive of southern charm and the good old days but not the racism and sexism that historically accompanied it). That really makes it easier to stomach lyrics that, for all intents and purposes, are scummy.

[14887fan]

Jul 7, 2014 0:42:42 GMT -5 kanimal said:

1) The songs are good. Let's face it - there is a significant portion of the audience that does not even pay attention to lyrics. Only a handful actually scrutinize them. If the lyrics are fun, repeatable and support a catchy beat and melody, they work for most listeners. And no matter how much we want to criticize the shallow, trite material, if it's written over songs that are fun and catchy, it is not going to turn off the majority of radio fans.

By what standards? Being "feel-good" and anthemic? If that's what it takes to make a good song, then I should go scout out a record deal. Catchiness doesn't make a good song, because if that's the case, then all negative opinions about Carrie Underwood's "Undo It" (first example that came to mind, pardon the fan-drawn example) should be out the door because even though it's trite material, the song is fun and catchy. I'm very aware to the fact that there's a large audience out there that doesn't pay any mind to the lyrics, but there's also a large audience out there that does, which bears the question of why we, as fans and listeners, can't have a happy medium of both "feel-good" songs and songs with lyrical depth and substance. 
Catchiness and hooks aren't all it takes to make a good song. Being a male seems to be the big slam-dunk for Country music currently, and being a male singing a song about the same stuff that's on radio (as well as making something that's sonically identical to everything, as well) seems to be all it takes to get a hit. But does that make the songs good? To me, no. 

Jul 7, 2014 0:42:42 GMT -5 kanimal said:

2) The guys are so charismatic and, seemingly, nice. I'm sure there are some anomalies and skeletons you can bring up, but someone like Luke Bryan SEEMS like a genuinely good guy. He's charismatic on hell on stage (he even makes those cheesy twirls and dances work), he seems really likable when interacting with people and he's great in all his appearances. The same goes for a lot of "bros" -- pretty much anyone rundown in the Maddie and Tae song. They come off like GOOD guys.

They also come off as very female-friendly guys--and not just to girls in their teens and twenties. Because they're generally older than their pop, and because they project that "country boy southern charm," they tend to be very popular with the "mom" crowd. Seriously, look at the people who Tweet excitement when something good happens to a Chris Young or Jake Owen. Plenty of women in their 30s and 40s are getting involved.

And that helps soften the image. If they're mom-friendly AND have that whole southern thing going on, they can't possibly be sleazy (note that, for whatever reason, America tend to look at the positive of southern charm and the good old days but not the racism and sexism that historically accompanied it). That really makes it easier to stomach lyrics that, for all intents and purposes, are scummy.

I'm intrigued by how we can write them off as being good guys when we have tweets that stand as evidence to their massive egos. I don't disagree with you at all about the charisma that many of them impose, nor do I disagree with you on the "mom" crowd point (and that's another thing that makes my stomach twist, but that's a different discussion for a different issue, I suppose), but I can't agree with you on them being very female-friendy guys and seemingly nice guys when we have such huge evidence of their massive heads.

IDK. I'm just not convinced that all of these guys are super innocent when they release songs as vulgar as they have lately. I'm especially unconvinced (and likely won't ever be convinced) that these songs are good in any way, shape, or form.

[liza]

This "mom" dislikes everything about bro country, especially the lyrics. I think the trend will change soon just because it's time, not because of a song. The bad press they have been getting will have an impact and probably already is - I don't believe for a minute that the songwriters are happy with the same boring lyrics over and over.

[Deleted]

Great thread idea. :)

*The backlash against bro Country could lead to a flood of feminist, "We are women hear us roar" type songs, I can't really see it as having much of an impact overall. Since females have an impossible time on radio unless you're one of the big 3, there's probably no room for any flood of female artists, no matter what the subject matter is

*The strong female presence has always been a selling point for a few women, but the public seems to be turned off by a woman using that as her selling point (See: The downfall of Gretchen Willson). So, even it it worked for a little bit, I couldn't see women sticking with it, since most seem to be above that, anyway.

*The idea that so many people defend what's at Country radio right now as "good" is worrisome, and it's the reason I fear the state of music will never quite be back to where it was. Luke, Blake, FGL, etc. are making music that is selling to a certain demographic right now; by no stretch does that mean it's quaility music, though. These guys are doing well because they're catering to the what the public is buying, and radio is responding equally. Quality does not, and never has, equaled quantity.
Frankly, this kind of "it's catchy, so it's good" attitude is what has turned me off to the genre for the past several years. Catchy melodies/vocals may be important to some, but there an equal number of others who want SUBSTANCE back. It's one thing for radio to play s*it, but it speaks to a whole other issue when people are defending it without a second thought.

I could care less about what other people like, but when their apathy leads to excuses like "it's catchy and it sells" THAT'S where I have a real problem. Radio may not demand more, but we shouldn't have to settle for it just because it sells.

*The "it's catchy and it sells" idea is what's driving radio/sales right now. If Country doesn't turn around, I fear the genre will lose even more fans and just attract even more bandwagoners instead of those who really appreciate the genre for what it is.

[kanimal]

*I don't know that I quite agree that all the country bros come off as cocky, but even if they did, I'm not sure that would/should affect their appeal with women. Women often gravitate towards confident--if overly cocky--guys.

*I also disagree with the part about vulgarity. I'm with you in calling a lot of the lyrics sexist and objectifying, but I rarely encounter a mainstream country lyric that goes beyond a PG/PG 13 level. The content is more "damn, she's hot" or, at worst, "I'd like to see you naked and hook up with you." It's never as graphic as what you hear in mainstream rap and even some pop songs.

*While "Undo It" is a bad example in that it completely disproves my point, I'm glad you brought it up because it, in my opinion, serves as a valid focal point for understanding why so many talented female country singers are struggling to make names for themselves.

I know this isn't the rule, but one of the things I've noticed with a lot of the Internet darling female country singers (your Maggie Rose or Leah Turner type people) is that their lyrics lack the specific storytelling and imagery that are supposed to be inherent to country.

Songs have to be relatable to the listener, but in country, they also have to give you a vivid window into the performer's tale. As shallow as they are, songs by Luke Bryan and Florida Georgia Line happen to be *very* descriptive. They give you a precise setting, and they explain exactly what's happening. We want to write everything off because it's so shallow and petty, but it's important to recognize that there is some country spirit in what they're doing. Songs like "Play it Again" and "Cruise" completely immerse you in their world.

I guarantee the average country critic isn't thinking this line from Luke's Crash My Party - I could be on the front row of the best show. And look down and see your face on my phone. And I’m gone so long, hang on. I’ll meet you in a minute or two - is deep or poetic, but it's also such a REAL, clear image. I can put myself in that situation; the detail and clarity of his story is dead-on. That means something in country music. It's just a shame that they're using their way with words and descriptions on trivial topics.

And, for what it's worth, I *have* seen even harsh country critics acknowledge how great Florida Georgia Line is at painting a picture. You may not like who you're meeting, but you definitely get to know them through their songs.

Then take something like Leah Turner's "Pull Me Back." She has a great voice and the lyrics are solid, but they're also so unbelievably generic and distant. This is a song that basically could have been written and sung by MILLIONS of people in relationships. I don't get any real window into her relationship or to her as a person.

It's a very "pop" mindset; the kind of stuff you'd get from like a Diane Warren or (the Undo It example) Kara DioGuardi. And that's what's ironic - so many of the buzzed about females are releasing songs that are very pop in nature, yet it's the guys who ARE staying true to the country form of songwriting (even if their content isn't true to country) that get the flack for ruining the genre.

There happens to be two female singers who consistently release vivid, descriptive songs, and they happen to be two of the genre's most successful acts. Taylor Swift and Miranda Lambert.

Miranda Lambert's discography is loaded with songs that actually DESCRIBE the setting and evoke imagery, and it turns her into a real person I feel I'm getting to know when I listen. That's why I was so devastated when I found out she didn't write "The House That Built Me," because that is the perfect example of using real images to tell your story.

(On the male side, the same goes for Justin Moore's "If Heaven Wasn't So Far Away")

[bluedog6]

* I was listening to a radio show this morning and Maddie and Tae were there as part of their radio tour. The one DJ got to talking about how they had been thinking of songs that contained the words "painted on jeans" and they thought of six songs right off the bat. That's sad.

* I had the radio playing in the back room at work today and we started keeping track of how many songs were being played that were about wanting to get a girl in the sack, or using words like "money maker" or "sugar shaker". It was scary.

* One of my biggest complaints about "bro-country" and even a lot of non-bro-country current country music is the seeming abandonment of traditional country instrumentation. Some use it sparingly, maybe one of the instruments I will mention, but many none at all. The fiddle, the banjo, the mandolin, the pedal steel guitar, etc., all of them make a song sound country. It is so unusual to hear a band playing more than one of those instruments in a song. Although I'm not a huge The Band Perry fan, they are one that I can think of that uses country instrumentation quite frequently and does it in a unique and modern sounding way. It can be done. Luke Bryan's music in the early days was heavy on the fiddle. Two years ago I saw him live. The songs in the early part of the set had one of his band members playing fiddle. Then Luke started playing some songs from his current album (which I think was "Tailgates and Tanlines") and the fiddle player put down his violin and picked up the electric guitar. I counted 5 or 6 straight songs with no fiddle. There is no reason that even the most bro-country written song can't combo up some fiddle/banjo/mandolin.

I'm sure I'll think of more thoughts later. :)

[jferstler]

I think a lot of people tend to over analyze "bro-country"... Radio is sounding as good today if not better then it has in years. Name a "bro" song on the radio right now? Read Set Roll and Leave The Night On are all I can think of and I don't even mind them at all. It's not like these men are calling women "bitches" or "hoes" as rap artists do. Not every song is going to be as lyrically in depth as say "He Stopped Loving Her Today" or "Whisky Lullaby" . I don't take radio so seriously that I get upset over the songs I hear on it, if I don't like the song I just turn the radio off and listen to the music I have downloaded. Radio is getting better then it was is '12 and '13. The Band Perry is one group I always turn off when they come on. Most of their music just annoys me but it's not "bro" it's just extremely pop sounding and in my opinion just fake.

[kanimal]

Jul 8, 2014 20:54:32 GMT -5 jferstler said:

I think a lot of people tend to over analyze "bro-country"... Radio is sounding as good today if not better then it has in years. Name a "bro" song on the radio right now? Read Set Roll and Leave The Night On are all I can think of and I don't even mind them at all. It's not like these men are calling women "bitches" or "hoes" as rap artists do. Not every song is going to be as lyrically in depth as say "He Stopped Loving Her Today" or "Whisky Lullaby" . I don't take radio so seriously that I get upset over the songs I hear on it, if I don't like the song I just turn the radio off and listen to the music I have downloaded. Radio is getting better then it was is '12 and '13. The Band Perry is one group I always turn off when they come on. Most of their music just annoys me but it's not "bro" it's just extremely pop sounding and in my opinion just fake.

Ready Set Roll is pretty bad as far as bro lyrics ("get your little fine ass over here"), but the bigger issue is how terrible Chase Rice's voice sounds on the recording.

Here are some other songs that I can see fitting into the "bro" subgenre

Tyler Farr - Whiskey in My Water
Dustin Lynch - Where it's At
Eric Paslay - Song About a Girl (this one is actually really bad, because it makes fun of all the truck and drinking cliches but then goes into the bit about how the girl is rocking those jeans)
Brantley Gilbert, Thomas Rhett, Justin Moore - Small Town Throwdown
Cole Swindell - Hope You Get Lonely Tonight
Frankie Ballard - Sunshine and Whiskey
Little Big Town - Day Drinking (**Note - People will disagree with this because it's women singing, but if you had a guy singing these lyrics, people would HATE this song and write it off as Bro 101.  So I'm counting it)
Scotty McCreery - Feelin' It
Brothers Osborne - Rum
Dan + Shay - Show You Off (people will disagree with this because they have sensitive voices and are more like a boy band, but the lyrics are as ridiculously bro-y as any Luke Bryan song)

[Cody Wants Out...]

I think that this "bro-country" fad is strongly influenced by this party craze that has influenced today's social media, which has been around for quite a few years. Unfortunately but truthfully, this has been affecting not only country radio, but top 40 and other genres as well, where radio PDs add the most random songs ever that I believe come from the internet (this may apply to strictly top 40 radio, but I'll do my best to restrict it to country here). It was alright at first, but as time went on, I believe that it's been getting out of hand now. Maybe this is what the general public is into these days, but listening to songs like "Ready Set Roll" and anything from Cole Swindell, Eric Paslay, Tyler Farr, and Parmalee has me questioning what people (mostly youngsters around my age) consider what "good music" is these days...aside from my faith in humanity. ;)

[jferstler]

Jul 12, 2014 21:24:50 GMT -5 Cody Wants Out... said:

I think that this "bro-country" fad is strongly influenced by this party craze that has influenced today's social media, which has been around for quite a few years. Unfortunately but truthfully, this has been affecting not only country radio, but top 40 and other genres as well, where radio PDs add the most random songs ever that I believe come from the internet (this may apply to strictly top 40 radio, but I'll do my best to restrict it to country here). It was alright at first, but as time went on, I believe that it's been getting out of hand now. Maybe this is what the general public is into these days, but listening to songs like "Ready Set Roll" and anything from Cole Swindell, Eric Paslay, Tyler Farr, and Parmalee has me questioning what people (mostly youngsters around my age) consider what "good music" is these days...aside from my faith in humanity. ;)

Have you listened the artists you mentioned albums? Eric Paslay has one of the greatest songs of the past 10 years with "She Don't Love You" and Cole Swindell has a few stellar songs on his album as well, like "Dozen Roses and a Six Pack" "Swayin" and " I Just Want You". Tyler Farr has some decent songs on his album as well I haven't listen to much from Parmalee as I haven't really cared for what I've heard from them. But I know they've been busting their ass for years trying to make it and one of the members got shot trying to defend their tour bus from an armed robbery and shot the intruder.

[McCreerian (Harris 2024!)]

Since we're talking about the current state of radio, here is an excellent article put up today at the Boot about women.


Why Are There So Few Women at Country Radio?

By Sterling Whitaker July 13, 2014 3:15 PM


Read More: Why Are There So Few Women at Country Radio? | theboot.com/women-country-radio/?trackback=tsmclip


Some of the most important artists in country music today are female — but you might not suspect that from listening to country radio.

Women have dominated much of the last 12 months in country music, releasing some of the most impactful albums of the year — except commercially.

It’s been the subject of much discussion both within and without the Nashville industry, with everyone from Billboard to NPR weighing in on the puzzling statistics. But there seems to be little more light at the end of the tunnel than there was a year ago today for female artists who are trying to compete with men at country radio.

Carrie Underwood, Miranda Lambert and Taylor Swift are among the only female artists who have scored major success at country radio recently, as the genre has become even more dominated by “bro country” artists like Jason Aldean, Luke Bryan and Florida Georgia Line.

Kacey Musgraves, Ashley Monroe and Brandy Clark released three of the most critically acclaimed albums of 2013, but only Musgraves has had a Top 10 hit, and she’s so far proven unable to follow it up. That didn’t stop her from winning an armload of awards for her major label debut, ‘Same Trailer Different Park,’ including a Grammy for Best Country Album.
"The country music business is almost entirely male-dominated, especially at a decision-making level. Most of the record label executives are men, and most of the radio program directors are men, too."
So if women are driving the marketplace in so many ways in terms of the quality of the work they are releasing, why are they not getting more airplay?

It’s a multi-faceted question, and the most obvious part of the equation may be as simple as this: the country music business is almost entirely male-dominated, especially at a decision-making level. Most of the record label executives are men, and most of the radio program directors are men, too.

That may seem to suggest an answer as simple as out-and-out sexism, but it’s much more complicated than that. The truth is that the demographic for country music is predominately female, which leads many to argue that if radio played more female artists, it would appeal to women more.

But that’s not the thought process in the business. The prevailing argument in the industry appears to be, if we’re marketing primarily to women, then we need to be marketing male artists that they will find attractive and relatable. That’s part — but only part — of the explanation behind the rise of artists like Bryan, Aldean, Florida Georgia Line and more.

The other, far more important part is — as always in the music business — money. The simple fact is, it’s not the job of radio to provide exposure for the highest-quality songs in the genre. It’s the job of country radio to draw as many listeners to their stations as possible, and keep them listening for as long as possible, so they can present bigger numbers to potential advertisers, which in turn means they can charge higher rates for ads. Higher ad rates mean more profit for the station, which is, after all, a for-profit business.

That works in concert with the record labels, who have to try to assess how best to market their artists in light of the current radio environment. Since commercial country radio is still the easiest way to mass market an artist, we’re seeing a trend now where artists are altering their approach to recording in response to trends at radio.

It’s always been that way, of course — go back and listen to any of your favorite albums from the ’80s and ’90s, and chances are they contain some production elements that sound dated now, but were part of an industry trend at the time of their release. But we’re also seeing this get tied in with touring, which has become an even more vital part of the overall bottom line for artists as song revenue has been dramatically impacted by illegal downloading.

As a result, we’re seeing more and more artists develop a career plan that emphasizes touring as much as possible in the biggest venues possible, which then forces them to craft songs that are designed for that environment. As more and more artists place greater emphasis on performing in arena-sized venues, there’s a definite shift toward writing and cutting songs that are intended specifically to play in arenas — a performing environment that doesn’t really lend itself to subtly nuanced, introspective ballads, for instance.

That may well be one reason why Swift, Lambert and Underwood are all doing so well when so many other female acts are not.
"There’s a definite shift toward writing and cutting songs that are intended specifically to play in arenas — a performing environment that doesn’t really lend itself to subtly nuanced, introspective ballads, for instance."
Swift’s recent Red Tour set a new record for the most successful country tour in history, and she has certainly shifted her focus in recent years to songs that can play in a bigger environment, which allows her to design spectacular live shows that are hugely entertaining visually, featuring special effects, dancers and even aerialists. Music is just one part of that equation, and there’s hardly any getting around the fact that it’s probably easier to get an arena full of people excited with material like ‘We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together’ than with ‘White Horse’ or ‘Teardrops on My Guitar.’

Underwood is another performer who has placed increasing emphasis on visually stunning live shows, and has gradually changed her approach over time to record songs like ‘Blown Away’ that will come off better in larger venues. And while Lambert doesn’t go in for that high-tech approach to the same degree, she definitely leans toward more up-tempo songs, and performs them with a manic energy live that allows her to succeed in bigger places.

“Bro country” is ideally suited to those larger places, since most of its appeal is arguably in the music and particularly the rhythm track, as well as the spirit of fun in those songs. That’s a much better fit for tens of thousands of people tailgating and getting crazy in a huge setting, and it’s no surprise that artists like Bryan, Aldean and more are benefiting from that and breaking through to the largest concert venues in the country.

While they’re not exclusively female, we’re also seeing female-fronted acts like Lady Antebellum and the Band Perry shift their focus away from songs like ‘Need You Now’ and ‘If I Die Young’ and toward fare like ‘Bartender’ and ‘Chainsaw,’ which might be more likely to play well in the bigger settings in which those acts now find themselves. And as acts are able to book larger and larger gigs, there’s more of what the business calls “event power” around each gig — more excitement for more fans, which makes it easier for the local radio station promoting the gig to get fans engaged in ticket giveaways, contests and the like.

That’s better for the stations, who naturally reward those artists by playing their songs more — which then sends a signal to other artists that they need to switch up their approach to get similar results. So even though they’re seemingly unrelated, the radio stations, labels and managers are actually all working in tandem toward a common goal — that of exploiting artists in the commercial marketplace for as much profit as possible. Naturally, they’re going to do that by emphasizing whatever kind of music appears to be getting the best marketplace results during any given album cycle.

That tends to leave out artists like Musgraves, Monroe or Clark. It’s a difficult scenario for them in that the quality and challenging nature of their work may actually play against them getting more air time at commercial radio.

Take Musgraves, for example. Her first major label single, ‘Merry Go ‘Round,’ was a Top 10 hit, and it helped her album debut at No. 1. The second single, ‘Blowin’ Smoke,’ missed the Top 20.

For her third single, Musgraves chose the extremely provocative ‘Follow Your Arrow,’ despite the fact that it addresses hot-button topics like same-sex relationships and marijuana use that are still widely seen as taboo issues for much of country’s more conservative fan base. Predictably, many radio programmers simply chose not to play it at all, rather than risk potentially offending their listeners. The song stalled outside the Top 40, and subsequent singles have so far failed to re-capture her initial heat at radio.
"Even though they’re seemingly unrelated, the radio stations, labels and managers are actually all working in tandem toward a common goal — that of exploiting artists in the commercial marketplace for as much profit as possible."
So far Monroe — whose album ‘Like a Rose’ slants heavily toward a traditional take on country music — has charted with just one of her singles, ‘Weed Instead of Roses,’ which squeaked into the Top 40 at No. 39, while Clark — who’s signed to a smaller label that simply doesn’t have the financial resources to compete on a level playing field at country radio — has had most of her success via alternate marketing means like satellite radio.

The reality for artists of that caliber is simply this: it’s easier for someone to get hammered and put their fist in the air at a huge arena gig to the sounds of the latest hick-hop hit than it is to the strains of a better-written, more subtly nuanced song from a writer of greater substance — which makes it easier to exploit that kind of music for money. Which is what the music industry does for a living.

So what will it take for us to see more women singing material of more substance at country radio?

The main thing a fan can do is (legally) download music from the artists they like, which sends a message to the labels and radio that supporting those artists could be good business. Don’t just complain there’s nothing you like — get engaged, get involved, call your local radio station and ask for what you want, and let them know you want and would support higher fare.

In the meantime, instead of complaining about the lack of women at country radio, let’s focus on the fact that female artists are creating such strong work right now, and celebrate the fact that we as fans get to access that work online, via satellite radio, NPR and especially through attending live shows by those artists. We’re lucky to be living in an age and time when we don’t have to sit around waiting for a song we like to come on the radio — we can go find whatever we want, whenever we want, and that winds up providing enough financial support for those artists to make a good enough living to continue doing what they’re doing.

And that’s a good thing, not a bad thing.

[14887fan]

So what will it take for us to see more women singing material of more substance at country radio?
The main thing a fan can do is (legally) download music from the artists they like, which sends a message to the labels and radio that supporting those artists could be good business. Don’t just complain there’s nothing you like — get engaged, get involved, call your local radio station and ask for what you want, and let them know you want and would support higher fare.

In the meantime, instead of complaining about the lack of women at country radio, let’s focus on the fact that female artists are creating such strong work right now, and celebrate the fact that we as fans get to access that work online, via satellite radio, NPR and especially through attending live shows by those artists. We’re lucky to be living in an age and time when we don’t have to sit around waiting for a song we like to come on the radio — we can go find whatever we want, whenever we want, and that winds up providing enough financial support for those artists to make a good enough living to continue doing what they’re doing.

And that’s a good thing, not a bad thing.

What a heaping load of bulls**t. I'm willing to bet that many, many passionate fans of female artists do call in to radio to request their favorites' music to be played. DJs won't care, though. They A) don't have to take the calls, B) don't have to play everything that every caller requests, and C) will play whatever they're being payed by labels to play over what one casual listener wants. So that's complete bulls**t. It's obvious that fans DO get involved by supporting female acts -- has Kacey Musgraves' Same Trailer Different Park not sold over 400k copies to date despite having only 1 measly Top 10 to support it, followed by several Top 30 (+ below)-peaking releases? These women need PUBLICITY -- that includes radio airplay, awards show performance slots (if the ACM Awards were able to make room for just about every damn male in this genre [it felt like] and only had room for ONE solo female act -- ML -- then you know there's a huge issue, and it's not the lack of fan support), etc., and if they don't get it, then fan support can only get them so far when there's minimal promo opportunity there.

"In the meantime, let's focus on the fact that female artists are creating such strong work right now..."
Okay, and while we're at it, let's also focus on how it's seeing virtually no success in comparison to the likes of every Florida Georgia Line radio release, "That's My Kind of Night," "It Goes Like This," "Hey Girl," and [insert any and all other s**t 'bro-Country' songs here] that go Gold/Platinum/I don't even want to know how many copies of the monstrosity that is "Cruise" sold, set airplay records of some shits and sorts, and hit #1 faster than a child hits water after falling out of a boat.

So no, I, along with others, I'm sure (but I won't speak for them), won't simply focus on the great stuff we're getting from women right now and not focus as much on the minimal amount of success they've seen. That's basically saying "Shut up and succumb to what radio and these redundant male artists in the genre are spoon-feeding everyone right now because we don't care about what the general public wants."

[Cody Wants Out...]

Jul 13, 2014 18:08:11 GMT -5 jferstler said:

Jul 12, 2014 21:24:50 GMT -5 Cody Wants Out... said:

I think that this "bro-country" fad is strongly influenced by this party craze that has influenced today's social media, which has been around for quite a few years. Unfortunately but truthfully, this has been affecting not only country radio, but top 40 and other genres as well, where radio PDs add the most random songs ever that I believe come from the internet (this may apply to strictly top 40 radio, but I'll do my best to restrict it to country here). It was alright at first, but as time went on, I believe that it's been getting out of hand now. Maybe this is what the general public is into these days, but listening to songs like "Ready Set Roll" and anything from Cole Swindell, Eric Paslay, Tyler Farr, and Parmalee has me questioning what people (mostly youngsters around my age) consider what "good music" is these days...aside from my faith in humanity. ;)

Have you listened the artists you mentioned albums? Eric Paslay has one of the greatest songs of the past 10 years with "She Don't Love You" and Cole Swindell has a few stellar songs on his album as well, like "Dozen Roses and a Six Pack" "Swayin" and " I Just Want You". Tyler Farr has some decent songs on his album as well I haven't listen to much from Parmalee as I haven't really cared for what I've heard from them. But I know they've been busting their ass for years trying to make it and one of the members got shot trying to defend their tour bus from an armed robbery and shot the intruder.

Nope. And I refuse to. I mean, Cole doesn't even sound a quarter of the way interested in his career when he "performs", and the way I see it, those aforementioned artists are just wanting to make money. "Song About a Girl" is absolute bull-hockey and radio is willing to play it over several other much better quality songs for country radio at the moment (EYB's "Dust", anyone?).

Also, Sam Hunt's latest does absolutely nothing for me and I don't think I'll ever remotely like it in the end.

[14887fan]

Newest bro-Country hit: "Burnin' It Down", Jason Aldean

This song raises another issue, though, which runs hand-in-hand with what this thread calls for (the current state of Country radio): has Country music's sound been evolving, or has the genre simply lost its identity? Who's to blame -- the fans? Radio? Music Row & their corporate big heads?

[McCreerian (Harris 2024!)]

Jul 22, 2014 16:00:54 GMT -5 14887fan said:

Newest bro-Country hit: "Burnin' It Down", Jason Aldean

This song raises another issue, though, which runs hand-in-hand with what this thread calls for (the current state of Country radio): has Country music's sound been evolving, or has the genre simply lost its identity? Who's to blame -- the fans? Radio? Music Row & their corporate big heads?

I say it's the fans. If fans weren't buying it, then corporate heads wouldn't be pushing it on radio to play it. Unfortunately as each generation comes along, the less traditional has been in their upbringing over the last 20 years. After all 2000 was "Murder on Music Row" and looking back now most of what they were singing about sounds traditional compared to today's radio. Country is getting more watered down with Pop/Rock, now Rap/Hip Hop, with each year and decade. Casual fans growing up think that is what Country music is and don't care enough to go back to listen to their older siblings, parents, etc brand of Country music. There are still 20 year olds who want to sing that kind of "original "Country music but the "normal" 20 year old hasn't even heard it. I'm afraid of what it'll be like in another 10 years.

Case in point...my 17 year old cousin heard some Bro-Country the other day and he said "I used to hate Country music when Grandma listened to it, but this new stuff is great!"

[drummerman2009]

Anyone remembers MusikMafia? The genre started by Big and Rich and Gretchen Wilson? John Rich buying Barbara Mandrell's mansion and turned it into their headquarters for awhile? We probably know what happened with that genre, Big and Rich slowing down their sound and Gretchen Wilson having not released a new album in nearly 5 years. I think that bro-country might go away in the same vein as did that genre.

[sabre14]

Jul 22, 2014 16:15:03 GMT -5 drummerman2009 said:

Anyone remembers MusikMafia? The genre started by Big and Rich and Gretchen Wilson? John Rich buying Barbara Mandrell's mansion and turned it into their headquarters for awhile? We probably know what happened with that genre, Big and Rich slowing down their sound and Gretchen Wilson having not released a new album in nearly 5 years. I think that bro-country might go away in the same vein as did that genre.

The MuzikMafia was nowhere near as popular as "bro-country" is now though and didn't achieve the chart and sales success as FGL, Thomas Rhett, and others have garnered.

I also think most of Big & Rich's material was not bro-country. To me it was in another category all it's own with songs like "Real World", "Love Train", "Rollin'", "20 Margaritas", "Comin' To Your City", etc. Though I was a fan of it because they balanced it out with great ballads like "Holy Water", "Never Mind Me", "Live This Life" and "8th Of November". Gretchen Wilson, James Otto, and Shannon Lawson were also not bro-country either.

[drummerman2009]

Jul 22, 2014 16:21:58 GMT -5 sabre14 said:

Jul 22, 2014 16:15:03 GMT -5 drummerman2009 said:

Anyone remembers MusikMafia? The genre started by Big and Rich and Gretchen Wilson? John Rich buying Barbara Mandrell's mansion and turned it into their headquarters for awhile? We probably know what happened with that genre, Big and Rich slowing down their sound and Gretchen Wilson having not released a new album in nearly 5 years. I think that bro-country might go away in the same vein as did that genre.

The MuzikMafia was nowhere near as popular as "bro-country" is now though and didn't achieve the chart and sales success as FGL, Thomas Rhett, and others have garnered.

I also think most of Big & Rich's material was not bro-country. To me it was in another category all it's own with songs like "Real World", "Love Train", "Rollin'", "20 Margaritas", "Comin' To Your City", etc. Though I was a fan of it because they balanced it out with great ballads like "Holy Water", "Never Mind Me", "Live This Life" and "8th Of November". Gretchen Wilson, James Otto, and Shannon Lawson were also not bro-country either.

What I was saying though was that MuzikMafia was a phase just like bro-country is a phase and those before it like the Urban Cowboy phase in the early 1980s, the outlaw phase of the mid 1970s, the first traditional phase of the early 1980s which brought George Strait and Ricky Skaggs to the forefront, the mid 1980s traditional phase that brought Randy Travis and Keith Whitley, the country-pop phase in the mid 1990s through early 2000s that brought crossover success for Shania Twain and Faith Hill to megastardom. Years before it was the country-pop phase that brought John Denver and Olivia Newton-John to country radio and both winning awards from the CMA's and much earlier in the late 1950s through the mid 1960s with Marty Robbins, Jim Reeves and Eddy Arnold and their crossover phase. So there has been at least a dozen or so of these phases, some have lasted a couple of years and some lasted a long time.

[sabre14]

Jul 22, 2014 16:32:57 GMT -5 drummerman2009 said:

Jul 22, 2014 16:21:58 GMT -5 sabre14 said:

The MuzikMafia was nowhere near as popular as "bro-country" is now though and didn't achieve the chart and sales success as FGL, Thomas Rhett, and others have garnered.

I also think most of Big & Rich's material was not bro-country. To me it was in another category all it's own with songs like "Real World", "Love Train", "Rollin'", "20 Margaritas", "Comin' To Your City", etc. Though I was a fan of it because they balanced it out with great ballads like "Holy Water", "Never Mind Me", "Live This Life" and "8th Of November". Gretchen Wilson, James Otto, and Shannon Lawson were also not bro-country either.

What I was saying though was that MuzikMafia was a phase just like bro-country is a phase and those before it like the Urban Cowboy phase in the early 1980s, the outlaw phase of the mid 1970s, the first traditional phase of the early 1980s which brought George Strait and Ricky Skaggs to the forefront, the mid 1980s traditional phase that brought Randy Travis and Keith Whitley, the country-pop phase in the mid 1990s through early 2000s that brought crossover success for Shania Twain and Faith Hill to megastardom. Years before it was the country-pop phase that brought John Denver and Olivia Newton-John to country radio and both winning awards from the CMA's and much earlier in the late 1950s through the mid 1960s with Marty Robbins, Jim Reeves and Eddy Arnold and their crossover phase. So there has been at least a dozen or so of these phases, some have lasted a couple of years and some lasted a long time.

This phase hasn't showed any sign of slowing down though. To be honest I think you're giving the MuzikMafia a little too much credit for being a phase. It was it's own thing that didn't really branch off into copycats like bro-country has.

As for how long it will last--I honestly don't know. Who's to say though that this "phase" doesn't turn into something worse than what we're experiencing now? I don't think it's automatic that it will go into a more traditional phase and that this is the limit. We haven't seen sales dwindle yet so you're guess is as good as mine. It's uncharted waters right now and I wish that this music would cease to be popular but that won't happen. Country radio is in it for money just like any other corporation. I will say I do believe that labels and songwriters are slowly starting to recognize that they will have to challenge themselves and try different song subjects but now that this music is out there, I think that some artists like FGL will continue with the music like "Cruise's" of he world because that's the kind of artist they are and want to be, and judging by their success, I don't think they will change for the most part. I don't think they would want to bite the hand that's fed them anyway.

[Cody Wants Out...]

Jul 22, 2014 16:00:54 GMT -5 14887fan said:

Newest bro-Country hit: "Burnin' It Down", Jason Aldean

This song raises another issue, though, which runs hand-in-hand with what this thread calls for (the current state of Country radio): has Country music's sound been evolving, or has the genre simply lost its identity? Who's to blame -- the fans? Radio? Music Row & their corporate big heads?

Is all of the above an option?

[Uncle Lumpy]

Jul 22, 2014 16:00:54 GMT -5 14887fan said:

Newest bro-Country hit: "Burnin' It Down", Jason Aldean

This song raises another issue, though, which runs hand-in-hand with what this thread calls for (the current state of Country radio): has Country music's sound been evolving, or has the genre simply lost its identity? Who's to blame -- the fans? Radio? Music Row & their corporate big heads?

All the above, but the main problem still comes from the Big Wheel Corporate heads that are calling the shots from up above. I refuse to accept that country music has "evolved". It has simply been replaced. I see ridiculous arguments on Pulse every day proclaiming that if its being played on country radio, its country music. What? Thats a mind numbingly ignorant statement. I could put a Ford sticker on my Chevy truck but I don't think I would convince anybody by calling it F-150.

Jul 22, 2014 16:32:57 GMT -5 drummerman2009 said:

Jul 22, 2014 16:21:58 GMT -5 sabre14 said:

The MuzikMafia was nowhere near as popular as "bro-country" is now though and didn't achieve the chart and sales success as FGL, Thomas Rhett, and others have garnered.

I also think most of Big & Rich's material was not bro-country. To me it was in another category all it's own with songs like "Real World", "Love Train", "Rollin'", "20 Margaritas", "Comin' To Your City", etc. Though I was a fan of it because they balanced it out with great ballads like "Holy Water", "Never Mind Me", "Live This Life" and "8th Of November". Gretchen Wilson, James Otto, and Shannon Lawson were also not bro-country either.

What I was saying though was that MuzikMafia was a phase just like bro-country is a phase and those before it like the Urban Cowboy phase in the early 1980s, the outlaw phase of the mid 1970s, the first traditional phase of the early 1980s which brought George Strait and Ricky Skaggs to the forefront, the mid 1980s traditional phase that brought Randy Travis and Keith Whitley, the country-pop phase in the mid 1990s through early 2000s that brought crossover success for Shania Twain and Faith Hill to megastardom. Years before it was the country-pop phase that brought John Denver and Olivia Newton-John to country radio and both winning awards from the CMA's and much earlier in the late 1950s through the mid 1960s with Marty Robbins, Jim Reeves and Eddy Arnold and their crossover phase. So there has been at least a dozen or so of these phases, some have lasted a couple of years and some lasted a long time.

The only problem is all of those phases still allowed the other side to have a voice. During the Urban Cowboy fad George Jones , Merle Haggard , John Anderson etc etc .. were still having massive hits on the radio. During the pop country sounds of Patsy Cline & Jim Reeves there was Loretta Lynn & Faron Young. During the Olivia Newton John & John Denver years there was Tom T Hall & Charley Pride. During the popish sounds of Faith Hill & Shania Twain we still had Alan Jackson & George Strait to balance out the sound of country music . Thats not happening anymore. Not even close. Theres virtually nothing on country radio that ties it to country music anymore. Even taking Bro-Country out of the equation , there's very little on Mainstream Country radio that I find appealing. Its all so watered down. I fear Country Music as a genre is going down a much darker path this time as they seem to be literally throwing away the honest to goodness fans that have built it into the biggest genre to chase the late teen / early twenty something male demo. What happens when the next shiny thing comes along and all these new "fans" chase the next fad to another genre? Will there be enough of the original country fans left to keep the genre a float?

[43dudleyvillas]

Jul 22, 2014 16:00:54 GMT -5 14887fan said:

Newest bro-Country hit: "Burnin' It Down", Jason Aldean

This song raises another issue, though, which runs hand-in-hand with what this thread calls for (the current state of Country radio): has Country music's sound been evolving, or has the genre simply lost its identity? Who's to blame -- the fans? Radio? Music Row & their corporate big heads?

I'm with Uncle Lumpy -- I'm going to say corporate gatekeepers on Music Row and throughout radio.

Like I said in the Sam Hunt thread (and as Gary Allan and many others have said in various venues before me), country radio playlists in the big media conglomerate ownership age (starting around 1996) are driven by demographics more than they are by music.

While radio remains the quickest and most reliable way to achieve mass exposure today, it is obviously under increased challenge in the Pandora/Spotify/Rdio age. Radio listeners today are listening to radio for shorter spans of time...this blog reports that the amount of time spent listening to radio (TSL) declined 30% from 2008 to 2013. This late December 2012 report notes the decline in time spent listening from 14 hours 19 minutes per week (from a 1 April 2010-30 March 2011 sample) to 13 hours 51 minutes per week (from a 31 March 2011-28 March 2012) sample. This graphic is illustrative...the amount of time adults 25-54 spent listening to country radio declined from 10 hours 30 minutes weekly in 2004 (averaging to an hour and a half per day) to 6 hours 45 minutes weekly (less than an hour per day) in 2013. Music business professor Paul Allen notesin this op-ed:

Country radio reports growth in listeners, but overall we’re just not listening as long as we used to.

If you want an explanation for why the number of spins allocated to the stations' top songs has increased to a CHR/Top-40 level 80-100 spins per week in some markets, declining TSL is a major part of the explanation -- country radio (and radio in general) is relying less on the committed listener who might tune in all day or for several hours per day and more on the drivetime, drive-by listener. With people tuning in for less time and more willing to surf to find a song they know and like, many stations have become more aggressive about grabbing the surfer by playing the song s/he is more likely to know and like, i.e., the biggest hits. And so those already rich in airplay get richer, and playlist diversity has obviously suffered as a consequence.

Moreover, radio formats now compete for music listeners not wedded to any particular genre of music, and who listen to multiple radio stations in a variety of formats. There's a greater chance of grabbing the channel surfer if the station plays a familiar sound, and that arguably reduces the incentive to play something sonically distinctive. And so as country stations compete with CHR/Top-40, Hot AC, Rock, and, to some extent, CHR/Rhythmic stations for listeners, they seem to feel there is more of a chance of grabbing the channel surfer if they play music with a sound that could fit on those other formats, and perhaps more of a chance of alienating the channel surfer if they give high rotation spins to music that sounds more distinctively country.

A natural question is, then, what's the point of having separate radio formats if they are all converging on a similar sound? The formats have started to focus on branding through factors other than by sonic distinction. And that's where specific demographic targeting has come into play. The Jason Aldean/Luke Bryan/Florida-Georgia Line heyday has coincided with a focused and successful effort to bring the younger male demo, the "bros," to country radio, taking advantage of their departure from rock radio and also taking advantage of the fact that the corporate rock sound defined by Nickelback is no longer in favor at Top-40 and Hot AC radio.

But the thing about demographic targeting is that it is cyclical, and it appears that the industry is actively looking for artists who may mobilize a different demographic -- see Big Machine/Dot Records launching Maddie & Tae with "Girl in a Country Song," and see MCA Nashville pushing Sam Hunt. As I mentioned in the Sam Hunt thread, his sound apes the Jason Mraz/Script acoustic rhythmic sound that was all the rage at Hot AC and at Top-40 radio to an extent about five years ago, and has fallen out of favor at those formats since. MCA Nashville is no doubt betting that the audience for that music still exists and will find at least a temporary home (natch) at country radio if given the opportunity. Big Machine has been searching, I think, for an artist who can mobilize the teenage female demographic the way that Taylor did when she started out now that Taylor is primarily focused on the pop formats and pop music. Big Machine seems to hope that Maddie & Tae could be that artist.

Ideally, we'll see a few different kinds of breakthroughs, because if we do, that could facilitate more diverse playlists. In the meantime, I think Uncle Lumpy is absolutely right to say that country radio programmers have made a deliberate decision to focus on attracting listeners who aren't committed to country music, and a deliberate decision to forego their strategy through 2009 or so of favoring music with multi-generational appeal that appeals to committed country radio and country music fans.

Jul 22, 2014 16:06:21 GMT -5 McCreerian (Harris 2024!) said:

I say it's the fans. If fans weren't buying it, then corporate heads wouldn't be pushing it on radio to play it. Unfortunately as each generation comes along, the less traditional has been in their upbringing over the last 20 years. After all 2000 was "Murder on Music Row" and looking back now most of what they were singing about sounds traditional compared to today's radio. Country is getting more watered down with Pop/Rock, now Rap/Hip Hop, with each year and decade. Casual fans growing up think that is what Country music is and don't care enough to go back to listen to their older siblings, parents, etc brand of Country music. There are still 20 year olds who want to sing that kind of "original "Country music but the "normal" 20 year old hasn't even heard it. I'm afraid of what it'll be like in another 10 years.

I see your point, but don't fully agree because of what I mentioned above: radio's selective targeting of certain demographics. The album sales of people like George Strait and Kacey Musgraves compared to the album sales of Jake Owen, Thomas Rhett, Tyler Farr, Justin Moore, and even Keith Urban show that a market for country music that sounds identifably country is alive and well (and I do realize that Kacey Musgraves has plenty of pop influence in her country too). While it's true that the most successful of the bros (Aldean/Bryan/Florida-Georgia Line and to a lesser extent Blake Shelton) are selling very well, the wannabes are not. So yes, country radio has been able to grab a segment of fans for ratings purposes with its programming tactics over the past couple of years, but it doesn't follow that that is the only segment of fans buying music branded as country. Country radio has been far less diverse than sales justify.

All of the above is also why I completely agree with sabre14, jhomes87, Uncle Lumpy, carriekins and others who don't think it's logical to define country music by what gets played on country radio. Increasingly in this era of demographic-chasing, country radio is "country" only by branding, and it makes little sense to define country music by the moving goalposts of corporate gatekeepers (and, increasingly, pop programmers) rather than by the music itself. If the music is only incidental to format branding, it just doesn't make sense to define the music by that branding. It's more realistic to acknowledge that artist Z (who may or may not legitimately be a country singer) is promoting his/her/their [insert genre here] song to [insert radio format here] radio, where genre and format are not necessarily the same.

[Deleted]

Absolutely ridiculous.

"There's still this old kind of standard rule in radio that you don't play two females back to back. [It] sounds kind of ridiculous in the year 2014 but it just doesn't come across. Listeners just don't like it. It doesn't trend well for us." - Karen Daniels (93.7 JRFM)

[.indulgecountry]

Sept 1, 2014 12:00:37 GMT -5 @dawson said:

Absolutely ridiculous.

"There's still this old kind of standard rule in radio that you don't play two females back to back. [It] sounds kind of ridiculous in the year 2014 but it just doesn't come across. Listeners just don't like it. It doesn't trend well for us." - Karen Daniels (93.7 JRFM)

Appalling. It's even more disappointing those words came from another woman.

[Deleted]

Sept 1, 2014 12:00:37 GMT -5 @dawson said:

Absolutely ridiculous.

"There's still this old kind of standard rule in radio that you don't play two females back to back. [It] sounds kind of ridiculous in the year 2014 but it just doesn't come across. Listeners just don't like it. It doesn't trend well for us." - Karen Daniels (93.7 JRFM)

Yes, Karen, you do sound ridiculous.

The problem is that corporate country radio is targeting and developing an audience (the "bro" demographic) that doesn't listen to female singers. If they would play music to other demographics and age groups, they wouldn't have such a problem.

[someguy]

Sept 1, 2014 12:00:37 GMT -5 @dawson said:

Absolutely ridiculous.

"There's still this old kind of standard rule in radio that you don't play two females back to back. [It] sounds kind of ridiculous in the year 2014 but it just doesn't come across. Listeners just don't like it. It doesn't trend well for us." - Karen Daniels (93.7 JRFM)

It does sound ridiculous because it worked very well all throughout the 90s and most of the 00s. This kind of thinking is disgusting.

[Cody Wants Out...]

Sept 1, 2014 12:00:37 GMT -5 @dawson said:

Absolutely ridiculous.

"There's still this old kind of standard rule in radio that you don't play two females back to back. [It] sounds kind of ridiculous in the year 2014 but it just doesn't come across. Listeners just don't like it. It doesn't trend well for us." - Karen Daniels (93.7 JRFM)

Where should I begin?

Listeners don't like back-to-back females, or you don't like playing back-to-back females, Karen?

I also highly doubt that this "standard rule" is old anyways; in fact, it wouldn't surprise me if that kind of ideology started to develop right before the bro-country phase began.

She's either pretty young or pretty high imho.

[14887fan]

Sept 1, 2014 12:00:37 GMT -5 @dawson said:

Absolutely ridiculous.

"There's still this old kind of standard rule in radio that you don't play two females back to back. [It] sounds kind of ridiculous in the year 2014 but it just doesn't come across. Listeners just don't like it. It doesn't trend well for us." - Karen Daniels (93.7 JRFM)

*vomits*

The sexism in this genre is appalling.

[jesster]

Depending on why she is saying that, I wouldn't consider it sexist necessarily. If actual monitoring of station airplay patterns shows it to be factually true, then it is a data-driven statement that back to back female-led songs don't "trend well" with the station audience.

Which would "sound kind of ridiculous" despite whether it may actually be true. I can imagine that in fact it is true. Which would mostly to me, make the listeners possibly sexist. Or just that they prefer lower / guy voices because most of the listeners are female which isn't sexist IMO - just a choice.

Now, the PDs could program ignoring all of that of course, but they do want higher ratings to pull in advertising $$s presumably.

What I always find interesting is that solo females seem to struggle so much professionally with this question.

But female voices heading up groups seem to be a different category. Is it just as bad [supposedly] so far as "trending well" with the audience, I wonder, to have Miranda playing back to back with Kacey, or Carrie, or some other female solo voice as it is if they play a Lady A song with Hillary out front followed by a TBP song and then a Sugarland song and LBT.