All News Radio: An Idea Who's Time Has Come Again?

[FredLeonard]

From about 1961 to when the station flipped to all news in 1976.

NPR has not proven that locally-produced in-depth news can not be done. Because something has not been done doesn't mean it can not be done. Under the current system, there is little incentive of a "member station" to do a locally-produced drive-time news magazine show. That, of course, does not stop local stations from pushing for more local time. But a commercial station, especially one looking for an alternative to the failing right-wing talk format, would have an incentive to attempt a more locally-oriented news magazine.

 

[Richard Stefan]

Fred: There are no people on the bench to take over, name me anyone in their 20s thats any good? I just found her....could be a good one...http://danaloeschradio.com/

 

[stevensonair]

Richard - you're funny.

 

[TheBigA]

But a commercial station, especially one looking for an alternative to the failing right-wing talk format, would have an incentive to attempt a more locally-oriented news magazine.

An incentive, maybe, but not the budget. In the case of Philadelphia, CBS is already doing news, so there's no need to replace talk with more news. As we've pointed out, the track record for news start-ups isn't good. Cumulus has no incentive to take it's experiments in Atlanta or San Francisco any further. And as I said, the production values that NPR uses are far higher than any commercial news operation is doing now. It's TV quality news production. So perhaps, a TV company might be able to provide NPR-quality magazine reporting for radio, but no radio company is even in the ball park.

The example you gave was almost 40 years ago, back when radio stations had full staffs of production engineers to do quality work. Very few have that kind of staffing now, and I doubt they'd want to hire producers and engineers to create local radio magazines.

 

[FredLeonard]

NPR and major market union shops all have far more bodies than they need. Quality production can be done a lot more economically. There was a station in Wilmington, Delaware doing it until Clear Channel moved in a few years back. Not as polished and sometimes rough around the edges, perhaps. But the station's product had a loyal - often well placed - following. And this was a station notorious for its unwillingness to spend money. Add to that stations in Selinsgrove, PA and in Lansdale, PA. Even smaller, even lower budgets.

Another instance of economical all-news, although not in the news magazine and documentary style, is KQV in Pittsburgh.

 

[TheBigA]

NPR and major market union shops all have far more bodies than they need. Quality production can be done a lot more economically.

If so, then why is it not done? Even CBS News Radio, which is ironically located in the same building with Sunday Morning, isn't offering "Sunday Morning" quality pieces for radio. There is no structure in commercial radio, either nationally or locally, than is able to deliver content that can compete with NPR. And that's what it would have to do in order to survive.

 

[Richard Stefan]

Richard - you're funny.

Thanks.....most everyone wants to be the next Stern........after the top tier of talk hosts who is on the bench? Thats why talk radio is dying.

 

[radiophiler]

I wonder if this would be an inexpensive-enough option to work: FCC has to allow AM-TV co-ownership in a market and allow simulcasting of TV audio onto the AM signal. Simulcast the audio of the TV news onto the AM. In most markets, that would mean you'd have local news programming available from 4:30-7 am and 4-6:30 pm. And in some markets, due to continuation of the morning TV newscast on a .2 digital channel or on a co-owned station, you'd have audio available until 9 am.

I know the argument against: On-air references to video ... "as you see here ... " "as you see on super-stupendous radar ... " But I sometimes listen to CNN audio on XM radio in my car. It's not all that bad (well, it used to be better before Zucker took over, but that's a topics for another post).

Before digital TV signals, people would listen to the audio of WPVI, Channel 6, ABC owned, in Philadelphia on 87.7 FM. That was with KYW Newsradio (CBS) in the market.

Fill the night-times with whatever. It wouldn't matter. Prime focus would be on drive times weekdays and mornings on the weekends. Have a small local staff to fill in the midday hours with all news product, heavy on traffic if appropriate to the market, using soundbites captured from the TV audio.

 

[TheBigA]

I wonder if this would be an inexpensive-enough option to work: FCC has to allow AM-TV co-ownership in a market and allow simulcasting of TV audio onto the AM signal. Simulcast the audio of the TV news onto the AM.

I'm not aware that this isn't allowed by the FCC.

AFAIK, both CBS and NBC allow simulcasting of their evening news and Sunday news shows. Few stations choose to do this. At one time, a lot of AM stations ran CNN Headline News audio as a radio format.

 

[Avid Listener]

I wonder if this would be an inexpensive-enough option to work: FCC has to allow AM-TV co-ownership in a market and allow simulcasting of TV audio onto the AM signal. Simulcast the audio of the TV news onto the AM. In most markets, that would mean you'd have local news programming available from 4:30-7 am and 4-6:30 pm. And in some markets, due to continuation of the morning TV newscast on a .2 digital channel or on a co-owned station, you'd have audio available until 9 am.

I know the argument against: On-air references to video ... "as you see here ... " "as you see on super-stupendous radar ... " But I sometimes listen to CNN audio on XM radio in my car. It's not all that bad (well, it used to be better before Zucker took over, but that's a topics for another post).

Before digital TV signals, people would listen to the audio of WPVI, Channel 6, ABC owned, in Philadelphia on 87.7 FM. That was with KYW Newsradio (CBS) in the market.

Fill the night-times with whatever. It wouldn't matter. Prime focus would be on drive times weekdays and mornings on the weekends. Have a small local staff to fill in the midday hours with all news product, heavy on traffic if appropriate to the market, using soundbites captured from the TV audio.

It shouldn't be that much more expensive to hire someone to simply read the same scripts as the TV news shows, leaving out the "as you can see" references.

 

[FredLeonard]

If so, then why is it not done? Even CBS News Radio, which is ironically located in the same building with Sunday Morning, isn't offering "Sunday Morning" quality pieces for radio. There is no structure in commercial radio, either nationally or locally, than is able to deliver content that can compete with NPR. And that's what it would have to do in order to survive.

The most powerful force in broadcasting is inertia. CBS got in the all news business in 1968 and the all news stations differed little in style from the TOH news. CBS does what they do because it's what they do. Besides, Newsradio 880 and the other CBS format all news stations are doing OK. However, to my ear, they have moved in the direction of longer pieces at times, as well as all those live debriefs with local and network reporters - a la NPR.

 

[TheBigA]

However, to my ear, they have moved in the direction of longer pieces at times, as well as all those live debriefs with local and network reporters - a la NPR.

I don't hear it. To me, it's all just spot news. And they're limited in what they do and how it sounds by the demands of their affiliates, who seem to want to keep them in a box. Plus there's a lack of imaginative reporting, which has become so common on TV. In my view, news radio isn't using the medium as creatively as they could. And I don't see that changing.

 

[FredLeonard]

I don't hear it. To me, it's all just spot news. And they're limited in what they do and how it sounds by the demands of their affiliates, who seem to want to keep them in a box. Plus there's a lack of imaginative reporting, which has become so common on TV. In my view, news radio isn't using the medium as creatively as they could. And I don't see that changing.

I thought you were talking about all news stations, like Newsradio 880, which do not have "affiliates."

On the network side, I'd consider Osgood and Ross to be doing NPR type content.

 

[TheBigA]

I thought you were talking about all news stations, like Newsradio 880,

I've listened to the station reporting at KWY, WCBS, and Hubbard's WTOP. They all do local feature reporting, which incorporates sound beyond straight actuality. But they're still short, probably less than a minute.

On the network side, I'd consider Osgood and Ross to be doing NPR type content.

It's what we call "straight voicers." No production at all. Just script. That's like an NPR commentary.

 

[semoochie]

A couple of pages back, someone was asking for an example of a startup All News operation within the last 30 years. I'll have to go with KOMO Seattle. I don't think they've been around for ten years and were at or near the top of the ratings for quite awhile.

 

[Ravens]

Ratings aren't the be-all-end-all of the equation. Billing and expenses are also part of this decision.

If radio companies thought 24/7 news with a full staff would make them more money than news/talk, they'd flip in a second. If they thought oldies or sports would bill better, the same deal.

Talk is a cheap format to run. That's why it's on so many stations.

 

[FredLeonard]

Ratings aren't the be-all-end-all of the equation. Billing and expenses are also part of this decision.

If radio companies thought 24/7 news with a full staff would make them more money than news/talk, they'd flip in a second. If they thought oldies or sports would bill better, the same deal.

Talk is a cheap format to run. That's why it's on so many stations.

You assume radio managers are intelligent and rational. For the most part, they are not. When in doubt, they do what they have always done. Failing that, they copy what seems to work for somebody else. History is replete with instances of managers making changes that did NOT result in better billings.

Syndicated talk radio is cheap. Real talk radio, local and live, is not. Before satellites and cheap, high quality long distance made syndicated talk possible and economical, only a few major market stations did it. Syndicated right-wing talk is on so many stations because it's on so many stations and station managers are mostly second-handers incapable of independent thought.

 

[Ravens]

You assume radio managers are intelligent and rational. For the most part, they are not. When in doubt, they do what they have always done. Failing that, they copy what seems to work for somebody else. History is replete with instances of managers making changes that did NOT result in better billings.

Syndicated talk radio is cheap. Real talk radio, local and live, is not. Before satellites and cheap, high quality long distance made syndicated talk possible and economical, only a few major market stations did it. Syndicated right-wing talk is on so many stations because it's on so many stations and station managers are mostly second-handers incapable of independent thought.

Insulting tone aside, there is some truth in this. When I say "talk is cheap", I mean 24/7 off the bird talk is cheap.

 

[davideduardo]

You assume radio managers are intelligent and rational. For the most part, they are not. When in doubt, they do what they have always done. Failing that, they copy what seems to work for somebody else. History is replete with instances of managers making changes that did NOT result in better billings.

Based on the rate of success, radio managers are brighter and better than those in many other fields. Procter & Gamble is renowned for having a new product success rate of nearly 50%, while competitors average less than half if this. But that means that half of P&Gs new products don't meet the sales and ROI goals set for them.

So, to be as good as the best in the world, more than half of all format changes would have to be successful. I'd say that the success rate is higher than that.

Also consider that to get that 50% success rate, P&G spends $2 billion a year in product research and $400 million in market research (all P&G stats come from the June, 2011 Harvard Business Review). A radio station generally would spend less than $100 k in format research and a music test... and in smaller markets, not even that.

 

[davideduardo]

A couple of pages back, someone was asking for an example of a startup All News operation within the last 30 years. I'll have to go with KOMO Seattle. I don't think they've been around for ten years and were at or near the top of the ratings for quite awhile.

Good point. It's apparently been in all news for about 12 years, but with a near-30 year history of talk with strong news components.