WDJO: Save local radio

[gr8oldies]

WDJO ran a brief blurb just before the top of the hour exhorting listeners to go to the WDJO website and learn how to "save local radio". This is in response to recent FCC "localism" proposals.

Here's the link:

http://www.helpradionow.com/

Comments from the crowd at large (to borrow a McConnell phrase)?

There is also a "Christian" version of this site.

 

[uppendowndadial]

I saw that on their website the other day. Seems funny that so many folks who were DISPLACED when radio went corporate are now singing the praises of having less staff, voice tracking, and everything else. "Oh, don't make us hire any more local people..we'll lose money!!" Gosh, Bri. Are you changing your last name to Mays??

 

[BobointheH20]

I don't think the FCC is out to get the little guys, I think it's making an attempt to force all radio to be responsible and responsive to the public which they are supposed to serve. The airwaves are, after all, public property (although Colin Powell's boy didn't seem to see it that way.) Running public service announcements throughout the day and having some kind of community outreach doesn't sound like too much to ask, and really not that expensive. If all you carry is prerecorded and voicetracked programming, you're not really "local radio" anyway, are you?

WDJO posting that site accusing the FCC of being "nostalgic" like it's a bad thing is kind of ironic. I like what they do over there, but it's not really the FCC's problem if they can't make a profit.

 

[flakunkel]

Running public service announcements throughout the day and having some kind of community outreach doesn't sound like too much to ask, and really not that expensive. If all you carry is prerecorded and voicetracked programming, you're not really "local radio" anyway, are you?

WDJO posting that site accusing the FCC of being "nostalgic" like it's a bad thing is kind of ironic. I like what they do over there, but it's not really the FCC's problem if they can't make a profit.

Well, WDJO is locally programmed with local personalities, and almost entirely voicetracked. It is the only way they can stay in business. They are targeting an age group that most advertisers shun, and what business they get is sold at quite low rates. They can afford to operate because most of the staff is part-time. They still provide public service announcements and local news, although the news is outsourced. If they had to hire their own news staff and have a live body in the studio at all times, they'd be out of business. That's not a matter of opinion, that's a fact. Modern automation technology is what makes it possible for a station like WDJO to exist on the meager revenues it's able to generate.

People have to understand that you can't have as many radio stations as we have, and have them all full-service live, local operations. The economics just don't work. Audiences are too fragmented and a top-rated station is reaching a fraction of the number of listeners it reached 20 or 30 years ago. In some markets a station can be #1 with an audience share of less than 5%. There was never room for more than a handful of full service stations in any market. The difference is, "back in the day," we only had a handful of stations in any market, period. And even then, many stations met the "public service" and other mandates by what can charitably be called sleight-of-hand.

If the FCC wants everybody to be live and local all the time, and jump through all sorts of paperwork hoops about so-called "public service," then it's going to have to make the conscious decision that a significant portion of the currently-licensed stations must go broke and go silent, permanently. I think we all know that's not going to happen. In fact, the policy seems to be to keep cramming more stations on the dial, until the medium itself is destroyed by technical degradation and audience fragmentation. Ironically, WDJO is subjected to destructive interference from a co-channel station in Chicago that never should have been licensed at its power -- a situation to which the FCC is utterly indifferent. Were it not for that action to ignore the laws of physics (an all-too-common action these days at the FCC), WDJO might be better able to compete.

In this era of infinitely multiplying media, everybody seems to be forgetting that people have got to get paid.

 

[Elephant]

But what about the return of the main studio rule? Can you really imagine Clear Channel moving all of their stations back into the Cincinnati city limits? KISS would have to get a studio in Milford. Bonneville would have to put a studio in Fort Thomas for WYGY, one in Fairfield for WSWD, and then keep WUBE and WKRQ where they are. Cumulus would have WRRM in the city, but then a studio in Hamilton for WGRR, and another in Lebanon for WFTK. Radio One would have three sites in the city for WDBZ, in Erlanger for WIZF, and Norwood for WMOJ. WCIN would have to move out of Blue Ash back into the city, WDJO would have to go back to Florence, and WSCH would get out of Lawrenceburg back to Aurora. WOXY now has to move back to Oxford (or Mason when its finally built), WAOL gets moved out of Georgetown to Ripley, and WNOP goes back to Newport (maybe floating on the river again). Who am I forgetting?

What a mess.

 

[microbob]

I can't imagine that the FCC would require a station's main studio in it's city of licence. It would be a huge expense not only for small owners, but what about the the K-LOVE and Air1 satellite stations? I'm sure that the FCC's localism proposal is not going to go into effect as it is currently written.

 

[michaeljaffe]

An interesting side issue about this. I have heard this appeal to save local radio while listening to WDJO on the internet and it sounds to me that the voice on this spot is none other than the voice of Bobby Jay (who lost his job on WCBS-FM when that station became Jack on 6/3/2005 and has not been regularly heard on terrestrial radio since).

 

[BobointheH20]

Running public service announcements throughout the day and having some kind of community outreach doesn't sound like too much to ask, and really not that expensive. If all you carry is prerecorded and voicetracked programming, you're not really "local radio" anyway, are you?

WDJO posting that site accusing the FCC of being "nostalgic" like it's a bad thing is kind of ironic. I like what they do over there, but it's not really the FCC's problem if they can't make a profit.

Well, WDJO is locally programmed with local personalities, and almost entirely voicetracked. It is the only way they can stay in business. They are targeting an age group that most advertisers shun, and what business they get is sold at quite low rates. They can afford to operate because most of the staff is part-time. They still provide public service announcements and local news, although the news is outsourced. If they had to hire their own news staff and have a live body in the studio at all times, they'd be out of business. That's not a matter of opinion, that's a fact. Modern automation technology is what makes it possible for a station like WDJO to exist on the meager revenues it's able to generate.

People have to understand that you can't have as many radio stations as we have, and have them all full-service live, local operations. The economics just don't work. Audiences are too fragmented and a top-rated station is reaching a fraction of the number of listeners it reached 20 or 30 years ago. In some markets a station can be #1 with an audience share of less than 5%. There was never room for more than a handful of full service stations in any market. The difference is, "back in the day," we only had a handful of stations in any market, period. And even then, many stations met the "public service" and other mandates by what can charitably be called sleight-of-hand.

If the FCC wants everybody to be live and local all the time, and jump through all sorts of paperwork hoops about so-called "public service," then it's going to have to make the conscious decision that a significant portion of the currently-licensed stations must go broke and go silent, permanently. I think we all know that's not going to happen. In fact, the policy seems to be to keep cramming more stations on the dial, until the medium itself is destroyed by technical degradation and audience fragmentation. Ironically, WDJO is subjected to destructive interference from a co-channel station in Chicago that never should have been licensed at its power -- a situation to which the FCC is utterly indifferent. Were it not for that action to ignore the laws of physics (an all-too-common action these days at the FCC), WDJO might be better able to compete.

In this era of infinitely multiplying media, everybody seems to be forgetting that people have got to get paid.

Call this playing devil's advocate.
You seem to be saying that they have some kind of inherent right to exist. They knew the signal was bad (or should have,) when they bought the station. As for public service announcements, unless you count community calendar stuff, nobody really airs them any more. There are a couple of crack of dawn "community focus" programs, but that's about it.

I repeat: It's not really the FCC's problem if they can't make a profit. The FCC, like most government departments, is all about creating policy for policy's sake, no matter how convoluted the end result. I'm not defending them, that's just the way it is. I stand by my original theory, that the point of the rules is about trying to make the current radio giants show some accountability to the communities. I didn't say it was the right way or the most effective way, or that there wouldn't be some collateral damage (in the form of little independent stations,) I just think that's what they are trying to do.

The comment "everyone seems to forget that people have got to get paid" made me chuckle, though. Particularly at the small stations, nobody's really getting paid a living wage. The Save Local Radio campaign is the attempt by the investors of their little stations to rally support in order to make to make a return on their investment, not to save or preserve the fine, fading tradition of local radio. The automation, etc., that the "little guys" use are all directed toward the same end goal as the corporate giants- a profit. It's not really a more noble cause than the bottom line at either level.

 

[gr8oldies]

There is really no way to "bring back the good old days" when I can program an iPod, get the school lunch menus off the local school's website, get traffic and weather on my cellphone, as well as have a couple of hundred TV channels. A station group leasing 5 offices instead of one doesn't make them "more local". How many people show up at a radio station's door these days? Up in Dayton we'd have the same situation, Cox would have to have main studios in Piqua (which they actually do have because Dayton is over 35 miles away), and Xenia as well as Dayton. Clear Channel maybe gets to lease the old WDJX/WYMJ digs in Beavercreek again for WXEG, find a spot in Kettering for WLQT, (are they supposed to broadcast the Kettering police blotter every day?), they have space in Springfield for WIZE but no staff, of course Greenville for WDSJ. The rest can stay on Pine St (which is in the city of Dayton). Mainline builds a studio in Springfield for WDHT, its back to Eaton for Fly 92-9, and Kiss Country goes back to Urbana. They all spend a lot more in rent, but how does that make them "more local"?

 

[flakunkel]

Call this playing devil's advocate.
You seem to be saying that they have some kind of inherent right to exist. They knew the signal was bad (or should have,) when they bought the station. As for public service announcements, unless you count community calendar stuff, nobody really airs them any more. There are a couple of crack of dawn "community focus" programs, but that's about it.

I repeat: It's not really the FCC's problem if they can't make a profit. The FCC, like most government departments, is all about creating policy for policy's sake, no matter how convoluted the end result. I'm not defending them, that's just the way it is. I stand by my original theory, that the point of the rules is about trying to make the current radio giants show some accountability to the communities. I didn't say it was the right way or the most effective way, or that there wouldn't be some collateral damage (in the form of little independent stations,) I just think that's what they are trying to do.

[/quote]

You are missing the point. I never said or even implied that the WDJO's of this world have a right to exist. My point is that if you WANT them to exist, and a lot of people who post here seem to, then you have to accept the economic reality that they must do so on a shoestring, by nature of what they are.

The proposed rules that "attempt to make the current radio giants accountable" as you put it must inevitably force the little guys out. Moreover, they appear consciously intended to do so. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but is that what you really want?

 

[nedsmith2007]

This is in response to recent FCC "localism" proposals.

If they can't survive should "localism" rules go into effect, I say let these wastes of spectrum go dark. Weed out the dead wood. Clear the clutter from the dial. Without the bottom feeders taking a share of the pie, the big boys can grow a little stronger. Not that I expect any of you typical radio info bitter beer face corporate radio sucks types to agree with me. Gotta have your local moldy oldies. Even if no one listens. Localism or not.

 

[major]

I've made this comment many times before: Radio is screwed because when de-regulation/consolodation began, the "big guys" paid too much money for the properties they bought. Now, they have to pay the bills with less money coming in. It is the fault of the mega-conglomerates for speculating and running up the costs of stations. If you bought a station for $5 million (just for example), and now can't pay the bills, what makes you think that property is still worth $5 million +? No one in their right mind is going to pay you $5 million just to lose money on the proposition. So what is happening? Major layoffs, satellite delivered programming with no staff. It just doesn't seem any more complicated than that to me. I own my own business, and unfortunately, that's what you must do sometimes, just to survive.

 

[del_griffith]

I've made this comment many times before: Radio is screwed because when de-regulation/consolodation began, the "big guys" paid too much money for the properties they bought. Now, they have to pay the bills with less money coming in. It is the fault of the mega-conglomerates for speculating and running up the costs of stations. If you bought a station for $5 million (just for example), and now can't pay the bills, what makes you think that property is still worth $5 million +? No one in their right mind is going to pay you $5 million just to lose money on the proposition. So what is happening? Major layoffs, satellite delivered programming with no staff. It just doesn't seem any more complicated than that to me. I own my own business, and unfortunately, that's what you must do sometimes, just to survive.

Radio and a lot of other industries have operated on what's known as the bigger fool theory. It goes like this: If I'm foolish enough to pay 5 million for a station worth 1 million, then there's a bigger fool willing to pay me 7 million when it doesn't work out. Since the radio spectrum is a limited commodity, and radio is an ego business, then there will always be an ego driven bigger fool is how the buying and selling model has worked for about 20 years.

Is the foot dragging by the banks in the Clear Channel deal maybe putting a stop to a lot of that, if the courts do not make them go forward. Is the banks thinking that it would be very tough is not impossible to meet the numbers put forward in this deal? And with the economy possibly getting worse in the future sealing the probability of not only meeting the covenants of the loan possibly from day one but simply not being able to remain afloat for any reasonable amount of time behind their their desire to bail out and not finance this?

 

[almaniac27]

This is in response to recent FCC "localism" proposals.

If they can't survive should "localism" rules go into effect, I say let these wastes of spectrum go dark. Weed out the dead wood. Clear the clutter from the dial. Without the bottom feeders taking a share of the pie, the big boys can grow a little stronger. Not that I expect any of you typical radio info bitter beer face corporate radio sucks types to agree with me. Gotta have your local moldy oldies. Even if no one listens. Localism or not.

I doubt WDJO is stealing that many listeners from Clear Channel, and if WDJO goes dark, the listeners won't go to Clear Channel because they're not offering what they want. They'll likely get iPods, satellite radio or internet radio. So your point doesn't make sense. But I am certainly a "corporate radio sucks" guy, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

I would like it if someone held the big corporate entities responsible for providing quality local content, but I also think it would cost too much money for some stations. I just came back from a spring break trip to Florida, and being the radio nut I am, I spent most of the ride scanning the dial. What's sad to me is how much the dial in every city I went through sounds almost exactly the same. I'm just hoping wireless internet radio is just around the corner, bringing with it some much-needed variety.

 

[Oldbones]

You seem to be saying that they have some kind of inherent right to exist. They knew the signal was bad (or should have,) when they bought the station. As for public service announcements, unless you count community calendar stuff, nobody really airs them any more. There are a couple of crack of dawn "community focus" programs, but that's about it.

I repeat: It's not really the FCC's problem if they can't make a profit. The FCC, like most government departments, is all about creating policy for policy's sake, no matter how convoluted the end result. I'm not defending them, that's just the way it is. I stand by my original theory, that the point of the rules is about trying to make the current radio giants show some accountability to the communities. I didn't say it was the right way or the most effective way, or that there wouldn't be some collateral damage (in the form of little independent stations,) I just think that's what they are trying to do.

No, it's not the FCC's fault if a station can't make a profit. However, they seem to be going out of their way to make terrestrial radio compete with one hand tied behind it's back. The satcasters and webcasters aren't required to have any sort of "community involvement", don't have to deal with public file and EAS BS either. Alas, they're responding to political pressure from activist groups that seem to think that all radio stations are owned by deep-pocketed corporations that are making obscene profits from these properties and can well afford to abide by a lot of silly rules that don't apply to the competiton. After all stations were staffed round the clock back in the good ole days.

This is in response to recent FCC "localism" proposals.[/size]

If they can't survive should "localism" rules go into effect, I say let these wastes of spectrum go dark. Weed out the dead wood. Clear the clutter from the dial. Without the bottom feeders taking a share of the pie, the big boys can grow a little stronger. Not that I expect any of you typical radio info bitter beer face corporate radio sucks types to agree with me. Gotta have your local moldy oldies. Even if no one listens. Localism or not.
[/quote]

Again, why is terrestrial radio being singled out? Don't the satcasters occupy RF bandwidth too? And heaven help the poor broadcaster that plays the unedited version of "Money" that a webcaster or one of the satcasters can play with impunity.

Let's make the playing field level.

 

[Inventor989]

"If the FCC wants everybody to be live and local all the time, and jump through all sorts of paperwork hoops about so-called "public service," then it's going to have to make the conscious decision that a significant portion of the currently-licensed stations must go broke and go silent, permanently. I think we all know that's not going to happen. "

Um, I wouldn't bet the retirement account on THAT.

I think that a lot of what is going on has the ultimate goal of silencing voices that can't be controlled by a small cadre of power-hungry oligarchs in Washington, or, more likely, The Hague. Telecom 96 was the beginning of Big Brother's decimation of independent thought and opinion on the airwaves of the US.