An Unsafe Premium
Vermont Public Radio discovered that one of the mugs it offered in the middle of the last decade has high levels of lead. VPR reports they tested all 34 of the mugs produced in the past decade after concerns were raised recently. 11 mugs contained lead. One was found to have unacceptable levels. Members are being notified not to use the mug. The issue is being reported in Foster's Daily Democrat.
What's Next?
Many of public radio's and public TVs mugs come from a couple of sources. Where they are actually manufactured might be an issue. Does this mean public broadcasting (and other non-profits) should get their mugs tested? I have several mugs I got as premiums. I'm drinking out of one right now. It does give me pause.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Saturday, October 5, 2013
Public Radio Fundraising
Fundraising Off Message
What would happen if a portion of the pitches focused on outcomes?

So much of what I'm hearing locally is all about premiums. There are long descriptions about mugs, holiday wreaths and CD's. Are these things really the reason listeners tune-in to public radio?
Outcomes
Part of the pitch should be about outcomes. The outcomes should be from the listener's perspective instead of the station's internal focus. An internal focus might be something like, "With your contributions, we were able to hire two new reporters. We're hoping for more this year!" An example of a positive outcome from a listener's perspective might be testimonials about the value of reporting from a listener's perspective. "You're reporting on the plant closure in the Quiet Corner" gave me a greater understanding to the implications of long term unemployment on the economy. The stories in your series brought home the human toll of joblessness." Something like this takes preparation but, is effective in driving home the unique value proposition of Public Radio's content.
Balance
It is not about what we need. It is not about the premiums. Premiums are inducements. The real reason people listen is the compelling content. If the content matches the lifestyle and values of a large enough portion of the audience on a consistent basis, listeners become contributors. There needs to be a balance in the message points. Talent needs to make sure there is a balance between the case and the close. Long pitches focusing on a mug or a bouquet of flowers as a premium might motivate some donations but, they are off point. They ignore the built-in advantage of listener loyalty to content that matters.
What would happen if a portion of the pitches focused on outcomes?
So much of what I'm hearing locally is all about premiums. There are long descriptions about mugs, holiday wreaths and CD's. Are these things really the reason listeners tune-in to public radio?
Outcomes
Part of the pitch should be about outcomes. The outcomes should be from the listener's perspective instead of the station's internal focus. An internal focus might be something like, "With your contributions, we were able to hire two new reporters. We're hoping for more this year!" An example of a positive outcome from a listener's perspective might be testimonials about the value of reporting from a listener's perspective. "You're reporting on the plant closure in the Quiet Corner" gave me a greater understanding to the implications of long term unemployment on the economy. The stories in your series brought home the human toll of joblessness." Something like this takes preparation but, is effective in driving home the unique value proposition of Public Radio's content.
Balance
Labels:
Case,
Close,
Fundraising,
Outcomes,
public radio
Monday, September 30, 2013
Poor Health Coverage/Poor Reporting
Public says news coverage of health care law shortchanges practical information
Pew research says most of us are unhappy with the way the Affordable Care Act is being covered. According to Pew a majority of Americans say the news media’s coverage of the law has been focused on politics and controversies, rather than how it will impact people. By focusing on the rhetoric, the public is being shortchanged on the facts on how the plan will affect them.The Kaiser Health Track Survey (the source for the survey) suggests the reporting on the issue has resulted in a lack of trust of the media on this issue.
"More than half (53%) of those surveyed say there is not a news media source that they trust for information about the health law; 44% said there were news outlets they trusted. Of those who said they trust one or multiple news sources, 19% cited cable TV, with 10% naming Fox News and 5% naming CNN. Broadcast TV outlets and newspapers ranked second at 7% each."I clicked through to the Kaiser Health Tracking Poll. Only 3% trust NPR's coverage and 2% trust PBS' coverage. The coverage of late on NPR has been more about how the ACA will be implemented but, public perception is that public broadcasting's coverage is not to be trusted. This runs counter to public broadcasting's perception that it the nation's most trusted news source. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/02/4th-annual-tv-news-trust-poll.html
Stretching the Meaning
This may be a stretch but, an interpretation of the research may be that the public is tired of the partisan politics perpetuated by cable news outlets like Fox, MSNBC and conservative pundits. The controversy is wearing all of us out when the real story is how the ACA is going to work. "How is this change going to affect my health coverage?" Partisan politics and partisan media coverage that fuels the partisan divide is getting us nowhere.Saturday, September 21, 2013
WNPR.ORG coming back Updated
This is long overdue. Wnpr.org was supplanted a few years ago by yourpublicmedia.org in an effort to create a more robust news website. WNPR took a risk when they did this. The move abandoned a really effective branding...WNPR. It also led to confusion. They were always talking about two websites and one of them took the listener away from WNPR. When the change was made it was deemed necessary because the experience of navigating through the CPBN site was frustrating. Unfortunately the move to yourpublicmedia.org left listeners confused. The question was...are you WNPR or are you Your Public Media?
Why did the change fail? I think the motivation for the change was internally driven. It was not driven by the user experience. To make things worse, the partnerships developed with yourpublicmedia never really evolved. It was always hard to find WNPR's content on the site. At least from my perspective, the user experience was frustrating when trying to find stories aired on WNPR. I gave up.
Now all they have to do is find the resources needed to keep the site updated and relevant.
Why did the change fail? I think the motivation for the change was internally driven. It was not driven by the user experience. To make things worse, the partnerships developed with yourpublicmedia never really evolved. It was always hard to find WNPR's content on the site. At least from my perspective, the user experience was frustrating when trying to find stories aired on WNPR. I gave up.
Now all they have to do is find the resources needed to keep the site updated and relevant.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Music for Change (Another Mix Tape)
Autumn arrives Saturday. With the change of seasons it's to think about making changes. It also a time for new beginnings. The school year begins. For some companies the new fiscal year starts October First.
I've come up with a few tunes about changes. Some are obvious. Some deal with the subject indirectly. As always, your suggestions are welcome.
See You In September - The Happenings
September in the Rain - Frank Sinatra
Wake me Up When September Ends - Green Day
September Song - Willie Nelson
Autumn Leaves - Cannonball Adderley
Changes - David Bowie
A Change is Gonna Come - Sam Cooke
Everybody Oughta Make a Change - Eric Clapton
Change Partners - Stephen Stills
Change Partners - Antonio Carlos Jobim/Frank Sinatra
Different Today - Kenny White
Something in the Air - Thunderclap Newman
I've come up with a few tunes about changes. Some are obvious. Some deal with the subject indirectly. As always, your suggestions are welcome.
See You In September - The Happenings
September in the Rain - Frank Sinatra
Wake me Up When September Ends - Green Day
September Song - Willie Nelson
Autumn Leaves - Cannonball Adderley
Changes - David Bowie
A Change is Gonna Come - Sam Cooke
Everybody Oughta Make a Change - Eric Clapton
Change Partners - Stephen Stills
Different Today - Kenny White
Something in the Air - Thunderclap Newman
Saturday, September 14, 2013
Staff Reductions at NPR
I hate this. It brings back bad memories of when CPBN was going through another round of layoffs. There were many of those at CPBN. For a lot of reasons I knew mine was coming. I could only wait for that shoe to drop. It was an awful feeling.
The reduction is being put in place to offset a $6.1 million deficit. All this comes on the heels of the announced resignation of Gary Knell. Knell is leaving to become CEO of the National Geographic Society. Paul Hagga, Jr. become the interim CEO on September 30.
the RIF will intensify the debate on how NPR funds itself and, where they should be spending their revenue. Can the network sustain itself with a combination of funding from Member's dues and underwriting? Will NPR need to bypass the stations and go directly to the listeners? If NPR cuts out the stations, what then? Has there been too much emphasis on new media efforts and not enough on it's core...the radio audience? Or, has radio become become a cash cow with slowing receding fiscal relevance?
Monday, September 2, 2013
Fundraising - Do we talk about ourselves or the donor?
Focusing on Donors, Not the Charity, in Your Appeals
Check out this podcast from the Chronicle of Philanthropy. So much of what I hear and read...especially on public radio and television...is all about "we need." "Another big pitch is, "We're great! Support us!" There's also an addiction to the premium. There's a fear nobody will give unless we're immersed in the give and get. I'm hearing this on both radio and TV.
We can go beyond fundraising that annoys and drives listener's and viewers away? Public radio loses half its audience as soon as it opens its mikes during a fund drive. Public Television can't raise money around its core programs. Is it the programming creating the problem for Public TV?
When something compelling hits the air like Downton Abbey, the funds flow in.
Answer this, "What are the positive outcomes from the listener's or viewer's point of view?"
A thank you gift or a pair of tickets is not a positive outcome. It is an inducement.
Labels:
Development,
Downton Abbey,
Fundraising,
public radio,
public TV
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)