Religious Radio Organization Cheers Upcoming Opportunities to Acquire More Signals

[Delete My Account]

Pardon my snarky headline. The NRB is under the impression the media they've succeeded very well in (see: EMF) was held back by the CPB being funded. Now it's "open, fair and free!"

I'm certain that now, all NRB members will distance themselves from attempts to fund religious private schools with taxpayer money, since we shouldn't be funding ideologies and all.

Christian Broadcast Association Supports End of Public Media Funding - Radio World

NRB said ending federal funding of public media is “a necessary step toward a media environment that is open, fair and free.”

www.radioworld.com

 

[powers]

Of course they support it! A lot of public radio is going to start drying up without the funding, ultimately with a lot of stations going dark. Then, the religious non-comms can come in and swoop up the ex-NPR stations at deeply discounted rates.

 

[Rusty Muck]

Of course they support it! A lot of public radio is going to start drying up without the funding, ultimately with a lot of stations going dark. Then, the religious non-comms can come in and swoop up the ex-NPR stations at deeply discounted rates.

The result will be a dead radio dial with no chance for afterlife.

(Pun obviously intended.)

 

[TheBigA]

These are the folks who sued SoundExchange, claiming they were paying higher music royalties than CPB:

Faith-Based Broadcasters Battle SoundExchange Over Streaming Fees.

Religious broadcasters are urging the Copyright Royalty Board to lower streaming royalty rates for non-commercial stations, arguing current rates hurt mission-driven stations and violate constitutional rights. SoundExchange opposes the move,

www.insideradio.com

Just because their people are bad negotiators is no reason to blame someone who does a better job.

One might say they have a "holier than thou" attitude about this.

 

[dmargalotti]

Just because their people are bad negotiators is no reason to blame someone who does a better job.

There should have been no need for negotiations in the first place. Why should one set of non-commercial stations be expected to pay a different rate than another set?

 

[K.M. Richards]

RadioWorld's most recent issue (June 18) had some statistics on radio station counts, ownership, etc.

EMF, the most common U.S. radio station operator, now has 912 stations.

And they are a member of NRB, which applauds public radio's possible demise because it gives them a chance to buy even more stations. Whatever happened to that Commandment on "coveting" another's wife and possessions?

 

[TheBigA]

There should have been no need for negotiations in the first place. Why should one set of non-commercial stations be expected to pay a different rate than another set?

A lot of these music royalty rates are negotiated. It's based on the concept of "willing buyer/willing seller."

There are a lot of specific circumstances to be considered. It's explained in the article.

The alternative is that rates are imposed by the government with no ability to challenge.

Religious broadcasters argue that this structure unfairly penalizes them as their audiences grow, despite their nonprofit missions and limited revenue streams.

What they're complaining about is something that affects a lot of smaller streamers as well. SoundExchange charges more to streamers with more users. The more audience they get, the more they get charged. In that way, they're discouraged from growing.

 

[dmargalotti]

RadioWorld's most recent issue (June 18) had some statistics on radio station counts, ownership, etc.

EMF, the most common U.S. radio station operator, now has 912 stations.

And they are a member of NRB, which applauds public radio because it gives them a chance to buy even more stations. Whatever happened to that Commandment on "coveting" another's wife and possessions?

While they do play music from Christian artists, EMF is more of a brand than they are a ministry focused on evangelism. Their imaging promotes the fact that they play "music to make you feel good". That doesn't necessarily align with the great commission. Jesus did not send his disciples out into the world to make people "feel good"! If you actually pay close attention to their playlist, you would see that there are a number of songs they play (songs that become very popular on Christian music charts) that don't really point back to the Lord, invoke the name of Jesus, or promote sound biblical principles.

 

[TheBigA]

If you actually pay close attention to their playlist, you would see that there are a number of songs they play (songs that become very popular on Christian music charts) that don't really point back to the Lord, invoke the name of Jesus, or promote sound biblical principles.

Which is why some question whether they should be charged a religious royalty rate.

 

[JJSPC]

If Christian radio will continue to expand and Public radio truly does shrink, what does that say about the generosity of the respective listeners?

 

[TheBigA]

If Christian radio will continue to expand and Public radio truly does shrink, what does that say about the generosity of the respective listeners?

It depends. Generosity isn't involved in something known as "tithing." That's where people give a percentage of their income to their church.

There is no equivalent in the secular world.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

If Christian radio will continue to expand and Public radio truly does shrink, what does that say about the generosity of the respective listeners?

rolls eyes. what about those places where even if every listener donated its still just not enough?

A station with 1 part time, 1 full time announcer and 2 remote/contract/pt people, combined with internet and electricity and other costs... its about $15,000 a month to run.

 

[JJSPC]

It depends. Generosity isn't involved in something known as "tithing." That's where people give a percentage of their income to their church.

There is no equivalent in the secular world.

My point though is that it will be interesting to see if Public radio listeners will support their programming as much as the folks that listen to Christian radio do, and if they don't why not?

 

[TheBigA]

My point though is that it will be interesting to see if Public radio listeners will support their programming as much as the folks that listen to Christian radio do, and if they don't why not?

The product is very different, wouldn't you say? It's pretty hard to compete with salvation.

Their audiences seem to seek different things from their radio experience.

Generally speaking, people tend to be motivated when something they like comes under threat.

 

[ted chittenden]

There should have been no need for negotiations in the first place. Why should one set of non-commercial stations be expected to pay a different rate than another set?

Actually, there are three different sets of rates for non-commercial outlets: 1 for religious stations, one for public radio stations, and one for college stations. As TheBigA has noted, this was set up by the industry because each group wanted different things. For example, while college stations didn't like the rates, they liked some of the logging requirements even less; so in the end (and this was back in 2006 when the first deals were negotiated), college stations paid a higher per song per listener fee than religious stations but didn't have to comply as much with logging requirements.

I agree with all of the radio stations, be they commercial or noncommercial, about the per song per listener requirement--that will definitely nip any real chances for streaming growth even if you have a lot of advertising agency or listener support. To add insult to injury from the broadcasters' perspectives, you cannot charge listeners for the streams because if you do, then you have to pay an even higher fee to Soundexchange.

The recording artists and labels counter first by pointing out that the copyrights are their property and that they should have the absolute right to charge however much they want; also, many artists complain that the revenues they receive from streaming are a great deal less than what they would have had if people had just gone out and purchased their CDs.

And so it goes. I side with the broadcasters on this one, but the laws and the treaties side with the recording industry.

 

[TheBigA]

The recording artists and labels counter first by pointing out that the copyrights are their property and that they should have the absolute right to charge however much they want;

The music industry will also point out that Christian recording artists have a more limited marketplace for their music. Any discount given to broadcasters means less money for the Christian musicians and writers. Which members of the flock should be hurt?

 

[ted chittenden]

My point though is that it will be interesting to see if Public radio listeners will support their programming as much as the folks that listen to Christian radio do, and if they don't why not?

What I'm watching for (and have predicted elsewhere) are efforts by the current Federal administration to bully corporate public radio sponsors to stop sponsoring both public stations and programs.

 

[Rusty Muck]

My point though is that it will be interesting to see if Public radio listeners will support their programming as much as the folks that listen to Christian radio do, and if they don't why not?

The thing is, a typical public radio station can not compete at scale with an EMF or VCY, which controls a whole network of relay transmitters. They have no overhead in places like rural Iowa or in NYC.

 

[Mark Roberts]

Pardon my snarky headline. The NRB is under the impression the media they've succeeded very well in (see: EMF) was held back by the CPB being funded. Now it's "open, fair and free!"

I'm certain that now, all NRB members will distance themselves from attempts to fund religious private schools with taxpayer money, since we shouldn't be funding ideologies and all.

Kicking people when they’re down. How Christian.

You can read that literally or as sarcasm. Either works.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

The thing is, a typical public radio station can not compete at scale with an EMF or VCY, which controls a whole network of relay transmitters. They have no overhead in places like rural Iowa or in NYC.

It costs about $1500 a year to operate each of our sites.... power, internet and various other menial expenses. electric is 75 c a kwh hour. internet depending on who we use is $90 to $260 a month.

One of the nice things is we arent required to maintain a public file due to a little known exemption we qualify for... so thats man power/time saved and no lawyer involved in any part of that (we still have one obvious, but one less thing for him to potentially be involved in)