"If I were the boss at CBS...."

[Mark Roberts]

has he ever been outside the academia bubble?

That’s a cheap shot and barely worth addressing.

Woelfel’s “thought experiment”, as he himself described it, is precisely the thing you want people in an academic environment to do. The broadcasting business is in trouble and needs new ideas. Academics are one source of such ideas. Some may pan out; some may not. But practitioners of the news business on a daily basis often don’t have the time to step back to gain a broader perspective. I’ve said elsewhere that broadcasters seem limited in their thinking. That’s not surprising: a lot of things have to happen every day. Time and mental energy aren’t boundless. Outside perspectives, particularly from people who are preparing new entrants into the field, can be worthwhile. This sort of thing happens in technology all the time. Tech businesses that aren’t open to new ideas don’t stick around. So they’re doing new things all the time. Some work, some don’t. Broadcasters could learn from that.

Hire someone from Denver to run CBS News and end CBS Mornings! This should fix everything!

There are very good local news operations around the country. KUSA is one of them. It’s probably the best news operation in Denver. Who’s to say that people at the network level couldn’t learn something from them. The only problem I have with that suggestion is that I would hate to lose Clark and company. But that may happen anyway if the Nexstar-Tegna merger goes through.

 

[Mark Roberts]

I think he's wildly underestimating the time and resources an hour-long documentary take. To schedule one weekly would require either insane staffing and expense or outside contractors, which is still money, and which means it's not entirely the product of CBS News.

Documentaries previously were a prestige effort, intended to demonstrate the public-mindedness of the news organization and, not coincidentally, to reinforce justification of the licensing of the networks’ local stations. I don’t think money was too much of an object. They might have been intended for a mass audience, but the mass audience most probably wasn’t all that interested.

Times have certainly changed, and the justification for documentaries could also change. If a network decided not to go for a mass audience but, instead, for an elite audience, there might be more of a financial justification for documentary production. But I think that would be tenuous at best, especially with any kind of advertiser-supported model. But that’s the thing with a “thought experiment”: you can at least do a tabletop exercise to see how it might play out.

 

[michael hagerty]

Documentaries previously were a prestige effort, intended to demonstrate the public-mindedness of the news organization and, not coincidentally, to reinforce justification of the licensing of the networks’ local stations. I don’t think money was too much of an object. They might have been intended for a mass audience, but the mass audience most probably wasn’t all that interested.

Times have certainly changed, and the justification for documentaries could also change. If a network decided not to go for a mass audience but, instead, for an elite audience, there might be more of a financial justification for documentary production. But I think that would be tenuous at best, especially with any kind of advertiser-supported model. But that’s the thing with a “thought experiment”: you can at least do a tabletop exercise to see how it might play out.

All of the above. Which is why you can't schedule one a week.

 

[Weiserguy]

Woelfel’s “thought experiment”, as he himself described it, is precisely the thing you want people in an academic environment to do. The broadcasting business is in trouble and needs new ideas. Academics are one source of such ideas. Some may pan out; some may not. But practitioners of the news business on a daily basis often don’t have the time to step back to gain a broader perspective. I’ve said elsewhere that broadcasters seem limited in their thinking. That’s not surprising: a lot of things have to happen every day. Time and mental energy aren’t boundless. Outside perspectives, particularly from people who are preparing new entrants into the field, can be worthwhile. This sort of thing happens in technology all the time. Tech businesses that aren’t open to new ideas don’t stick around. So they’re doing new things all the time. Some work, some don’t. Broadcasters could learn from that.

There's an old saying in the I.T. world, one you've probably heard before: When you're up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to remember that you originally intended to drain the swamp. Running a spot news organization is like taking a 24-7 swim with the alligators.

 

[michael hagerty]

There's an old saying in the I.T. world, one you've probably heard before: When you're up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to remember that you originally intended to drain the swamp.

So, I had (of course) heard that phrase in broadcasting, even before jumping to news. Your post sent me looking. And it landed here---where someone did WAY too much work trying (and failing) to trace the phrase's origin:

Quote Origin: When You Are Up To Your Ass in Alligators, It Is Hard To Remember That Your Original Intention Was To Drain the Swamp – Quote Investigator®

quoteinvestigator.com

Clearly, the earliest printed versions weren't original. It was a saying that had been in circulation for some time. My brain says it had its origins in politics---that some biography I read somewhere has the quote from an elected official, explaining how (and how quickly) idealism and what you ran for office to do fall by the wayside once you are actually involved in the process.

But I can't prove that.

 

[Loverofradio]

We need to find a way to pay for real journalism, because the old ad-supported model is dying. The person who does that will become the savior of journalism. The way for journalism to succeed is to make so much money that it's bulletproof. That's how the old newspapers were able to survive...until the bottom fell out.

How can tv news make people spend more money when they’ve gotten for free for years?

 

[PTBoardOp93]

In which case, why even do news?

I think that's a legitimate question. 50 years ago, broadcasters aired news, in part, because it brought cachet to their overall operation.

Is that still true? I really don't think it is, particularly at CBS.

 

[davideduardo]

I think that's a legitimate question. 50 years ago, broadcasters aired news, in part, because it brought cachet to their overall operation.

Sure, there was prestige in having a good news operation. But the main reasons for stations running news were two:

First, 50 years ago the FCC required a percentage of news to get a license renewal.
Second, advertisers liked news and paid well to be sponsors of newscasts.

Is that still true? I really don't think it is, particularly at CBS.

First, the FCC relaxed rules and compliance issues. Now, stations that don't want news disrupting their format can do less... or no news. And folks know where to find news anyway

(When I owned 9 stations in Quito, Ecuador, only one did news. Most of the all-music stations beat my news and talk station in revenue. Listeners knew where to go for breaking news... such as an earthquake or a revolution or the like.)

The profusion of local news sources is so great, that those "outstanding" providers are far less prominent.

 

[Weiserguy]

Also, 50 years ago Americans took it on faith that tuning into a radio station or a network newscast was going to deliver factual, predominantly unbiased news. The networks, and the local news staffs, aspired to do exactly that. Even on stations (CKLW, for example -- and yes, I know that's technically a Canadian station) whose newscasts were delivered in a sensationalistic style, the facts were the facts were the facts.

Half a century later, that set of standards has largely disintegrated. The remaining commercial networks do a decent job at best. Local stations have largely abandoned news in any daypart except AM Drive. Only the all-news stations and the public stations that are (for the most part) NPR affiliates still treat their news with respect and meticulousness.

 

[davideduardo]

Half a century later, that set of standards has largely disintegrated. The remaining commercial networks do a decent job at best. Local stations have largely abandoned news in any daypart except AM Drive.

And that focus on AM drive is due to audience research which showed that, even back in the 70's, outside of mornings, music listeners did not want news outside of early morning. In other words, the government wanted us broadcasters to do stuff that listeners did not want.

You can drive them to water, but you can't make them drink....

Only the all-news stations and the public stations that are (for the most part) NPR affiliates still treat their news with respect and meticulousness.

Many news/talk stations do excellent news coverage, with KOA, KFI and WLW being just a couple of examples. And quite a few stations that are mostly music, AC ones being good examples, integrate good news coverage into AM drive.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Many news/talk stations do excellent news coverage, with KOA, KFI and WLW being just a couple of examples. And quite a few stations that are mostly music, AC ones being good examples, integrate good news coverage into AM drive.

The majority of KOA’s news coverage, and all of its weather coverage, comes from KDVR(TV), “Fox 31”. KDVR is owned by Nexstar.

 

[davideduardo]

The majority of KOA’s news coverage, and all of its weather coverage, comes from KDVR(TV), “Fox 31”. KDVR is owned by Nexstar.

That does not mean it is not of good quality.

 

[ted chittenden]

And that focus on AM drive is due to audience research which showed that, even back in the 70's, outside of mornings, music listeners did not want news outside of early morning. In other words, the government wanted us broadcasters to do stuff that listeners did not want.

You can drive them to water, but you can't make them drink....

Many news/talk stations do excellent news coverage, with KOA, KFI and WLW being just a couple of examples. And quite a few stations that are mostly music, AC ones being good examples, integrate good news coverage into AM drive.

I find it very difficult to keep a straight face when reading the above response given the threads on the cutbacks at KFI and Michael Hagerty's comments about what KFBK was doing.

 

[Mark Roberts]

That does not mean it is not of good quality.

I hear it every day, and will say that the quality is variable. It isn’t up to the standard of one of the Audacy all-news stations (thinking here about KCBS or KNX).

 

[davideduardo]

I find it very difficult to keep a straight face when reading the above response given the threads on the cutbacks at KFI and Michael Hagerty's comments about what KFBK was doing.

KFI is still doing news all day, but most is outsourced in the same company. Using a centralized newsroom is not a de facto sign of badness. With radio revenue, inflation adjusted, off by about two-thirds in the last two decades, we have to use technology and creativity to maintain programming.

 

[davideduardo]

I hear it every day, and will say that the quality is variable. It isn’t up to the standard of one of the Audacy all-news stations (thinking here about KCBS or KNX).

Both are huge markets, while Denver is not big enough to support all news. Better to compare the news of other talk stations rather than with a format that is not viable in smaller markets.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Both are huge markets, while Denver is not big enough to support all news. Better to compare the news of other talk stations rather than with a format that is not viable in smaller markets.

OK, then it’s not up to the quality of KMBZ or KMOX.

 

[davideduardo]

OK, then it’s not up to the quality of KMBZ or KMOX.

But is it good enough?

In "fuzzy" subjects (not math and science) I was taught a long time ago that getting a 100% test score was really no better than a 90% test score. You had learned the important things, but maybe not all the little details. But you had saved about half the time in preparation, allowing you to pursue other interests.

 

[Mark Roberts]

But is it good enough?

In "fuzzy" subjects (not math and science) I was taught a long time ago that getting a 100% test score was really no better than a 90% test score. You had learned the important things, but maybe not all the little details. But you had saved about half the time in preparation, allowing you to pursue other interests.

KOA functions at more like the 66 2/3% level, and likely to go down starting tomorrow morning.

 

[davideduardo]

KOA functions at more like the 66 2/3% level,

That is about how much radio revenue is off in the last two decades.

and likely to go down starting tomorrow morning.

Please give us your analysis tomorrow.