Who's minding the store?

[wadio]

Yes, mistakes happen. But this kind of thing has become a way of life on terrestrial radio.

It's a slippery slope. Can you imagine Rick Sklar condoning YESTERDAY'S newscast running on WABC. Apparently we're all frogs in the pot and the water is getting hotter all the time.

Shame on the industry insiders here who say this kind of sloppiness is acceptable. You should at least strive for excellence and decry mediocrity. Shame on you!

 

[TheBigA]

Can you imagine Rick Sklar condoning YESTERDAY'S newscast running on WABC.

Rick was pretty upset when the station dropped music for talk, so there are a lot of things he wouldn't like about the station now. He hated newscasts PERIOD.

Shame on the industry insiders here who say this kind of sloppiness is acceptable.

Who said it's acceptable? Show me a quote. No one is saying that. What I'm saying is it happens. Especially early Sunday morning.

 

[Element9]

No, it wouldn't have happened back in the day when Charlie Greer or Chuck Leonard was working with an engineer producing the show, but those days are gone forever. That duly noted, production people should know how to trim-label-date a commercial with an end date that prevents it from running beyond expiration date. same for automated news. THAT'S the kind of detail that some people here trying to address. But we long ago stepped out on the slippery slope and there's little to no chance of going back. If you're playing PD, you'll likely find more gaffs like those cited; but if you're a consumer really looking for news, roll up to WCBS or WINS each of which likely offers accurate, updated newscasts, delivered live and professionally at that time of the night.

 

[TheBigA]

No, it wouldn't have happened back in the day when Charlie Greer or Chuck Leonard was working with an engineer producing the show,

Chuck would not have been there at this time Sunday morning. WABC ran "public service programming" Sunday mornings.

 

[mimo]

Someone didn't take the old ads out of the system. That's where the fault should lie, and that doesn't necessarily lie with someone making minimum wage or a board op. It could have been overlooked, it also could have been someone so busy they never got around to it. I remember having to read ads live at one station I worked for and found there was one I was scheduled to read that was out of date. I called the PD and asked what I should do instead, and they suggested to read the next one on the list instead. I removed the old ad so it didn't get read from the notebook.

 

[flybynight]

I'm amazed at the apologists on here.

Anyone who isn't aware of how degraded today's "product" is, due to all the cost and corner cutting is either woefully naive...or just a contrarian liar.

And this situation is EXACTLY like a restaurant---or any service or product who's providers decide to make money by CUTTING product quality. Initially the savings is achieved while the effects are negligible, but over time, whether due to perceptible or imperceptible impressions, customers will go elsewhere.

If Campbell's soup wants to make more money, do they find better ways to market their product to grow sales...or do they decide to buy cheaper and/or inferior ingredients and risk making the product less appealing over the long haul? A good businessman knows the obvious answer.

 

[davideduardo]

No, it wouldn't have happened back in the day when Charlie Greer or Chuck Leonard was working with an engineer producing the show, but those days are gone forever.

And those days went away far later than they should have. There is nothing better than a jock running his own board or, today, computer / board.

That duly noted, production people should know how to trim-label-date a commercial with an end date that prevents it from running beyond expiration date. same for automated news.

And people should never have accidents in their car. But they do.

On the other hand, the most common reason in my experience for out-of-date spots running is bad agency or client instructions.

THAT'S the kind of detail that some people here trying to address.

But there are problems in every field that get worked out and fixed. Bad airbags in tens of millions of cars. Bacteria in food products. Bedbugs in four star hotels. In radio it can be everything from a direct lightning strike on the antenna to misread handwriting on a sales or production order.

If you're playing PD, you'll likely find more gaffs like those cited; but if you're a consumer really looking for news, roll up to WCBS or WINS each of which likely offers accurate, updated newscasts, delivered live and professionally at that time of the night.

So you are saying that WINS and WCBS never have glitches or mistakes? With the logistics of a 24/7 news department, I'm sure they both have the occasional mislabeled audio cut or older story not being replaced with the new one. Or the battery in the geny shorts when its most needed and so on.

No station is immune to the occasional glitch.

 

[davideduardo]

Anyone who isn't aware of how degraded today's "product" is, due to all the cost and corner cutting is either woefully naive...or just a contrarian liar.

Much of the cost cutting in radio, as in many other businesses, is due to the economy. Adjusted for the present value of the dollar, radio revenues are off as much as 40% over 2000 depending on the market. Since very few stations had 40% margins, something had to be done to keep stations profitable.

Blaming the issues on "immense debt" sounds terrific. But stations have always been financed with debt, going back to Bartell, Storz, Storer, McLendon, Rounsaville and the growth companies of the 50's and 60's.

 

[davideduardo]

Someone didn't take the old ads out of the system. That's where the fault should lie, and that doesn't necessarily lie with someone making minimum wage or a board op.

Or, as I mentioned in a previous post, the agency or client did not give the right copy instructions (at least for the Kars for Kids spot).

 

[flybynight]

Blaming the issues on "immense debt" sounds terrific. But stations have always been financed with debt, going back to Bartell, Storz, Storer, McLendon, Rounsaville and the growth companies of the 50's and 60's.

While financing with debt isn't new, the substantial
and unwieldy amount of properties that are now at the constant beck and call of banks, thanks to post consolidation hoarding, is unprecedented. It's deleterious effect on the quality of the product is not only disgraceful, but tragically timed, as the variety of audio source options only increases. What a great time to make the product LESS appealing!

 

[davideduardo]

While financing with debt isn't new, the substantial
and unwieldy amount of properties that are now at the constant beck and call of banks, thanks to post consolidation hoarding, is unprecedented. It's deleterious effect on the quality of the product is not only disgraceful, but tragically timed, as the variety of audio source options only increases. What a great time to make the product LESS appealing!

The only difference between the last few years and any period from the mid-50's onwards is that we had a significant recession.

Stations large and small were financed going back that far, too. In many cases, such as the 70's and 80's, with higher interest rates.

The debt per station in adjusted dollars is probably no different than it was 30, 40, or 50 years ago. What has changed is that one owner can have many more stations, all with their particular debt loads. The biggest difference is that the debt is not held by banks but by private investment capital.

When I was working out the loans to buy FMs in NY, Miami and Hartford in the late 70's, the only place to go was a bank. In that case, we picked two of them, Manny Hanny and Chase, and they were going to give us the money to buy the stations. We were going to try to make money, and pay the bank back and have something left over. That's the way it has always been.

The cuts in staffing have less to do with debt than with the economy. And in the larger markets, they have as much to do with the PPM which has sent the message that listeners today are annoyed by yesterday's DJs and promotions and remotes.

 

[flybynight]

The only difference between the last few years and any period from the mid-50's onwards is that we had a significant recession.

Stations large and small were financed going back that far, too. In many cases, such as the 70's and 80's, with higher interest rates.

The debt per station in adjusted dollars is probably no different than it was 30, 40, or 50 years ago. What has changed is that one owner can have many more stations, all with their particular debt loads. The biggest difference is that the debt is not held by banks but by private investment capital.

When I was working out the loans to buy FMs in NY, Miami and Hartford in the late 70's, the only place to go was a bank. In that case, we picked two of them, Manny Hanny and Chase, and they were going to give us the money to buy the stations. We were going to try to make money, and pay the bank back and have something left over. That's the way it has always been.

The cuts in staffing have less to do with debt than with the economy. And in the larger markets, they have as much to do with the PPM which has sent the message that listeners today are annoyed by yesterday's DJs and promotions and remotes.

The big difference is that now there is much more control concentrated in much fewer hands. Blaming the state of today's radio on the crash of the economy is folly. Radio ruined itself with owners cashing in on the post-telecom gold rush. Let's also give credit to the bought-and-paid-for congressmen who pushed it through.

Never before have so many radio stations been under the thumb of so few radio people. And it shows.

 

[davideduardo]

The big difference is that now there is much more control concentrated in much fewer hands. Blaming the state of today's radio on the crash of the economy is folly. Radio ruined itself with owners cashing in on the post-telecom gold rush. Let's also give credit to the bought-and-paid-for congressmen who pushed it through.

Never before have so many radio stations been under the thumb of so few radio people. And it shows.

When the 7/7 radio rules were created, FM was not a factor and there were under 3,000 AM stations. Today there are 15000 stations, not even including translators and LPDM stations. While there are some big companies, the two biggest don't even reach 10% of all stations when combined. That's one of the lowest percentages of concentration in any field.

Consolidation was the direct result of Docket 80-90 which so overpopulated the FM dial that in many small and medium markets nobody was making money.

If you want to blame someone, blame the folks at the FCC who came up with the brilliant idea of giving towns of 15,000 six radio stations.

 

[flybynight]

When the 7/7 radio rules were created, FM was not a factor and there were under 3,000 AM stations. Today there are 15000 stations, not even including translators and LPDM stations. While there are some big companies, the two biggest don't even reach 10% of all stations when combined. That's one of the lowest percentages of concentration in any field.

As you know, not all radio stations have the same value and significance.

While the big companies do not own the majority of the 15,000 stations you mention, they certainly own many of the most substantial and potentially valuable properties----unless you're trying to tell me that owning Vermont, Connecticut & Oriental Avenues in Monopoly is better than having those two measly Park Place & Boardwalk properties.

 

[wadio]

Who said it's acceptable? Show me a quote. No one is saying that. What I'm saying is it happens. Especially early Sunday morning.

The newscast I mentioned was at 11 am on Sunday (that's one hour before noon.)

Don't parse words. Saying, "hey, it happens," is pretty much like saying, "it's acceptable." Then there's the list of excuses -- the economy, technology, ad clients (in the case of expired commercial copy,) staff too busy, etc.

Acknowledging a problem is the first step toward fixing it. Some of you guys seem to be reflecting management's attitude that nothing is really wrong. Your posts are good reinforcement for that attitude. You're being enablers, if only in a small way.

These boards can demonstrate that people are paying attention, that sloppiness doesn't go unnoticed and that not everyone finds it acceptable. You should be ashamed of blowing that opportunity.

 

[TheBigA]

Some of you guys seem to be reflecting management's attitude that nothing is really wrong.

You have no idea what you're taking about. No one is saying "nothing is really wrong." Do you want a pubic execution? Because otherwise, you have no idea what actions were taken by management, other than what you invent in your imagination.

 

[TheBigA]

Anyone who isn't aware of how degraded today's "product" is, due to all the cost and corner cutting is either woefully naive...or just a contrarian liar.

Just want to point out that someone had their membership revoked for calling another poster a liar. Do you want to follow him?

No one is lying or apologizing or defending anything. No one. So quit making up crap. We have one incident on one station on a Sunday morning, and you're extrapolating this to an entire industry.

 

[flybynight]

Just want to point out that someone had their membership revoked for calling another poster a liar. Do you want to follow him?

No one is lying or apologizing or defending anything. No one. So quit making up crap. We have one incident on one station on a Sunday morning, and you're extrapolating this to an entire industry.

That one incident is just the tip of the iceberg and unless you've been living under a rock with your fingers in your ears, you'd be aware of that fact. And I didn't call anyone a liar per se, although if someone is a liar, I will certainly call them a liar. Whether or not that leads to a suspension is irrelevant.

 

[davideduardo]

As you know, not all radio stations have the same value and significance.

While the big companies do not own the majority of the 15,000 stations you mention, they certainly own many of the most substantial and potentially valuable properties----unless you're trying to tell me that owning Vermont, Connecticut & Oriental Avenues in Monopoly is better than having those two measly Park Place & Boardwalk properties.

You are stating the obvious.

But look at any city. There are a few ultra-affluent suburbs or central city enclaves of the well-to-do. And there are hundreds of middle class and working class neighborhoods. And even a few so run down that they don't fit in any of the other classifications. Radio is no different. Unless your goal was to be a part of a small community, if you were a broadcaster in the transformation days of the 50's and 60's you wanted more stations in bigger markets.

But the guy who bought the station in Douglas, AZ, went to his little hometown bank, and perhaps mortgaged his house and got the money to pay for it. The small company that was expanding from a single station in Knoxville to a bigger one in Nashville went to their bank and put the first station as security for the second one. And the guy who owned gas stations in Toledo borrowed money to buy a radio station, and then borrowed more to buy in Wheeling and Cleveland and Detroit and eventually TV stations to go along with them, working the company up to ownership in NY and LA and even an airline... all with borrowed money.

My point is that the immense majority of stations now and in the past were acquired with the help of a bank or other lender. Claiming that debt alone is having a negative impact on radio is ignoring the other factors such as the recession, the change in ratings measurement, increased numbers of stations, and the groundswell of change among listeners who want a "pull" rather than a "push" model for entertainment.

 

[flybynight]

You are stating the obvious.

But look at any city. There are a few ultra-affluent suburbs or central city enclaves of the well-to-do. And there are hundreds of middle class and working class neighborhoods. And even a few so run down that they don't fit in any of the other classifications. Radio is no different. Unless your goal was to be a part of a small community, if you were a broadcaster in the transformation days of the 50's and 60's you wanted more stations in bigger markets.

But the guy who bought the station in Douglas, AZ, went to his little hometown bank, and perhaps mortgaged his house and got the money to pay for it. The small company that was expanding from a single station in Knoxville to a bigger one in Nashville went to their bank and put the first station as security for the second one. And the guy who owned gas stations in Toledo borrowed money to buy a radio station, and then borrowed more to buy in Wheeling and Cleveland and Detroit and eventually TV stations to go along with them, working the company up to ownership in NY and LA and even an airline... all with borrowed money.

My point is that the immense majority of stations now and in the past were acquired with the help of a bank or other lender. Claiming that debt alone is having a negative impact on radio is ignoring the other factors such as the recession, the change in ratings measurement, increased numbers of stations, and the groundswell of change among listeners who want a "pull" rather than a "push" model for entertainment.

I didn't just point to one factor, however, allowing the mass ownership that exists today was simply BAD for the industry, particularly the quality of what is heard over the air.