I've been Arizona and California for 12 years, so I've fallen away from the nuances of Canadian radio. Can you explain the "impossible on FM" for me like I'm five?
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Rogers Shuts Down Six Stations
- Thread starter Huff
- Start date
Yeah I’m not really buying that. Maybe it’s purely coincidence, but one can’t help but wonder when they take a flash cut approach to ending programming (while simultaneously spending a huge sum of money on Toronto sports). It speaks to a larger issue at play. The fact that resources in Canada are often spent on Toronto with everyone else SOL.Rogers already owned the Maple Leafs. They just bought the remaining 30%. The two things have nothing to do with each other. They didn't use the money from salaries in Vancouver to pay for a hockey team in Toronto. They have other money to draw on. I don't know what the work arrangements are for Rogers, but most companies would offer severance pay and other continued benefits for a time. The employees know this going in. There are no lifetime jobs other than the priesthood.
I was looking into career options with Rogers at one point. One thing that Rogers loves to hammer home is that as an employee, you’ll get some special perks. One of those perks is a discount on tickets to see Toronto Blue Jays Baseball games. I highly doubt anyone working outside of Ontario cares about that.
You’re right about broadcasting not being a “lifetime” career anymore. That’s the nature of the businesses and is neither here nor there. But I definitely feel terrible for people who are going through this in a job market like Vancouver (where getting a job seems to require sacrificing your or something equally extreme).
Essentially, the CRTC prohibits it. Spoken word program and sports content is basically stuck on AM (unless there’s an exception made). So in this scenario, a broadcaster operating a FM in a market like Vancouver or Calgary cannot just start airing talk, news, or sports on their FM station. It seems like an archaic rule, but it is what it is.I've been Arizona and California for 12 years, so I've fallen away from the nuances of Canadian radio. Can you explain the "impossible on FM" for me like I'm five?
Yeah I’m not really buying that.
Keep in mind the company doesn't need your permission. It's their money. If AM radio wasn't dying, those stations would still be there. Rogers can't keep pumping money into a dying business.
You’re right about broadcasting not being a “lifetime” career anymore.
"Anymore?" When was it ever?
Essentially, the CRTC prohibits it. Spoken word program and sports content is basically stuck on AM (unless there’s an exception made). So in this scenario, a broadcaster operating a FM in a market like Vancouver or Calgary cannot just start airing talk, news, or sports on their FM station. It seems like an archaic rule, but it is what it is.
Prohibits is a stretch; and illegal is just incorrect. It's just a different category of license. Ownership caps have prevented many from applying to change categories anyway.
Corus in Calgary and Rogers in Ottawa both tried to do it first and apply for the category change after the fact. The changes were denied, likely because of the way they went around it.
And... sure my phone gives me that stuff. But I have to interact with my phone and take time out of my busy day (and especially morning).I know we go over this every time someone asks, why does radio still have traffic reports or weather reports? Your phone can give you everything a radio station gives you and it does it instantly. News, weather, traffic, sports.
But radio gives the info to you in a way your app won't. Let's say Interstate 10 has a traffic jam and that's your route. Your app tells you don't take I-10. But is it caused by an accident? Is the accident going to be cleared by the time you get there? Is it an overturned truck or a giant pothole or a fallen tree?
Tomorrow it will be sunny and 78. May app told me. But will it be windy? Very humid? Are we still in a drought? Is there a cold front for later this week? Any hurricanes developing in the South Atlantic?
Maybe you're a baseball fan and you want your local team's score. But if you like sports, a radio sports updates tells you more about the game than just who won. And it tells you more about sports you may only have a passing interest in and wouldn't check on. You're not going to look up who won the U.S. Open but it's good to know when you talk with your friend who's into tennis.
We are human. We like to hear stories. Facts are cold. A traffic reporter, weather forecaster and sportscaster adds personality and insight to make the info relatable.
I'm on the air in the mornings now so I'm up and out of the house before most morning shows start. But I would usually just flip on the local morning show while showering in the morning before I had that shift. By the time I got out of the shower, I'd know what I needed to know to get my day going in the right direction. I can't do that with my phone.
Yes, I look at my phone for weather. But it's also nice to hear on the radio. Especially for the context, as you mention.
I also wear a watch. And have a clock in my kitchen on the wall. Why? I hate having to pull my phone out of my pocket to figure out what time it is.
Sure, we can get pretty much everything from our phones. But that doesn't mean the phone is the end-all-be-all.
Sure, we can get pretty much everything from our phones. But that doesn't mean the phone is the end-all-be-all.
But what it does is make all competing devices less important and less utilized. That translates to less money to pay for the service.
It would be different if radio stations weren't owned by private companies. But they are. So they have to make money in order to exist.
Keep in mind the company doesn't need your permission. It's their money. If AM radio wasn't dying, those stations would still be there. Rogers can't keep pumping money into a dying business.
The problem with that analysis is the reports from both the poster you were responding to and others further up the thread stating that CKWX specifically *was not* losing money at the time it was shut down.
The problem with that analysis is the reports from both the poster you were responding to and others further up the thread stating that CKWX specifically *was not* losing money at the time it was shut down.
They don't know. They're just guessing. Meanwhile other posters say all of the spots they heard were for other Rogers businesses, such as cell or internet service. So it's not real money.
Either way, the company explained why it's shutting down those six stations. They don't need government approval or a vote by the people to do it. Any changes would have needed government approval. This alleviates that need. If the government is concerned about public service or competition, they could expedite their process. But that seems pretty unlikely.
Agreed, BigA. But the reality is that the internet has caused pretty much every business (aside from the biggest of the big) to be in the same boat. The dollar is spread thinner across many industries and sectors, not just radio.But what it does is make all competing devices less important and less utilized. That translates to less money to pay for the service.
It would be different if radio stations weren't owned by private companies. But they are. So they have to make money in order to exist.
Yes, radio now has a lot more competition. But it's not unique in that - a lot of sectors do. If anything, radio historically has had an un-level playing field to its advantage. Not anymore.
Also - even when stations were giving "time & temperature" all of the time back in the 60s & 70s as standard practice, most folks had a watch on their wrist and a clock on the wall in the kitchen... they didn't "need" an announcer to let them know that it was 8:55 in the morning. They could just look at their wristwatch. Or any of the many clocks that used to be on storefronts. Or at the clock on their car's dashboard (no, not every car had one but many of them did). Especially for folks in cities, there have been plenty of ways to tell the time since before the dawn of radio. In smaller towns, there was often a church bell that sounded off the hours all day long.
Weather? Our local newspaper still publishes forecasts. In 1965, anyone with a newspaper subscription (a lot of folks) had access to a printed weather report for the whole week. There's also the NOAA's weather radio service. TV has been doing forecasts for decades, too - and a majority of houses had televisions while the "time & temp" era was still alive and well.
In other words, there have been lots of ways to access the time & temp as long as if not longer than radio has been around.
I, for one, appreciate when stations still do that. It's convenient and makes life a little easier.
I, for one, appreciate when stations still do that. It's convenient and makes life a little easier.
Enjoy it while you can.
I do. There aren't many places left that have it at this point. And so it goes.Enjoy it while you can.
That was not my observation. Lots of spots from non Rogers businesses. Maybe even the majority.They don't know. They're just guessing. Meanwhile other posters say all of the spots they heard were for other Rogers businesses, such as cell or internet service. So it's not real money.
That was not my observation. Lots of spots from non Rogers businesses. Maybe even the majority.
How much do they charge per spot? Are the spots enough to cover the expenses? If not, that would support the company.
As you know, the all news format is very expensive. It's practically impractical in the US in markets outside the Top 10.
Once again, it's the company's decision. They're not complaining or making excuses. They're just leaving the business.