• 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

The Revenge of Bob

It's (Almost) All Good

Mark, I know that you are a big Bob Edwards fan, and that the NPR ratings in Rochester started to weaken about the time that he was replaced.

Elsewhere, the effect has not been the same. In a majority of markets, the morning numbers for NPR have actually increased since Steve Inskeep and Renée Montagne took over Morning Edition. In fact, the move, intended to attract both a larger and younger audience, appears to be at least a limited success.

With that being said, I think the re-emergence of Bob Edwards in a looser, less restrictive format on the weekend is good for NPR, good for listeners, and good for Mr. Edwards.

Overall, it looks like a win-win-win in most markets.

As far as Rochester goes, perhaps the NPR management needs to look elsewhere for reasons relating to their ratings decline. For example, who else did they lose around the same time? And what new voices have they added?
 
Re: It's (Almost) All Good

> Mark, I know that you are a big Bob Edwards fan, and that
> the NPR ratings in Rochester started to weaken about the
> time that he was replaced.
>
> Elsewhere, the effect has not been the same. In a majority
> of markets, the morning numbers for NPR have actually
> increased since Steve Inskeep and Renée Montagne took over
> Morning Edition. In fact, the move, intended to attract both
> a larger and younger audience, appears to be at least a
> limited success.
>
> With that being said, I think the re-emergence of Bob
> Edwards in a looser, less restrictive format on the weekend
> is good for NPR, good for listeners, and good for Mr.
> Edwards.
>
> Overall, it looks like a win-win-win in most markets.
>
> As far as Rochester goes, perhaps the NPR management needs
> to look elsewhere for reasons relating to their ratings
> decline. For example, who else did they lose around the same
> time? And what new voices have they added?
>

I agree with you that this is a win-win situation for both NPR and Bob Edwards, and I am glad to read that Edwards will once again be on terrestrial radio.

As for WXXI’s ratings decline, in my opinion it has very little to do with the departure of Bob Edwards from Morning Edition. If one has the ability to look at the Arbitrons over the past few years they will see that WXXI’s listenership drops significantly after 9 a.m. weekday mornings, bottoms out around the noon hour, and then begins to increase from 2 to 6 p.m. Right after 6 o’clock the ratings drops like Enron stock.

As for your last question as to who left WXXI around the same time as Bob Edwards, I can answer that. It was me.

I left a month before NPR announced Edwards departure, which by the way took me totally by surprise. Yet I was impressed by the professional way Edwards handled the obvious shaft he received from the network by not burning his bridges and, at the time, not being critical of the decision.

Anyways my position as afternoon news anchor was vacant for several months (Scott Fybush did a fantastic job as fill-in by the way) until the station hired a young college graduate from New Mexico. From what I was told her only prior experience was working for her college radio station in New Mexico plus interning at NPR before being hired at WXXI in the late summer of 2004.

One has to give WXXI credit for hiring someone right out of college and giving them the opportunity to experience a professional market the size of Rochester.


<P ID="signature">______________
"I won't be wronged, I won't be insulted and I won't be laid a hand on.
I don't do these things to other people and I expect the same from them".</P>
 
Multiple Choice

Despite your classy response, I think it's time for a pop quiz...

Select the best available answer:

1> One has to give WXXI ________ for hiring someone right out of
college and giving them the opportunity to experience a
professional market the size of Rochester.


a) credit

b) blame

c) a comedy award

d) a gift certificate to Consultants-R-Us


I think we know how the listeners have voted...
 
Re: It's (Almost) All Good

> As far as Rochester goes, perhaps the NPR management needs
> to look elsewhere for reasons relating to their ratings
> decline. For example, who else did they lose around the same
> time? And what new voices have they added?

Oh, that's easy. The ratings slide began pretty much the same day I joined the staff... (ulp!)

:)<P ID="signature">______________
Tower Site Calendar 2006 ON SALE! - <a target="_blank" href=http://www.fybush.com/nerw.html#calendar>www.fybush.com</a></P>
 
Re: Multiple Choice

> Despite your classy response, I think it's time for a pop
> quiz...
>
> Select the best available answer:
>
> 1> One has to give WXXI ________ for hiring someone right
> out of
> college and giving them the opportunity to experience a
> professional market the size of Rochester.
>
>
> a) credit
>
> b) blame
>
> c) a comedy award
>
> d) a gift certificate to Consultants-R-Us
>
>
> I think we know how the listeners have voted...
>

I'd suggest that WXXI did just what so many commercial radio and television stations have done over the last five to ten years, hiring a person that is academically qualified yet in some cases glaringly inexperienced on the air for considerably less money than the person who'd been replaced.

The thinking by upper management is programming will "bring the new person along" and assist in developing the person's talent. Bunk! Listeners know what's good and what's not good, whether they're shopping at Wegmans or listening to radio and watching TV.

Over the years, the level of competence has sunk dramatically. The newbies can't really be blamed because they're accepting jobs that are being offered by managers who are working with ever shrinking budgets.

There's no longer a minor league small market training ground for news people and jocks to hone their skills. Listeners and viewers hear and see the results of this every day.

We frequently discuss on this board the erosion of listening to iPods and satellite radio due to the diversity of the formats and music offered by the new media. It's not only the availability of new and varied music that forces the movement, it's the air talent or lack thereof on terrestrial radio.

Sooner or later, the suits will realize that radio stations can't beat listeners over the heads with spiffy bumpers, sweepers and slogans. Smart programmers, managers and owners are beginning to realize that it takes real live, local people to enhance and maintain listener interest.

Just another reason Buffalo Jack, with it's aloof sweeper voice guy and absence of live, local jocks might be expected to fail.

-9-
 
How About Another Choice?

>
> I'd suggest that WXXI did just what so many commercial radio
> and television stations have done over the last five to ten
> years, hiring a person that is academically qualified yet in
> some cases glaringly inexperienced on the air for
> considerably less money than the person who'd been replaced.
>
>
> The thinking by upper management is programming will "bring
> the new person along" and assist in developing the person's
> talent. Bunk! Listeners know what's good and what's not
> good, whether they're shopping at Wegmans or listening to
> radio and watching TV.
>
I’ve listened on and off to this person for the past few years and have come to the conclusion that she has no business being in the market the size of Rochester.
She can’t get through a newscast without making a mistake. It sounds like she never proof-reads her copy ahead of time. Her delivery is horrific and most importantly she has no clue as to what should be the top news stories of the day.
At first I was willing to give this individual a chance, considering that she was new to Rochester. But if one can not improve after two years, then its time for WXXI to show this woman the front door, or place her in job where she isn’t anchoring afternoon drive news. Her lack of experience, or just plain inability to perform her job, only hurts WXXI’s creditability. At most medium and major market radio stations this person wouldn’t have lasted past her three month probation period. So the question arises why does the management at WXXI allow this situation to continue? Are they afraid to admit making a mistake in hiring her? Or is it more likely that management realizes that if they want someone with experience they might have to actually pay a decent salary. No matter what their explanation there is no excuse for the continuance of this charade to the listeners and donors of WXXI. Do you agree or not?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom