With syndication - mornings, news talk and sports talk shows are often brought in via satellite, reducing the need for new local talent and the opportunity for this generation’s air talent to develop. It’s not uncommon for medium and small markets to have one or two live local morning shows at most.

This isn’t a gripe fest, however. For some talent, this has been a great boon. For those that are syndicated, they are making money far in excess of what they could have made without it. The top 1% of talent, pay-wise, is doing very well. This is much the same stratification that much of America has been seeing over the past decade as well. I don’t think Rush Limbaugh, Tom Joyner or Bob and Tom can argue that syndication hasn’t worked out for them. Except I’m guessing that Joyner doesn’t get as many frequent-flyer miles as he used to rack up.

But this is not a political or economic column, it’s an internet column. So how does the internet tie all of this together? As I described last week, I and many others feel that once wireless internet access in the car gets hooked up to the speakers on a regular basis, internet audio will be competing on a much more level playing field. Since the internet can offer an unlimited amount of content (they don’t need a license to broadcast, only a computer and some bandwidth), they can target narrower and narrower niches with the exact same music radio is playing. Any music radio can put on the air, so can the internet.

That leaves the differentiating factor to be unique qualities – basically, air talent. (Yes, radio has a host of other advantages, check last week’s column for more on those). So after radio companies spent over a decade maximizing profits by reducing their reliance on expensive talent, they are going to need to turn it around a bit and start developing and relying on those same people. The only difference is that talent will not need radio the same way they have needed it in past either.

If a show builds a small but loyal audience, maintains a frequently updated web presence, and delivers content easily via the internet, it will be ready to take advantage of wireless internet access as it becomes more widespread. Then, if people get used to listening to your show on-demand, over the internet – if the radio station fires you, you still have a method to deliver shows to that loyal audience.

Will the audience be as big as you had on the station? Absolutely not, as you will lose your occasional listeners. However, when you move to another station, even on the other side of the country, your fans will be able to stay with you. With clever marketing and a quality product, you could even build audiences in markets where you’ve never broadcast.

Now, I’m sure many people are laughing at the prospect of producing a professional internet only show. Where’s the money going to come from? Well, internet streams will have a much better understanding of their audience’s demographics, because the listeners have to retrieve the audio, allowing you to track them. If the shows focus on desirable niches, say like, tech news – they will be able to charge quite the premium for their advertising.

Don’t believe me? If you’re not aware, there at least a few bloggers making over $100K/year on web advertising alone. That’s not comparable to the total cost of a large market morning show, but there are probably a few small market shows that would take that in a heartbeat. Plus, not having a PD to answer to has its perks.

Besides, the revenue numbers will only increase. Niche shows will get much higher revenue per listener than radio does now as spots will now hit their target audience a much greater percentage of the time. If talent can establish an online base, radio stations will not be their sole source of revenue. When a station can’t ruin your whole financial life by firing you, it loses a lot of power and leverage over you. Once that leverage is lost, the whole dynamic changes very quickly.