2024 Format Change Predictions

[TheBigA]

]My point is that "all news, some of the time" doesn't work. Even the mighty KCBS found that out in the 1980s.

KGO was all news when it counts. Running talk in the evenings didn't hurt WBZ Boston. There are lots of stations that do this. Audacy's KRLD Dallas runs Dave Ramsey starting at 8PM. As I said, all-news is starting to disappear in Phoenix and Seattle.

I question whether those were "the best resources".

KGO was owned by a radio-only company. KCBS was owned by a multi-media company. They have very different resources. I think if you watch KCBS now that it's owned by a radio-only company, you'll see them cut back on staff and coverage.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Because the FCC eliminated the news mandate around that time. Also the fact that the FCC passes the newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership rule, prohibiting newspapers from owning broadcast. A lot of news stations were co-owned by newspapers.

I worked for one. Absolutely zero content was shared between us and our newspaper. If we quoted a story that appeared in the paper, we credited them just as we would have credited any other newspaper being quoted.

In St. Louis, the Post-Dispatch owned KSD radio and TV until 1979. The radio and TV stations did share newsgathering resources, but very little if anything was shared with the newspaper or vice versa.

 

[TheBigA]

I worked for one. Absolutely zero content was shared between us and our newspaper.

It didn't matter. They were in the same business, so they understood the budgeting required. They understood the staffing. And the combined finances and recognition gave them power and independence. The Washington Star owned WMAL. After they were forced to sell broadcasting, it wasn't long before the paper folded. Mission accomplished.

 

[Mark Roberts]

It didn't matter. They were in the same business, so they understood the budgeting required.

Actually the station and the newspaper ran their finances entirely separately and only major capital expenditures required the publisher's approval. Operating expenses were entirely under the control of each entity.

 

[TheBigA]

Actually the station and the newspaper ran their finances entirely separately and only major capital expenditures required the publisher's approval. Operating expenses were entirely under the control of each entity.

Once again, it didn't matter. They knew what each other did. Once they were owned by someone else, the game changed.

Take a look at KCBS owned by CBS Corporation (co-owned with KPIX) and now owned by Audacy. As I said, KRLD is running Ramsey at night. KYW re-runs news blocks in overnight. Coming soon to the city by the bay.

 

[Mark Roberts]

I'm going to bow out of this discussion, because it's been circling the drain for some time and all it's becoming is certain people telling me I'm wrong, ignorant, not knowledgeable, etc. I've agreed with a few of the counterpoints but otherwise I think we're just arguing past each other. I will just repeat the points I've been trying to make, and will leave it at that. Otherwise it just becomes tiresome.

• Recent (as in post-2010 or so) efforts at all-news formats failed because of contextual factors. They did not fail solely because the all-news format itself was doomed to failure.
• Those contextual factors included going up against an established, successful competitors; being on a station with known coverage problems, with coverage being a necessary but not sufficient condition for success; and/or lack of resources and/or commitment.
• News/talk stations are not a substitute for a true all-news station. News/talk, all-news, and all-talk all are distinct genres. They serve different purposes and are perceived differently by the public.
• News on radio has been dying for 40 years. Far too many programmers back then just wanted to get rid of it because they saw it as a hindrance. A few appreciated its benefits, but that wasn't enough.
• Public radio's version of news is more of a newsmagazine of longer-form features and also is not a substitute for an all-news station.
• Any new attempts at an all-news format are unlikely because of the economic pressures facing radio generally. This is unfortunate, but that's the reality of the 2020's.
• I am doubtful of the argument that companies that manage to do a credible job with all-news (or news generally) are able to do so because they are cross-subsidized by other, non-media operations of those companies. I've never seen a modern corporate environment where a troubled business unit is propped up on a long-term basis by other, more-successful units. Generally, troubled business units are either shut down after a period of time or are jettisoned. I've spent more than 30 years in corporate environments, albeit not in media-related businesses. Possibly the media are different, but I suspect they're not going to stay in business if they don't make money, either.
• Broadcast media will have to adapt to a media environment of vastly increased choices if they are to survive. What that looks like is very much up in the air. Some creativity and openness is required to figure that out; the lessons of the past 30, 40, or 50 years no longer may apply.

 

[TheBigA]

• News/talk stations are not a substitute for a true all-news station. News/talk, all-news, and all-talk all are distinct genres. They serve different purposes and are perceived differently by the public.
• News on radio has been dying for 40 years. Far too many programmers back then just wanted to get rid of it because they saw it as a hindrance. A few appreciated its benefits, but that wasn't enough.

I think those two are related. You say combining news & talk is no substitute. But all news is simply unsustainable as a 24 hour format. That's why everyone ultimately adds talk or repeats segments in fringe time.

Then the idea of incorporating news in other formats kills AQH. Programmers have known that since the 60s. It was justifiable when there were fewer stations before the big FM explosion. But top of the hour news was a turnoff. Even MTV got rid of it.

• I am doubtful of the argument that companies that manage to do a credible job with all-news (or news generally) are able to do so because they are cross-subsidized by other, non-media operations of those companies.

Here's what I know: WTOP succeeds as an all news station because it has monetized its digital platform to the point where it's the #1 local news site in DC. On the other hand, we're seeing substantial changes in news coverage by the Audacy news stations since the sale by CBS. We know CBS Radio was losing money at the time of the sale. You can connect the dots.

• Broadcast media will have to adapt to a media environment of vastly increased choices if they are to survive. What that looks like is very much up in the air. Some creativity and openness is required to figure that out; the lessons of the past 30, 40, or 50 years no longer may apply.

Here's what I've been saying about that: Ad supported radio is in big trouble because they can't increase the number of spots to keep up with the increasing costs. So radio needs to find another revenue stream. The only logical one is digital. Otherwise the radio companies need to sell medical marijuana or something that makes money. It's not a programming issue, but a financial one.

 

[TheBigA]

I'm going to bow out of this discussion, because it's been circling the drain for some time and all it's becoming is certain people telling me I'm wrong, ignorant, not knowledgeable, etc.

BTW I don't think any of those things about you. I'm just offering a different perspective as someone who is still in the biz.

 

[fybush]

WBZ got mentioned here several times, and having been there at the dawn of its not-quite-all-news format, I can confidently say it was/is a unicorn. Boston is the sort of market that was and is perfect for all-news radio - top-10 in size (at least in 1992 when it started), in the Northeast where weather and traffic matter, in a city obsessed with politics and sports (which are often interchangeable). CBS owned the all-news space in town from the 1960s into the early 1990s at WEEI, but when that station's new ownership went to sports radio, Westinghouse saw an opening and took it.

Only, the all-news(ish) WBZ wasn't a startup. It built on 40 years of a strong news identity that had already been established with an afternoon all-news block by the late 1970s and a morning show that evolved slowly into all-news built around the existing team of Gary LaPierre on news and Gil Santos on sports. No other station in town had so much "information radio" DNA, and so nobody else could have just tried to fill the WEEI void and succeeded as quickly as we did, because we weren't a startup - we just took what we were already doing and expanded it into middays and the rest of the morning clock.

Westinghouse could probably have gone all-news at WBZ as early as the late 1960s and won, but the station was so phenomenally successful as a full-service outlet, why mess with success?

If there was ever any talk of dropping talk at night and on weekends to go all-news, I certainly wasn't privy to it in my time there (1992-97). Again, a lot of it was simply the DNA of the station: talk at night was cheap to run (or at least cheaper than all-news) and brought in a ton of listenership and money because the audience had become so accustomed to using WBZ that way.

My point, I think, is this: there's something about the all-news format that is extraordinarily slow to build audience momentum as compared to any other format, music or spoken word. We know it works in some big markets but not all of them, and isn't economically sustainable in any market smaller than about #20. I would add to that the idea that it requires some sort of existing information radio DNA to have any chance of taking off in any reasonable timeframe today's broadcast companies would tolerate. Of the startups that have been mentioned in this thread, we know KROI lacked the signal or the corporate patience to catch fire, even if Houston might have been the biggest market without an all-newser. (Earlier on, KEWS in Dallas also didn't last long enough). KPIX, WNEW in DC and the FM Newsers in Chicago and NYC had decent signals, but didn't offer anything those markets weren't already getting from KCBS, WTOP, WBBM or WINS/WCBS. Of all of them, I thought WNEW was the best programmed, but the market had no habit at all of using 99.1 for news.

How far back do you have to go to find a successful all-news startup that didn't evolve into the format the way WBZ did? I'd submit that in North America, it's 680 News in Toronto, and that's 30 years ago this past summer. That was a straight flip from AM top-40 (!) to all-news, and it came with a big marketing push and a LOT of corporate patience, not to mention the luck of having that format all to itself in the country's #1 market.

I don't think you could do it at all in the 21st century, anywhere in North America. There are just too many headwinds.

 

[fybush]

To be honest, if I had dealt with program directors who are as grounded in facts as you are, I might have stayed in broadcasting far longer than I did. But I didn't. It was rough being in radio news in the 1980s. I really didn't understand the lack of professionalism and respect until I bailed out, went into another field, and, even if there were disagreements sometimes, professionalism, respect, and decent treatment usually prevailed.

As I round the curve into my final decade and change in the business (assuming it lasts that long), I guess I've been exceptionally lucky. Over 33 years in the business, I've worked for a family-owned small city AM station (WCAP Lowell MA, now nearly defunct), a big broadcaster at the very top of its game (WBZ), a big cable company that was in the early years of experimenting with local cable news before it figured out how to streamline regional news production into irrelevance (Time Warner's pioneering R News in Rochester), and, for almost 20 years now, a public broadcaster that has been deeply committed to filling a growing local news void (WXXI).

I haven't always been treated with perfect professionalism (ask me about the time WBZ tried to deny me time off for my own wedding!), and I've had to fight too often to get to reasonable pay levels everywhere I've worked, but I wouldn't have stayed in so long if I'd had the sort of experience you did, Mark. I'm not sure how much has been dumb luck and how much has been accidental good strategy, but I've managed to avoid what could have been some bad wrong turns along the way - as early as the late 1990s, I figured out that trying to rise through the ranks at Westinghouse wasn't going to lead to any big career prizes in the long term, which probably saved me from being laid off later on as it became CBS and then Audacy.

 

[TheBigA]

My point, I think, is this: there's something about the all-news format that is extraordinarily slow to build audience momentum as compared to any other format, music or spoken word.

Interesting post, and that comment is one I've seen here a lot. Most recently Lance said it about AAA. It's also true about talk. In fact it makes me wonder when was the last time a format flip was a big success in less than a year? Other than a Christmas flip.

 

[radiofan2023]

Interesting post, and that comment is one I've seen here a lot. Most recently Lance said it about AAA. It's also true about talk. In fact it makes me wonder when was the last time a format flip was a big success in less than a year? Other than a Christmas flip.

KITS in San Francisco earlier this year

 

[fybush]

Interesting post, and that comment is one I've seen here a lot. Most recently Lance said it about AAA. It's also true about talk. In fact it makes me wonder when was the last time a format flip was a big success in less than a year? Other than a Christmas flip.

Entercom did pretty well a few years ago with the Spot in Houston (KKHH), too. But the same factors are generally at play - it's a lot harder to get breakout reactions to a format flip when you're part of the infinite dial than it was when you were one of maybe a dozen total choices on the dial.

The flip side to that, no pun intended, might be sports - one of the most profitable radio stations in the nation, period, is Boston's Sports Hub (WBZ-FM), a station that was created out of thin air in 2009 and didn't take long to eat the lunch of the previously dominant WEEI. When you're the station that has the Patriots at the height of Brady's dominance, plus the Celtics and Bruins, that's the sort of unique content that can bring ears along very quickly.

 

[Mark Roberts]

I haven't always been treated with perfect professionalism (ask me about the time WBZ tried to deny me time off for my own wedding!), and I've had to fight too often to get to reasonable pay levels everywhere I've worked, but I wouldn't have stayed in so long if I'd had the sort of experience you did, Mark. I'm not sure how much has been dumb luck and how much has been accidental good strategy, but I've managed to avoid what could have been some bad wrong turns along the way - as early as the late 1990s, I figured out that trying to rise through the ranks at Westinghouse wasn't going to lead to any big career prizes in the long term, which probably saved me from being laid off later on as it became CBS and then Audacy.

I'll break my silence on the point to note that the passion and emotion I had for news didn't entirely go away even though a certain ND did his best to try to squeeze it out of me. (That guy's antics provided plenty of fodder for Paul Harasim's column in the Houston Post, culminating in the time when that ND got into a fight with a Rice University professor over a bucket of fried chicken. Really. This gives you some idea of the atmosphere that prevailed at KTRH.) After that awfulness, the communications and research skills developed were a big help in my cybersecurity career and may even have gotten me to the CISO level. But for the rest of my life, I'll be struggling over whether what happened to me at KTRH, painful as it was at the time, might have been a lucky break in considerable disguise.

If I had it to do over again, I wouldn't have gone into radio or even journalism generally, but remembering my mindset at the time, I had a set of goals and was bound and determined to reach them. Whether the goals were suitable is a whole other question. Moreover, writing is natural for me. I've had to learn to be understanding of people who struggle to get their words out in writing. The words you read here pretty much have come directly from what I'm thinking with little editing.

The main reason I mention all of this is that some of you may wonder why my usual dispassionate, fact-based, pragmatic approach wasn't entirely evident this time.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Interesting post, and that comment is one I've seen here a lot. Most recently Lance said it about AAA. It's also true about talk. In fact it makes me wonder when was the last time a format flip was a big success in less than a year? Other than a Christmas flip.

This is one reason KEXP's Bay Area experience will be worth watching. Can it bring in the KFOG crowd (which by now is, what, seven years distant - and even older and grayer than it was then? I'm not counting the couple of years when KFOG was trying to be Live 105 Lite) while appealing to a younger generation with more interest in diverse experiences? KALW has made something of an attempt with the latter, but that's only on a part-time basis.

 

[TheBigA]

This is one reason KEXP's Bay Area experience will be worth watching. Can it bring in the KFOG crowd (which by now is, what, seven years distant - and even older and grayer than it was then?

Yes and how long will it take? In Seattle, Hubbard's AAA station has been operating for almost a year and is barely a 1 share station.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Yes and how long will it take? In Seattle, Hubbard's AAA station has been operating for almost a year and is barely a 1 share station.

Of course, Hubbard's up against KEXP, so what is KPNW offering that's been missing? I know little about Seattle radio, so I wouldn't venture a guess.

In the Bay Area, I think we'll just have to see. Either this is an experiment on their part, or KEXP's playing a longer game than commercial broadcasters do nowadays. Or both!

 

[TheBigA]

Of course, Hubbard's up against KEXP, so what is KPNW offering that's been missing?

Commercials and some previously retired talent.

I think KEXP is playing the long game in SF. I can't wait!

 

[Mark Roberts]

I think KEXP is playing the long game in SF. I can't wait!

Likewise! (Even though I'm not there any more.)

 

[CTListener]

Up here, New Hampshire-based Great Eastern Radio has been playing the long game with AAA for many years, with little to show for it in the 6+ numbers. It even moved the format onto a bigger signal from an HD-fed translator on 106.7 to a full signal on 93.9, pushing '60s/'70s oldies to the weaker station, when its AAA rival was sold to EMF. But Great Eastern does so well here with its classic rock, country and AC stations that it can afford to keep AAA and Oldies stations around as parts of advertising packages, since there's no agency business in markets this small, and because their stations' only competitors at the top of the ratings pile are two public radio stations (one news/talk, the other classical music) and another country station). I can't see that picture changing anytime soon. There are no obvious format holes to fill.

One other thing about WWOD, that lone AAA station -- it breaks format just about every day from April through September for Red Sox baseball! Any other commercial AAA's out there carrying sports play-by-play?