Where is Jubal?

[davideduardo]

At least in the Miami instance - the station said *something.*

In the Jubal instance, the audience was left in the dark for months on end. That is completely inexcusable! At least acknowledge the man's absence. There is no need to go into specifics.

And, yes, I do believe many in positions of power have little respect for the audience.

Where is there deception in not saying that a talent is not in the studio? The Jubal bits were not done live (maybe there were exceptions, but I was told they were all pre-recorded) so if they are run the next week or next month detracts nothing from their entertainment value.

The FCC has a renewed interest in shows (not bits) that say "live" and are not.

The Brooke and Jubal show only needs a "recorded" announcement if portions or all of it are recorded for playback in different hours... mostly due to time zones.

Just think of newscasts with actualities: Lots of them are done prior to broadcast. Only if the whole show says "live" and is not do they have to do a qualification statement.

Otherwise, we'd have to say, "And this is Elvis with 'Suspicious Minds"... he's dead now so this is a recording..."

And I think the audience is smart enough to know things like that.

 

[TheBigA]

In the Jubal instance, the audience was left in the dark for months on end. That is completely inexcusable! At least acknowledge the man's absence.

What do you know about the situation? Nothing as you admit. You don't know if there were legal or contract issues involved. A radio station or any business has no responsibility to provide confidential information about its employees to the public. That's really up to the employees themselves. You make up some fake line about "little respect for the audience" because they won't tell you private personal details that you have no right or business to know. If Jubal wants to talk about it, he will.

 

[staggmovie]

What do you know about the situation? Nothing as you admit. You don't know if there were legal or contract issues involved. A radio station or any business has no responsibility to provide confidential information about its employees to the public. That's really up to the employees themselves. You make up some fake line about "little respect for the audience" because they won't tell you private personal details that you have no right or business to know. If Jubal wants to talk about it, he will.

I will imagine that DavidEduardo will be more then happy to educate this poster about the business of radio, or is it just me that he likes to educate? Who knows but i have to imagine that there is a contract involved, most people don't work in radio for free. The only person I am aware of that did, was Pete McMuarry when he used to do evenings for WGN Radio, when they were still at Tribune Tower, but before Justin Kaufmann signed on as host, were he left to do an ill fated sports talk show I believe on the Drive.

 

[MarkW]

A radio station or any business has no responsibility to provide confidential information about its employees to the public. That's really up to the employees themselves. You make up some fake line about "little respect for the audience" because they won't tell you private personal details that you have no right or business to know. If Jubal wants to talk about it, he will.

Sorry, but using Jubal's name in the show title for many months after (a) the man was fired or (b) reached consensual agreement to exit the job with ZERO announcement to the audience is just pathetic and is not at all a good way to build rapport with listeners. Yes, in Chicago the show has always largely consisted of recycled bits from the previous day, but that isn't true in Seattle or Portland where the show aired LIVE and where listeners have been left in the dark for a very long time.

I never requested that "personal" or embarrassing information be disclosed.

But, hey, keep defending how big radio goes about its business. It's clearly working wonders! Stations that used to trade at $50 million a piece now trade for $10 million a piece. Always an excuse for everything. Always someone else's fault. Never any introspection. Enjoy the race to the bottom.

 

[TheBigA]

Sorry, but using Jubal's name in the show title for many months after (a) the man was fired or (b) reached consensual agreement to exit the job with ZERO announcement to the audience is just pathetic and is not at all a good way to build rapport with listeners.

Once again, a company has no obligation to reveal personal information to customers. You nay think that's bad or pathetic, but if you were the person involved, you'd think differently. And this has absolutely nothing to do with "big radio." This would apply to any company.

I never requested that "personal" or embarrassing information be disclosed!

Of course you did. You want the company to publicly say why the co-host of a show is no longer there. They have no obligation to explain. And they have a contractual obligation to keep his name in the title of the show. So explain again what you want the company to do.

And we're talking about a FAMILY OWNED company here.

 

[MarkW]

I understand they have "no obligation to explain." It's their choice. However, I think it's bad form to keep using his "brand" with no disclosure to the listeners.

I never requested that the reason WHY he isn't there be disclosed. Re-read my original post.

 

[TheBigA]

I never requested that the reason WHY he isn't there be disclosed. Re-read my original post.

Their CONTRACTUAL LEGAL obligation is to (1) The employee, and (2) the affiliated stations. That's it. Not to listeners. Their legal obligation was to continue to deliver the contracted program until such time as they made a change. That's what they did. End of story.

 

[MarkW]

Thanks for validating my claim that corporate radio management treats listeners like second class citizens.

 

[TheBigA]

Thanks for validating my claim that corporate radio management treats listeners like second class citizens.

This is not "corporate radio management." This is a family owned company.

They treat their listeners like listeners. They gave the listeners what they listen for until such time as it changed.

You prefer the way iHeart handled Kane?

 

[MarkW]

You prefer the way iHeart handled Kane?

Yes, I do.

For one - his ratings have been just "OK" (not great) for a while. I can understand the move. In fact, his station in Baltimore is suffering some of the softest ratings it has ever seen.

Second, and more importantly - iHM didn't lie to its listeners!!! His name was immediately removed from the show, and the company immediately confirmed he was no longer an employee.

Hubbard Broadcasting might be family owned, but it's still a corporation nonetheless. I think they do a great job with many of their holdings, but the way they handled the Jubal situation was very, very shady.

 

[davideduardo]

Hubbard Broadcasting might be family owned, but it's still a corporation nonetheless. I think they do a great job with many of their holdings, but the way they handled the Jubal situation was very, very shady.

Almost every station in the United states is owned by some form of corporation. The first reason to do that is to protect the owner or owners from personal liability from something done by the operation. The second reason is to allow shares in the company to be held by family members, particularly useful for estate planning. A third reason is to allow the possibility of adding a partner or investor who would enhance the value of the operation or provide necessary cash, expertise or relationships.

There is nothing wrong with a station being owned by a corporation. When you say that Hubbard is "still" a corporation, it seems as if we should consider that to be the sign of the Death Star or something else equally as evil. That is far from the truth.

And we don't know the internal situation at Hubbard. There are a variety of reasons why the company may have postponed a final decision. The one that comes to mind is that they wished to do a thorough analysis or investigation of a situation in order to be fair and not seem impulsive.

No listener was harmed any more than a TV viewer is by the departure of a cast member in a series.

There is no "evil empire" at work, no deception of listeners. And it appears that the company gave considerable and due deliberation to its final decision, which would indicate great fairness.

 

[davideduardo]

Thanks for validating my claim that corporate radio management treats listeners like second class citizens.

I have owned, worked for and consulted "corporate" radio operations in 16 or 17 countries. I've never been involved with a station that was owned by an individual who was not incorporated for a reason: someone who would run an unincorporated station business today would not be an employer I would care to work for as it indicates a lack of planning and understanding of our enormously litigious society.

Aside from that, owners (and I myself owned a group with nearly 20 stations and un-built licenses) realize that the commodity that allows us to make money is listeners. More listeners, more income. So we try the hardest to satisfy listeners so that we can have enough of them to be able to produce results for advertisers.

Radio is one of the few enterprises where the income is not provided by the consumers. Running a station involves trying to balance the needs of advertisers with the enjoyment and use of a station by listeners.

In difficult times, stations sometimes have to make compromises to stay alive. That may mean not doing everything towards good programming that they'd like to do because doing that would bankrupt the operation.

Yes, I've run into a couple of horrible broadcasters. My first job was with one, and it taught me what not to do for the rest of my career. All professions and businesses have a few bad apples, but your blanket remarks about radio owners and operators offend and insult the vast majority of us who want to do as good a job as we can to satisfy listeners and to make a bit of money in the process.

You really should apologize to all the dedicated and good broadcasters. So many have been affected, through no fault of their own, by this current health crisis that we should be hoping that all of them find a job and an income and that stations survive this time when most are billing next to nothing.

 

[TheBigA]

Second, and more importantly - iHM didn't lie to its listeners!!!

I think that overstates the situation. The listeners continued to hear Jubal right up to the day they announced the change.

 

[MarkW]

DavidEduardo - there's no bigger defender of "real" air talent than yours truly. While hedge funds and corporate radio big shots throw them under the bus and some frequent posters on here turn the other cheek, I've stood up for these folks by calling out the greed and incompetence of Farid Sulemann, the Dickey family, and others.

Highly leveraged buyouts arranged by folks making high six or seven figure salaries are a large reason radio finds itself in its current predicament.

I will never apologize for speaking the truth. I think many mom & pop broadcasters and many long-time air personalities (many of whom have been treated very unfairly in recent years) are dedicated to their craft and to their communities and have done many wonderful things. I hate how David Field, Bob Pittman, Caroline Beasley and their direct reports are treating these fine people!

 

[TheBigA]

I've stood up for these folks by calling out the greed and incompetence of Farid Sulemann, the Dickey family, and others.

Congratulations on your great job. I hope your legs aren't too tired from standing.

Look I believe talent has the potential to be the real power in radio as it is in the music business, if only the talent UTILIZE and DEMONSTRATE their abilities to attract revenue and audience to radio. Some are doing a great job in doing that, some aren't living up to their potential.

Highly leveraged buyouts arranged by folks making high six or seven figure salaries are a large reason radio finds itself in its current predicament.

Gee and I thought it was because of an international pandemic. Seems to me people are losing their jobs in every industry and every country right now.

BTW Speaking of buyouts, Entercom has been offering a lot of its 6-figure air talent buy-outs too. Not just executives.

 

[MarkW]

Coronavirus unfortunately has only served to exacerbate pre-existing issues in the AM/FM broadcasting industry.

Again, for the most part, I think Hubbard runs its business well and they own & operate some terrific radio stations. Some of the best in the country, in certain instances. I don't like what they did with the Jubal situation, however.

 

[davideduardo]

DavidEduardo - there's no bigger defender of "real" air talent than yours truly. While hedge funds and corporate radio big shots throw them under the bus and some frequent posters on here turn the other cheek, I've stood up for these folks by calling out the greed and incompetence of Farid Sulemann, the Dickey family, and others.

Highly leveraged buyouts arranged by folks making high six or seven figure salaries are a large reason radio finds itself in its current predicament.

I will never apologize for speaking the truth. I think many mom & pop broadcasters and many long-time air personalities (many of whom have been treated very unfairly in recent years) are dedicated to their craft and to their communities and have done many wonderful things. I hate how David Field, Bob Pittman, Caroline Beasley and their direct reports are treating these fine people!

You are painting with a wider than needed brush. The Beasley family are traditional broadcasters who'd like to do things the way we think is most attractive to the audience. But the 2007-2008 recession, the trend to online, the changes in top 50 market measurement and the current near-closure of the entire economy requires changes in business practices.

If you adjust for inflation, radio today bills around 33% of the 2005 level. The industry never recovered from the damage Docket 80-90 created, and then had to confront recession, lower ratings, new technology and disease.

It's impossible to expect the same practices and attitudes as we had in "the good old days".

I think we will see the near elimination of the "local radio" myth while stations run personality music based shows on national and regional systems of as many as hundreds of stations. Local programming in all but the largest markets will be limited to news bytes, local weather and traffic inserted into the network offerings (which will be done with work parts, not live).

Add in the fact that newer generations generally don't want those great announcers and jocks that were a key part of radio in the years between the 50's and well into the 90's. Changes in the audience wants and needs and new technology has reduced the interest in on-air "talent".

Dickey turned out to not be a competent operator. Farid was Dickey squared. No different than operators like Richard Eaton and Don Burden in the 60's. As I said, every business, government office, charity and organization gets occasional crooks and crazies, but most of us are decent, moral and fair people.

 

[MarkW]

I think we will see the near elimination of the "local radio" myth while stations run personality music based shows on national and regional systems of as many as hundreds of stations. Local programming in all but the largest markets will be limited to news bytes, local weather and traffic inserted into the network offerings (which will be done with work parts, not live).

Sadly, I agree.

Dickey turned out to not be a competent operator. Farid was Dickey squared.

Thank you for stating this. We have some common ground after all.

 

[TheBigA]

I think we will see the near elimination of the "local radio" myth while stations run personality music based shows on national and regional systems of as many as hundreds of stations. Local programming in all but the largest markets will be limited to news bytes, local weather and traffic inserted into the network offerings (which will be done with work parts, not live).

That's exactly what critics expected 20 years ago when Clear Channel owned 1000 radio stations. It didn't happen. It's taken 20 years, and the company has sold about 200 stations, so its now down to about 800. They've built a solid syndication system that not only is used by its own stations, but also by some small single station owners. I don't see any other company building the same kind of syndication system or national talent system that iHeart has. In fact Cumulus has spent the last two years breaking up its national "Nash" country service.