Rusty Walker

Nashville may be the home of the Country music business, but for many, Country radio's "home away from home" is Luka, Mississippi - the "cosmic center of the universe" of renowned Country programmer and consultant Rusty Walker. Getting into radio in 1968, he crafted a career that made him one of the top air personalities in the country. In fact, during his stint at WZZK/Birmingham, Arbitron reported that he was the highest-rate DJ in America in 1981. That led to being hired as a programming executive at Sconnix Broadcasting and Katz Broadcasting.

Walker formed his own consultancy in 1983; since then he has consulted over 500 stations. By now his acumen is legendary; he was honored as one of Country radio's top-three programmers in the 20th Century. We're a decade into a new century and Walker is still going strong. Here's how he sees today's Country music and radio terrain.

How has radio programming changed since you first got into the business?

Actually, the programming is the same; the only thing difference is the targeting. The bottom-line definition of programming is to create a product that will satisfy and appeal to the people you have determined to be largest group of consumers for that product. While that hasn't changed over last 35 years, the target -- that group of consumers you want to reach -- has changed drastically.

When did you realize you had to change with the audience?

I was an early research adopter, probably in the second wave of guys who did it. Folks like Bob Pittman and Bill Moyes were the first; I was among the second wave of programmers who were really interested the second step of the research process. The first step was to find out what our target consumers wanted. The second step was to find the best ways to bring that to them - marketing and promotion.

Was it tougher to get your peers to believe in such research back then?

It was no tougher than it is today; it still is tough. Although I'm a programmer and I'll be one until day I die, nowadays you almost have to be a marketer first and a programmer second. You really can't identify or create your product until you find the needs of the consumer. It's still tough to prove that nowadays, but when you have at least a modicum of success, a track record helps turn people around.

In the past you said one of your proudest achievements was bringing Top 40 formatics to Country radio programming. How did that work?

That came about through research as well. It's not really as hard as it sounds. The folks I worked with at that time - this all happened during late '70s and early '80s - such as Marshall Rowland, who owned WQIK/Jacksonville (and gave me much latitude in contemporizing his station), and then I went to work for Katz, which became New City and is now Cox Broadcasting. Both of those companies, Rowland and Katz, were very supportive because they saw Country as a destination format for the 25-54-year-old female. When you look at it strategically, what format did the majority of those ladies come from? Top 40. So if you create a Country station that feels to them at age 27 or 29 like the Top 40 station they'd been listening to since they were 12 or 13, it's easier to transfer the partisanship from one format to the other.

How has consolidation impacted Country radio?

It's the same situation as with every other format, but the one thing that's unique for post-consolidation Country is that prior to consolidation, most Country radio stations were managed or owned by people who were advocates of the Country format. As a result of cluster development, that is no longer the case. Since Country and Urban are the two most passionate formats out there, having advocates inside the radio cluster is critically important. We don't have as many advocates as we used to.

The lack of advocacy doesn't stop at the GM, unfortunately. It can go down to the programmers and air personalities, too. Another potential issue is that Country, on a revenue basis, does quite well on the format scale, so in many clusters where the Country station is pretty darn successful revenue-wise, they rob Peter to pay Paul ... a mentality that requires Country stations share their riches with less fortunate brother and sister stations.

Doesn't that create a certain resentment of sorts for those who rake in the money?

Not if everybody understands how the cluster mentality works. Sure, there's an underlying resentment when the revenue you generate -- and would like to spend on your own marketing -- is going to a station that isn't doing as well, but that happens. You have to make sure such feelings don't run rampant in the cluster situation.

Another repercussion from consolidation is the growing number of programmers who oversee multiple, different-format stations. How do you consult with a different-format PD who has just been given the reins of the Country station in the cluster?

To be honest, for myself and all of the folks in my company, we almost relish the chance to work with a PD who has a lack of Country experience. We've spent decades recruiting program directors from Top 40, Rock and more recently Alternative, because when you find someone with a fresh perspective and a contemporary concept of execution, they are usually better at executing the format and are more passionate about taking chances than someone who may have years of experience doing it his or her way.

Granted, that's not the case with everybody - and it's not that we want to work with someone who is a complete blank slate, but we've got to identify folks who are fabulous marketers, great managers and mentors, who have worked in good systems and disciplines. As long as they love Country music, not actually having programmed it before can actually be a benefit

Of course, if the PD post is basically designated to a programmer from another format who looks at it as being a Country carpetbagger, that may not work out so well. But you've got to remember the other side of equation: You also have Country aficionados and brilliant Country programmers who have to program other formats that they don't relish, either. The knife cuts both ways in today's environment. It transcends Country. There's so much musical stimulation available to us that it's almost impossible to be a single-genre music freak anymore.

Describe the relationship a programmer should have with a label.

We have a really simple philosophy that, most of the time, serves us well. Our philosophy is the input you get from a label is different than the input you get from your consumer ... and you always defer to the consumer. The labels may want you to move off a song - which they believe has generated all the revenue it can for them -- onto new song, even though the first song isn't over with your audience. It can take a lot of courage to say, "Hey, this song may not be valuable to you, but it's still valuable to us."

Would a performance royalty negatively impact your stations?

Oh, yes ... big time. As the only current-based adult format, the labels are really reliant upon new music getting exposed. If a tax is imposed upon radio stations, they will be forced to become much more conservative. If they have to pay more than what they already are paying for all the music that gets aired, obviously they're going to choose to air proven hits instead of developing hits. If my livelihood depended on developing hits and I worked at a record label, I don't know how aggressive I would be at working to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

How has the PPM rollout impacted the stations you consult?

To me, the best station will always be the most dynamic and most streamlined station - and the streamlining is more important to the radio consumer than the dynamic is. The majority of our client stations are now measured by the meter ... and for the most part, we're pretty happy with way it's turned out. Then again, I'm the guy who helped institute the "most music concept" into the Country format.

So you have no qualms about the meter monitoring more passive, some say "drive by" listening, instead of capturing those who are real fans of a particular station.

I don't know if that's all passive. It all boils down to no matter how talented your air personality staff may be, odds are they're not quite as talented as Kenny Chesney, Brad Paisley, Carrie Underwood and Taylor Swift. Just because listeners want to hear music more than a rambling personality, I don't know if that automatically defines them as passive.

A lot of Country acts are crossing over into the pop mainstream, a la Taylor Swift and Lady Antebellum. Is sharing your superstars with other formats good for Country?

Yes. You can go back 40 years and see that every lean of the format toward the contemporary and at a younger target always benefited Country music. In 1947, they wouldn't let Hank Williams, Sr. on the Grand Ole Opry because they thought he was the ruination of Country music. Now the traditionalists of today have built a statue for the same guy who was ostracized in the early days of career ... just like Taylor and Rascal Flatts are now being ostracized as diluting the lineage of Country.

I don't even mind it when pop songs cross over into Country, although I like it better when Country crosses over there. I'd rather have our fox in their henhouse than other way around.

Some would say that the crossovers are evidence of Country music peaking right now in popularity as part of the ongoing music cycles. Do you agree and how do you counsel your PDs to prepare for the change in cycles?

I see a correlation to the cycles Guy Zapoleon attests to in the pop world, such as going from Doldrums to Extreme. I've not quantified it for us, but you have to remember Country is the only adult music genre with a high concentration of current music. Still, to stay successful in our genre, we're going to have cleanse or replenish ourselves -- as long as the music itself remains popular.

Looking at the older end of our target, the 47-year-old today is drastically different than the 47-year-old 10 of years ago, just like the 25-year-old today is different from the 25-year-old of 10 years ago. So if we can continue to be current, the format has to be regenerative. Programmers can't stop it because that's the creative evolution at work. We may be able to leverage how fast or slow it evolves, but songwriters at the peak of their craft today have drastically different life experiences than Country songwriters of years past ... and that's going to show in the music.

As far as preparing our PDs for a down cycle, you never know when it's going to come. You comfort them when it arrives, but you don't prepare them for it. The bottom line is as long as there are more average everyday Joes and Janes in the world than there are people of above-average means, Country will continue to flourish. And I don't see the number of average folks diminishing; we seem to be multiplying.

Is the replenishing of artists always good for the format - even when so many heritage or "traditional" Country artists are being left off the playlists?

Yes and many times deservedly so. Think about it: We have seen an amazing new artist renaissance in Country over last three to five years. Look at our charts; who's in the top 10? Joe Nichols, Chris Young, Lady A, Justin Moore, Steel Magnolia, Miranda Lambert, Rascal Flatts, Eric Church ... seven out of our top-10 testing airplay records are by new artists. If that's not a renaissance, I don't know what is.

Finally, where do you see your future? Do you have long-range plans? Are you still setting new goals and challenges for yourself?

As long as I can still accommodate the needs and perceptions of the Country music target and help radio stations create a product which superserves that target, I will be doing this as long as I possibly can. Mike Joseph, one of great Top 40 consultants, many years ago told me, "Son, no matter what you do in life and how old you become, never stop listening to and understanding the music the teenagers are listening to because they are the foundation for all the music those older fans will be listening to in couple of years." So in that sense, the music industry is bottoms up instead of top down.