NAB keynote: ‘The real problem is the vocabulary’

Steve Safran April 16th, 2007

The internet did get a shoutout at the National Association of Broadcasters keynote speech Monday morning in Las Vegas. David K. Rehr, CEO and President of the NAB, said “internet.” He mentioned it once. In passing. During his discussion of issues about radio. It came 47 minutes into the keynote session and was the only time anyone said “internet.” That’s really all you need to know about the keynote. The NAB is simply not interested in the potential of the web, and what little interest it may have is only in terms of saying how broadcasting is better.

Rehr got off to a promising start. He talked about the need for change in the broadcasting industry. He spoke of how broadcasters talk in the language of a bygone era. “Broadcasting is using the equivalent of “horseless carriage language” to define ourselves,” said Rehr. Right on, bro. So, what should we do? Change our attitudes, right? Stop talking about the web in terms of broadcast TV, no? No. “As an industry we need to rebarand to reflect the new digital industry. A new vocabulary will make ourselves more understandable to policy makers and the public”

Right. That’s the problem. Broadcasting is losing audience to cable, the internet and the many other emerging platforms because it needs vocab lessons.

The theme of Rehr’s speech was how “words matter.” Again – this was a promising theme. He kicked it off by showing those Great Moments in Broadcast History. The Hindenburg disaster. JFK’s assassination. Reagan at the Berlin Wall. Amazing moments when broadcasting was at its best. Then, he said, we need to turn our attention to words. Right – he must mean the web. Words matter, because online is where the words live. Broadcasters needs to think about words now. That’s the point, right? Wrong. The NAB has spent the past year, Rehr said, thinking about new words it can use to redefine the issues it wants changed in Washington.

“Here’s the big picture: we need to reframe those issues and perceptions about the broadcasting industry itself,” said Rehr. “(Terms like) ’Free, over the air broadcasting’ and ‘terrestrial radio’ are outdated and (not understood).” Well, I’ll agree with that – but when did any civilian ever use that language? We just say “radio” and “TV.” What kind of rebranding campaign is required? Rehr suggests jargon like “Down Conversion” should change to “Broadcast Discrimination.” (“Down Conversion” is when a cable company takes a broadcaster’s HD signal and compresses it. This is a legitimate gripe. I hate this.) But calling it “Discrimination?” “Mister Politician, we’re not lobbying for our own interest – we’re being discriminated against! This is a civil rights issue!”

Then came the Annual Mocking of Satellite Radio. The NAB is firmly opposed to the Sirius/XM merger. In fact, says Rehr, it’s no merger at all. It’s a change from a duopoly to a monopoly. He gets chuckles with a quick-cut montage of Mel Karmazin saying the word “merger” about a dozen times in his testimony before Congress. I guess it’s a “Daily Show” kind of attempt at humor, but two companies are trying to become one. The NAB may hate the word and oppose the plan– but this is an attempt at a merger. Rehr says it won’t happen, and this gets a round of applause.

No mention of the astonishing new technologies broadcasters can take advantage of. On the day a student used his cellphone camera to capture the horrifying scene outside the shootings at Virginia Tech on his nobody talked about how lightweight cameras and cellphones are empowering people everywhere to participate in journalism.

Words matter, Rehr pounds home this message. Broadcasters need to embrace the future. This too is a good message. But NAB should be more than a rebranding and marketing company – it needs to be a support group for broadcasters going through a time of amazing change. The NAB could be true leaders. They could say to the broadcasters “Look – this business is really changing and you need to, as well. Here are five tips.” The NAB could say “Words matter – so here’s how your website is going to transform into a 24/7 operation with words, pictures and video.”

Instead, the NAB is trying to have Congress take grammar lessons. It could start by adding ‘internet’ to its own vocabulary.