NPR stations have 2.3 percent of LA audience

[zumahans1]

[forgive this bump to the left side of the screen - but I can't see the posts out there ----->]

So David, in the ever-changing world of ratings that only you can see:

If KPCC and KCRW have half of the 4.7 noncomm listenership, that would mean a 12-plus news audience that is not listening to KNX and KFWB. In the money demographics that pull your puppet strings, that percentage is probably a little higher.

How on earth can you say that the two commercial news stations, that barely crack the top 20, and program similar formats aimed at similar demographics, are not affected by that?

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zumahans1 on 09/15/05 11:18 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: NPR stations are not all news

> [forgive this bump to the left side of the screen - but I
> can't see the posts out there ----->]
>
> So David, in the ever-changing world of ratings that only
> you can see:
>
> If KPCC and KCRW have half of the 4.7 noncomm listenership,
> that would mean a 12-plus news audience that is not
> listening to KNX and KFWB. In the money demographics that
> pull your puppet strings, that percentage is probably a
> little higher.

Income level is not often the main consideration in station selection. I may have mentioned that one central area Lexus dealer switched to all Spanish radio, and sales are up immensely... not all the listeners have to be upscale, just enough to provide a client base to a merchant.

Further, as I have mentioned, all news is not an AQH play. They sell based on circulation, just like newspapers. The 12+ share number is deceptive, just as it is, for a different reason, for sports stations. case in point: WFAN, seldom even 15th in NY, is generally 3rd or 4th in billing in that market. 12+ can be very deceptive.
>
> How on earth can you say that the two commercial news
> stations, that barely crack the top 20, and program similar
> formats aimed at similar demographics, are not affected by
> that?

I can say that because I went back as far as 1997, and there is no correlation of change at the two NPR stations and KNX and KFWB.

This is probably because htey are not even in the same format.

The NPR stations are truly news talk stations, and would best be compared with KFI, et. al. and not KNX and KFWB. Both the all news stations repeat news every 20 minutes or so, and specialize in very frequent traffice and weather. But you know this yet insist on comparing KCRW and KPCC with KNX and KFWB.

The two NPR stations have long form news and commentary shows. They have talk shows and features that are more like public TV than the array of commercial radio. KCRW has music shows, a book show, talk shows and even an investment show. It is not an all news station, and not used the same way.

 

[zumahans1]

One of the NPR stations is all news, the other is all news more than half the day

> you insist on comparing KCRW and KPCC with
> KNX and KFWB.
>
> The two NPR stations have long form news and commentary
> shows. They have talk shows and features that are more like
> public TV than the array of commercial radio. KCRW has music
> shows, a book show, talk shows and even an investment show.
> It is not an all news station, and not used the same way.
>

Yes, I do insist on comparing KNX/KFWB with KCRW/KPCC. And for very good reasons:

During morning and evening drive, the NPR stations are all-news. ME and ATC are not talk programming.

Between 9-12, KCRW plays music. But KPCC doesn't. And both stations are longform news programming from noon to 7:30p. KPCC is longform news programming all night.

To say that NPR longform programming is talk is inaccurate.

NPR's call-in shows are journalism based, not opinion based. Most do not take phone calls, and the phone calls that are accepted are to ask questions, not state opinions.

There is a huge difference between the John and Ken on KFI, and Science Friday or Talk of the City, for example.

And most importantly, my friends at KNX and KFWB view the NPR stations as direct competitors for listenership, underwriting/ad dollars and influence.

And yes, david, I have many friends at KNX and KFWB. And the comments I post are shared by most of them, including their blistering criticisms of how KNX performed during the outage. But, please, let's keept this thread focussed onthe point:

KNX and KFWB have lost much audience to the NPR stations.

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zumahans1 on 09/16/05 06:30 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: One of the NPR stations is all news, the other is all news more than half the day

>
> KNX and KFWB have lost much audience to the NPR stations.
>

There is, going back 8 years in Arbitron, no eveidence of that.

Less than 2% of KCRW listeners even cume KNX, and less than 2% of KNX listeners cume KCRW. Sme goes when looking at KPCC or KFWB. KPCC listeners share, mostly, with KPCC.

I can go back 8 years and see the same thing. There has been no recent growth especially at KCRW. Both are ahead of 1997 figures, but they had both quit grwoing when KNX started to fuss with the format... and there was no decrease in KNX or KFWB at any time, as both are int he same general range in cume that they have always had.

 

[KMRichards]

Re: One of the NPR stations is all news, the other is all news more than half the day

> Yes, I do insist on comparing KNX/KFWB with KCRW/KPCC. And
> for very good reasons:
>
> During morning and evening drive, the NPR stations are
> all-news. ME and ATC are not talk programming.
>
> Between 9-12, KCRW plays music. But KPCC doesn't. And both
> stations are longform news programming from noon to 7:30p.
> KPCC is longform news programming all night.
>
> To say that NPR longform programming is talk is inaccurate.
>
> NPR's call-in shows are journalism based, not opinion based.
> Most do not take phone calls, and the phone calls that are
> accepted are to ask questions, not state opinions.

Unfortunately, your definitions do not agree with what the radio industry calls a News format. Anything other than around-the-clock news is not, by industry definition, a News station. It doesn't matter if the call-in shows are journalism based, they do not constitute what a News station is.

You do not get to redefine the industry's definition of the format just to win your argument. Sorry.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[zumahans1]

Horsefeathers

> There is, going back 8 years in Arbitron, no eveidence of
> that.
>
> Less than 2% of KCRW listeners even cume KNX, and less than
> 2% of KNX listeners cume KCRW. Sme goes when looking at KPCC
> or KFWB. KPCC listeners share, mostly, with KPCC.
>
> I can go back 8 years and see the same thing. There has been
> no recent growth especially at KCRW. Both are ahead of 1997
> figures, but they had both quit grwoing when KNX started to
> fuss with the format... and there was no decrease in KNX or
> KFWB at any time, as both are int he same general range in
> cume that they have always had.
>

That's not what I asked.

Just because KCRW/KPCC listeners have given up on KNX/KFWB, and don't crosspollinate, does not mean they don't appeal to the same audience.

And my point is that NPR stole half the audience years ago. For example, KNX started running almost 20 minutes of commercials an hour long before DGH arrived at KNX & fussed up its format.

I maintain that all-news audience split years ago, after when NPR started Morning Editon.

That, and when local morning TV supplanted allnews radio as the place to go.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zumahans1 on 09/17/05 04:08 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[zumahans1]

Re: One of the NPR stations is all news, the other is all news more than half the day

>
> Unfortunately, your definitions do not agree with what the
> radio industry calls a News format. Anything other than
> around-the-clock news is not, by industry definition, a News
> station. It doesn't matter if the call-in shows are
> journalism based, they do not constitute what a News station
> is.
>
> You do not get to redefine the industry's definition of the
> format just to win your argument. Sorry.
>

That's just the point. You two are so beholden to the industry you have lost touch with the listeners.

To a listener, KNX and KPCC are both news and information stations. I don't care if the industry classifies them as seperate - the industry is not the point.

The listener is the point.

Public radio does surveys, too. And if you don't think those surveys show them in the same market for listeners as the Infinity AMs, then you just do not understand the market.

KFWB and KNX reporters and anchors have told me they consider NPR stations their number onecompetition for listeners and underwriting or ad dollars.

So the "industry" doesn't consider them the same? So what? The stations do, and so do the listeners.

 

[KMRichards]

Re: Horsefeathers

> Just because KCRW/KPCC listeners have given up on KNX/KFWB,
> and don't crosspollinate, does not mean they don't appeal to
> the same audience.
>
> And my point is that NPR stole half the audience years ago.
> For example, KNX started running almost 20 minutes of
> commercials an hour long before DGH arrived at KNX & fussed
> up its format.
>
> I maintain that all-news audience split years ago, after
> when NPR started Morning Editon.
>
> That, and when local morning TV supplanted allnews radio as
> the place to go.
>

Interesting new tactic. When proved wrong on the original line of thinking, switch to a new one.

The NPR stations still do not outpull the commercial news stations, so now you claim television has something to do with what you (and only you; note that NO ONE is agreeing with you) perceive as a problem.

At least the new subject line makes sense ... this is starting to read like a Marx Brothers movie. Is anyone making any sense out of these muddled arguments of Hans'?<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[KMRichards]

Re: One of the NPR stations is all news, the other is all news more than half the day

> >
> > Unfortunately, your definitions do not agree with what the
>
> > radio industry calls a News format. Anything other than
> > around-the-clock news is not, by industry definition, a
> News
> > station. It doesn't matter if the call-in shows are
> > journalism based, they do not constitute what a News
> station
> > is.
> >
> > You do not get to redefine the industry's definition of
> the
> > format just to win your argument. Sorry.
> >
>
> That's just the point. You two are so beholden to the
> industry you have lost touch with the listeners.
>
> To a listener, KNX and KPCC are both news and information
> stations. I don't care if the industry classifies them as
> seperate - the industry is not the point.
>
> The listener is the point.
>
> Public radio does surveys, too. And if you don't think those
> surveys show them in the same market for listeners as the
> Infinity AMs, then you just do not understand the market.
>
> KFWB and KNX reporters and anchors have told me they
> consider NPR stations their number onecompetition for
> listeners and underwriting or ad dollars.
>
> So the "industry" doesn't consider them the same? So what?
> The stations do, and so do the listeners.

And you still have not proven, with cold hard facts, that your allegations about listenership are correct.

Hearsay doesn't prove it. Your overstated opinion doesn't prove it. The only facts have been cited by David, and you refuse to accept them.

I doubt anyone cares what you think by now. Even David considers debating with you to be a game. <P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[zumahans1]

And now, horsefeathers from a moderator

> Interesting new tactic. When proved wrong on the original
> line of thinking, switch to a new one.


Proved wrong?

David Eduardo's interpretation of ratings figures prove nothing, except that he talks a big game and cannot support his big talk with any dasta that we can check.

Show us the numbers. He can't, and uses the numbers that only he can see to act like a big shot.

Sorry, he has proved nothing.
>
> The NPR stations still do not outpull the commercial news
> stations, so now you claim television has something to do
> with what you (and only you; note that NO ONE is agreeing
> with you) perceive as a problem.

KNX news director Ed Pyle said at an RTNA State of The Industry forum years ago - probably 10 years ago, when he was #2 - that morning news TV had fundamentally changed the nature of AM news listening patterns.

>
> At least the new subject line makes sense ... this is
> starting to read like a Marx Brothers movie. Is anyone
> making any sense out of these muddled arguments of Hans'?
>

The people in this forum are largely not public radio listeners. I do not expect support.

I just expect to raise the point. Thought that was what this board is for. Apparently people who disagree with Those Who See The Ratings are not welcome.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zumahans1 on 09/17/05 04:35 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[zumahans1]

Facts? Show me the facts D-E has cited.

> The only facts have been cited by David, and you
> refuse to accept them.
>

Excuse me, David did not supply facts. He interpreted facts that we cannot see.

Big difference.

Here's another D-E "fact" that is a real belly-slapper:

> "The NPR stations are truly news talk stations, and would best be compared with KFI, et. al. and not KNX and KFWB. "<


Sorry, but this is so obvious that you cannot be possibly serious.

All Things Considered and Morning Edition? Talk shows like KFI? Not newscasts like KNX?

NPR's morning drive, midday and evening drive shows are NOT talk shows. They do not solicit nor accept calls.

KPCC airs less than 40 percent talk shows, and only during off hours.

KCRW airs no talk shows, and airs all-news programming weekdays except 9a-noon and 7:30p-3 am.



<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zumahans1 on 09/17/05 04:48 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: One of the NPR stations is all news, the other is all news more than half the day

> >
> > You do not get to redefine the industry's definition of
> the
> > format just to win your argument. Sorry.
> >
>
> That's just the point. You two are so beholden to the
> industry you have lost touch with the listeners.

That is ridiculous. Format descriptors are a requirement so that advertisers will have a standardized way of identifying programming types around the country. This has nothing to do with being "beholden" (whatever that means in this context) to radio, and everything to do with an establish naming convention that advertisers, agencies, trade publications and the broadcast industry understand easily.
>
> To a listener, KNX and KPCC are both news and information
> stations. I don't care if the industry classifies them as
> seperate - the industry is not the point.

KNX is an all news station. KPPC is not. It is a news and news analyis and talk and information station. Such programming is what the industry considers to be news talk, whether you like it or not.

Shows on KPPC like talk of the Town, Past Sunset, Pacific Drift and many other on the staiton are not news shows, so you can not call KPPC a news station.
>
> The listener is the point.

No, the listener is the benficiary of the ability of radio to provide free entertainment because advertisers support the industry.
>
> Public radio does surveys, too.

They use Arbitron, There are no other radio ratings (except Eastlan in small, small markets).

> And if you don't think those
> surveys show them in the same market for listeners as the
> Infinity AMs, then you just do not understand the market.

Every station in a market area competes, as there are only 100 shares. However, there is little sharing between the news staitons and the NPR talk stations... less than a percent or two.

You said that KPCC and KCRW had taken audience from KNX and KFWB. There is nothing in the ratings that suggests this, nothing at all.
>
> KFWB and KNX reporters and anchors have told me they
> consider NPR stations their number onecompetition for
> listeners and underwriting or ad dollars.

Underwriting dollars do not come from the same place as ad dollars. Underwriting dollars come from corporate PR an community relations budgets, while advertising comes, duhh, from advertising budgets.

Since there is no indication that the NPR staitons even share, let alone take, listeners from KNX and KFWB, whoever you talked to is misguided and does not know the business side of radio.

>
> So the "industry" doesn't consider them the same? So what?
> The stations do, and so do the listeners.

The listeners do not consider them the same. In fact, talk and news stations generally do not share a lot.
>

 

[davideduardo]

Re: Facts? I have sourced them.

> > The only facts have been cited by David, and you
> > refuse to accept them.
> >
>
> Excuse me, David did not supply facts. He interpreted facts
> that we cannot see.

I told you the existence of data which legally can not be posted here. The data proves you are wrong.
>
> Big difference.

Nope. I cited sorurces, and anyone can prove that this is the truth by accessing the same data.
>
> Here's another D-E "fact" that is a real belly-slapper:
>
> > "The NPR stations are truly news talk stations, and would
> best be compared with KFI, et. al. and not KNX and KFWB. "<
>
>
> Sorry, but this is so obvious that you cannot be possibly
> serious.

KFI is a talk station with news. KCRW and KPCC are talk staitons with news blocks. The fact that Bill Handel and the other KFI shows are not as high-brow as the talk shows on KCRW or KPCC does not change the fact that all are news talk staitons, not all news stations... just as a Yugo and a Porsche are both cars.
>
> All Things Considered and Morning Edition? Talk shows like
> KFI? Not newscasts like KNX?

Many talk stations across the US have news blocks, like the morning shows on staitons like KMOX, KOA, WGN, etc. News, comentary, information, etc., all mixed together are stapeles of talkers, not all news staitons. ME and ATC are magazine shows, not news shows by definition...
>
> NPR's morning drive, midday and evening drive shows are NOT
> talk shows. They do not solicit nor accept calls.

Talk shows do not all have calls. that is just one aspect of talk radio. And KPCC and KCRW are not all magazine or news magazine shows. In fact, most of the lineup is not news, but talk... ranging form drama to cooking, and even including some music shows. Neither are news staitons.
>
> KPCC airs less than 40 percent talk shows, and only during
> off hours.

9 AM to 3 PM are hardly off hours. There is more radio listening in that daypart than in afternoon drive. And a staitons that is nearly half non-news is not an all news station. How do you define "all" in your world?
>
> KCRW airs no talk shows, and airs all-news programming
> weekdays except 9a-noon and 7:30p-3 am.

Huh?

The drive time programs are news magazines, not newscasts. Even KCRW's website calls them news magazines, not newscasts. A news magazine is a variety talk show featuring news, nes commentary, interviews, etc. A newscast is a reading of news sotories, not interpretation, etc. Hoist on your own petard, I think.

Half of KCRW's afternoon programming is made of talk shows, and most all the evening and weekend shows are talk shows. The rest are music shows. KCRW is over 25% music every day, in fact. So it is not really even a talker. It is more a full service station, if anything. Gosh, they even have a talk show about cars!

 

[davideduardo]

Re: And now, horsefeathers from a moderator

> > Interesting new tactic. When proved wrong on the original
>
> > line of thinking, switch to a new one.
>
>
> Proved wrong?
>
> David Eduardo's interpretation of ratings figures prove
> nothing, except that he talks a big game and cannot support
> his big talk with any dasta that we can check.

I am not interpreting any data. I am saying that the data exists, and is available to subscribers. But you can not get me to break posting rules and my Arbitron contract.

Again: I am reading tables. I am not interpreting anything.
>
> Show us the numbers. He can't, and uses the numbers that
> only he can see to act like a big shot.

Any subscriber can see them. Non subscribers can not. And neither can post them here.
>
> Sorry, he has proved nothing.

The ratings numbers have proved it all. They are there for anyone with access to see. And, I even gave you a site where the non come numbers, 12+ to be sure, are published for all to see. But we can not post that data here.
> >
> > The NPR stations still do not outpull the commercial news
> > stations, so now you claim television has something to do
> > with what you (and only you; note that NO ONE is agreeing
> > with you) perceive as a problem.
>
> KNX news director Ed Pyle said at an RTNA State of The
> Industry forum years ago - probably 10 years ago, when he
> was #2 - that morning news TV had fundamentally changed the
> nature of AM news listening patterns.

I thought we were talking about the NPR radio stations affecting KNX and KFWB today and in the last few years. Where do you get off dragging TV into the discussion... and TV over a decade ago... in a context that is 100% irrelevant to this discussion.
>
> >
> > At least the new subject line makes sense ... this is
> > starting to read like a Marx Brothers movie. Is anyone
> > making any sense out of these muddled arguments of Hans'?
> >
>
> The people in this forum are largely not public radio
> listeners. I do not expect support.

People in general are not largely public radio listeners. The 14 public stations get less than 5% of LA listening, while the remaining 55 stations get 88%.
>
> I just expect to raise the point. Thought that was what this
> board is for. Apparently people who disagree with Those Who
> See The Ratings are not welcome.

I thought you swore that Aribtron did not rate non-coms? Have you done a turnablout? Or is the the beginning of a long line of obfuscation-to-be.

The first time I debated you, you swore that the night Spanish language interference to KNX to the east was a daytimer in San Luis Potosi, MX, which not even the most skilled AM DXers had ever hear, probably because it is a daytimer... and you swore that my contention that it is the Obregon, Sonora, staiton, was wrong. From that moment forth, I hav enever seen you post anything that was right.

 

[zumahans1]

Point by point, more darts for your balloons

> Again: I am reading tables. I am not interpreting anything.

Tables that you choose and pick from, that others cannot see and cannot challenge you on. Sorry, David, that proves nothing.

>
> The ratings numbers have proved it all. They are there for
> anyone with access to see. And, I even gave you a site where
> the non come numbers, 12+ to be sure, are published for all
> to see. But we can not post that data here.

How convenient.

> > >
> > > The NPR stations still do not outpull the commercial
> news
> > > stations,


Not the issue, David.

I said the NPR stations affect the commercials stations' numbers.

I, like many others, question the ratings accuracy, as well as your biased and unverifiable interpolation of them.

>> now you claim television has something to
> do
> > > with what you (and only you; note that NO ONE is
> agreeing
> > > with you) perceive as a problem.


Yes, David, I claim that TV viewing habits affect radio listening habits.

> >
> > KNX news director Ed Pyle said at an RTNA State of The
> > Industry forum years ago - probably 10 years ago, when he
> > was #2 - that morning news TV had fundamentally changed
> the
> > nature of AM news listening patterns.
>
> I thought we were talking about the NPR radio stations
> affecting KNX and KFWB today and in the last few years.
> Where do you get off dragging TV into the discussion... and
> TV over a decade ago... in a context that is 100%
> irrelevant to this discussion.


The context is there for all to see. It is directly related.


>
> People in general are not largely public radio listeners.
> The 14 public stations get less than 5% of LA listening,
> while the remaining 55 stations get 88%.
> >

We are not talking about people in general. The subject is whether NPR, which is a substantial portion of that 5 percent you claim, affects commcerical all news, which also make up about 5 percent of the 12+ listeners.


>
> I thought you swore that Aribtron did not rate non-coms?
> Have you done a turnablout? Or is the the beginning of a
> long line of obfuscation-to-be.

No, I said the non-com ratings are not released. Again you misunderstand both the actual words and point a challenger makes.


>
> The first time I debated you, you swore that the night
> Spanish language interference to KNX to the east was a
> daytimer in San Luis Potosi, MX, which not even the most
> skilled AM DXers had ever hear, probably because it is a
> daytimer... and you swore that my contention that it is the
> Obregon, Sonora, staiton, was wrong. From that moment forth,
> I hav enever seen you post anything that was right.

No, David, that was not the first time you "debated" me. That was the first time you lectured me with your sanctimonious, all-knowing, condescending attitude. The attitude that we know too well.

 

[zumahans1]

Have you ever even listened to NPR?

> KFI is a talk station with news. KCRW and KPCC are talk
> staitons with news blocks.

Fundamentally not true. You (or maybe it was your supporter KM) said the industry does not classify them the same. Listeners certainly do not.

> The fact that Bill Handel and the
> other KFI shows are not as high-brow as the talk shows on
> KCRW or KPCC does not change the fact that all are news talk
> staitons, not all news stations... just as a Yugo and a
> Porsche are both cars.

I concede your point here: KFI and KCRW are as different as a Yugo is from a Porsche.

> ME and ATC are magazine shows, not news shows by definition...

Wait as minute, I thought you said they were talk shows?

By any definition, they are news programs. A magazine is a news program if it reports news.

> Talk shows do not all have calls. that is just one aspect of
> talk radio. And KPCC and KCRW are not all magazine or news
> magazine shows. In fact, most of the lineup is not news, but
> talk... ranging form drama to cooking, and even including
> some music shows. Neither are news staitons.

By that definition KNX, with 8 hours of cooking shows a week, is not a news station either. And KFWB, with 40 hours a week of Dodgers, is not a news station either.


> The drive time programs are news magazines, not newscasts.

Now this is a third definition. First they were talk, then they were magazines-but-not-news, now they are news magazines.

> Even KCRW's website calls them news magazines, not
> newscasts. A news magazine is a variety talk show featuring
> news, nes commentary, interviews, etc. A newscast is a
> reading of news stories,

Or the Food News Notebook? Or Chip Talk? How about Jeff Levy?

>
> Half of KCRW's afternoon programming is made of talk shows,
> and most all the evening and weekend shows are talk shows.

Really? You just said they were news magazines, not talk shows.

From 12-1, news magazine from NPR.
1-2, The World, news from the BBC.
2-2:30 Business news/Marketplace.
2:30-3 various talk for a HALF HOUR/
4-7 NPR's news magazine.

Half the afternoon? More like a half hour!

> The rest are music shows. KCRW is over 25% music every day,
> in fact. So it is not really even a talker. It is more a
> full service station, if anything. Gosh, they even have a
> talk show about cars!

No, they do not. They have not had a car show for about 8-10 years. <P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by zumahans1 on 09/17/05 06:45 AM.</FONT></P>

 

[KMRichards]

That does it.

> > Again: I am reading tables. I am not interpreting
> anything.
>
> Tables that you choose and pick from, that others cannot see
> and cannot challenge you on. Sorry, David, that proves
> nothing.

Hans, if the focus of your argument is that David will not "prove" his position without violating both Arbitron's terms of service and Radio-Info's rule about posting ratings, then you are continuing this debate with no possible conclusion. You are being contentious when you know your questions cannot be answered to the standards you have set.

Apparently you believe you can win in the absence of data that cannot be legally posted. This is a fallacy on your part.

Therefore, as a moderator, I am closing this thread, and requesting that you not reopen the subject. Otherwise, I will be forced to bring this to the attention of the site owners.<P ID="signature">______________


</P>

 

[zumahans]

Bump.

 

[mostb1]

Bump.

You should link this to the David G. Hall thread.

 

[zumahans]

Re: That does it.

[[[[[[K.M. Richards---->Therefore, as a moderator, I am closing this thread, and requesting that you not reopen the subject. Otherwise, I will be forced to bring this to the attention of the site owners.

Looks like ol' KM wasn't the only one who sent this to the site owners. ]]]]]]