Unconfirmed word trickling out of Buffalo's public radio stations WBFO and WNED-AM indicates WNED-AM last week terminated staff members. At WBFO, word is at least one member of management was offered and accepted an early retirement incentive. A person familiar with Western New York Public Broadcasting suspects negotiations are underway that could result in WBFO being operated by WNED as the University at Buffalo alters its commitment to WBFO. Such a shame. With each passing day, public radio appears more like commercial radio. How long before most or all programing becomes satellite delivered. Remember, it's not National Public Radio. It's N-P-R.
-
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
Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me!
- Thread starter Element9
- Start date
Element9 said:
Mark Scott, the long-time news director at WBFO is the one who retired. Mark had been with that station since the 1980s.
Last year WXXI offered early retirement incentives to several long-time employees in order to balance their budget. What I found disturbing is that the CEO of WXXI, who already makes over $300,000 a year, was offered a $50,000 bonus if he could get all seven people to accept the early retirement plan. All but two employees accepted and left. A year later two of those individuals who left are still without full time jobs or health benefits while the CEO and a few other top department heads are pulling down some serious money; money they get in part from the state and federal government and from those individuals who donate money to the station.
You mention that each day public radio appears more like commercial radio. Well in a sense you are correct. It's a lot like corporate America. Those who hold executive positions get the big bucks, bonuses and other perks, while the people in the trenches get little or no raises; and in some cases have to deal with the threat of losing their jobs ever year when its budget time.
The irony is that while there are layoffs, several public stations are gobbling up smaller AM stations, and in some cases taking over college FM stations, in order to increase their empires. So where is the money coming for that?
Yes, that is very disconcerting...
And... I was really hoping from the thread title that this would be word that the radio show "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" was coming to the area... which would no doubt have been much better news...
And the adage "Never judge a book by it's title (cover)"...has fallen by the wayside???
(I was curious myself as to what was behind door # 1)
HDBG
SUNY Buffalo is planning major growth at a time when the State of NY has a budget gap in the Billions. WBFO occupies space that UB covets, and I've been told that they're not exactly "revenue-neutral".
We're seeing the same kind of consolidation in public broadcasting that we've seen in the past in commercial radio. Public broadcasters either eat, or get eaten. WBFO is licensed by the SUNY, which is a state agency, and many employees enjoy state employee pay and benefits. Current management apppears to be encouraging long-time employees who have moved to the top pay steps, and have enough time in the state retirement system to have maxed out their benefits.
Those moves could be a precursor to a sale of the station to a party that's not state-owned, which may significantly change the pay structure. WNED comes to mind. I'm sure that they'd love another FM to expand the reach of WNED-AM without giving up their Classical station. Since both WNED-AM and WBFO-FM share many programs, it seems like a no-brainer for interest by both parties.
We're seeing the same kind of consolidation in public broadcasting that we've seen in the past in commercial radio. Public broadcasters either eat, or get eaten. WBFO is licensed by the SUNY, which is a state agency, and many employees enjoy state employee pay and benefits. Current management apppears to be encouraging long-time employees who have moved to the top pay steps, and have enough time in the state retirement system to have maxed out their benefits.
Those moves could be a precursor to a sale of the station to a party that's not state-owned, which may significantly change the pay structure. WNED comes to mind. I'm sure that they'd love another FM to expand the reach of WNED-AM without giving up their Classical station. Since both WNED-AM and WBFO-FM share many programs, it seems like a no-brainer for interest by both parties.
Over on the LA board, they're saying that KCET-TV is talking about dropping its PBS affiliation due to cost. From what I can see, most of their programming comes from PBS. Don't know how they'll fill the day and attract viewer donations. They're leasing their studios out to cable channels to pay the rent.
I keep reading all the people say that if you just give the public great programming, they'll support it. Apparently it's not true.
I keep reading all the people say that if you just give the public great programming, they'll support it. Apparently it's not true.
WNY Public Broadcasting, the parent of WNED AM/FM/TV, is fiscally solid. We have public support for quality programming in WNY/Southern Ontario. WBFO's fiscal situation is more reflective of their position as a state-owned institution that's now being forced to wean itself from the public teat.
We're seeing a wave of consolidation in public broadcasting that mirrors commercial broadcasting. Part of the reason is that local stations are feeling the pinch of a difficult economy. Part of it is the NPR decision to offer their programming on-line as either a stream or podcast, eliminating the need for them to tune to a local station. NPR even solicits funds directly, bypassing local affiliates. Stations that are little more than NPR repeaters offer nothing to local listeners that they can't get elsewhere.
In Buffalo, WBFO has a significant (though shrinking) amount of local programming. The ratings are there, but they're not being translated into sponsorships, largely because it wasn't seen as a priority until recently. That's either going to change, or WBFO is going to be spun to another owner.
We're seeing a wave of consolidation in public broadcasting that mirrors commercial broadcasting. Part of the reason is that local stations are feeling the pinch of a difficult economy. Part of it is the NPR decision to offer their programming on-line as either a stream or podcast, eliminating the need for them to tune to a local station. NPR even solicits funds directly, bypassing local affiliates. Stations that are little more than NPR repeaters offer nothing to local listeners that they can't get elsewhere.
In Buffalo, WBFO has a significant (though shrinking) amount of local programming. The ratings are there, but they're not being translated into sponsorships, largely because it wasn't seen as a priority until recently. That's either going to change, or WBFO is going to be spun to another owner.
SirRoxalot said:
Are you sure about that? While the idea has been discussed, it was shot down by the NPR Board, made up mainly of local station GMs. They DO go after corporate and foundation money, as they have since the 1980s. All of this to replace federal funding, which was phased out by the Reagan administration.
Back to WBFO, the days of government-owned public broadcasting may be ending, not just in New York, but many other states. The City of New York spun off WNYC a very long time ago. The State of New Jersey is talking about selling New Jersey Public Broadcasting. I think there was a certain amount of laziness at those operations, with regular state funding built in. No need to chase after local funding or audiences. That is changing, and I think it will put the "public" back in public broadcasting.
It would be (IMHO) a shame and disservice to the Univerity at Buffalo if WBFO was taken over by the public broadcasting conglomerate that is WNYPB, Channel 17, WNED-AM and FM. Clearly, there are funding issues at the state level and cutbacks have worked their way into every level of publicly financed education, impacting the University and WBFO. Understood. But WBFO is a pronounced asset to the University at Buffalo. As a professional broadcaster whose two adult sons are products of UB graduate programs (MA and JD), I've expressed my opinions to former UB President, the late William Greiner and the former General Manager of WBFO, with whom I've had the pleasure of speaking in informal settings. WBFO is a jewel which at times appears misunderstood or under-appreciated by the University. Some folks know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Greiner, BTW, was a huge advocate of WBFO and did a monthly call in show. We can only hope that if WBFO passes into the hands of WNYPB, its programming and ties to the University at Buffalo are unsevered.
Jim, you're correct about the funding issue, but it also is an example of the changing role of universities in the community. This change has come about during the past ten years, as schools focus more on the basics, and less on things outside the classroom.
Back in the early days of public broadcasting, universities were the perfect partners. They had experts in areas that could help the station, and the university was seeking things like "outreach" into the community. That outreach area has changed. Universities are less interested in sharing their internal resources with the community, and more focused around building and serving their students, staff, and alumni. Greed has invaded the university. So a radio station, which serves more the community than the internal needs of the university, becomes an unnecessary expense. Unless the community pays for it in some way, or unless the university gets some tangible benefit in running it, the value of the radio station to the university diminishes. The fact that most of these stations have rules about student involvement in operations also limits their value to the primary goals.
It doesn't help that the role of radio has changed. That's not just a commercial radio issue. Public radio is suffering from all of the same problems that come from the multi-media marketplace. There are lots of ways that universities can be part of the media marketplace without the expense of owning studios, transmitters, and towers. So what they may do is keep the license, but outsource everything else, with the university keeping certain benefits while eliminating the costs. Sound familiar? You bet.
Back in the early days of public broadcasting, universities were the perfect partners. They had experts in areas that could help the station, and the university was seeking things like "outreach" into the community. That outreach area has changed. Universities are less interested in sharing their internal resources with the community, and more focused around building and serving their students, staff, and alumni. Greed has invaded the university. So a radio station, which serves more the community than the internal needs of the university, becomes an unnecessary expense. Unless the community pays for it in some way, or unless the university gets some tangible benefit in running it, the value of the radio station to the university diminishes. The fact that most of these stations have rules about student involvement in operations also limits their value to the primary goals.
It doesn't help that the role of radio has changed. That's not just a commercial radio issue. Public radio is suffering from all of the same problems that come from the multi-media marketplace. There are lots of ways that universities can be part of the media marketplace without the expense of owning studios, transmitters, and towers. So what they may do is keep the license, but outsource everything else, with the university keeping certain benefits while eliminating the costs. Sound familiar? You bet.
Well, I suppose it's time for a WBFO insider to weigh in here. First of all, I can't criticize a university that has been so good to us for so many years. It's not all about greed, Big A. UB President John Simpson told me in an interview last week that the university has now sustained a 30 percent reduction in its state funding since the fiscal crisis began. That's a huge figure! The university is doing what it needs to do to bring its expenses in line with revenues, not just at WBFO but across the entire enterprise.
Please know, at least from what we've been told, the University at Buffalo, or the State University of New York (which is the official holder of our license), is not selling the frequency. There are talks with Western New York Public Broadcasting about our future. What will happen is pure speculation at this point. Our staff has not been told anything beyond discussions are taking place.
Indeed, I agree with Jim that WBFO is a community asset that benefits the University at Buffalo. The support of Bill Greiner during his term as president was greatly appreciated. I miss him terribly! That said, much has changed since Professor Greiner left the president's office. John Simpson is a good man who is tasked with a difficult challenge and a dysfunctional state government that is not giving him the tools to grow. So, I will not criticize the university administration, even though what's happening saddens me greatly. It's my hope that whatever plan that is eventually worked out with WNED provides a place for my talented colleagues to continue their good work.
Finally, I want to address the argument of reduced local programming on WBFO and Jeff Simon's misguided call for a return of jazz programming. Sure, a music host playing jazz CDs is technically "local" programming. But is it really better? Michel Martin's program "Tell Me More" delves into issues of diversity on a daily basis. She's doing what Bill Siemering created back in the '60s with his Jefferson Avenue satellite studio giving voice to Buffalo's African-American community. Terry Gross interviews musicians, introducing us to new artists. The Capitol Pressroom spends an hour each day on state issues, which is so important given what's happening in Albany. These programs are available only on WBFO, so the duplication argument (with WNED) is nonsense. And they're clearly more compelling than a midday jazz show. The fact that Morning Edition and All Things Considered are airing on the two stations is something that happens in cities all across the nation, so it's not unusual and is, in fact, a good thing because it brings NPR's flagship programs to the widest audience. But outside of one hour of "On Point" at 10am, the programming on WBFO and WNED-AM is different. For example, you get "Talk of the Nation" on WBFO and "The World" on WNED-AM.
One of the goals of adding more news and information to the WBFO schedule is to include a local show. The resources aren't available now to do that. But it remains an objective. I have more I could say. I've gone on too long already. I'll be interested to read what y'all have to say about what I've written here.
Please know, at least from what we've been told, the University at Buffalo, or the State University of New York (which is the official holder of our license), is not selling the frequency. There are talks with Western New York Public Broadcasting about our future. What will happen is pure speculation at this point. Our staff has not been told anything beyond discussions are taking place.
Indeed, I agree with Jim that WBFO is a community asset that benefits the University at Buffalo. The support of Bill Greiner during his term as president was greatly appreciated. I miss him terribly! That said, much has changed since Professor Greiner left the president's office. John Simpson is a good man who is tasked with a difficult challenge and a dysfunctional state government that is not giving him the tools to grow. So, I will not criticize the university administration, even though what's happening saddens me greatly. It's my hope that whatever plan that is eventually worked out with WNED provides a place for my talented colleagues to continue their good work.
Finally, I want to address the argument of reduced local programming on WBFO and Jeff Simon's misguided call for a return of jazz programming. Sure, a music host playing jazz CDs is technically "local" programming. But is it really better? Michel Martin's program "Tell Me More" delves into issues of diversity on a daily basis. She's doing what Bill Siemering created back in the '60s with his Jefferson Avenue satellite studio giving voice to Buffalo's African-American community. Terry Gross interviews musicians, introducing us to new artists. The Capitol Pressroom spends an hour each day on state issues, which is so important given what's happening in Albany. These programs are available only on WBFO, so the duplication argument (with WNED) is nonsense. And they're clearly more compelling than a midday jazz show. The fact that Morning Edition and All Things Considered are airing on the two stations is something that happens in cities all across the nation, so it's not unusual and is, in fact, a good thing because it brings NPR's flagship programs to the widest audience. But outside of one hour of "On Point" at 10am, the programming on WBFO and WNED-AM is different. For example, you get "Talk of the Nation" on WBFO and "The World" on WNED-AM.
One of the goals of adding more news and information to the WBFO schedule is to include a local show. The resources aren't available now to do that. But it remains an objective. I have more I could say. I've gone on too long already. I'll be interested to read what y'all have to say about what I've written here.
Philip_Airtime said:
I understand. That statement wasn't meant about UB in particular, as I have no inside information. Nor was it a criticism. It was about a trend in higher education in general I've seen and tracked at public and private colleges around the country. Universities by necessity are concentrating on the core. As you say, a big part of this is budget related, as state budgets are being cut around the country. But it's also brought about by a change in philosophy, expressed by the federal government. The atmosphere that led to the creation of public broadcasting in 1967 has systematically disappeared, starting with the federal budget cuts in 1983, and continuing to the present. That's what I was talking about.
There's some interesting analysis of this over at Current.org. The best way I can describe it is a high-stakes game of "chicken". Both KCET and PBS have a lot to lose if KCET drops out; it'll effectively force PBS out of the #2 market in the nation, and cost them millions in lost affiliate fees (not to mention national underwriting clout and prestige). The catch is that the proposal KCET has made will also cost PBS a lot in affiliate fees, and worse still, may set a precedent for other "overlap" markets that'll mean even more lost fees for PBS. There's no answer here that won't make someone very unhappy...hence the game of "chicken".
I'm no expert on pubTV, but I would suppose that if there's multiple PBS affiliates in Buffalo, then the KCET situation could have direct relevance.
As for NPR affiliates, that's a completely different story. But a lot of the same underlying issues are indeed there and, arguably, are slowly reaching a boiling point as well.
BTW, *NPR* does not solicit funds directly from listeners. However, there are shows distributed by PRI and APM that do indeed do just that. FWIW, John Sutton has some very intelligent things to say about this topic.
TheBigA said:
With states like New York and New Jersey facing budget deficits, cutting government funding to public broadcasting should be on the 'to do list' for lawmakers. The same goes for the federal government.
Let subscribers and these multi-million dollar foundations foot the cost of keeping public broadcasting by donating money. Also it's time that the salaries and benefits paid out to a few top executives of these stations be re-examined. Why some of these GM's make more money than the governor of New York is outrageous: Especially in this economy. Every time one reads about cut backs at public stations it is always the long-time employee who gets the ax. Very few times do we read or hear about top executives getting shown the front door.
If you want public broadcasting to survive, then some changes will have to be made. Like it or not.
There's a simple way to resolve the compensation issue for top executives in broadcasting - be it public or private. Pay a base salary to compensate for their capabilities as administrators and responsible parties in licensing, corporate reporting, etc.
Add to that a commission on money brought in, whether it be from fundraising, grants, or donations. The more money that comes through the door, the greater the compensation. My guess is that the number of sales people and grant writers will increase, to the overall benefit of the organization.
Add to that a commission on money brought in, whether it be from fundraising, grants, or donations. The more money that comes through the door, the greater the compensation. My guess is that the number of sales people and grant writers will increase, to the overall benefit of the organization.
B
Bob1370
Guest
The self-styled "voice of reason" opined, "Let subscribers and these multi-million dollar foundations foot the cost of keeping public broadcasting by donating money. Also it's time that the salaries and benefits paid out to a few top executives of these stations be re-examined. Why some of these GM's make more money than the governor of New York is outrageous: Especially in this economy. Every time one reads about cut backs at public stations it is always the long-time employee who gets the ax. Very few times do we read or hear about top executives getting shown the front door."
State funding is already down over 60 per cent from its peak back in 1990. The radio side gets ZERO operating help from ANY level of government. Another hit, and one day you just may turn on your radio and not find an alternative to the stuff that someone in San Antonio decided you should hear.
State funding is already down over 60 per cent from its peak back in 1990. The radio side gets ZERO operating help from ANY level of government. Another hit, and one day you just may turn on your radio and not find an alternative to the stuff that someone in San Antonio decided you should hear.
Bob1370 said:
That's great news that state funding is down 60% from 1990. It should be zero funding. Why should taxpayers be forced to pay for the outrageous salaries your station's CEO and other top executives make?
LBJ's Great Society Dr. Smith is over with. And while the current administration feels the need to bail out every company and organization in America, there are people like myself who strongly disagree with tax dollars being spent to prop up non-profits like public broadcasting. I would like to keep some of the money I have worked so hard to earn to spend it on me and my family's needs.
If your employer can't find or obtain local funding from listeners and viewers, then there are options that can be taken. The first option is to cut the huge salaries and end the perks top managers make. Second is to stop trying to expand by taking over the operations of FM stations, like the one in Geneva and the U of R. Also end the nepotism; meaning the hiring of the station's general manager's husband to host a morning radio show.
I would estimate that the majority of your station's programming comes from NPR and PBS. At one time your station offered a number of locally-produced programs, especially public affairs and news. Today I can count just two such programs: Your radio call-in show and the program on television where people sit around a table and just talk.
- Status