My Worst Day In Radio

[bturner]

The Big A: I am amused by your response. I work for a former corporate banker. I learned from him how important it was for the corporate owners to have stations in top markets in their portfolio. This brought investors and gave them more capital to work with. Price was not a consideration but holding a license in a top 10 market was. The price was insignificant to the cash it could generate from investors/stockholders. Conspiracy? I call that business. The trouble was there were quite a few groups after a select group of stations. That is why the price went up...easily doubling in a couple of years here in Houston.

My boss and I used to talk frequently about how the numbers couldn't work. We figured they needed to own more and more of the media in their markets to grab a big share of advertising revenue and then needed to own concert venues and other companies that could utilize anything these corporations were creating. I'm talking along the lines of owning the radio and TV traffic service, selling news to other media, owning concert promotion, having billboard companies, internet services, etc.

The big boys did get creative. I recall when Clear Channel decided they liked a particular automation system and bought the company. They sold the same system to other stations as well.

Nowdays, according to a radio station broker I know, a station would now go for about 35-40% of the price paid only a decade or so ago. He jokes he now stays busy playing solitare, as I called him about a major market CP we might want to sell.

 

[Al Timiter]

the big A: To blame "corporate" for the world economy is misplaced to say the least. Most of these companies are working hard to retain as much local flavor as they can.

I don't think anyone is blaming "corporate" for the world economy. But the reality is, whether it was a "conspiracy" or not, the 1996 Telecommunications act indirectly sent Broadcast property prices higher and only the bigger corps were able to play the game. So yes, they overspent. They were trying to be included in what would be a world with fewer owners/ooperators.

And no matter how you defend those corps, they did slash news operations in nearly every market they were in where the product was not branded as "News" or "Newstalk." And now, even their "News" and "Newstalk" stations are having their News operations slashed. News/Talk 610 WTVN in Columbus just let several people go. Most of their news will now come from Cincinnati. That's working hard to retain local flavor?

 

[TheBigA]

the 1996 Telecommunications act indirectly sent Broadcast property prices higher and only the bigger corps were able to play the game. So yes, they overspent. They were trying to be included in what would be a world with fewer owners/ooperators.

I think you need to research station prices in the 70s and 80s before making such a statement. The 96 Act didn't drive prices higher. They were already out of reach for small companies by that time. The main thing the bigger corps did was buy groups, not single stations.

And no matter how you defend those corps, they did slash news operations in nearly every market they were in where the product was not branded as "News" or "Newstalk."

Once again, that happened in the 80s when the FCC eliminated the news requirement. In fact, the only stations that continue to do 24/7 local news today are stations owned by big companies, like CBS, Entercom, Cox, and Bonneville. Single station operators simply can't afford the staff costs.

 

[bturner]

You make some good points. Many radio stations (any you'd really want to buy) were already high priced before 1996 but in Houston those numbers doubled or tripled inside a couple of years, starting in 1996. ie: 1993 price $30 million; 1998 price $112 million. BIA reported billing as up about 15% from 1993 to 1998 on that station that was always near the top of the pack.

I remember 1980. What a wonderful time! I was all for the elimination of those pesky percentages that pushed quantity over quality. My owner had stuck me with horrible numbers (15% news; 5% PA; 5% O) in a tiny market with 3,400 in the county. I spent tons of time trying to find syndicated programming to fill the time we had promised. Legitimately 5% news and about 2% O and 1% PA worked just fine for us as the only station on the dial as our audience mostly listened all day.

The effect was broadcasters took things the wrong way. They cut everything they could in many instances.

I think the point the poster was trying to make is that big news departments after 1996 were sliced down to bare bones and consolodated with other markets leading to more 'rip and read' than 'reporting'. The watchdog aka the radio station news departments, was sent to the pound and the news people, yearning to uncover the bad and break the story, found themselves without the time and resources to do so. It is easy enough to see in my market by comparing TV News to the 'News Station' which bragged they could uncover stories by surfing the internet instead of running their beat.

The question I have is a chicken or egg question: Did news deparments prove unprofitable or did the cuts and consolodating lower demand and reliance on radio? Should that question be answered by those still in the news chair? We all know radio is not in a good place now. As we limp along we must ask: Did we shoot ourselves in the foot or did we have that limp all along but disguised it well enough to not be noticed except by the station's accountant?

 

[TheBigA]

I think the point the poster was trying to make is that big news departments after 1996 were sliced down to bare bones and consolodated with other markets leading to more 'rip and read' than 'reporting'.

It has certainly happened in the last 5 years, but as a result of the bad economy, not the 96 ACT. We know the time line, and consolidation as we know it really didn't begin to kick in until 2003. And my point is that it was going to happen regardless of the 96 Act, because stations would have consolidated programming through LMAs or local syndication services like Metro Networks. Those kinds of things were already on the rise in 1990.

 

[bturner]

And in support of your comments, the internet has made it possible and logical to do so. Radio began losing the new leader role long ago and seemed willing to hand it off. Whenever you lose the lead, your important diminishes more and more over time. It could very well be the vanishing of the news department warm bodies was not just a financial decision but also a decision made through the availability of reliable, affordable high speed internet allowing news departments in various cities to get in synch with one another.

Here in Houston, we have a talk morning show done by the afternoon guy at the San Antonio station, direct from San Antonio. The guy knows Houston and his show is not syndicated, just originating from 200 miles down the freeway.

 

[MattParker]

I think the point the poster was trying to make is that big news departments after 1996 were sliced down to bare bones and consolodated with other markets leading to more 'rip and read' than 'reporting'.

It has certainly happened in the last 5 years, but as a result of the bad economy, not the 96 ACT. We know the time line, and consolidation as we know it really didn't begin to kick in until 2003. And my point is that it was going to happen regardless of the 96 Act, because stations would have consolidated programming through LMAs or local syndication services like Metro Networks. Those kinds of things were already on the rise in 1990.

A poor worker blames his tools. Bad management blames the economy.

Let's also thank the guy who deregulated broadcasting - and invented the Internet: Al Gore. Funny about Democrats. They trash big business; big business trashes them. That's supposed to keep us from noticing all the money they get from big business and how they give business exactly what it wants. Jimmy Carter ruined air travel. Al Gore ruined radio. Thanks, again.

 

[TheBigA]

I think people fail to recognize that radio changed dramatically every ten years. The first changes came with regulation in the 20s, then the growth of radio networks, then the demise of radio networks, the growth of local DJs, the expansion to FM, and the explosion of radio with Docket 80-90. Then what? Something had to happen. And it did: The internet revolutionized communication, and changed the landscape for radio. Al Gore didn't do that. The 96 Act didn't do that. It just happened. No one to blame. The cheeze gets moved, and people need to change their approach. Even a rat realizes when a maze is a dead end. He backs up, and goes a differenmt route. But humans keep on insisting they need to travel down the same route.

 

[MattParker]

But humans keep on insisting they need to travel down the same route.

Ah, yes. The definition of "insanity."

 

[TheBigA]

Ah, yes. The definition of "insanity."

Maybe...in any case, there are a lot of people walking around today wondering why things aren't like they used to be. That's because things never are like they used to be. You have to adapt to the changes as they happen, not look for blame, but look for a new path in the maze of life.

 

[flashback]

I think people fail to recognize that radio changed dramatically every ten years. The first changes came with regulation in the 20s, then the growth of radio networks, then the demise of radio networks, the growth of local DJs, the expansion to FM, and the explosion of radio with Docket 80-90. Then what? Something had to happen. And it did: The internet revolutionized communication, and changed the landscape for radio. Al Gore didn't do that. The 96 Act didn't do that. It just happened. No one to blame. The cheeze gets moved, and people need to change their approach. Even a rat realizes when a maze is a dead end. He backs up, and goes a differenmt route. But humans keep on insisting they need to travel down the same route.

please refresh my memory.was the 96 act the one that expanded ownership rules to such an absurd levil.if thats the case it didn`t just happen.someone wrote it up and someone made it law.

we didn`t just look out a window and say look the 96 act.

 

[TheBigA]

please refresh my memory.was the 96 act the one that expanded ownership rules to such an absurd levil.if thats the case it didn`t just happen.someone wrote it up and someone made it law.
we didn`t just look out a window and say look the 96 act.

You seem to be looking to blame someone. Forget it. It's law. Deal with it. Quit banging your head against the same 15 year old law.

 

[CaptBob92]

I think you are looking at this issue from the wrong angle. It's not a case of new sources of news just a case of convenience. For instance,

Last night I heard sirans on the next street, I looked outside and saw red lights flashing. Since our county sends a fire truck with every EMS call I couldn't tell if it was a fire or ambulance. Worse yet, I know friends living in that area.

The next morning I turn on the morning TV news from the station 30 miles away but because it wasn't a big fire or prominit poerson inovlved they wouldn't cover it. I can pick up the morning paper but it went to press at 10 pm about the time the incident happened so no go there.

I can search the TV station's or paper's web site but they won't post yet for the above reasons seeing as how the paper doesn't have a crew in until 9am and the TV doesn't think it's important to anyone. Besides, I can't fool around surfing for the story, I have to go to work.

I get in the car but the local radio station has dropped local news so I hear about fighting in Egypt, the federal budget etc from CBS but have to wait until the next day's paper to find out what happened. This is the way it is for many of us who just want to know what happened around the cornor each day!

For those who say it's a new era I would suggest that most people don't refuse to use the old sources i.e. radio, newspaper, TV to getlocal stories they want to learn about they just use the source they can get the details from first. Sometimes that's on the web or twitter but alot of times it's not and if it comes from a social site who knows if the story is right? Would you believe a tweet that your father died without checking?

I think the reason we BELIEVE that radio local news is dieing is because 1) Corporate radio has stopped doing it 2) we have been brainwashed into believeing the web reports everything. The answer is probably in between the two.

 

[TheBigA]

I think the reason we BELIEVE that radio local news is dieing is because 1) Corporate radio has stopped doing it 2) we have been brainwashed into believeing the web reports everything. The answer is probably in between the two.

I think my point has been that corporate radio HASN'T stopped doing it, because the only stations that provide local news 24/7 are owned by either CBS, Cox, or Bonneville. I don't see too many small local or regional broadcasters taking on 24/7 local news coverage.

I really don't think the web reports everything either. I had the exact experience you described, with sirens blaring just down the street, and not knowing what happened. I also had a neighbor's house burglarized, and not reading any coverage in any local web reporting. The way I found out what's going on was doing the old-fashioned thing of walking over to a neighbor, and asking. I got the complete scoop that way. Maybe more than I needed! For that kind of hyper-local information, there's no substitute for the old fencepost.

 

[WEFWradio]

Last night I heard sirans on the next street, I looked outside and saw red lights flashing. Since our county sends a fire truck with every EMS call I couldn't tell if it was a fire or ambulance. Worse yet, I know friends living in that area. ........

I get in the car but the local radio station has dropped local news so I hear about fighting in Egypt, the federal budget etc from CBS but have to wait until the next day's paper to find out what happened. This is the way it is for many of us who just want to know what happened around the cornor each day!..............
I think the reason we BELIEVE that radio local news is dieing is because 1) Corporate radio has stopped doing it 2) we have been brainwashed into believeing the web reports everything. The answer is probably in between the two.

But would this story have been reported on local radio back in the mythical good old days? Unless you live in a very small town (or an extremely slow news day, or both), chances are the local station is not going to report every ambulance call, traffic stop or lost dog.

 

[GeneSavage]

Actually, in Tulsa, Oklahoma as recently as 10 years ago you could turn over in the middle of the night and hear before commercial break, "police, fire running hot on Harvard to about 56th, responding to reports of a grease fire out of control at a residence after a domestic argument got out of control... your forecast is next."

There was only ONE station doing it at the time, but my mom talks about in the 50s turning over in bed anytime she heard a siren & flipping on the radio... there were two top 40s in town who also fought for news supremacy at the time & she says more often than not they'd have a blurb at the next break.

All this really takes is one person (who maybe babysits six stations already anyway) monitoring a scanner when not walking the halls; anytime he hears something of any consequence at all he records a 15 second blah-blah with different tags for the 6 stations (if all 6 actually care about running it! Most likely just the news / talker) & set them in the playlists. Most automation systems would allow the file to be set to expire after 15 minutes or a half an hour... maybe set up a generic file name that the playlist checks for and skips if there's nothing there at that particular time.

At that point, this can be the news guy on call at home with a scanner on; he records it from home, uploads, & away it goes.

This sort of service doesn't have to be labor intensive... it makes you sound like you're EVERYWHERE... and if a small something turns into a big thing, you can truthfully say "you heard it HERE, first!!!"

When I did afternoon drive at a local oldies AM for the past few years, I actually had a listener (an old radio guy, I'm betting) who must have had a scanner in the car; any time there was smoke, sirens, or someone hurt, he was first on the phone to me, & I passed what little detail I had along to listeners. Every so often it turned into a monster business fire, or a massive car wreck, or a major drug bust, etc... whatever the case, listeners knew if I was on the air, they would be in the know... and all because of a guy the station wasn't even paying!

...If you had somebody willing to check a voice mailbox while taking meter readings and finishing dubbing national spots, would it be a reasonable campaign to jump on the DHS's slogan of "if you see something, say something! Call us anytime day or night (on our tip line, which goes straight to a voice mailbox, so now you have an actuality to air)..."?

It could make for some entertaining promo copy. It could create that "sense of urgency" every news / talker seems to want. It could make you sound like you're everywhere, that everybody listens to you, & that you are the authority on anything happening in your city.

Could things go wrong? Of course, but that's a risk with ANYTHING. I remember not too many years ago a stopset on our classic rocker being interrupted by 20 minutes of songs from the co-owned rap station... then the legal ID, the final spot of the stopset, & the "kick-off of a 50 minute rock block" like nothing ever happened.

Have your legal department eyeball your wording on any call: "This report just made to the KXYZ tipline at 460-1234..." Make DARN sure you have something in place to delete the file after in airs... maybe a backup, such as a kill date on the file AND a little program to delete everything out of that directory every 60 minutes or something.

Point is, this would NOT be that tough, not even with today's over-stretched station staffs, not even in the biggest cities. In fact, the bigger the city, the more likely you have some little morsel to throw out the listeners every. single. break! How cool would THAT sound?

Sometimes it's not that radio doesn't think big enough; sometimes it doesn't think small enough. We get so used to "we can't do that" being the answer to everything that sometimes some of us stop trying to figure out how to make the magic happen. (I'm still working on myself about this, too!)

It CAN be done... WILL you? That's really the only question.

 

[radioray]

Outstanding post nightaire.

 

[BRNout]

Outstanding post nightaire.

x2!

All I will add to that fine missive is that I find it ironic that we now live in an age where you can be anywhere and sound like you're right in the studio, yet radio really doesn't take advantage of this to the extent that it could. The point about having someone work at home and monitor a scanner (and the internet), uploading audio periodically is true. You could pay someone pennies to sit in their bathrobe at home and do this. Yet the local newsman is a relic of 60s and 70s radio; back when he was paid a REAL salary.

In other words: radio provided this service back when it was expensive and now that it can be done on the cheap, they never consider it. The key word here seems to be "service" which doesn't add anything to the bottom line. And there's your answer.

 

[Roger That]

In other words: radio provided this service back when there was no other place to get that information.

Fixed that for you.

The point is, we live in a 24-hour-news-cycle, global awareness, info-at-your-fingertips society. In the 50's, there were very few sources for news and information like this. Now, you have to pick your niche and be amazing. In a world of huge metropolitan areas with melting pots of diverse cultures, it's simply too difficult to be all things to all people. That's not to suggest you should be boring and lifeless, but "local" doesn't have to mean talking about ambulance calls and swap meet shows. Talk about things going on the in the world, as seen through the lens of your local audience. It can be a local event, or a democratic uprising in Yemen, as long as the take on it is reflective of what your audience wants.

 

[soundsandsports]

As for the sub-topic that "hijacked" the title of the thread, I think our old pal "Les Nessman" ruined local radio news for us. I think it got into PDs minds that newsmen were all bumbling fools whose big story was some guy who lost his house because he didn't know where it was and other garbage along with it. Only WKRP could make stuff like that up and then some!

Now for my worst day in radio...I never really had a bad day in radio, but I did have a bad moment...I was working for the campus radio station at my junior college, which got some national attention for getting slammed by a tornado in 2006. The tornado was not the bad moment, but I was there when it happened.

Here's the story I wanted to tell you:

During basketball season, there's a good amount of time left over at halftime after you read off stats, even more during Homecoming, so I needed about 3 to 5 minutes of filler. I had my broadcast partner, "Big Tone", hold down the fort while I went to see who I could get to do an interview with us.

The head basketball coach was in charge of both the men's & women's teams, so he usually did his time with us after the men's game (99% of the time, the men's & women's games were doubleheaders). It was too far out of season to talk baseball, plus the baseball coach wasn't there. The softball coach was an assistant basketball coach, so no go there, he was already in the locker room. None of the school's "bigwigs" there either...

So then I did what I thought about doing all season long...interviewing a cheerleader. So as fate would have it, I had a connection to the squad, because one girl was in the same algebra class with me. So I asked my friend from class to chat with me on the air for a couple of minutes. I was clearly trying to use the little clout I had on campus to impress this girl, and it sorta worked, because she agreed to do the interview.

So then another cheerleader a few feet away overhears me requesting the interview, and she comes up to us and wants in on the interview. Apparently this was the captain of the squad, so I allowed it. All I wanted was the base of the pyramid, and I get the head cheerleader too! I figured asking a few easy questions to both girls wasn't a problem, right?

WRONG!!! After I got back to the announce table and was just about to get back from break, I see six of the ten cheerleaders on the squad pile up the stairs to the announce table. Even though I only intended for one (then two) to come up, I couldn't send the other four back because:

A) No straight man can resist six 19 to 20 year old girls in skirts!

B) I had to start the interview because there were one and a half spots left in the break we called for.

C) I knew if I tried to get rid of one of the girls, she would get jealous of the others, and cause a big on-air cat fight!

D) It was college radio! What did I have to lose?

Now a few seconds before the girls got there, I told my man "Big Tone" to "tone" himself down...I knew EXACTLY what he wanted to talk about, but I wanted to keep my "broadcasting job", so we decided that I would talk and he would listen and monitor levels.

The interview started with me passing the guest mic around so the girls could introduce themselves. No harm, no foul. Then I asked each of them how long they had been cheerleading, starting in high school or otherwise, so far so good. I then asked the smartest one out of the bunch (my algebra classmate) about the squad's relationship with student government, etc...

After a few more questions, I was running out of material and I would up using this gem, asking it to your typical "dumb blonde":

Me: "So how do you like the new gym floor?"

Dumb Blonde: "It's great to tumble on!"

After that exchange, "Big Tone" and I looked at each other as if to say, did that really just happen? and I knew I had to wrap things up...

The moral of the story is...quit while you're ahead! I got greedy, and it backfired on me! I should have said only one or two of you gets to do the interview, but I forgot that I "left the door open"! Cheerleader #2 probably said, "Hey! let's all get on the radio!", causing them to flood the makeshift studio and make my job a little bit harder by including them, which I wasn't prepared for.