Tom Manoff filed an interesting story on NPR about The Duke of Bohemia, King Wenceslas. The carol has been one of my favorites for a long time. (even more fun than the wassailing tune). Wenceslas was an early advocate of social justice and an early Christian. The last line of the carol sums up the King's Christian mission. "Ye who now will bless the poor / shall yourselves find blessing." Perhaps, a good reminder for the 1%, or at least the politicians who seem to be their champions. Take a moment to listen to Manoff's report on NPR.
The Evil Bother
According to an article in Wikipedia he was the duke of Bohemia from 921 until his assassination in 935. His younger brother, Boleslaus the Cruel, was complicit in the murder. A group of nobles allied with Boleslaus plotted to kill him. The King was invited to a feast. At the feast three of the nobles attacked him. His brother is said to have Wenceslas through with a lance. Is it a case of no good deed goes unpunished? Boleslaus and his allies acted to take control at a time of increasing tensions with the German Provinces. Boleslaus may have also been influenced by his pagan mother in a reaction to the growing influence of Christianity. Boleslaus later repented and became a Christian. There's more about Wenceslas and traditional caroling at"On Point."
Data provided by the Pew Research Center shows modest yet steady growth among Public Radio's news oriented stations. Data shows increases from 2015 to 2016.
Take a look at these trends. How does the data from your station stack up against the benchmarks established by national trends? (If you need help with that, let me know.)
Listenership if up 11% among the top 20 station.
NPR programming is up 14%.
PRI Programming is up 12.5%.
Public Radio's digital presence is on the rise.
PBS NewsHour grew 22%.
Revenue went up at the national level for NPR and PRI. APM saw a decrease. According to Pew, "At the national level NPR increased its total operating revenue in 2016 to $213 million, up 9% from 2015 levels. PRI saw gains as well, rising 26% to about $22 million in total revenue for 2016. APM’s total revenue, on the other hand, went down 6% year over year, accounting for $126 million in 2016."
Locally, earnings have been relatively flat.
News oriented station increased investment in their news gathering resourced about 5% from 2014 to 2015.
Viewership for commercial network news declined 1% to 24 million viewers.
Cable news networks increased 55% to 4.8 million viewers.
Newspaper subscriptions dropped 8% between 2015 and 2016. Subscriptions are up slightly since the election.
I recently saw a posting from somebody in charge of content at a public radio station wondering about what program she could acquire to replace "Dinner Party Download." The question made me pause. As somebody who was once in charge of content at a small statewide network, I worked diligently to create a consistency in programming. The question for me was not about individual programs, but about the service as a whole.
Coming out of the 80's, public radio was in a quest to create a consistent appeal through the selection of content that had a affinity. Disparate programs could have that affinity, but that does not mean that all content worked well with other content. One of the discoveries was that patchwork programming resulted in barriers and rifts in the audience. The more programs in the daily program grid would likely result in audience churn and lower time spent listening and lower core loyalty. The idea was to create consistency across day parts. A question that was often asked of PD's in those early days was, "Can you tell me what is on the air at your station right now?" Programmers with a crazy quilt of programs had a hard time answering that question.
The big discoveries were the inconsistent appeals between news content and music programming like classical and jazz...and the opera with everything else in public radio. But, even content that on the surface seemed to have consistent affinity and appeal might not have. At a network in the Midwest with a consistent schedule of locally produced talk shows had problems of churn. The audience was not carrying over from program to program. The audience was defined by the programs not the programming. The loyalty was built among a micro-set of listeners and did not carry over to other programs or day parts. The host would sign-off and so would the audience.
The station mentioned above has been drifting toward patchwork programming with inconsistencies in program selection horizontally across hours. That's a problem because radio listening is habitual. Listeners tend to tune in at the same time everyday. If the programming they seek is not there, they tune away.
Public station that perform well with their audience have a consistency across day parts and even horizontally across hours. Look at stations that perform well and take note of the consistency of their schedules.
The question should be, "How can I best serve my audience and my community." There are so many good programs. How do you make room for them all? You can't. You're the gatekeeper. You need to make the decisions. It's never been easy. For example, What are you supposed to do with something like "Science Friday?" You can only answer that question by looking at the numbers. Make informed decisions and measure the results.
For most of us there's a struggle between generosity of spirit, and selfishness and greed. Many of us succumb to the idea that somehow we're more deserving than others which lead to a crisis of justice. Unjust can be defined as not behaving according to what is morally right and fair. The opposite can be found in the second half of the Golden Rule, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself. It means all your neighbors. Which leads to an awareness that there is something bigger than me.
I looked up Social Justice. Those who seem to scoff at the concept of the greater good implied in the Golden Rule tend to use Social Justice as a pejorative. I looked up Social Justice and found this, "Social justice is a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity and social privileges."
It's okay to struggle with this concept. Hopefully, your better self wins. I found this quote which seems to put the struggle into perspective.
“A fight is going on inside me,” said an old man to his son. “It is a terrible fight between two wolves. One wolf is evil. He is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego. The other wolf is good. He is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith. The same fight is going on inside you.”
The son thought about it for a minute and then asked, “Which wolf will win?”
The old man replied simply, “The one you feed.” — Wendy Mass, Jeremy Fink and the Meaning of Life
I posted this several months ago when allegations about sexual harassment started to break. An article in The Atlantic suggests that public radio grew so fast that HR was unable to keep up with the extra demands. Given all that is still transpiring with #MeToo, public radio was (and is) woefully unprepared. WNYC is cited in the article for it's phenomenal growth, but at the same time not keeping up with the HR challenges that accompany that expansion. A article published by Nieman Lab wonders if WNYC can pull itself out of the toxic work environment that is dragging the organization down. As soon as an issue arises...
Don't let it go. It won't get any better.
Don't approach it alone. Listen!
Have a plan in place ahead of time.
Make sure everybody is aware of and has signed off on policies.
Be consistent with policies.
Seek professional advice.
Use your EAP. Strive for a safe and nurturing work environment.
I was listening to the final day of a fund drive a couple of weeks ago. There were so many incentives, challenges, drawings and giveaways going on all at once, I had a hard time focusing. All this unfocused chatter made the pitch hard to listen to. Good radio is all about focus and preparation. The message should be direct. One thing at a time...please.
Strong Stopsets
One idea per break
Eliminate the clutter
Forward promote to one thing
Promote to something within the next 20 minutes to increase time spent listening
A recent study by Pew Research suggests there's an increasing partisan divide in this country. There's evidence of divisions within Republicans and Democrats not just between Republicans and Democrats. The Republican coalition is divided by immigration, global economic engagement, acceptance of homosexuality. The four groups in the Democratic coalition differ on a number of issues: While they all strongly support the social safety net, the Democratic-leaning groups are divided on government regulation of business, and government performance more generally. And like the GOP coalition, they disagree on U.S. global involvement.
Throw into this mix the partisan politics that result in a do nothing congress and the divisive nature of presidential politics and you have people who more are willing to call each other names than to look for commonalities to solve problems. According to the report the extremists on both sides are the most likely to be politically active and, therefore, have the most influence. The Pew Study says, "The power of partisanship is reflected in attitudes about Donald Trump. In the survey, conducted in June, Trump’s job ratings are more deeply polarized along partisan lines than those of any president in more than 60 years."
I think it's explained by an anonymous source as, "There's my enlightened point of view...everybody else is a brain dead zealot." There's not a whole lot of room for conversation after that, nor was anybody invited to interject anything constructive. Angry tweets laced with name calling do not lend themselves to mutually agreeable outcomes.
The Answer
Civil discourse is engagement in discourse intended to enhance understanding. ... David Gergen describes civil discourse as "the language of dispassionate objectivity", and suggests that it requires respect of the other participants, such as the reader.
Our local paper (yes, I still read the paper), until recently, included commentary on a daily basis with columnists from the left and right. It was something I looked forward to. I enjoyed the multiple viewpoints on issues facing all of us. These were thoughtful and well-considered viewpoints which pretty much eliminates people who think the earth is flat. I think the reasoned and thoughtful discussion is important to gain a better perspective of what the other side is offering. If we just yell at each other, nothing will get accomplished.
Conservative Columnist David Brooks of the New York Times recently wrote a column about dealing with fanaticism. Brooks mentions four incidents within the past two weeks. The first was at a Nationals game. A pro Trump supporter went into a 10 minute, profanity laced tirade directed at Brooks, his wife and his son.Then he watched a debate among students about whether extremists should be allowed on campus. In Spain Brooks is told by leaders in Madrid that there was no way to have constructive discussions with separatists. Finally, Brooks was with pro-Brexit and anti-Brexit activists trying to have a civil conversation with one another. The conclusion he reaches is biblical. Love your enemy.
Brooks suggests you listen and engage. Paraphrase what is being said to show you're interested instead of attacking back. "Finally, it’s best to greet fanaticism with love for the sake of the country. As Stephen L. Carter points out in his 1998 book, Civility, the best abolitionists restrained their natural hatred of slaveholders because they thought the reform of manners and the abolition of slavery were part of the same cause — to restore the dignity of every human being."
Civility, Carter writes, “is the sum of the many sacrifices we are called to make for the sake of living together.”
If you're looking for the biblical passage about loving your enemy, here are two... Luke 6:27-36 and Matthew 5:43-48. Civility is not not saying negative or harsh things. It is not the absence of critical analysis. It is the manner in which we are sharing this territorial freedom of political discussion. If our discourse is yelled and screamed and interrupted and patronized, that's uncivil. -Richard Dreyfuss .
I was in Baltimore. I arrived the night before for the Public Radio Program Directors Association (PRPD) Conference. I signed up for a pre-conference session with a management consultant. The all-day session was about getting the most out of on-air talent.
I rose on 9/11 to a clear and sunny day. It was glorious. I opened the curtains and looked out from my hotel room onto the inner harbor. The sun was gleaming off the water.
I noticed a helicopter gunship fixed in place, making circles. Until it got to me. The ship stopped. It seemed clear they were looking at me. I backed away from the window. The gunship resumed it circling. This was about a half-hour before the first plane hit the World Trade Center.
Part of what we focused on at the start of the session was managing in an era of a paradigm shift. The idea was to get our talent to continue to strive relevance in a changing world. In this sense it's a shift in how we think and talk about things. A paradigm shift for my parents was World War II. As this discussion started to unfold, one of the PRPD board members came into our session to tell us a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. The meeting was over.
9/11 was a paradigm shift. My boss lamented the events of that day by saying, "This changes everything." He meant that everything that was expected of Public Radio was about to change. What we covered and how we covered it was going to take on a greater importance. Everything else was going to have less relevance. He was right. I saw a challenge as we struggled to grasp what had happened and what this meant for the future. He felt the loss of the way things used to be. With any paradigm we have no control over the catalyst that brings about the change. We change our perspective to adapt.
The change in what was expected on Public Radio didn't happen overnight, but the audience began to shift for us from a classical imperative to a news imperative. The shift happened faster than we could adjust for it, but by 2005 it was clear to us the changes that happened and what we had to do about those changes.
The relevance in this case was the sociological change brought about by the events of 9/11. Those events changed everything.
It may seem hard for people who care about the welfare of the stranger to find something positive after the decision by President Trump to end DACA. The future of the Dreamers is now in the hands of a congress that has been deeply divided on this issue for at least 10 years.
DACA was originally set up as a compassionate act. After several years of inaction by congress the policy was set in place by President Obama. Children were sent here by their family to escape poverty, war , hunger and slavery. According to Reference.com Under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals immigration policy, certain individuals who immigrated to the United States as children are able to request deferred action on their immigration status for two years, explains the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Certain guidelines must be met in order to qualify.
The need for a safe haven for children is urgent.
NPR reports the number of refugees, asylum-seekers and internally displaced people around the world has topped 65 million according to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.The reports goes on to say,"One in every 113 people on Earth has now been driven from their home by persecution, conflict and violence or human rights violations. Two other ways to wrap your mind around that number: Each minute, 24 people around the world flee their home because of violence or persecution. And if the world's displaced people were their own nation, it would be larger than the United Kingdom." The problem of refugees is not going away any time soon.
According to UNICEF1 billion children worldwide are living in poverty.
UNICEF estimates 22,000 children die each day due to poverty.
Among the those living in poverty are individuals being sold into slavery. One group that works to free people from slavery The International Justice Mission (IJM) says, "Millions of the world’s poor are trapped in slavery, because there’s no one there to protect them. In many places, the laws against slavery simply aren’t enforced by the police and courts—so slave owners and traffickers know they can prey on the poor without fear of any consequences at all."
Many of the impoverished children are sold into slavery.
There are more people in slavery today than at anytime in history...over 45 million.
Five million are children. At least one in four is in India.
Over 800,000 have been sold into slavery so far this year.
1.2 million children are being trafficked every year.
IJM isn't just reporting on this situation, they have put their words into action. To find out more about IJM's mission and how they putting thoughts into action, watch this video.
IJM is a global organization that protects the poor from violence in the developing world. They fight against slavery, sex trafficking, sexual violence, police brutality, property grabbing, and citizens rights abuse.
They declared their attempt to rebrand themselves a failure. Business has been down and the restaurant chain was hoping to draw new customers from the largest generation right now...the millennials.
Applebees' executive, John Cywinski, told NPR, "From my perspective, this pursuit led to decisions that created confusion among core guests as Applebee's intentionally drifted from its ... middle-America roots and its abundant value positioning." One of the things I was taught is that rebranding can lead to the situation described by John Cywinski. It is fraught with danger. Remember the New Coke, Crystal Pepsi, Mustang II, and when Radio Shack became The Shack? Chains like Applebee's, Ruby Tuesday's, Chili's and Friday's are seeing business fall off. Anna Lucia Murillo's feature for All Things Considered points to research by Technomic that finds all these people are offering the same food items, the decors are the same, and also that prices have become very high in these places." Customers are drifting away.
There might be two solutions.
First, don't assume Millennials are one giant marketing block. There are cohorts within that generation just like all the generations before it. Early research about the public radio audience suggested an affinity with Country Music fans when, in fact, there was very little crossover. Second, to reach this generation might require taking on a whole new identity and platform. Creating a new platform allows the original concept to focus on strengthening it's hold on the core market (in the case of radio on the core audience) while creating a new identity and purpose for the new target audience.
Pecan Pie is a favorite among the people of Texas. Rooby Dooby's is thinking of donating income from the sale of Pecan Pies toward relief efforts there. We would like your input. Do you like the idea? Would you be willing to order a pie? Let us know. By the way, you can have your pie with whipped cream of ice cream, but my favorite topping is bourbon sauce.
This comes at a time when the Pecan Growers are trying to increase consumption of the nut. In an article in the Western Farm Press, Janet Helm of the Weber Shandwick ad agency which markets pecans on behalf of the American Pecan Council (APC) says, “We need to shift the view of pecans and get people to enjoy them all year long.”
When it comes to top of mind for consumers, the peanut still comes out on top. The APC is trying to change that.
In Texas the pecan has significance beyond pie. According to Wikipedia,In 1919, the Texas Legislature made the pecan tree the state tree of Texas where the town of San Saba claims to be "The Pecan Capital of the World".
The Best of Car Talk is going off the air at the end of September.
Car Talk began recycling old material starting in 2012 when Tom could no longer participate in the show. Tom Magliozzi sadly passed away two years later. Without fresh material, it was only a matter of time before the show would end its run.
30 years is an amazing run. During the height of it's popularity on WNPR, Car Talk and Wait, Wait combined for the station's largest Average Quarter Hour Audience. Fundraising during that block of time was incredible.
One station, WPLN, is engaging its listeners with an invitation to share favorite memories of the show. That seems like a great way to engage listeners who have been faithful to Car Talk for years. The stations within earshot for me have not announced anything yet.
My question: Is it better to let the program slip away quietly, or acknowledge the place Car Talk has in minds of its many fans?
By letting it go, are you missing an opportunity to engage your listeners?
Radio stations in highly competitive markets used to battle for attention with billboard wars. Along the Tri-State Tollway around Chicago there used to be several touting various formats as stations vied for another ratings point in a lucrative market.
The billboards increased awareness and were also meant to develop branding identity. Effective campaigns could do that with simple, uncluttered messages. It wasn't as effective at creating ratings share. In markets that were measured quarterly, there would often be a new crop of billboards for the Fall and Spring books in the hopes of building an audience.
On our most recent trip around Chicago, I didn't see any.
What's Changed?
I don't have the answers, but I can surmise.
Social Media -
Social media is much more cost effective and with the right strategy can engage listeners directly.
Audience Measurement
The advent of PPM give Content Directors almost instant gratification on an hour-by-hour basis.
All things being equal, the data can give the station a pretty good idea if the billboard campaign is moving the needle at all. PPM also reinforces the idea that the most effective thing you can do is create great content and make effective use of forward promotion. Solid radio practices go a long way. Meeting listener expectations on a consistent basis generates loyalty and increases share.
St. Louis Public Radio is taking over operation of KMST. When it comes to radio...Location is everything. 100,000 watts is really impressive, but how many people are in the coverage area? It has been an uphill battle for KMST to generate enough audience to support itself. The alliance with St. Louis Public Radio and the cost effective sharing of programming may keep KMST in the public radio fold.
The obvious loss is the local programming with the exception of "Bluegrass for a Saturday Night. St. Louis Public Radio General Manager Tim Eby says, "St. Louis Public Radio officials pledge to continue supporting civic events and cultural programs in the Rolla area."
President Donald Trump should serve as a cautionary tale about what we say and what we share online. His tweets have been introduced as his state mind evidence as his travel ban travels through the court. His posts are his own worst enemy.
He's not the only one self sabotaged by his social media posts. Ten potential Harvard students had their admissions denied because of their offensive posts.
But there's more...
About the same time I was considered the damage that could be done by ill-advised posts can an op-ed from Mark Oppenheimer in the LA Times about how Twitter is bad for him...because...well...it's a huge time suck. Just think about the time wasted over Trump's typo. As Oppenheimer puts it, "Life is short, summer’s here, and my dog deserves a long, leisurely walk. Halfway through, we’ll sit down for a spell. I’ll bring a book.
Years of audience research and focus groups reveal that Public Radio's audience expect us to get it right. So...what happens to our credibility when the weekend host on our local station calls Delbert McClinton Dilbert?
Unless...of course...he really did mean Dilbert!
And another thing...It's BER-lin...not ber-LIN.
So...how come it's always being mispronounced?
Berlin: This town east of New Britain is BUR-lin, not bur-LIN. So, when you see the sign on Route 9 that says "East Berlin," try not to think of Cold War Germany.
It takes very little to get people to tune away. Why would you put any barriers between you and your listener? I worked in three very competitive markets with several public media options. Watching the audience data made it clear there was little room for mistakes. Barriers between you and the listener were usually unforced errors and easily fixed. Leaving the barriers unattended resulted in loss in occasions and duration of listening. For public media the decrease in revenue can be catastrophic. Today, with so many platforms and option available, there is very little margin for error. Work with your people to get it right. Checking out the details is easier than ever. Digital media may be resulting in competition for the ears and minds of your listeners, but it also offers a greater opportunity to get it right.
I'm no longer involved on a day to day basis.
When it comes to fundraising on Public Radio, I'm more like your typical listener. I tune away. If I can get the same content elsewhere without the funding pitch, I'll do it. The only time I didn't do that today was when there was content I knew I couldn't get anywhere else.
What's the Lesson?
It's the content. It's always been the content. To think otherwise is foolish. The listener/user comes to us for the content and their willingness to support us depends on the listener's relationship with the content. Consistently meet their expectations and you will have their loyalty. Fail to meet their expectations and risk losing them to somebody else. It's kinda' like relationships.
Are trade restrictions a good idea. It depends on who you ask. One of the lessons learned from the Great Depression was that protectionist policies made the depression worse. Here's a look at what trade restrictions can do. Canadian farmers are happy. Wisconsin farmers are not. "Dairy Farmers of Canada, a trade group, said in a statement in 2016 that protections for the country’s dairy farmers were in place before the Class 7 pricing rule, but weren’t being enforced, resulting in approximately $231 million in annual revenue losses for Canadian dairy farmers." The Canadians are being accused of protectionism.
Why do I care? I grew up in Wisconsin. My uncle owned a dairy farm near Shawano. He was successful, but success is getting harder to achieve for the small farm.
This may not hurt the corporate farmers, but the mom and pop operations that are a part of Grassland Dairy Products will feel the pain. These 75 dairy farmers are in danger of going out of business. You may not be able to tell by the price of dairy at the supermarket, but currently, there's a glut of milk on the market. That limits the options for these 75 farmers.
Other polls indicate the approval ratings for Trump are headed for all-time lows. The disapproval is not necessarily from his base but is instead from those who previously said they did not have an informed decision, but the poll numbers from Quinnipiac suggests erosion from his base too. If, Trump is trying to deflect blame to draw attention away from his mistakes by creating smokescreens of misinformation, it is not working.
You can find more information about Trump's approval ratings at The Hill. The results are from a Quinnipiac Poll.
"Tim Malloy, assistant director of Quinnipiac’s poll, said Trump’s approval has not yet reached the low point of former President George W. Bush, his most recent Republican predecessor."
“President Donald Trump continues to struggle, even among his most loyal supporters,” he said. "Many of them would be hard pressed to see even a sliver of a silver lining in this troubling downward spiral.”
Of course, Trump lashes back by making statements about fake news. Newsweek looked into the accusation from Trump. They conclude the polls are not fake. One of the issues with the election polls they found was that there were so many people unwilling to give an opinion about their choices during the election.
"Possible reluctance of respondents to voice support for Trump has frequently been cited as a possible reason that pre-election opinion polling, and post-election surveys, may have underestimated support for the Republican."
They are weighing in now in increasing numbers. Something you might want to think about, the next election is about 18 months away.
There's a whole lot that's involved in change. Just rushing in and making change for the sake of change can be challenging. The Republicans are in that spot right now. Benjamin Disraeli put it this way, The secret for success in life is for a person to be ready for their opportunity when it comes.
I've managed two changes in Public Radio. Both came with challenges.
Getting to Yes
Getting to yes requires more than the act of change. The follow through and clear direction after the change requires as much, if not more attention. The first change brought local control over the content. Unfortunately, there was no clear idea of the direction of the content. That lack of clarity brought dissension and confusion. Because leaders were not allowed to lead, it took about five years for the station to come about with a clear direction. To be sure, there was growth, The fits and stops stunted the growth as the majority of the staff each tried to assert their own vision. Those visions did not include the audience. They were all about personal agendas. On top of that, senior management was unprepared for the negative response from listeners. The atmosphere at the station became toxic until those elements were slowly weeded out.
The second change was more clearly planned. The direction of the programming and the content had the buy-in of the staff. There were clear estimates of the impact of the change among listeners and the supporters of the station.
Some will always resist change.
All of the staff was mobilized and ready for the impact, with the exception of top corporate management and the board. They were brought along every step of the process, but failed to clearly understand the negative impact the changes would have on certain sectors of the audience. They failed to understand the changes would not turn the audience on a dime.
Within six months the changes resulted in increased community service, significant audience changes, and increased funding within a year. That was forecast by the research. Those on top chose to ignore the findings of the research. The onslaught of phone calls by irritated members strained relationships within management. The negative feedback was also predicted and part of the preparations. The change agents paid the price, but the station thrives. A comprehensive approach to preparation led to a station that is thriving. We took the time to do it right. For those directly involved in the transition, the change went as expected.
The Republicans had seven years to prepare for their moment. For some reason, they weren't ready. True leadership is more than the act of the change. They did not invest in getting to yes.
More and more, I find myself searching for sanity in news coverage. I find myself recoiling from the bombast and daily assault of half truths and false statements.
There was a time when I would avoid the PBS NewsHour. It seemed so slow, so dry. I've come to appreciate the comprehensiveness and evenhanded approach to the stories. It comes down to trust.
I trust journalism...not punditry. So much of what passes for journalism is based on the exception. The comments and assertions are based on the exception to the norm...not on what is actually going on. The exception feeds on our fears and takes our attention away from real solutions.
After the recent election and the continued avalanche of misstatements based on sketchy sources, I find myself being a lot more careful about what I read. And if something turns out to be incomplete, I appreciate sources that continue to dig.
Other trusted sources:
NPR
APM
PRI
Reuters
BBC
and an assortment of newspapers, magazines and sites that take the time to check their sources.
What was it that Ben Bradlee said? Something like, "Check all your sources twice, except for your mother, check her three times.
At least that's what I was told. It's too commercial! (Heaven forbid we generate increased time spent listening.)
Reliving An Old Argument
I heard some forward promotion this evening on a commercial station. Most of the announcers on this station say goodbye with our any thought about what comes next. It's an invitation to tune out. Not this time. I was impressed. She mentioned the artist coming up after what promised to be a lengthy break. She even tied in the tidbit that the artist would be touring and stop in area this Summer. The break was, indeed, lengthy. I got out of my car after five minutes and the spots were still rolling out of my speakers as I turned off the radio. But still, the effort was there. I also learned something I might not have otherwise known which added value to my time.
So What's The Big Deal?
For the commercial station the increase in Time Spent Listening (TSL) promotes increased share. Something that can be taken back to the advertisers. Increased share for public radio can be taken to the underwriters, but it also promotes loyalty, increases the size of the core audience and helps generate member dollars. Now that there is a lot more competition for listener ears, and we're more dependent than ever on contributions from non-government sources, increasing TSL doesn't seem so bad.
Barriers
The length of the break led to my tune-out. The tune-out wasn't only about the commercial interruption, it was more about my listening habits. If I had been in the car longer, I might have stayed wit the station longer to hear the music of the artist and the consistency of format.
What happens when that consistency of format is no longer there? In the case of public radio, what happens to the audience when we switch programs or programming. For example, what happens when Morning Edition ends and another program starts. Audience figures suggest a large port of the audience tunes away. Then an hour later another program starts. The seams created by this continuous shift in focus creates more opportunities for tune out. The only tool immediately at the programmers disposal is promotion.
There's a public radio network in the Midwest that runs a daily line-up of locally produced talk shows. It was assumed that since they were all talk shows on the same network that the appeal of each program would be similar. Unfortunately, they were not. At each program shift, the audience would depart. As the two hours of the next program unfolded, n news audience would grow. Then at the next seam (program shift), that audience would depart. The the process would start again. The roller coaster effect was made worse by shifts in content within the programs.
Meeting Expectations
Forward promotion can help offset some of these. It does not offset inconsistency in appeal. If the content is not appealing to the target or core audience, The expectancy set up by the forward promotion has not been met. Content providers and show producers should always be prepared to present their best to meet audience expectations. If they do not, listeners will go elsewhere. That's not a happy thought in a highly competitive market. Nobody said this was going to be easy.
WNKU is on the verge of being sold to the Bible Broadcasting Corporation. The station has been running deficits since 2012, and Northern Kentucky University, the license holder, has decided that can no longer carry the weight. According to a report from WCPO, Cincinnati, the station has run up a deficit of $2.6 million despite subsidies from the University of $1.9 million over the same period.
Louisville Public Media is interested in buying the station to preserve the format and the local flavor of the programming. The University is says LPM waited too long to make a bid. There's also a petition to save the station with about 8,000 signatures. To me, the response is not overwhelming.
WNKU's fiscal problems began about the time they expanded their signal reach in 2011 with the purchase of two stations, 105.9 WPFBAM/FM and 104.1 WPAY FM as part of a network of stations. The station took on considerable debt to increase its reach. The cost was estimated to be $6.75 million. The added debt load combined with slower than anticipated growth may have led to their financial woes. A move like that is not just about audience size, but also about developing a loyal following that translates into listener sensitive income. That did not happen.
I had so much optimism that through journalism I could change the world. It turned out it was not that easy. I had to reach an understanding that through reporting I could lead people to the facts and by doing so they could connect the dots. With any communication, it's a two way street. The intended recipient has be willing to receive the message.
First, there were news papers. Followed by the evening news. "And that's the way it is..." That was followed by cable news and the 24 hour news cycle. Outside of journalism there's talk radio and now, there's social media.
Social media is a lot like the informal way news used to be passed among individuals and groups where people would discuss events in less formal situations. Ideas and opinions were passed back and forth among like minded individuals. There was a danger in this. Misinformation often got reinforced. But, for those who wanted to dig deeper there was also journalism and the academic pursuit of knowledge.
I have an example from my hometown from the late sixties and early seventies. Racial discrimination, fear and hatred colors this story.
Redlining/Discrimination
In the late 60's there were a series of equal housing marches led by a Catholic priest. The first marches were on the south side of the city. A few hundred marchers were met by thousands of angry white protester vehemently opposed to allowing people of color into their neighborhood. White protesters scream racial slurs, unfurled confederate flags, wore white hoods, started fires and threw bricks at the marchers. The police were there to make sure the marchers did not get out of line.
In the summer of 1970 the marches moved to one of the suburbs in the inner ring. The suburb was considered to be affluent and a good place to raise your kids. The streets were safe. The schools were excellent. The city next door had high rates of poverty and crime. Moving out of the city was problematic for people of color because of redlining. The conversation went something like, "I don't want those people moving into my neighborhood because soon they'll take over, and you know what they're like. Besides, my property values will fall. The streets will be filled with thugs and drug users and welfare and their children will take over the schools."
Hatred/Fear/Bigotry
After the marches in the suburb, a new high school was damaged by fire. The opening was delayed for a year. In discussions with friends and acquaintances, I was told the fire was set by angry black people jealous of the advantages the suburb offered to its residents. The conversation was concluded with, "It seems obvious, doesn't it?" About a year later, an investigation reveled that the fire was set by a white teenager. He was a stoner who accidentally set the school on fire. The truth was finally out there. Did it register with anyone? It did with me, but I was already wary of the common knowledge version of the story.
The people who insisted to me that somehow the protesters had burned down the school never acknowledged their mistake. The actual facts did not align with the narrative they had already put in place. This isn't much different that what we're getting from Social Media today. Only it is amplified many times. Today anybody can publish anything. If those thoughts align with prejudices they are offered reinforcing truth.
Listening
We must learn to listen. We must be open to views that might offer new vistas and new understanding. Journalism plays an important part but, can only change minds if people are willing to accept the message. Take consolation that the facts are there and that over time story will evolve and offer a better understanding of the issues. There's only so much journalism can do. We can do our job. Peel back the layers of a story and uncover more, but it is up to the audience to filter the information through their lens. Finally, without journalism we are left with alternative facts, and that's a dark place, indeed.
Still the Same?
As a final note...the city I grew up in is still considered one of the most segregated in the country. According to a report in 24/7 Wall Street, "There are numerous ways to calculate segregation levels. One standard measure, which indicates the proportion of black residents who would have to relocate to match the distribution of whites, pegs the Milwaukee area as the most segregated city in the nation. More than three-quarters of white area residents live in predominantly white neighborhoods, while more than one-third of black residents live in predominantly black neighborhoods, each well above the respective average shares for large U.S. metros."
The shaded grey areas show a more diverse mix than when I lived there. That is progress. Yet, as the election demonstrates, fear, hatred and bigotry, stoked by talk radio and social media, still has a strong pull.
With federal grant money in danger of being pulled, what we do now matters more than ever. What you air and what you say matters...all of it. Building audience and loyalty will increase funding. To do that takes a shift in thinking. Change from inward focus to audience focus.
I worked at a couple of music stations in public radio system where the stop sets would often run in excess of five minutes. That ain't nothin' compared to commercial stations that may run 12 minutes of back-to-back to-back-spots. The local ESPN outlet has been known to run 33 minutes of spots and promos in an hour. And yet...the public radio stations mentioned could do a whole lot more to build audience if the announcers would just stop rambling. Nobody cares...except maybe your grandmother. It doesn't take much to cause tune-out.
I used to go to listen to folk singers in clubs. They all seemed to feel they had to spend five or ten minutes setting up the next tune. Not really. It was all so tedious. Then on one occasion, from the back of the room, "Shut-up and play the music!" Laughter rippled through the room, and for that night we heard a lot more music and a lot less talk. He didn't stop telling stories about the music. He just did a better job of editing. What he had to say gave context without drowning us in words.
Fred Jacobs has a blog about improving the commercials in the commercial experience, and at the beginning of the blog he writes about "the era of the PPM ratings methodology has taught programmers about the value of minute-by-minute programming. Meters can migrate on a dime, reacting to everything from a rambling DJ to poor encoding to a weak-testing song."
Public radio should have such an advantage for building audience. No commercials. Yet the numbers often lag. The numbers are important when it comes to listener and underwriting support.
So what are you doing to eliminate the tune out? It could start with "Shut up and play the music." Or...you could focus your breaks. Make them more appealing. Instead of stopping,..move forward. Inform and move on. Advance the story and give context without overwhelming us.
