James.Cridland.net

James Cridland's blog

Where radio and new platforms collide. With beer.

« Customer service the Google way | Blog index | The untested 10 percent of your station’s output »

Hitz Radio UK and Ryan Dunlop - fantasists, and lazy journalists

Posted on Thursday, March 8th, 2007 at 9:07pm. #

Please read the notice at the bottom of this page

It all started - on the internet, at least - with an interesting story in the Daily Record, on 26 February 2007 - 5 million listeners - and radio boss Ryan is only 15. A heartwarming story, penned by Rod Mills, of a young boy making it big in the radio business, and teaching the big boys a thing or two. After two years, Ryan Dunlop is employing 40 people and running an internet radio station; and the headline, while confusing ‘hits’ with ‘listeners’, is a great good-news story.

And it was quickly picked up by other media: keen to bring some good news to their readers, listeners, or viewers. After a few fluffy appearances on BBC Scotland and Scottish television company STV, national newspapers were next: Teen tycoon hits paydirt with shed radio station appeared in The Sunday Times on the 4th March 2007.

The Sunday Times article contains a lot of information about this station’s success: all the more remarkable since it broadcasts from this grey-roofed shed in a well-to-do suburb of Ayr. We learn that his employees are actually volunteers, paid in gig tickets. We learn…

A 15-YEAR-OLD schoolboy has grown an internet radio station run from his father’s garden shed into a company that claims 250,000 listeners and has 40 people working for it. [...] The peak slot is drive-time between 4pm and 7pm, which Dunlop says averages 80,000 listeners. He is projecting turnover of more than £1m in his first year of trading, most of which will be profit.

These are serious numbers, so many congratulations should go to this young chap. who we discover from a later interview on BBC Radio 5 Live, thinks his station has the potential of bringing in £25m a year. All in all, this is a great story. Ryan is clearly a businessman with great talent.

However, users of a radio discussion area, Media UK (which I run), were suspicious. “Some pretty big claims”, posted one user from Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Another posts, “something doesn’t add up”. Petty jealousy is a staple diet of many internet chatrooms and forums, but Media UK doesn’t normally show this. Impressed with Dunlop’s claims, some people did what the journalists should have done - research the story: sharing their industry knowledge of the station’s likely costs of HitzRadioUK, based on the figures the company’s quoting.

There are three main costs to any radio station: transmission (in this case bandwidth); music costs, and staffing costs.

  • In terms of staffing costs, the Sunday Times article was clear: all (40?) staff were volunteers.
  • The transmission cost can be estimated by contacting Spacial Audio. One member did, and works out that the total streaming costs per month, according to Spacial Audio’s ratecard, would be £24,960.
  • The music costs were jointly worked out, too. For the drivetime show alone (”an average of 80,000 listeners”), the cost would be £28,800 per month for PPL, and a further percentage of revenue, estimated at £2,800, for PRS/MCPS.

So, total outgoings for the station must be at least £55,000 per month. On the face of it, that’s quite low. So, other users examined the business for revenue opportunities; to discover that, at the time, the only advertising on the website was an ad for Expedia through Commission Junction. The link to Ticketmaster isn’t one that earns revenue, either. And the station’s very light on audio advertising, too.

The inescapable conclusion - Ryan Dunlop is a fantasist; making up figures to look good, and egged-on by the flattering media attention. But let’s be fair: it took a number of internet and radio specialists to come to this conclusion. The real question is: was there anything that a journalist without any radio experience would have been able to discover about this story? A journalist just armed with a web browser?

Simply surfing the website, surely it would look slightly odd that a radio station with “250,000 listeners” has a website forum which has only attracted 25 registered users since November 2006?

But a journalist armed with Google would have found out so much more suspicious activity:

So, the investigation has moved on. We’re no longer wondering whether what Ryan says is true - he’s a fantasist, a child who is flattered by media attention and bolstering his own lies with more lies; even hiding the facts from his own parents. He deserves to be pitied, not pilloried. He can, and will, learn from his mistakes.

The real question is: why did journalists swallow this false story? Two minutes of Google searching produced a substantial and inescapable realisation that the story was false; just one call to any radio expert would have blown the whistle. Why didn’t they check their facts? The people who should be ashamed in this episode are the journalists in the newspapers and the television, who went to air with a false story.

And if it’s happening here - about something this community knows and understands - then how may other stories from journalists are printed with no fact-checking and absolutely no resemblance to the truth?

How rotten is the state of journalism today?

UPDATE; 8/9 April: Ryan Fisher contacts me with this story about Hitz Radio UK which contains some interesting claims apparently made by Ryan, and pictures of their London building - and ‘London studios’ which look identical to the shed. Again, the Media UK community comes up trumps: the building is the Quay House Business Centre in the Docklands. One member reports that it’s the first result in a Google Image Search for ‘London Offices’, though I can’t replicate this behaviour. Since it’s now under question whether there is a London office at all, it should be worth pointing out that a Google search shows that the London number that Ryan uses in many of his advertisements is a Skype number.

UPDATE: 23 April I complained to the BBC about the interview. Their reply is as follows:

Dear Mr Cridland

Thank you for your e-mail regarding the interview with Ryan Dunlop about
his internet radio station which ran on the ‘Stephen Nolan ’show on 4 March
just after midnight.

I have since been in contact with Five Live Senior Broadcast Journalist,
(Name given) who has responded as follows:

“Thanks for your correspondence; our producers fact-check their stories as
thoroughly as possible before broadcasting. On this occasion, we checked
out the Hitz Radio website and listened to broadcasts, and verified Ryan’s
role with them by calling the station itself. As you pointed out, the story
had run in several local and national newspapers, but because we could not
ensure that the listening statistics they quoted could be verified for
certain, we ensured our introduction went as follows:

“A 15 year old schoolboy who started his own 24 hour radio station from his
parent’s garden shed now ‘claims’ to have 250,000 listeners.”

When it came to discussing the turnover Ryan suggested the station might
make, the word “projected” was used, and the presenter Stephen Nolan was
deeply sceptical throughout. He says “let’s see if this stacks up”, and
later says “is this for real?”. He challenges Ryan saying “where are you
getting these figures from?” and the tone in his voice is one of
incredulity. He later says “I’m sorry if you think I’m being cynical.”
Since Ryan is just 15, Stephen didn’t want to be seen to bully him, but the
clear impression you get from the interview is that Ryan might be being
naïve about his station’s revenue possibilities.

However, as a piece of radio, I feel it was a justifiable broadcast. The
station clearly exists and is broadcasting programmes as we speak. Ryan is
entitled to hypothesise about Hitz Radio’s future possibilities, and he was
robustly questioned.”

I trust this sets out the BBC’s standpoint on the issue. Please be assured
that your comments have been registered and thank you again for your
e-mail.

Yours Sincerely

(Name given)
Divisional Advisor
BBC Information

On balance, I can see their point.


NOTICE

28 May: Following a telephone conversation tonight with John Dunlop, Ryan’s father, I’d like to make a few things clear.

I’ve been careful to back up every claim I’ve made with a statement of fact. Ryan is entitled to a right of reply, one I will gladly give him should he wish to put across his side of the story. However, I’m not actively continuing this story: because I don’t believe any further demolition of Ryan’s claims is helpful (or required). My last posting on this story was on the 9th April.

It’s desperately sad to me that this original false story made it as far as local television, and national radio, when not one of the ‘facts’ as reported were true. But this story isn’t about Ryan; it’s about lazy journalists who print stories without checking the facts first. Journalists who take too much at face value is a concern; journalists who reprint the original story without any further fact-checking are also simply not doing their jobs. That’s the point of this story.

Which is why I’m closing ‘comments’ today on this story, and doing some judicious editing of the comments that exist. And why, too, I’m disappointed to hear that people are threatening Ryan (and his family). If there’s one thing I admire Ryan for, it’s his ability to make people believe him. He’s done fantastically well. He certainly doesn’t need threatening; and it’s concerning to me to hear that his family are worried for their safety over a silly radio station. He’s just turned 16. He’s still, to all intents and purposes, a child.

Many may claim that he can’t have it both ways - making tremendous claims and then hiding behind the fact that he’s a child when things get nasty. But if there’s one thing I know and understand, it’s that we all have the capability to make mistakes; and (depending what religion you practise), we also all have the capability to be forgiven.

25 comments

Nick Jeffery said at March 8th, 2007 at 10:17pm

To pick up on a small point rather than the substantive:

Is there a particular reason why PPL is an order of magnitude more expensive than PRS for Internet broadcasting? My memory, albeit from more traditional platforms, says the two fees were for a broadly similar amount.

Callum May said at March 9th, 2007 at 7:15am

The thing is, unless you have a specialist knowledge of how Rajar and other, similar systems work, it’s hard to decipher stations’ puff pieces. I suspect the radio industry secretly likes this: stations can stick out a different press release each quarter, stating in which way they’ve stuffed the opposition this time (more listeners, “the number one station”, “most popular breakfast show in Anytown” etc etc, and no hard-pressed hack ever manages to get to the bottom of it all.

Martin Belam said at March 9th, 2007 at 8:09am

This is the kind of thing that drives me up the wall now when I read newspapers. Virtually everything I read *when I know about the topic already* has glaring errors or a, sometime wilfull, misunderstanding in it. Whether it is something trivial like the NME claiming the new Dexy’s track posted on MySpace is their first new material for 20+ years when they quite clearly had two brand new tracks on their “Best of” comp 3 or 4 years back, or more serious flaws like the one you’ve pointed out above.

I am now at the point where each morning I read online the BBC, Guardian, Daily Mail, Sun, Greece’S ERT, Biased BBC and Newscounter, and then if any stories interested me, I use the internet to see if I can find out what *actually* happend

Frankie Roberto said at March 9th, 2007 at 10:47am

PPL fees are indeed orders-of-magnitude higher than PRS fees for Internet broadcasting, mostly because PPL fees are cost-per-track-broadcast whereas PRS fees are a flat rate and/or a share of net revenue. So the PPL fees assume a minimum revenue level per listening hour, which in practice is almost impossible to achieve for an internet broadcaster, especially a small one without an experienced sales team.

I’m not even sure whether web services like Last.fm are able to pay PPL fees, as the last time I looked, the standard contract doesn’t allow for much interactivity (like skip, next track, etc).

Dynamoe88 said at March 9th, 2007 at 4:24pm

This article has had a thread running on the raido forum of DigitalSpy also.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=546304

Obviously this thing got totally out of hand when the London based media picked up on it. I think the story goes - he sent a press release of to a local paper. After this when it snowballed to Glasgow and London, it was a bit late to retract the hype.

Anyone heard 2, 3 or even 4 day old repeats of Sky Radio News too! Are they authorised? Perhaps someone should also check this with Sky or UBC Media. Even if the station did have PPL, they appear to have listeners in the USA & I actually heard then put a caller from New York to air the other night. PPL in the UK do not presently have an agreement with RIAA in America. So Hitz Radio UK is also technically on the wanted list there too!

[Note: this comment has been edited - JRC]

Craig Hannington said at March 9th, 2007 at 4:31pm

James………..

Genius…..I wonder what will happen next

Jason Cartwright said at March 9th, 2007 at 5:43pm

Interesting stuff. I’ve seen a similar story a while back picked up by national press about a kid starting up a web hosting business.

A little research revealed that the chap only had a Fasthosts Reseller account. All the servers and datacentres he claimed to own (by posting photos cribbed from fasthosts.co.uk) actually belong to them.

James Cridland said at March 9th, 2007 at 9:16pm

Frankie says: I’m not even sure whether web services like Last.fm are able to pay PPL fees, as the last time I looked, the standard contract doesn’t allow for much interactivity (like skip, next track, etc).

PPL don’t produce a public list of licensees - amazingly - so you’ve no idea who’s legal and who’s not legal; but Last.fm does not have a PPL licence.

[You should understand that PPL’s interactive rates are not realistic for ad-funded online radio; though that does mean that Last.fm are currently operating illegally.)

Frankie Roberto said at March 9th, 2007 at 11:50pm

“PPL don’t produce a public list of licensees - amazingly - so you’ve no idea who’s legal and who’s not legal; but Last.fm does not have a PPL licence.”

Indeed, I had suspected the same, but didn’t want to make the allegation without knowing for sure.

Internet radio is pretty difficult to run commercially (if not impossible, legally). But the real story here is that, commercial realities aside, internet radio is relatively easy to start up, and enables individuals and small groups to produce live radio broadcasts (like Ryan) for specific communities or audiences in a way that was never previously possible.

Daniel Brewington said at March 11th, 2007 at 6:47pm

I have had personal contact last week with both Ryan and Craig as has my business partner Ross. They came to us for help with their PPL licensing, (we hold the exclusive PPL Extended Territories license for internet radio) unfortunately due to the amount of listeners they claimed to have and the publicity we were told to back off as it was being dealt with directly with PPL.

I advised young Ryan last week not to over exaggerate his listening number and to be truthful. With his account on Spacial Audio he can hold 100 listeners at 32 kbps and the other station he has can hold 20 listeners at 32kbps. That’s it nothing more no massive numbers no FM studio just 120 listener slots at 32kbps

I too have heard some incredible stories from his New Media manager. He messaged me on MSN messenger and told me that they are working on a 6 figure deal with a major sponsor and how they are going to get you James as you seem to be their major nemeses now. The Craig also told me they are going to pay the £28,000 to PPL and I said that doesn’t make sense. Let’s do the math, £28,000 owed divided by 120 listeners equals £233 per listener!!!

I know a little about advertising as my wife is in the business and there is NO WAY any sponsor major or minor is going to pay over £200 per listener to advertise. You folks in the business know what I am driving at. Many of us here have been in internet radio for up to 10 years (me personally 8 years) and we all know that the claims are false.

I personally feel that all the publicly surrounding this story will not give advertisers faith in our industry. I think when the truth comes out it will do more damage to internet radio and will set us back years, as far as getting advertisers to advertise with internet radio.

Well that’s my 2 pence worth hope it sheds some light.

Cheers
Daniel H. Brewington
Founder & CEO
www.webradioworld.com

James Cridland said at March 11th, 2007 at 7:36pm

I too have heard some incredible stories from his New Media manager. He messaged me on MSN messenger and told me that they are working on a 6 figure deal with a major sponsor and how they are going to get you James as you seem to be their major nemeses now.

If they’ve said that, then it’s sad. Everything I’ve said about HitzRadioUK has been true and factual, and I’ve been careful not to sensationalise what he’s done. This episode isn’t really Ryan’s fault; more the fault of the media not bothering to do any fact-checking. The people who should be ashamed are the journalists, not a 15-year-old without the life experience to know better.

It is faith in our industry that is behind this piece on my blog; both faith in the fact-checking abilities of journalists, and faith in the figures quoted by websites and internet radio broadcasters. I hope they understand this.

Matin Carruthers said at March 14th, 2007 at 1:25pm

Who cares? you are clearly all jealous of the boy! ok hes lied about listeners etc but haha it is a good station

Nicky said at March 14th, 2007 at 9:40pm

My own pet hate is fake scientific claims, picked up and reprinted by lazy journalists, as beloved by the Daily Mail “CHEESE CAUSES CANCER” etc.. http://www.badscience.net is a great website which decodes the science claims behind the headlines. The author made a fascinating post this week where he traced a “puff” Press Release to the newspapers, barely touched by an edit on the way.

In my experience, Radio, as any other business, does indeed attract fantasists. I am astonished how far people can - and do - get on pure bull, to the detriment of genuine participants. We have to be vigilant lest we end up being complicit. But that goes without saying.

Gordon D said at March 16th, 2007 at 10:46am

Well, if as Dan as stated they were told by PPL not to deal with them as PPL are dealing direct with this clown, then all I can say he is in a whole heap of trouble with PPL re payments to them.

PPL ain’t cheap!!!

Paul Kerton said at March 18th, 2007 at 3:03am

Its pretty obvious that someone, somewhere is talking a good game. There is no way on EARTH he’s making those kind of listener figures, or money.

Matt T said at March 22nd, 2007 at 9:29am

Anyone can make up inaccurate facts about anything and publish them.

[This entry has been edited - JRC]

Memex 1.1 » Blog Archive » Fantasists and lazy journalists said at March 22nd, 2007 at 11:05pm

[...] — and (for anyone interested in journalism) salutary tale from James Cridland’s blog. It all started - on the internet, at least - with an interesting [...]

Alex G said at April 5th, 2007 at 9:25am

This whole story reminds me very much of a digital magazine about 15 years ago, whose editor, aged 13, wrote enthusiastically to the local press in order to blow his own trumpet and get some free publicity. He knew that such was the state of naivity around stats reporting in ‘new media’, and the general poor quality of local journalism when faced with emerging technology, that it would be comparatively straightforward to bluster his way through interviews and get featured in the local press. That arrogant young brat also raved about the sea-change on the horizon, when one day, almost everyone would be able to publish for themselves online. Naturally, this preposterous idea was loudly scoffed at in the articles that followed. 10 years on, these organs have spent millions building up huge online empires.

That was 15 years ago, when an ‘online magazine’ was published on bulletin board systems (the preceeding technology to the web) to download, and average connection speeds, if any, were about 20kbps (instead of the 2000kbps we now see).

The resulting clippings now reside in places of pride at my mum’s house.

What I’m trying to say is that it takes two people to bring untruths to the world, a kid with balls to provide a ridiculous story, and a journalist without a real interest or skill to investigate it.

As for this kid, I now work for one of the largest broadcasters in the world with their ‘new media’ stuff, and am always watching for the next kid with balls, because one day, they will be after my job.

Mike Bennett said at April 6th, 2007 at 12:34pm

This guy is still trying; and is posting job requests with radiodaddy.com.

[This entry has been edited - JRC]

Matt Hurst said at April 17th, 2007 at 11:42pm

Thank you so very much for making my day James! I’ve just caught up with the discussion on MediaUK and clicked through to here, it makes for fantastic reading. He must be laughing at the media attention he has received.

That said, he has achieved something remarkable. He has got several major media organisations to believe and publicise his claims… if he went to the tabloids tomorrow with the story of how easily he fooled the BBC, he’d probably do pretty well for himself!

[This entry has been edited - JRC]

Jason Hunter said at May 21st, 2007 at 2:40pm

OK… so he won the “Business Hero” award for the daily record. Is this simply due to what he has said… or is there fact there that prooves he is the true young entrepreneur of scotland…

Ben said at May 22nd, 2007 at 12:40am

He’s also just in the final stages of the Shell Livewire contest as well.

I think it’s brilliant, obviously no-one ever checks fact in the media world…

..did I mention I have 27 million people reading my daily paper and I own 17 BBC channels….

dynamoe88 said at May 22nd, 2007 at 8:14pm

A little bit of further info and digging here: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=579159

[No real name = trouble. This entry has been edited - JRC]

Could it bee more lazy journalists? - blog - James Cridland said at May 24th, 2007 at 9:50pm

[...] wrote a while back about a particular story about lazy journalism where an obviously fake story simply wasn’t checked before printing or [...]

dynamoe88 said at May 25th, 2007 at 12:10pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitz_Radio_UK
http://internet.wikia.com/wiki/Hitz_Radio_UK

[This entry has been edited - JRC]

[Further comments are now closed - please see main article for details - JRC]