• 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

NPR To Assist Station Funding

kevtronics said:
When Chris Christie shut down New Jersey's state-funded public radio and TV network (NJN), WNYC in New York and WHYY in Philadelphia gobbled up the former NJN radio stations and turned them into simulcasts of these neighboring big city stations. We'll probably see more of that as rural/exurban stations cease local operations and turn into simulcasts of larger operations.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. The big city stations will probably gobble up stations in mid-size markets if they believe there is enough of a population base there to provide the necessary financial support for these stations. St. Louis' public radio outlet, KWMU, did this many moons ago with the then-independent outlets in Quincy, IL, and Rolla, MO.

On the other hand, big city stations,even state public radio networks, may not be so interested in keeping stations in very remote areas with little of a population base for financial support. Nebraska Public Radio may wind up jettisoning its outlet in Merriman, because it only serves a sparsely native American population; the same could be said for South Dakota Public Radio which may wind up jettisoning its stations in Kado and the 97.1 frequency it owns in the northwestern part of the state for the same reason. And I wonder how long it will be before the Boise State university public radio network jettisons the stations they just put on the air in Challis, Stanley, and Salmon due to sparse populations living in the stations' service areas.
 
NPR has something called an "ombudsman" or Public Editor. It is someone from outside the company who reports on news coverage at NPR. Her latest column addresses the changes that public radio will be making now that federal funding has been removed:


Some are wondering who will replace CPB:

Although NPR is at the center of the radio network, running many of these systems as well as creating and distributing the national news content, it is not the de facto leader. In fact, it must constantly balance its loyalty to itself with its obligation to support the survival of the stations.

Ferro has often described the relationship between NPR and local stations as "married but living separately." I would add that they maintain separate bank accounts and don't always collaborate on their plans for the future. "Our system is not set up with a hierarchical structure," Ferro said. "At a time of crisis, like we're in now, it's very difficult for us to organize ourselves to respond because we all operate independently by design."
Click to expand...
 
radiofan2023 said:
Would the Native Americans be able to buy the station or not?
Click to expand...
Done as a tribal entity, if they'd like to pony up the money, I'm sure they'd be at the front of the line to do so.
 
kwthom said:
Done as a tribal entity, if they'd like to pony up the money, I'm sure they'd be at the front of the line to do so.
Click to expand...

I think it should be pointed out here that CPB also gave financial aid to a lot of non-commercial native American outlets, regardless of their programming sources. That leads me to conclude that the native tribes, including the one listed above, are most likely scrambling to find additional funding for their existing signals and probably don't have the money to buy assets such as the NEPRN stations in Merriman and Bassett, NE, and the SDPR outlets in Martin and Faith, SD.
 
ted chittenden said:
I think it should be pointed out here that CPB also gave financial aid to a lot of non-commercial native American outlets
Click to expand...

One of the senators from South Dakota tried to retain that funding. He couldn't get the rest of the senate to agree. So he cut some kind of deal with the bureau of Indian affairs. However, some have said it won't replace all of the money.

current.org

Why a senator’s side deal to protect tribal stations might not be enough

Native stations will receive funds to replace their CSGs, but the loss of other CPB subsidies will drive up their operating costs.
current.org current.org
 
TheBigA said:
I'm most familiar with the Syracuse situation, although I can speak about Buffalo.

Syracuse has two groups: The University-owned WAER and the community owned WCNY. WAER is news, WCNY is classical. They also own the PBS station. Any changes at WAER will have to be decided by the University, the Newhouse School, and an alumni advisory board. It'll take a while to get through all that. The university also owns the student run CHR WJPZ. I can tell you that the university is very territorial about its media. I doubt they'd agree to any combining of service with WCNY.

In Buffalo, WNYPM or whatever they call it now owns two radio stations and a TV. They are a community licensee. They seem to be also focused on Toronto. Could they combine some services with WXXI Rochester? This gets back to serving one's community. That phrase has perhaps become a joke today in the world of consolidated media. But it's still taken seriously in public radio. What I'm reading in the public radio media is that they're seeking a rededication to the mission that created public radio 55 years ago. The message is as relevant now as it was then because of the changes in commercial radio. We'll see which direction they take.
Click to expand...

One slight correction. WJPZ-FM is and has always been Syracuse University student owned and operated. And probably has turned out more radio talent than any other college station in the country! (Says the proud WJPZ alum, LOL).
 
ChrisBungo said:
One slight correction. WJPZ-FM is and has always been Syracuse University student owned and operated. And probably has turned out more radio talent than any other college station in the country! (Says the proud WJPZ alum, LOL).
Click to expand...
I thought the university got control when it moved on university property.
 
TheBigA said:
I thought the university got control when it moved on university property.
Click to expand...
It was on university property right from the start when it launched as a carrier current station in the mid-'70s. While I never was on staff there, the program director lived on my dorm floor at SU and I got to know him and a few of the other guys involved with JPZ, even hung around the station occasionally. The WJPZ call was fictitious then, chosen because that PD and others thought Z was a cool letter to have in the call.
 
I am not so sure the tribes cannot afford to buy and operate these stations. The Merriman station has 8,900 people in the 60 dbu and you can bet it gets out further because there is nothing on the dial. Still at a full class C, that's a bunch of money for barely enough to sustain a class A FM commercial station.

The tribes own successful commercial stations, have casinos and other money generating companies.
 
CTListener said:
It was on university property right from the start when it launched as a carrier current station in the mid-'70s. While I never was on staff there, the program director lived on my dorm floor at SU and I got to know him and a few of the other guys involved with JPZ, even hung around the station occasionally. The WJPZ call was fictitious then, chosen because that PD and others thought Z was a cool letter to have in the call.
Click to expand...
Prior to going on FM on January 30, 1985 at 6pm, the station was on carrier current, AM (at a tenth of a watt) and on the local cable system. The call letters W-J-P-Z were chosen back in 1972 because they rhymed with W-A-B-C. The station has been at various locations since 1972, either on or adjacent to the main campus of Syracuse University.
 
Here is an opinion article about an NPR station in rural Colorado.


If our mission is to serve the local community, can we do a better job of reaching its more conservative residents? Can we cover the Southwestern Colorado Livestock Association’s annual gathering, a local event since 1949? Why don’t we have any hardware or feed stores as sponsors?

The simple answer is “because they think we’re the devil,” Executive Director Tom Yoder said, with a sad laugh, when I put the question to him recently. In the current political climate, he said, the station’s affiliation with NPR has made soliciting more conservative-leaning members of the community — as listeners or sponsors — untenable. At the same time, we can’t afford to alienate NPR listeners. The congressional cuts, Yoder warned, will force the station to please and make pleas to its NPR-loving listeners, rather than reach beyond its circle of comfort. Work smarter for the money, not harder.
Click to expand...

So the issue is polarization of the people. The people don't want "unbiased news." They want what they want. They could add conservative views, but that would alienate their base. And just adding conservative views wouldn't attract conservative listeners because they "think we're the devil."
 
I get slammed so hard it leaves a mark when I say public radio operates like commercial radio when it comes to programming. This article proves my point. Regardless of political affiliations, the station realizes the more conservative audience is there but will not be served by the station because the base of support is on the other side of the political fence. In other words programming directed at keep the dollars rolling in just like commercial radio. The truth be told, that's the way it should be.

Whether the station is conservative or liberal in it's stance, perceived or imagined, it boils down to programming for the dollars. Is programming for the dollars what (that evil corporate) commercial radio does? I see you nodding your head in the affirmaive.
 
I've often said this to people who claim NPR or public radio needs to be more "palatable" or "outreach" to conservative listeners.

They have many of the non-reactionary, non MAGA Republicans of the professional class. They're the ones that still would want it funded. There's not much these stations can do when these people have been programmed (by commercial talk radio, often, and Fox News) to hate NPR on principle. Their representatives refuse to come on public radio shows. You're not going to win them over when they're convinced you're evil.
 
b-turner said:
Whether the station is conservative or liberal in it's stance, perceived or imagined, it boils down to programming for the dollars. Is programming for the dollars what (that evil corporate) commercial radio does? I see you nodding your head in the affirmative.
Click to expand...

You're focusing on one part and ignoring the rest of the story. Starting with the fact that the public stations AREN'T corporate owned. They're all locally owned and operated, either by the state governments, area colleges, or independent community licensees. So it's not top-down programming where decisions are being made in a corporate office.

The second key difference is that public stations don't care about demographics. That's why they can program to 55+ without any concern about their sponsors dropping them because their audience is too old. That's why you can have NPR stations with formats that program to 55+.

So yes, all professional radio stations need money to pay their staff. But that's where the similarities end.

b-turner said:
the station realizes the more conservative audience is there but will not be served by the station because the base of support is on the other side of the political fence.
Click to expand...

The other part is there's a huge audience that is on neither side of the fence. They don't see the news as political. They see it as informational.
 
Andy Travis said:
I've often said this to people who claim NPR or public radio needs to be more "palatable" or "outreach" to conservative listeners.
Click to expand...

This was the problem with the Uri Berliner article that gets referenced a lot. He assumed that conservatives would listen to NPR if there was something there for them. This article confirms the fallacy of his argument. Conservatives aren't looking for "unbiased news." Their minds are made up. That's also why the administration never attempted to "fix" NPR or public radio. They never based continued funding on "unbiased news." They just defunded it completely.
 
This was the problem with the Uri Berliner article that gets referenced a lot. He assumed that conservatives would listen to NPR if there was something there for them. This article confirms the fallacy of his argument. Conservatives aren't looking for "unbiased news." Their minds are made up. That's also why the administration never attempted to "fix" NPR or public radio. They never based continued funding on "unbiased news." They just defunded it completely.

Back in the 1990s when I was listening to *both* Rush Limbaugh and NPR, I very well remember the former's rants against the latter and his demand (that he would always end with) that Congress stop "funding leftist radio." It didn't really matter to Rush whether NPR was biased or not; what mattered was that NPR didn't hold Rush up and say how smart he really was, which is exactly what many of Rush's supporters wanted to hear. (Any reminder of events today is purely intentional.)

I will make one other point unrelated to what you've said but what has been discussed elsewhere in this and other threads on the subject. If NPR's primary source of support is to come from large businesses and philanthropic organizations, then the network will be forced to take a pass on reporting on possible misdeeds by these organizations, their officers, and/or their shareholders. While government money for the CPB and public stations was *not* contingent on how positively government actions were reported (something Mr. Trump *definitely* does not like), any businesses giving NPR and/or its stations large amounts of money will demand in return that the network *not* report stories that reflect poorly on the financial giver.

As a finamcial supporter of my local NPR outlet, this both saddens and worries me; for while both conservatives and liberals berate the wrongs that government does, few, especially on the right, are willing to acknowledge that large businesses also often engage in practices that are ethically questionable if not outright breaking current city, state, and Federal legal codes. Many assume that business leaders will do the "right thing" ethically when push comes to shove but history tends to paint a bleaker picture.
 


Back
Top Bottom