Should We Eliminate Market Ranking of Categories?

[Drake]

I have two thoughts on this idea of re-tooling the RAP Awards. First-off, I'm all for keeping the market rankings, but I do think that we should have a either a separation between countries or greater division of market sizes (1-10, 11-25, 26-40, etc) when it comes to promos/imaging. What's hot in Europe or Australia won't necessarily play in North America. Also, as a participant from an ever-shrinking large U.S. market, it's tough to compete with New York, L.A, and Chicago as it is. Then you throw in cities like London, Toronto, Sidney in the mix and suddenly my market is more like 35 than 25.

The other idea would be to divide the competition up between formats. For example, a Rock or CHR promo will always garner more votes than an AC or Country promo because the content is usually more ear-catching and memorable, no matter how great that AC and/or Country promo may be. I've heard some wildly creative stuff come from country creatives in the last 5 years but it never gets any love come awards time.

[Editor]

Great ideas all the way around.

One thing to keep in mind: print advertising has literally dozens of award categories including color versus non-color, actual size (yes they award for one column, two, three, banner, etc...), and whether it's magazine, newspaper, mailer, billboard, insert, labeling, packaging, ad nauseam. I've seen agencies that entered the exact same ad in lots of different categories and win them all. 1 campaign - as many as 20 different awards.

Even television commercials can have a dozen or more potential award categories depending on length, style, and where the spot ran.

Why shouldn't the RAP Awards be any less?

Here's another point to consider: What about podcasts? So many radio people are now doing work in podcasting that should those areas be invited for consideration? I've heard some very interesting work being done on internet exclusive broadcast, even for radio, and some of that work is quite good. Shouldn't that work be recognized too? And if so, what categories - or should there be new categories?

How's that for livening up the dialogue?

Thanks for opening up a whole new can of worms, John! Actually, we have thought about adding more categories than the 7 we've had all along, but there has always been the question of how much support those new categories would get. We tried twice to open two new categories for independent producers, and each time, we didn't get enough entries to make a decent competition out of it, so we cancelled those categories. But I'm thinking a new Sweeper/ID Campaign category would probably get enough support.

I'm still on the fence regarding eliminating the market rankings, but I'm thoroughly enjoying all the great ideas and feedback I'm getting. Thanks!

jv...

[Tucker]

JV,

I understand the dilema when you have several pieces of the spot being done in different markets. But I have to say, the reason many producers enjoy this award competition is because they feel like they are getting a fair shake with the market seperation. Maybe it should be determined by the market your station is in (not where it may have aired)? Which would also allow you to create a seperate category for freelance/outside station work. It really shouldn't be a negative that a small market producer has been able to snag and use a big voice talent for their spot. That's great, good for them...for me, I kinda like getting voices nobody has really heard. It makes it that much more impressive. So, I wouldn't sweat who wrote it or who voiced it.


T

[Editor]

I understand the dilema when you have several pieces of the spot being done in different markets. But I have to say, the reason many producers enjoy this award competition is because they feel like they are getting a fair shake with the market seperation. Maybe it should be determined by the market your station is in (not where it may have aired)? Which would also allow you to create a seperate category for freelance/outside station work. It really shouldn't be a negative that a small market producer has been able to snag and use a big voice talent for their spot. That's great, good for them...for me, I kinda like getting voices nobody has really heard. It makes it that much more impressive. So, I wouldn't sweat who wrote it or who voiced it.

Thanks, Tucker. I see the vote has swung the other way. The arguments for keeping the market rankings are valid. Right now, the rules say this:

Entries must be original work written and produced at the radio station, by at least one full-time employee of the radio station, and aired on a station in that market. Entries from production houses owned by station groups or station networks are eligible, but entries must be entered for market rank equal to largest market served by the production house.

I’m thinking now about something like this, which would also allow independent producers to enter without having to create a separate category for them (since we do have a few indies that keep requesting that we let them compete):

Entries must be entered in the Market Rank category of the market in which the entry was written and produced. If it was written in a large market BUT produced in a small market, it must be entered in the Large Market category. Likewise, a station or production house in a large market cannot enter anything in the Small or Medium Market categories, even if the entry was produced for a small or medium market station.

In other words, WHERE the entry gets WRITTEN and PRODUCED is what decides the market ranking, not where it airs. This would be an advantage to, let’s say, an independent production house in a small town, knocking out big time spots for a large market station, because these could be entered in the Small Market category. But I’m guessing this is a rare case. If they’re that good, chances are they’re in a medium or large market.

One concern I have with opening up eligibility to independent producers is the fine line between the little one or two-person production houses and the major advertising agencies. In effect, we would have to allow ad agencies to enter, but they would have to enter in the market rank that corresponds to the location of the agency. So, a major New York agency plays with the Large Market boys, but the smaller agency/production house in a medium market would only compete with other stations and independent producers in similar sized towns.

Where are the loopholes here? What am I missing? Thoughts, please.

jv

[rickandrews]

I think, for now, you should keep the market rankings, but at the same also break it into Countries.

[Editor]

I think, for now, you should keep the market rankings, but at the same also break it into Countries.

Thanks, Rick. I'm leaning towards keeping the market rankings at this point, but still trying to decide if WHERE a spot is written/produced should be the determining factor for which market ranking that entry goes into.

The problem I have with the Countries sub-categories is that it is very likely we will not get enough entries into one or more of these sub-categories, which will result is us having to cancel that "Country" category. If we received significantly more entries from around the globe than we do now, Country categories would be a consideration.

jv

[Editor]

I have two thoughts on this idea of re-tooling the RAP Awards. First-off, I'm all for keeping the market rankings, but I do think that we should have a either a separation between countries or greater division of market sizes (1-10, 11-25, 26-40, etc) when it comes to promos/imaging. What's hot in Europe or Australia won't necessarily play in North America. Also, as a participant from an ever-shrinking large U.S. market, it's tough to compete with New York, L.A, and Chicago as it is. Then you throw in cities like London, Toronto, Sidney in the mix and suddenly my market is more like 35 than 25.

The other idea would be to divide the competition up between formats. For example, a Rock or CHR promo will always garner more votes than an AC or Country promo because the content is usually more ear-catching and memorable, no matter how great that AC and/or Country promo may be. I've heard some wildly creative stuff come from country creatives in the last 5 years but it never gets any love come awards time.

Both excellent points, Drake. I like the greater division of market sizes. I, too, have thought for some time that the Large Market category consisting of markets #1 through #25 is rather wide. Perhaps we have Major Market at #1-#10, Large Market at #11-25, Medium at #26-100, and Small at #100+.

The format separation is cool also, but again my fear is having too few entries in a particular format category and having to cancel it as a result.

Your ideas are well thought out. I will put these in the marinade! Thanks!

jv...

[radioeffects]

I like the idea of a total campain category as well as some sort of sweeper category...maybe there are one in the same, not sure. But there is a ton of creativity that doesn't get showcased.

[Editor]

Here are my thoughts. The paragraph below is absolutely true. There's no question that some of the small market production has been as good, and often much better, than the medium and large markets.

And one final thought: in this past decade, I have had more judges comment on how the Small Market categories were far better than the Medium and Large. That alone tells me that even with limited resources, entries from small markets have a REAL good chance of beating the majors. And wouldn't that be an HONOUR.

I think you should abandon the market rank. However, if you feel compelled to keep the market distinctions, I think there needs to be better defined criteria to ensure that everyone is competing on an level playing field ...perhaps something like this.

Promos: Market size is based on the individuals who worked on the project. A promo which aired only in a small market would be categorized by the people involved. If for example the promo was written by someone who is employed in a major market, and produced by someone employed in the small market...then the promo would default automatically to the large market category.

Commercials: Same criteria as above, but voice talent would also be in play. The category would always be defined by the role/job of the person employed in the largest market.

If it's an independent Agency or Production House - then I think their material should be entered in the largest "market" they've served ...regardless of the size of market their entry ran in.
If they've done work for large markets, then even their "small market" spots should compete against other Large Market material. And if they've only ever done work for a medium market - and they find their talent locally - then Medium Market is what it should be entered in.

If someone has multiple roles - they're a writer for example for both a small market station as well as a medium or large market station, then their material should always default to the larger market category. (regardless who produces and who the talent is)

Clearly this would all be on the honour system, as it's very difficult to police.

Again ...I think you should abandon the market rank. I like the idea of humour and non-humour categories. I think it's pretty clear that humour wins over non-humour more often than not so I'd love to see separate categories.

I too would love to see an imaging category, but I certainly don't think you can put a time limit on the duration of individual pieces. I've produced splitters which are 45 seconds long ...yes splitters. Entries in this category must have run as IDs/sweepers & not as promos. And I think you put a limit on the number of sweepers you could enter as a campaign (say 3, 4, 5, or 6), rather than the total duration of the campaign. I'm hoping people can figure out the difference between feature Production and Sweeper imaging, but there could be some cross-over.

Chris Pottage

I see we agree on the market rank being determined by where the producer/writer works rather than where the spot/promo aired. And you're right, it gets a little convoluted when it comes to ad agencies, and that needs further thought.

A 45 second splitter? That, to me, is stopping the music for a 45 second promo. But I suppose it's possible. I like the idea of making a Sweeper/ID entry one that has run as such, but I've known programmers that specifically run "promos" in between songs. They were considered "promos" simply because of their length, not their position on the clock. Length, I think, really separates a promo from a sweeper/ID.

Great feedback, Chris. Thanks a bunch!

jv...

[Editor]

After much debate and discussion, the category changes have been decided, and we are officially ready for the call for entries to the 21st Annual Radio And Production Awards!

At the core of our considerations was the difficulty determining which market rank an entry should be entered into, when various collaborators on the entry work in different markets or when someone in one market is producing for several stations in the company chain, in larger and/or smaller markets. For example, a commercial has a producer in a large market, but the copywriter is in a small market, and the commercial airs in a small market. Or a promo is produced in a large market but airs on a station in a medium market.

We concluded that we could keep things simple yet properly competitive if 1) only the producer’s market of service is considered, and b) market rank is chosen by whichever is larger, the market in which the entry was produced, or the market in which it aired. This way, no producer in a larger market will be able to enter smaller market categories, regardless of where the entry aired. Likewise, a big time producer working from a smaller market, but servicing larger markets, must enter their work in the larger market categories. So it’s the larger of the two: the market where it was produced, or the market where it aired.

Another change this year is the entry fee structure. To help with rising costs, raising the entry fee from $30 to $40 was planned. But after further consideration, we opted to keep the fee the same for RAP Members, $30, but raise the fee to $50 for non-RAP Members. We expect this will generate close to the same revenues as an across the board increase would have, but this way we get to extend savings to our loyal supporters.

Finally, we considered adding categories, but we are going to keep them status quo this year to see how the other two changes above affect the competition overall. If all goes well, we expect to expand the categories next year.

Links to the entry form and rules are at www.rapmag.com. Read the rules through completely, as there were several minor details changed. The entry form has changed from last year as well. Most noticeably, there is now only one field for selecting both the entry category AND the market rank, as opposed to two fields we’ve had in the past. Also, RAP Members will need to include their account number on the form to receive the $30 rate. This is the number at the top of the address labels on the envelopes we send out. It’s also on your invoices next to your name. If you want us to dig it up for you, just email awards@rapmag.com.

Your feedback on these changes is welcome!