NPR's Older Appeal
Recent research released by NPR suggest they have two audiences. There is the stalwart over 54 crowd...loyal to the programming. Then there's the less loyal under 54 crowd more enamored with social media. According to an article in
Current,
"The gap between older and younger listeners of NPR stations is widening. Stations are losing listeners 12–44 years of age. NPR projects that by 2020, its stations’ audience of 44-year-olds and younger will be around 30 percent, half that demographic’s audience share in 1985."
The 44 year old audience in 1985 would be 64 now which explains, in part, the bulge in the NPR audience among the boomers. The research seems to suggest the younger audience is spending a lot less time with public radio. Does anybody really think we can change the way they use media? I hope not.
Where are they?
Probably on their mobile devices. If they're like my millennial sons, they're connected to three devices at once. They are toggling their brains between content. It's whatever catches their attention for the moment and then they move on. Time spent listening is divided. attention spans are short. They are not interested in gathering news in the way our traditional audience does. They think it's boring! As the article in Current points out, the frustration is, this kind of listening (and watching) can't be reliably measured yet.
Because this group listens less to radio doesn't mean we stop making great radio. As Jeff Hanson said in the Current article, “The radio audience is still funding most of what we do.” And the audience is still much larger than any single podcast or groups of podcasts.
Since most of our funding still comes from the much larger radio audience, the most effective way to fund new initiatives, digital or radio, is through the practice of great radio. If, as the article suggests, Public Radio is under performing in its medium, we need to examine what we're doing, and correct it fast.
It depends on the platform. Radio is all about consistency of appeal and programs that have a high affinity. Digital media? It all depends on what the individual is looking for. The individual is formatting their own listening and viewing preferences. The sweet spot for public radio lies in ability to offer content that appeals to the younger cohort on the platforms they prefer.
I'm probably one of those old-timers Eric Nuzum talked about at the PRPD conference. We were cohorts when we both served on the board of the Public Radio Program Directors Association, He might have rolled his eyes every time I started talking about programming at conferences. I worked with some of the first generation of public radio researchers. I learned from people like Bailey, Church and Giovannoni. I was able to apply findings from Audience 88 and participated in Audience 98. To those producers and programmers who think public radio is all about doing anything they want and find reinforcement in their decisions based on phone response I was part of the unwashed...the philistines. We were about content and programs that are put together in a cohesive manner to be appealing to a targeted audience.
And yet, we grew a loyal audience and a large membership base. Support from corporations and foundations followed. With success came more talented people providing more content our listeners cared about.
What If Nobody Listens?
My motivations came from some early failures. I worked in public radio for over 30 years (this is where you start rolling your eyes). Early on I had dreams about, "What if nobody is listening" which is kind of like my other dream, "What if nobody pledges." During my career there were instances where nobody listened, and there were instances where nobody pledged. If nobody is listening and nobody pledges...there's usually a reason. If you do not have a handle on your audience preferences you will have no clue as to what is working and what is not.
Everything Matters
Ask yourself this, "How can your content be a community service is nobody is listening?" Who exactly are you serving? It is best to take a look at the effectiveness of your entire schedule by taking a step back. In your research data look at the entire day and look at longer periods of time. Audience averages that reflects listening over six months or a year. That way you'll be able to limit statistical bounce.
The View From 30,000 Feet
I recently worked with a station that's struggling. In their research analysis they were focusing on growth in individual hours while overall their audience was slowly eroding. They failed to see the big picture of how their midday, evening and weekend programming fit with their program tents poles. There were broad expanses of programming with poor appeal to their core audience. There was no way Morning Edition or All Things Considered could overcome poor programming choices. Everything you do...all of your content matters from the listener's perspective.
Shiny Object Syndrome
At one of the stations I worked for, upper management decided it would be a good idea to program opera year 'round. Their decision was based on a successful European tour featuring several operas. The tour served about 25 major donors. After cost, we cleared a few thousand dollars. It was a classic case of Shiny Object Syndrome. The decision was based on making some quick bucks. The decision ignored the listening choices of the station's audience. Opera was already driving away audience by the boatload. Adding more opera only made it worse. Average audience numbers during that time slot dropped. Total loyalty crashed to below 10%. Core loyalty was almost non-existent.
It could be argued I was focused too narrowly on the hours dedicated to the opera. Surely, a few hours wouldn't matter. After 18 months time spent listening to the station dropped by about an hour. Among the core audience TSL dropped by almost two hours a week. Total core loyalty dropped about five points. Even more distressing, the number of core listeners was dropping. Changes to this situation were made only after being able to demonstrate the adverse effects an ill-advised programming decision was having on listener sensitive income. We were falling tens of thousand of dollars behind our membership goals. To be sure, there were other issues with our programming choices. Those were addressed at the same time.
Where to Start?
I used to look at the loyalty charts provided by
Audigraphics...first. They give a quick look at what is working and what is not throughout the week. Then figure out what can be fixed and what cannot. Listen to the station. Run airchecks. Sit down with your talent to assess their performance. Understand that everybody needs an editor. Everybody needs to be on-board with the idea that this service is for the audience, not the content producers and providers. No matter the platform, the content has to have a strong appeal for the audience. Need more? Go back to Deb Blakeley's and Israel Smith's report
"Thinking Audience." Become brilliant on the basics. The art of good radio and great content requires your attention.
I agree with Eric Nuzum. You have plenty of room to try things. It is likely there are programs...even program streams....within your schedule that are not resonating with your audience. Those resources can be better used elsewhere. As program director, the tools are there to fix the programming on your radio station. By doing that you can create opportunities to create content no matter the generational cohort or the platform.
There's plenty of experience in the system. Ask!
Think Audience!
