Who would those folks be?
-
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.
WBFO Comes Up Short
- Thread starter Element9
- Start date
Who would those folks be?
I would expect, based on your OP, that the "admonishing" will increase. It's pretty standard stuff. The reason for it is to create a sense of urgency among people who already listen to the station.
If a station isn't meeting it's goals, it will have more pledge drives. But that's not the problem here. The problem is in converting listeners to donors. So more pledge drives may yield more money, but not improve the donor/listener ratio. To improve the ratio, they need to crank up the sense of urgency.
Nobody likes pledge drives, but they're a necessary evil. Once they get a solid base of regular contributors, they can do pledge drives off the air, through direct mail. But at this stage, they need addresses.
If a station isn't meeting it's goals, it will have more pledge drives. But that's not the problem here. The problem is in converting listeners to donors. So more pledge drives may yield more money, but not improve the donor/listener ratio. To improve the ratio, they need to crank up the sense of urgency.
Nobody likes pledge drives, but they're a necessary evil. Once they get a solid base of regular contributors, they can do pledge drives off the air, through direct mail. But at this stage, they need addresses.
Perhaps they need to pay attention to ratings, and listener disatisfaction with their programming. Then there will be less need for "admonishing". It's tough to shame people into paying for programming that they're not interested in - especially if they feel that the money that's already donated isn't spent wisely.
Perhaps they need to pay attention to ratings, and listener disatisfaction with their programming. Then there will be less need for "admonishing". It's tough to shame people into paying for programming that they're not interested in - especially if they feel that the money that's already donated isn't spent wisely.
Once again, you assume that people listen to programming they don't like. Where in the ratings does it say that?
Consider music. People love music. They listen to it all the time. But they don't want to pay for it. Same thing with radio. It has nothing to do with "dissatisfaction with their programming." People want to get what they enjoy for free. And you can't do that in public radio.
Donating to public radio doesn't mean you get to pick the content.
It means you support the overall product and mission.
If enough people stop contributing, then they should examine the
Programming.
At least NPR still provides some quality and civility.
That cannot be said for commercial radio...
It means you support the overall product and mission.
If enough people stop contributing, then they should examine the
Programming.
At least NPR still provides some quality and civility.
That cannot be said for commercial radio...
If enough people stop contributing, then they should examine the
Programming.
They have, and they found that the people who listen to public radio love the programming, and are very loyal to it. Some listen to public radio programming to the exclusion of all other radio. But the issue here isn't the programming, but transforming listeners into members, and that requires listeners to change from being passive users to active supporters. That takes admonishing. Otherwise, listeners will do the easy thing, and do nothing. I'm not saying this based on my opinion. I'm saying this based on the experience of watching listeners become supporters. It's not a programming issue.
Many Jazz and AAA formats have disappeared in spite of good ratings
and passionate listeners.
In some markets, the alternative rock stations are non-commercial, listener supported radio. Like WFUV and WFMU in New York. Both depend on listener support. There are also two non-commercial jazz stations: WBGO and WKCR. However, the economies of non-profit radio are different. But certainly it's always an option. Listeners have to be confronted with the fact that if they don't take action and support their radio station, it will go away. In the case of those formats, they know it's true.
The ratings during some very important dayparts ARE down. The committment by listeners is soft in other dayparts. Programming IS part of the problem. If people aren't willing to pay for what you're serving, you end up with less money in the till. They may still prefer it to WBEN's bomb-throwing, or it may become background listening instead of foreground engagement. Either way, the dollars - or lack of them - indicate management is simply not responding to the audience. There is no lack of hubris at WNYPB.
Either way, the dollars - or lack of them - indicate management is simply not responding to the audience. There is no lack of hubris at WNYPB.
I don't know how representative your opinion is of the rest of the city. As I said earlier, we don't know that donations are down, just that a smaller percentage of actual listeners contribute. If they don't like the programming, they aren't listening. That's what you're doing. There are more freeloaders as a percentage of the audience. People will freeload regardless of the programming. If they feel they can get away with it, that's what they'll do. It's human nature. Why pay for something if you can get it for free? So the listeners need to feel a sense of urgency, that if they don't contribute, the programming they now enjoy could go the way of jazz and blues.
As I said, it's a revenue collection problem, not a programming problem. They could change the programming, but obviously people weren't compelled to contribute to the old WBFO...otherwise, the University wouldn't have been so anxious to sell.
I don't know how representative your opinion is of the rest of the city. As I said earlier, we don't know that donations are down, just that a smaller percentage of actual listeners contribute. If they don't like the programming, they aren't listening.
Conversely, if listeners do like the programming, especially the local programming, they're inclined to listen and can be convinced to become members and contribute. The greater number of listeners, the better. Four per cent of 10 thousand (400) is larger than 4% of 5 thousand (200). Then again, four per cent of 10 thousand is larger than 7% of five thousand (350). It's easier to elicit contributions for programming that listeners like and listen to in greater number than for programming listeners don't like and listen to in lower number. Ratings. Cume. AQH Persons.
They could change the programming, but obviously people weren't compelled to contribute to the old WBFO...otherwise, the University wouldn't have been so anxious to sell.
WBFO was funded by the University at Buffalo Foundation, which is charged with funding research, student scholarships and manages endowments and some of the university's projects. As the university explained, it preferred to fund research rather than the radio station, so in all probability, WBFO was not generating sufficient membership to attain a revenue neutral position or positive cash flow position. But it could very well be that some of the changes made by WNYPB did not attract additional listeners. Haranguing listeners to compel them to contribute is a delicate process. It appears the new owners have yet to determine the correct ratio between carrot and whip. More bees are attracted to the scent flowers than the scent of ammonia. What works for Ch 17 or 94.5, may not work on WBFO listeners. What works in Dallas may not entirely work in Buffalo.
Think about a favorite restaurant "under new management or ownership." One small change on the menu, the departure of a chef or favorite waiter/waitress can tick off a considerable number of regular or long time patrons. Although the restaurant is still on the same corner and most of the menu remains unchanged, customer might say, "I can't put my finger on it, but it's not the same."
Last edited:
Conversely, if listeners do like the programming, especially the local programming, they're inclined to listen and can be convinced to become members and contribute.
Maybe. The fact that the national average is 7% tells you that 93% of regular public radio listeners DON'T contribute. They don't contribute regardless of the programming, and we all know that public radio listeners tend to be passionate fans of the programming. But being a fan of the programming or the cause isn't always enough to make someone donate money. I don't know anyone who don't feel empathy to cancer sufferers, or don't know someone with the disease. But not many of those people actually give money to cancer charities. People CAN be convinced to be members if they feel an urgency to contribute. Otherwise, what's the motivation? Most people, especially in high unemployment areas, have more important priorities for their extra money. As you said in your OP, there are other reasons this number is low besides programming.
More bees are attracted to the scent flowers than the scent of ammonia. What works for Ch 17 or 94.5, may not work on WBFO listeners.
I agree with all of that. WBFO has the additional problem as a news station that it would probably prefer not to have its journalists act as fundraisers. So the on-air people the listeners trust and have a relationship with aren't likely to be the ones who'll ask them for money. It's hard to walk the line as a trusted and impartial news person, and also pitch people for your paycheck. Not that it can't be done, but most don't.
Last edited:
Isn't it odd that the one guy who's not in the market is the only one arguing that WNYPB is doing the right thing?
Isn't it odd that the one guy who's not in the market is the only one arguing that WNYPB is doing the right thing?
What's the "right thing?" Would you recommend that they donate the station back to the University so they can bring back the old programming?
Nobody said that. Perhaps if they'd have retained some of the old programming and old scheduling they wouldn't be having a revenue problem. People here in Buffalo have seen a lot of "smarter guys" put their stamp on a station that they thought was worth investing millions in, only to find out that the original owners weren't so dumb after all. It's not hard to see the results of the changes made by WNYPB in a rating book - and those ratings reflect revenue.
Nobody said that. Perhaps if they'd have retained some of the old programming and old scheduling they wouldn't be having a revenue problem.
According to the OP, it's not a "revenue problem," but a revenue collection problem. Two different things.
And for all we know, the problem existed under previous ownership.
It's a revenue problem if not as much money is coming in because support for the current programming is soft. Perhaps you need to sit in some of the WBFO public meetings and hear some of their managers in order to have a handle on the situation. You're talking generalities. People on here are locally involved, and talking specifics. As I've already explained, I may be willing to listen to lesser content, but not willing to contribute as much to it. WNYPB needs to build bridges to listeners, not burn them.
It's a revenue problem if not as much money is coming in because support for the current programming is soft. Perhaps you need to sit in some of the WBFO public meetings and hear some of their managers in order to have a handle on the situation.
Did you read the first post in this thread? I don't think you did.
I may be willing to listen to lesser content, but not willing to contribute as much to it.
So you think everyone in Buffalo is exactly like you?
Last edited:
As far as I know WBFO's ratings have been pretty good since the purchase by WNYPBA...last Winter they were above a three share. Also, I would think the company looked very closely at the pledge income before they bought the station. WNYPBA simply doesn't have the University to fall back on when the pledge dollars don't come in.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.