-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Is it normal to transmit Open Line public affairs across all signals?
- Thread starter ercjncpr
- Start date
- Status
is your question why do they run the same show on 2 different stations?
The answer is to make it appear the station is "operating in the public interest" and to be able to put something in the space on the renewal application that they are running shows that serve the public.
The answer is to make it appear the station is "operating in the public interest" and to be able to put something in the space on the renewal application that they are running shows that serve the public.
I get the public affairs angle but it seems lazy and cheap but I guess I should expect that from big radio companies
The stations have two different audiences, so the show reaches more people. That makes it more effective.
That's also why advertisers buy time on multiple stations: To reach more people.
Let's just say when it comes to News or Public Affairs or even PSAs stations can and should do whatever they want!
Ask the taxpayers.
Let me know when they don't take ANY taxpayer money and my point will no longer be relevant. Until then, it is.
Audacy is tanking, why they have not declared bankruptcy is beyond me, but they have laid off so many people I'm surprised they are still doing any in house public affairs programming at all
Back in the late 1970's WSSH 99.5 Lowell MA used to have WJUL 91.5 produce a local public affairs show for them using some University VP as the host, we would record it during the week, edit what had to be polished, then deliver the reel of tape to WsSH and it would run at 0600 Sunday morning.
When I was at WLYN and WAZN we ran a public affairs show from WUMB , the University of Massachusetts Boston's station
Back in the late 1970's WSSH 99.5 Lowell MA used to have WJUL 91.5 produce a local public affairs show for them using some University VP as the host, we would record it during the week, edit what had to be polished, then deliver the reel of tape to WsSH and it would run at 0600 Sunday morning.
When I was at WLYN and WAZN we ran a public affairs show from WUMB , the University of Massachusetts Boston's station
That’s a network news program, hardly the same thing
Yet, even the reddest of the red states still allocate the funding. I'm sure we could get rid of all the public stations. TBN would be happy to have the channels
What does the color of the state have anything to do with it?
It is a basic question. Why is the government in the business of subsidizing some stations? I never said anything about getting rid of public radio (an intriguing idea though!), just that if they are going to be "member supported", then that is what they should be. Either the station is relevant to enough people to allow them to continue operating on a direct funding model or they are not (like possibly KCSN), but taxpayer dollars should not be in the equation at all.
It's the same show on two different signals.
Because profit-making radio companies only care about their profit and reaching the lowest common denominator to attract advertising. Somebody has to care about public service rather than corporate profit. To do that, you remove the profit motive. You would never have a station like KCSN if it had to make a profit.
For over 55 years, Democrats and Republicans have agreed that the government appropriation for public radio is good for their states. It's not only a subsidy for radio but it's also a subsidy for the states, many of which own the stations that receive the money.
Bottom line: Rural kids would not be seeing Sesame Street because there isn't enough of a donor base to keep the stations going, and those frequencies would be taken over by right-wing religious broadcasters.
The big thing the federal appropriation pays for is the interconnection. Getting the shows to the stations. People don't think about that, but it's a big expense that local listeners don't consider. Everyone has access to that interconnection, not just NPR. Independent radio producers can use it, local stations can use it, and it's led to an incredible diversity of programming options for non-commercial radio stations.
Last edited:
It's not the same show. In markets that are big enough to sustain multiple NPR members, there's so much room for local content in the ME clock that it's not unusual for half or more of the hour to be unique to each station. In Boston, WGBH has turned its ME into a personality-driven show with two co-hosts and lots of local talk, while WBUR sticks to a more traditional news-driven approach. Each has found a solid unique audience.
- Status