• 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

Good Karma To Lease 880; WCBS News Programming To End

Status
Not open for further replies.
Same thing with newspapers-- long, long ago, 25 cents would get you a fairly-decent paper that had a good and plenty of content from all areas of news (national, international, state, local, business, sports, entertainment, the works), and 50 or 75 (possibly $1) would get you an even better helping on Sundays. Now in this day and age of devices, it takes $3.50 to $4 to get a bastardized USA Today-style daily in Gannett markets (of which there are far too many), and $5 on Sundays (and these bastardized ones talk about the same things over and over and over again, even when those topics have been done to death; quite a few have no opinion pages either).
Stresses were already apparent in the newspaper industry in the 1970s, though. Remember the legalization of joint operating agreements? That was courtesy of the Newspaper Preservation Act. Of 1970.

I went to high school in St. Charles County, Missouri. Our local newspaper was the St. Charles Banner-News. Until May 31, 1978 when it ceased publication and sold its subscription list to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. The Post started up a zoned section and managed to salvage some reporters' jobs. But a local newspaper in a rapidly growing, prosperous area wasn't able to make it. Sure, there were free "shoppers" that had some news in them and that cut into the Banner-News' business. But in 1978, in that place, you'd think there would have been enough business to go around.

The Post-Dispatch ditched its JOA with the St. Louis Globe-Democrat in 1984. That way it could go to morning publication. The Globe stumbled along for a few more years, under an owner who, we shall just say, was in over his head. The Post lumbered along in its somnolence until Ralph Ingersoll started the St. Louis Sun tabloid in 1989. That failed after a year, but the competition woke up the Post, and it was doing high-quality work into the next decade, and still seems to be a better-than-average newspaper even today.

I cite these examples to indicate that there were stresses going back 55 years or more. They were papered over by various means: consolidation, reliance of upon classified ads for revenues, transition to newer, cheaper, faster computer-based production technologies (know any Linotype operators?), but you have aptly described the wreckage that is now most newspapers. There are lessons there for radio, and radio is failing to learn them. Consolidation will not save you, for starters.
 
Audacy has a loss-leader contract for the Mets—a team that, again, has no radio network because the Wilpon family doesn't care...
You are aware that Steve Cohen is the majority owner of the Mets now, right?

The loss of the Mets' radio network outside of NYC occurred in the past few years since Cohen took over. And that may be more Audacy's bad than it is ownership's.
 
Show me proof it isn't.

Oh so that's the game you're playing.

If that's true, don't you think it will come up during the Audacy bankruptcy hearing the way it did with Cumulus and the White Sox?


Or the team deals that Balley Sports dropped during its bankruptcy?
 
This place is so toxic right now with you and the rest of the armchair CEOs writing post after post celebrating the loss of this great station, justifying it as business as usual.

Point of fact: The phrase "armchair quarterback" and your derivative above are defined within the industry as people outside of the business who think they know more than those in it.

TheBigA, David, Scott Fybush, myself, and certain others do not deserve to be called by that term, because we are not outsiders.

What you interpret as "celebrating" is simply our explaining what has happened at 880 based on years of watching the industry change. If you don't like it, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. But PLEASE, no more name calling.
 
If owning and operating Radio in NYC were as attractive as people seem to think, 98.7 would have been snapped up immediately, instead of still being on the block today.
I just wanted to see that standing on its own. It took almost 300 posts to get to the heart of the matter but that says it right there.
 
Part of the reason is the product. ABC invested in music format prep services when CBS was only doing real time hard news.
Um, wait a minute here. CBS is clearly oriented toward news/talk and talk stations. Music format prep wouldn't be relevant to such stations.

ABC then invested in digital content that its affiliates could place on their websites.
Now that makes more sense.

As I said, CBS News benefited from being on the CBS owned radio stations. That benefit went away when the stations were sold to Audacy.
The guarantee of clearance went away. Aside from what's about to happen to WCBS, do you know of any other of the former CBS O&Os that have dropped CBS Radio News? I don't.
 
Part of the reason is the product. ABC invested in music format prep services when CBS was only doing real time hard news.

Um, wait a minute here. CBS is clearly oriented toward news/talk and talk stations. Music format prep wouldn't be relevant to such stations.

I am going to take an educated guess that A was referring to the fact that when WCBS went all-news, WABC was a top-40 station.

One could say the same thing about Chicago, where it was WBBM and WLS.
 
Point of fact: The phrase "armchair quarterback" and your derivative above are defined within the industry as people outside of the business who think they know more than those in it.

TheBigA, David, Scott Fybush, myself, and certain others do not deserve to be called by that term, because we are not outsiders.

What you interpret as "celebrating" is simply our explaining what has happened at 880 based on years of watching the industry change. If you don't like it, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinions. But PLEASE, no more name calling.

I wasn't referring to you at all, nor Scott, and I certainly did not call you any names, but your reply reads like an admission of guilt. I would be happy to engage with you if that's your wish, though. ;)
 
I am going to take an educated guess that A was referring to the fact that when WCBS went all-news, WABC was a top-40 station.

No I'm talking about now. Under the current ABC News Radio distribution agreement. Here's an example:


ABC News Radio is offering “Press Play,” hosted by entertainment correspondent Jason Nathanson, who features the different ways Americans are having fun this summer. The special takes listeners to Ticonderoga, NY, to explore a new Star Trek attraction and shows the expansion of the video game industry through DreamHack 2023, a video game tournament taking place in Dallas.

But they also offer prep services with audio and script for morning shows in several music formats.

 
I wasn't referring to you at all, nor Scott, and I certainly did not call you any names, but your reply reads like an admission of guilt. I would be happy to engage with you if that's your wish, though. ;)

I'll settle for you not using the term in the future. Even if you don't call us by name, it still feels like a slap in the face.
 
No I'm talking about now. Under the current ABC News Radio distribution agreement. Here's an example:




But they also offer prep services with audio and script for morning shows in several music formats.


I recall ABC doing specials for Independence Day back in the days of the multi-demographic network era. The big difference was that the shows weren't fed down the network line, for obvious reasons.

But I completely agree that CBS has always been about news and information, whereas ABC always tailored most of its network newscasts to "fit" the music formats of their affiliates.
 
Point of fact: The phrase "armchair quarterback" and your derivative above are defined within the industry as people outside of the business who think they know more than those in it.

TheBigA, David, Scott Fybush, myself, and certain others do not deserve to be called by that term, because we are not outsiders.

I understand your point, but also realize that outside perspectives can also be sometimes very useful. Any industry or speciality can get wrapped up in its own jargon and dogma, leading to, at the very least, missing the forest for the trees. At the worst, it means not detecting existential challenges that could destroy, or at least radically reshape, that industry or speciality.

Often, posts will be dismissed here by saying, in essence, that's not how radio works. And there is some crazy stuff on occasion. Moreover, a business is a business and will do what it needs to do to survive. I get that, too. But is radio really working, as in functioning, these days? New revenue and operating models are needed and maybe, just maybe, one of the people spouting out crazy stuff may land on something that works. It wouldn't necessarily be radio as we know it now, but experimentation and failure and inventiveness built radio (and broadcasting) into the force that it was for so many years. The status quo ante ain't workin' these days. Yet there seems to be relatively little of that experimentation and inventiveness that we saw in AM radio in the 1950s or FM radio in the 1960s and 1970s. It's hard to stick your neck out when the bill collectors are pounding on your door. I get that, too. But I see a lot of closed-mindedness in these discussions; I think it's more useful to ask: how can this business get to a better place than it is today?

Effectively, I am an outsider, since I last modulated a carrier in 1986. That also gives me the freedom to see the larger picture and consider approaches that insiders might not even think about, much less consider.

What you interpret as "celebrating" is simply our explaining what has happened at 880 based on years of watching the industry change.
I do agree with you on that point. I don't think anyone here has celebrated job losses.
 
The Post lumbered along in its somnolence until Ralph Ingersoll started the St. Louis Sun tabloid in 1989. That failed after a year

I've heard of it, and EBay at one time had a Buy It Now offering for 10 old issues of that paper for (IIRC) $45; I should have taken them up on it, because I never got to see what that failed paper was like (all that's left now is single issues and memorabilia; I'm a vintage newspaper collector, BTW).
 
For those wondering where CBS News On the Hour goes after WCBS flips into WHSQ 880 ESPN New York. They go to Audacy app as an all news feed for national news. At this point I don't know if Paramount cares about who get the CBS Radio News affiliation at on the local level at this point given that Paramount itself is currently focused on protecting the flagship app Paramount+ as we seen in how they eliminated channel numbers off the local TV CBS O&O's like KPIX5 San Francisco is now known as CBS News Bay Area as part of a ploy to boost attention to the CBS News and Paramount+ apps on the TV side. Also Paramount itself has paid attention to how Newer TV's emphasize on wifi signals and apps given their situation.

In reality Audacy and competitors are emphasizing on the phones and car dashboard apps. Audacy has a point here to look at where the audience is going to offset the removal of WCBS-AM. We also mentioned that WINS-AM and WINS-FM are the flagship all news stations for Audacy based on whatever data Audacy had to make the flip on 880 AM take place.




 
Oh so that's the game you're playing.

If that's true, don't you think it will come up during the Audacy bankruptcy hearing the way it did with Cumulus and the White Sox?

When the details emerge on the Mets deal, then sure. But it's incomparable with the ridiculously awful deal Cumulus had with Reinsdorf.

And again, CBS couldn't afford to keep both the Mets and Yankees rights, but Entercom/Audacy could? Dare I ask what changed or is that going to be yet another unanswered question?
Or the team deals that Balley Sports dropped during its bankruptcy?
Bally Sports is the textbook example of how not to go through chapter 11.
 
And again, CBS couldn't afford to keep both the Mets and Yankees rights, but Entercom/Audacy could?

Every deal is different. Just because something is "unaffordable" at one time doesn't mean one side or the other can't change the terms the next time. That's how negotiations work. They may be different company names, but Chris Olivero has been there since the CBS Radio days, so he knows the situation under both ownerships. Same with Mark Chernoff, a 30-year veteran who just retired in 2021. The NY cluster was basically kept intact from CBS Radio. Good idea, given they're responsible for $125 million in revenues. Anything else?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom