News at the top of the hour?

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

When I had to be at work at 8:00 A.M., I used to time my arrival by the Top 40 or AC station that ran the news at :55 minutes to the hour. If I was pulling into the parking lot at :55, then I knew I could be at my desk on time. I couldn't afford a car w/ a clock in it. And it's not always easy to look at a wrist watch if one is on the freeway. But in those days, they played instrumental songs right up to the :55 minute mark, and the better jocks could pretty much "hit the post", as you all say here.

But, I think Chimp's point is not that listeners necessarily care what time the news comes on. He is just wondering why his particular station advertises that the news is at the top of the hour, when in fact, it is not at the top of the hour. Why not just announce........"News coming up shortly, or we'll have news after this song" or "news at the top of the hour-ish, whenever we get around to it." etc. Don't make it sound precise, if it is not precise.

I will say in praise of KQED San Francisco, Cap Radio in Sacramento, and KCRW L.A., that when they say news on the half hour -- they are right on. Maybe no one cares any more, but someone at those stations is conscientious enough to really hit that post. I'm talking about the news that comes on at :30. I realize that top of the hour news comes on at :01, after the introduction to the upcoming show.
KCBS 740 San Francisco is pretty good about getting the CBS National News from New York on at 3:30 pm Pacific Time, or very close to it.

But, at the NPR stations in the Bay Area, somebody on their staff cares about it. Or, someone cares to program the computer to do that ; and I, at least, a simple listener, am impressed. Enough to make me want to donate and receive a free tote bag. ( Joking. LOL) Daryl

 

[tvnut]

No average listener cares, nor even cared back in the day, that the newscast wasn't bang on the TOH. To believe otherwise is just silly.

Of course, we are not average listeners here. I prefer my news on the hour to be on the hour. With a local station beep if they see fit.

 

[bmasters1981]

No average listener cares, nor even cared back in the day, that the newscast wasn't bang on the TOH. To believe otherwise is just silly.

That's how I understood it-- to me, "news on the hour" means that you get news every hour, not that it has to air right at the top of the hour.

 

[boombox4]

Apart from the majors, the money in TV news is at a point, where about all you can attract are people fresh out of college. And the majority pursuing journalism careers have been female for more than a decade.

The majority of college students in the US has been female for probably around a decade. I think the percentage today is around 60% female.

And the number of college students is starting to decline, as GenZ is 15% smaller than the Millennials they are replacing. Not sure how much that will affect TV news recruits, but the programs will have to prepare for it, if they haven't already.

TV used to be considered -- at least as late as the early 1990s -- as a 'glamor job' (Radio also -- to a certain extent). In other words, there was a nearly endless supply of new people who wanted to work in the field, because working in the field made you known in the community, and TV presenters were sometimes like local community stars. Even if you weren't on the air as a presenter, and worked in the 'back shop' of TV, if you told people you worked at XYZ TV, people would go 'wow!'. I experienced a little of that whenever I told people I worked in Radio in the 1990s.

Now? People are probably more indifferent about it. TV has lost some of its glamor -- although I'm sure if someone works at one of the big networks, that's still considered a very big deal.

Either way, today, anyone with a smartphone can do the same thing that 1980's TV grads could do after several years of training -- be an online influencer and video talking head with your own video podcast. All you need is a smartphone and a tripod -- or even just a smartphone -- and a TikTok or YT account. So there is that aspect to it that is affecting the numbers of grads as well.

As for News At The Top Of The Hour, I think Mr. KM Richards is probably correct. The average listener doesn't care when the news is broadcast, except if they're a regular listener to a station, the time of news broadcast might help them figure out if they're going to be early and late to work or an appointment when they're on the freeway (as Daryl Lynn LA mentioned).

Most people probably don't pay close enough attention. They just hear the news when it comes on. It's like with stop sets. People will complain about commercials, but I doubt many listeners are using stopwatches to keep track of the length of all of the stop sets. It's all subjective when their listening is background listening.

 

[CTListener]

Great Eastern Radio, the leading station ownership group up here (Hanover/Lebanon/White River Junction), operates two ACs, a country station, a classic rock station, a '60s/'70s oldies station and a right-wing talk station. Only the oldies and talk stations carry any news at all: CBS news at the top of the hour on the oldies station, CBS and local news on the talker. That ought to tell you something about who wants to hear news on the radio in 2024.

 

[Gregg.]

KCBS 740 San Francisco is pretty good about getting the CBS National News from New York on at 3:30 pm Pacific Time, or very close to it.

Actually, CBS News Radio does the news brief on the half hour at :31. Since most of the stations carrying it are Audacy All-News outlets, they give the local anchor 60 seconds to do the bottom-of-the-hour headlines leading up to the :31 network feed.

 

[michael hagerty]

Actually, CBS News Radio does the news brief on the half hour at :31. Since most of the stations carrying it are Audacy All-News outlets, they give the local anchor 60 seconds to do the bottom-of-the-hour headlines leading up to the :31 network feed.

Yeah, and NPR (unless they've changed in the last five and a half months) does the bottom at :31 during Morning Edition and at :32 during All Things Considered.

 

[michael hagerty]

Yeah, and NPR (unless they've changed in the last five and a half months) does the bottom at :31 during Morning Edition and at :32 during All Things Considered.

And you know what? I’m wrong. That’s where the local newscasts begin after the network does its thing at :30.

Never mind.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Actually, CBS News Radio does the news brief on the half hour at :31. Since most of the stations carrying it are Audacy All-News outlets, they give the local anchor 60 seconds to do the bottom-of-the-hour headlines leading up to the :31 network feed.

Correct. KCBS, at least, takes it live. On occasion, when there's a major breaking story, there will be additional updates at various points of the hour.

 

[Mark Roberts]

All true, Mark, but my intent was to show why a tape delay of ABC/I before then was at least implied by the network as being out of the question.

Right, although during my five years at an ABC-I affiliate, including before 1980, I don't recall ever actually seeing a directive from ABC to that effect. It could just have been a positioning statement, and reflective of the fact that most stations carried it live. Since there was no pre-feed, that also would have reinforced the practice of live carriage. With the culture in place at the station where I worked, tape-delaying any newscast was almost unthinkable. Maybe if a sporting event ended between :00 and :05, but that would have been about it.

With ABC's improving reputation in TV, my working hypothesis was that the powers that were eventually felt that a more effective way to position the newscasts was to identify more strongly with the TV network. During the first 10 years or so of the four-network arrangement in radio, it always felt to me as if they were soft-pedaling the connection with ABC, though, if I recall correctly, outcues still said "ABC News".

Much, much later, during KGO's "all news some of the time" period, KGO would delay the ABC network news five minutes on weekdays, and make it a selling point that it had local news at the top of the hour. I think that was one of the things KGO got right in what otherwise was an effort with very mixed consequences. It was a good way of counterprogramming KCBS.

 

[Mark Roberts]

No average listener cares, nor even cared back in the day, that the newscast wasn't bang on the TOH. To believe otherwise is just silly.

It's not just radio. I can give you plenty of examples from cybersecurity of things that we think people should care about, but actually don't...sometimes to their detriment. But this is a radio discussion board, so discussion of such minutiae is an absolute given. And at one time, at least some station programmers did care about this. But discussing radio news practices these days is probably like discussing blacksmithing.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

It's not just radio. I can give you plenty of examples from cybersecurity of things that we think people should care about, but actually don't...sometimes to their detriment. But this is a radio discussion board, so discussion of such minutiae is an absolute given. And at one time, at least some station programmers did care about this. But discussing radio news practices these days is probably like discussing blacksmithing.

This is the kind of minutiae that listeners like to talk about, but professionals in the business think is a ridiculously trivial waste of time. Listeners are fascinated with the behind-the-scenes aspects of radio production, because they see radio as something intensely interesting, all-enthralling, and almost magical. At least the "propeller heads" of radio fans do. However, I do understand that the propeller-heads' interest in this can be a source of annoyance to professionals. With this new format, if you wished, you could set up a forum called "listener questions", then all the listeners could go to that forum to discuss minutiae like this, and the professionals wouldn't have to be bothered.

I do appreciate the radio professionals taking time out of their day to patiently explain issues like these to the listeners. Thank you for your patience.

P.S. I never realized that KCBS put on the CBS Nightly News from New York at 6:31 pm and 3:31 pm Pacific Time. I'm sure you're correct, but I'm going to listen today and see what happens. On behalf of the listeners, thanks again.

P.P.S. I always listen to KRTH 101.1, and one time I was concerned that they did not do their station I.D. jingle at the top of the hour, like all stations did "back in the day." And David Eduardo, a busy person who works so intently on the archives, had to remind me that stations are no longer under any obligation to do I.D. at the top of the hour, or much of any I.D. at all. Thanks, David.

 

[AMRadioGuy]

We run CBS news at the top of every hour on two of the three stations I work for. Through most of my tenure there, music would continue as normal and at around :59:30, the automation would jump forward and load the top of the hour ID into the next player (CBS news was after the ID). The system would begin recording CBS from satellite at the top of the hour and would just start playing back that file (often while still recording) when the time came. If a 5:00 song started at :59:10, it would be almost five minutes past the hour until the news would start.

We recently changed automation systems and I believe the new system now just grabs a file from CBS...

The top of the hour CBS news usually includes "on the hour" in the opening tagline, so when the "ding" is heard at 4 minutes past the hour, it can be a bit strange. I've never, ever had a listener ask or care about the news being a bit late, though.

It's been entertaining hearing news logistics at different stations over the years throughout this thread!

 

[K.M. Richards]

But, I think Chimp's point is not that listeners necessarily care what time the news comes on. He is just wondering why his particular station advertises that the news is at the top of the hour, when in fact, it is not at the top of the hour. Why not just announce........"News coming up shortly, or we'll have news after this song" or "news at the top of the hour-ish, whenever we get around to it." etc. Don't make it sound precise, if it is not precise.

Personally, I don't think "top of the hour" creates a presumption of that being precisely :00. And I don't think most listeners -- Chimp being an exception, apparently -- think that either.

 

[vchimpanzee]

But, I think Chimp's point is not that listeners necessarily care what time the news comes on. He is just wondering why his particular station advertises that the news is at the top of the hour, when in fact, it is not at the top of the hour. Why not just announce........"News coming up shortly, or we'll have news after this song" or "news at the top of the hour-ish, whenever we get around to it." etc.

I wasn't asking a question. Merely pointing out what this station does and the fact that even if they do, they're airing a voice that says they're doing what they're not actually doing.

No one says the news is coming up. All that precedes the news is kids doing the legal station ID. Between songs there are recordings of someone saying what the station plays and how great it is.

 

[Kelly A]

It's not just radio. I can give you plenty of examples from cybersecurity of things that we think people should care about, but actually don't...sometimes to their detriment. But this is a radio discussion board, so discussion of such minutiae is an absolute given.

Okay, now I'm curious about the comparison. Other than complacency, how does a newscast not hitting the TOH compare with cybersecurity? I think we all know the damage and negative aspects of being a victim of a cyber attack. What damage has ever been caused by a newscast not running at 00:?

And at one time, at least some station programmers did care about this. But discussing radio news practices these days is probably like discussing blacksmithing.

Or 8 track tapes, VCR's, AM stereo, or buggy whips.

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

Nobody in the real world is so pedantic as to say that not being at :00 as measured by an atomic clock means saying something is at the top of the hour constitutes a lie if it’s a minute or two after.

No. One.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Okay, now I'm curious about the comparison. Other than complacency, how does a newscast not hitting the TOH compare with cybersecurity? I think we all know the damage and negative aspects of being a victim of a cyber attack.

My point was that professions tend to get wrapped up in various forms of dogma.

What damage has ever been caused by a newscast not running at 00:?

I'm not disagreeing with you.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

I wasn't asking a question. Merely pointing out what this station does and the fact that even if they do, they're airing a voice that says they're doing what they're not actually doing.

No one says the news is coming up. All that precedes the news is kids doing the legal station ID. Between songs there are recordings of someone saying what the station plays and how great it is.

I hear you. They're putting on the news whenever they get around to it - or if they get around to it.

 

[Kelly A]

I hear you. They're putting on the news whenever they get around to it - or if they get around to it.

That's not the case. There is no "getting around to it". It's a scheduled event on the station log. Just because it doesn't fall exactly at the top of the hour doesn't mean the content has somehow become stale or irrelevant.