Will Public radio be hurt by HD the way Public TV was hurt by basic cable?

[Talk_Dude]

In the thread about comparing PBS to NPR, it was noted that that public television saw most of the program categories that made public television necessary because the major networks wouldn't carry such programming being scarfed up by basic cable networks. Losing many of the things that made public television necessary has hurt public television stations.

Public radio seems to rely on three main types of programming. They carry music formats that aren't popular enough to be supported by advertisers, mostly classical music or jazz. They carry in-depth news with commentary such as NPR's drive time programming. And they carry old-school, throwback spoken word and variety entertainment programs like "Fresh Air", "Car Talk", "Wait Wait ... Don't Tell Me", "Prairie Home Companion", etc.

Will the added capacity for content provided by HD enable commercial stations to start to compete with public radio for the economical-to-produce content like the latter two categories, leaving public radio in the same straights as public television is in now?

On NPR's website they have separate buttons to go to lists of their News/talk, Entertainment, and Music programs. Those latter two are the groups I think HD radio could compete with to the point of killing them on NPR. American Public Media's website has a similar categorization of their programs. PRI's website list of programs isn't categorized like the other two, but the programs listed do fit into the same categories.

 

[TheBigA]

The better comparison is between public radio and satellite. In fact, most public radio members will tell you that the latest moves of converting classical stations to news have moved them to satellite, not HD. The satellite model is similar to public radio. Memberships in a public station have gone to $125 a year, and that's about what it costs to subscribe to satellite. You get all the diverse musical offerings formerly available at public radio, plus an added benefit of Bob Edwards interviews and a few other familiar shows. Years ago, public radio stations promoted themselves by saying "radio worth paying for," and that's what satellite says. HD's biggest problem is it requires people to buy new radios. Thus, even in markets where great programming options are available, HD hasn't taken off. Why? Because diverse fringe formats aren't going to move the sales meters in ways that we can see. Look at satellite. Over a hundred channels of commercial free music, and less than 10% of the country subscribe. Of course, HD has about 1% of the public. But there you go. Diverse fringe programming may be a motivation for some people, but it's a small percentage of the overall population, who seem content with whatever they can get for free.

 

[DonTheTrucker]

I don't know a single person that listens to HD Radio. I think public radio will be fine.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Interesting thread concept.

The non-commercial forms of broadcasting currently enjoy a more favorable treatment by the copyright and performance fee crowds I believe. That mitigates against the ability of satellite to uproot NPR... but that could change.

With all the hand-wringing in Washington over getting deficits under control, I would guess we will see new pressures for the FCC to become a bigger source of revenue. How will the gouging for cash be allocated among the various spectrum users? That could be another game-changer for any kind of race between NPR, HD and satellite.

In my lifetime I have seen a large swing in operating expense allocations. The cost of labor now seems to be a much big player in the financial equations. Part of me wants to say that not-for-profit NPR stations, many affiliated with schools, might have a leg-up in that fight, but I quickly recognize that is based the current and past years' patterns. Future patterns could include satellite making use of off-shore labor and facilities while NPR is stuck with hometown domestic labor and benefits costs.

Being a futurist isn't an easy task!

 

[Talk_Dude]

A few things worth noting. HD hasn't gained wide acceptance because there hasn't been much advertising and marketing to promote HD receivers, and there isn't yet any really compelling HD programming. At least, there hasn't been any compelling HD radio programming that has also been advertised and promoted. I suppose anyone curious enough to want to find out what's on HD radio could go look it up, but it's seldom that new technologies gain market acceptance that way.

The market demand for FM radios didn't really take off until there was programming on FM that wasn't available on AM that a large segment of the market wanted to hear. Cable TV didn't really take off until there was content on cable that wasn't available free with rabbit ears, except for rural areas where cable was required to receive "regular" television. Indeed, CATV used to mean "Community Antenna Television", and was offered as a solution to bad reception of local stations. It wasn't until channels like HBO, A&E, and the other early cable channels came along, and they were advertised to let people know they existed that cable became common everywhere, even in cities where over-the-air reception was good.

The issue of copyright and performance fees is somewhat of an issue for music format radio. And for those short-sighted radio "experts" who can't see beyond the DJ-playing-songs model of radio, that would seem to be an insurmountable obstacle.

Who would have ever thought that commercial basic cable would ever be able to compete with PBS shows like the Rick Sebak documentaries? How could there be a market for shows like his "Diner Show"? I watched the answer to that last night on the Food Network. Guy Fieri's "Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives" is the commercial equivalent of a Rick Sebak documentary on PBS. So what's the chances that a commercial radio version of "A Prairie Home Companion" or "What Do You Know?" could work on an HD channel? What about a commercial version of "Fresh Air"?

This is the point where the usual suspects will now ask, regarding this suggestion for a new, innovative, and untried idea, "When has that ever worked before?"

 

[TheBigA]

A few things worth noting. HD hasn't gained wide acceptance because there hasn't been much advertising and marketing to promote HD receivers, and there isn't yet any really compelling HD programming. At least, there hasn't been any compelling HD radio programming that has also been advertised and promoted.

I disagree with both assertions. The HD Radio Alliance has been the #1 advertiser on commercial radio stations for the past two years. And the primary thrust of the Alliance has been to offer wider programming choices. This has been especially true for NPR stations, where stations have focused on creating programming exclusive to HD. Money is being spent, advertising is being done, manufacturers are building radios, and it hasn't mattered. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. That is the lesson of HD Radio.

Comparing this to FM isn't going to work, because radio has far more competition from other platforms today. People know that, so great programming isn't the motivation it may have been 40 years ago. They can get the same content on internet or satellite radio. Plus the difference between AM and FM is far more obvious than the difference between FM and FM HD. People aren't buying radios, and the ones they get for free don't include HD. I just rented a brand new car for the holidays. The radio had AM/FM/XM. And the XM was paid for.

So what's the chances that a commercial radio version of "A Prairie Home Companion" or "What Do You Know?" could work on an HD channel? What about a commercial version of "Fresh Air"?

Chances are slim and none. The budget for Prairie Home Companion is prohibitive for a platform with no audience. If a commercial company started such a show, they'd put it on their main channel, not a sub channel. The early days of FM were dominated by unhosted music channels. It took a while before stations invested money in FM programming. The audience had to be there first in order to justify the investment. Real specialty programming on FM didn't start until the late 70s with shows like King Biscuit Flower Hour and National Lampoon's Radio Hour. If programming led to the growth of FM (and I don't believe it was), it wasn't expensive specialty programming.

 

[JimmyJames]

I truly doubt most commercial operations would have the long term strategy to develop a program like PHC. These programs were growers, not overnight successes. So even if there is value in the programming, it's unlikely commercial radio will pay to develop it. It simply doesn't fit their model. And it would require not giving $60 million deals to personalities like Ryan Seacrest.

 

[TheBigA]

I truly doubt most commercial operations would have the long term strategy to develop a program like PHC.

The real story here is that with all of Garrison's success, no one has been able to replicate it. At least in that kind of off beat folk-based variety show. This was a show that was a local success, and got its funding that way, and was simply transfered to national distribution based on local success. That's also the story behind Fresh Air and WWDTM.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The market demand for FM radios didn't really take off until there was programming on FM that wasn't available on AM that a large segment of the market wanted to hear. Cable TV didn't really take off until there was content on cable that wasn't available free with rabbit ears, except for rural areas where cable was required to receive "regular" television. Indeed, CATV used to mean "Community Antenna Television", and was offered as a solution to bad reception of local stations.

It may have been a minor role, but there was a preliminary step in the development of FM that you did not include.

In the late 1960s, AM radio in the Midwestern states maxed out in smaller communities. Because of the strong ground conductivity there were no vacant spots on the dial for new AM stations or power increases. A lot of really good small town operators jumped into the radio vacuum that followed the rise of TV in the 50s and into the early 60s. Many of these guys had daytimers. Once it was established that maybe radio was going to survive after the rise of TV, some radio people began working at milking the very best from radio. And in small town America, that meant Friday night football, election nights, severe weather coverage, etc.

I was functioning in Indiana in the late 60s and I watched as really daring people built new FM ONLY radio stations in county seat towns. This worked well in the Midwest. I was from the South so on my trips home I would check to see what was happening there. There even smaller towns would often have TWO AM stations in a lesser economy so few were daring enough to make something of this "new fangled FM" thingy.

I don't disagree with your premise that circa 1980 and forward the presence of good programming on FM began to turn an industry in a new direction. I only suggest that a 10 or 15 year experimentation with FM in small, commercially strong Midwestern hometown markets gave people the guts to try the same thing in larger cities.

 

[Talk_Dude]

This is the point where the usual suspects will now ask, regarding this suggestion for a new, innovative, and untried idea, "When has that ever worked before?"

Looks like my prediction was close, though not 100% on target.

I have heard programs on commercial radio that were very, very similar to "A Prairie Home Companion" in the broad sense. They weren't family-friendly with a rural, Midwestern touch, but they were radio variety shows that consisted of a combination of comedy skits, musical performances, and stand-up comedy.

Basically, it was a live, evening show done by a leading morning show team. It was performed in front of an audience at a local club, and included many of the characters from regular morning show skits, though expanded in length. There were several local musical acts, some guest comedians, and stand-up bits from one of the show hosts who started out in stand-up. The cost of the tickets went to a local charity. If anyone wanted to turn that concept into a regularly scheduled weekly event, with the cost of admission covering some of the costs of production, there's an excellent chance that such a show could work. It just takes people with a sense of imagination and a positive attitude to give the thing a try.

Even more important is to totally ignore those who can't see beyond the tip of their nose and who gauge the possibility of a program idea succeeding or failing based on the lack of precedent for anyone ever doing the exact same thing as a show with a similar concept.

Oh, and to those who are totally lacking in imagination, the format of "Prairie Home Companion" is nothing but a throwback to the kind of variety programs that used to be common on radio back in the Golden Age of radio.

Also, there's no reason why a public radio station couldn't put together and air a similar show, and even syndicate it. Just because Garrison Keillor has dibs on a rural Midwestern flavored radio variety show doesn't mean that something similar but with an urban (meaning "city", and not necessarily Black) sensibility.

 

[MattParker]

This is the point where the usual suspects will now ask, regarding this suggestion for a new, innovative, and untried idea, "When has that ever worked before?"

Looks like my prediction was close, though not 100% on target.

I have heard programs on commercial radio that were very, very similar to "A Prairie Home Companion" in the broad sense. They weren't family-friendly with a rural, Midwestern touch, but they were radio variety shows that consisted of a combination of comedy skits, musical performances, and stand-up comedy.

Basically, it was a live, evening show done by a leading morning show team. It was performed in front of an audience at a local club, and included many of the characters from regular morning show skits, though expanded in length. There were several local musical acts, some guest comedians, and stand-up bits from one of the show hosts who started out in stand-up. The cost of the tickets went to a local charity. If anyone wanted to turn that concept into a regularly scheduled weekly event, with the cost of admission covering some of the costs of production, there's an excellent chance that such a show could work. It just takes people with a sense of imagination and a positive attitude to give the thing a try.

Even more important is to totally ignore those who can't see beyond the tip of their nose and who gauge the possibility of a program idea succeeding or failing based on the lack of precedent for anyone ever doing the exact same thing as a show with a similar concept.

Oh, and to those who are totally lacking in imagination, the format of "Prairie Home Companion" is nothing but a throwback to the kind of variety programs that used to be common on radio back in the Golden Age of radio.

Also, there's no reason why a public radio station couldn't put together and air a similar show, and even syndicate it. Just because Garrison Keillor has dibs on a rural Midwestern flavored radio variety show doesn't mean that something similar but with an urban (meaning "city", and not necessarily Black) sensibility.

Y'all got it backwards. PHC is similar to a commercial program, rather than the other way around. The commercial program is The Grand Ol' Opry on clear channel 650, WSM. It's been a commercial program since 1925 and is actually similar to an earlier program, the WLS National Barn Dance. Garrison Keillor has said several times that he got the idea for Prairie Home Companion while preparing an article on the Grand Ol' Opry for The New Yorker (yes, The New Yorker).

 

[Talk_Dude]

This is the point where the usual suspects will now ask, regarding this suggestion for a new, innovative, and untried idea, "When has that ever worked before?"

Looks like my prediction was close, though not 100% on target.

I have heard programs on commercial radio that were very, very similar to "A Prairie Home Companion" in the broad sense. They weren't family-friendly with a rural, Midwestern touch, but they were radio variety shows that consisted of a combination of comedy skits, musical performances, and stand-up comedy.

Basically, it was a live, evening show done by a leading morning show team. It was performed in front of an audience at a local club, and included many of the characters from regular morning show skits, though expanded in length. There were several local musical acts, some guest comedians, and stand-up bits from one of the show hosts who started out in stand-up. The cost of the tickets went to a local charity. If anyone wanted to turn that concept into a regularly scheduled weekly event, with the cost of admission covering some of the costs of production, there's an excellent chance that such a show could work. It just takes people with a sense of imagination and a positive attitude to give the thing a try.

Even more important is to totally ignore those who can't see beyond the tip of their nose and who gauge the possibility of a program idea succeeding or failing based on the lack of precedent for anyone ever doing the exact same thing as a show with a similar concept.

Oh, and to those who are totally lacking in imagination, the format of "Prairie Home Companion" is nothing but a throwback to the kind of variety programs that used to be common on radio back in the Golden Age of radio.

Also, there's no reason why a public radio station couldn't put together and air a similar show, and even syndicate it. Just because Garrison Keillor has dibs on a rural Midwestern flavored radio variety show doesn't mean that something similar but with an urban (meaning "city", and not necessarily Black) sensibility.

Y'all got it backwards. PHC is similar to a commercial program, rather than the other way around. The commercial program is The Grand Ol' Opry on clear channel 650, WSM. It's been a commercial program since 1925 and is actually similar to an earlier program, the WLS National Barn Dance. Garrison Keillor has said several times that he got the idea for Prairie Home Companion while preparing an article on the Grand Ol' Opry for The New Yorker (yes, The New Yorker).

Didn't you read the paragraph in the material of mine you quoted that I highlighted with boldface? The Prairie Home Companion is the latest in a long line of programs of the same genre. The variety show that consists of a stock company of actors and sometimes guests who perform skits interspersed between musical numbers from either cast members or guests is one of the oldest formats for shows on the radio. It's almost a direct descendant of vaudeville. Yes, Prairie Home Companion is similar to The Grand Ol' Opry and the WLS National Barn Dance. It's also similar to the variety shows hosted by Bob Hope, Jack Benny, The Edgar Bergen/Charlie McCarthy Show, The Fred Allen Show, and many, many others. I don't doubt that Garrison Keillor might have been inspired by reading about one particular variety show, but he could have just as easily gotten the idea from reading about any old-time radio variety show.

 

[Tom Wells]

Interesting thread concept.

How will the gouging for cash be allocated among the various spectrum users?

Ooooooooooo! Ooooo! ( Waving hand )

Let's fine the producers of wideband RF interference and the manufacturers of the devices that produce it!

Or let's heavily tax the right to produce RF byproducts as a "necessary" result of your "efficient" motor drives.
These destroy radio for neighbors, and should be taxed for the indulgence in efficiency at the expense of others.

That makes a lot more sense than harrassing those who are trying to use the spectrum "correctly".

 

[TheBigA]

Let's fine the producers of wideband RF interference and the manufacturers of the devices that produce it!

"Lets?" Of course we don't live in an actual democracy, where the public gets to vote on everything. So "we" are not going to fine or tax anyone.

But hey...if you start now, maybe you can lobby Congress on the idea, and see what they say. In the meantime, they're talking about a spectrum tax on broadcast licensees to pay for free broadband for everyone. See what I'm saying about their agenda?

 

[aaronread]

Will the added capacity for content provided by HD enable commercial stations to start to compete with public radio for the economical-to-produce content like the latter two categories, leaving public radio in the same straights as public television is in now?

Strikes me as unlikely. Quality content requires a lot of people to create it. Public radio has, traditionally, been willing to invest in that concept. Commercial radio, usually, has not. It wasn't until all these niche cable channels started churning out seriously good product that public TV really started having problems. There aren't too many high-level commercial radio programs out there and most of them are programs/stations that were high-level many years ago and have at least sort-of maintained levels. I'm not sure of any that are new within the last 5 years...?

(disclaimer: since I run an NPR affiliate and a college radio station, I spend the bulk of my radio listening on them...I rarely listen to commercial radio)

 

[Talk_Dude]

Will the added capacity for content provided by HD enable commercial stations to start to compete with public radio for the economical-to-produce content like the latter two categories, leaving public radio in the same straights as public television is in now?

Strikes me as unlikely. Quality content requires a lot of people to create it. Public radio has, traditionally, been willing to invest in that concept. Commercial radio, usually, has not. It wasn't until all these niche cable channels started churning out seriously good product that public TV really started having problems. There aren't too many high-level commercial radio programs out there and most of them are programs/stations that were high-level many years ago and have at least sort-of maintained levels. I'm not sure of any that are new within the last 5 years...?

(disclaimer: since I run an NPR affiliate and a college radio station, I spend the bulk of my radio listening on them...I rarely listen to commercial radio)

In other words, you don't really know what you're talking about, do you?

 

[MattParker]

Will the added capacity for content provided by HD enable commercial stations to start to compete with public radio for the economical-to-produce content like the latter two categories, leaving public radio in the same straights as public television is in now?

Strikes me as unlikely. Quality content requires a lot of people to create it. Public radio has, traditionally, been willing to invest in that concept. Commercial radio, usually, has not. It wasn't until all these niche cable channels started churning out seriously good product that public TV really started having problems. There aren't too many high-level commercial radio programs out there and most of them are programs/stations that were high-level many years ago and have at least sort-of maintained levels. I'm not sure of any that are new within the last 5 years...?

(disclaimer: since I run an NPR affiliate and a college radio station, I spend the bulk of my radio listening on them...I rarely listen to commercial radio)

Aaron: A bunch of students playing obscure tracks to please themselves at a college hobby station hardly qualifies as "quality content." The New York Times this morning reports universities dumping these stations: (1) to save money and (2) because they serve no real purpose.

The real issue here is whether "quality" of content has any correlation with commercial or non-commercial status or with for-profit or non-profit incorporation. Does adding product comparisons or calls to action to the "spots" on major public radio stations really have anything to do with "quality?" I say no. Public radio targets an elite, high income and well educated audience (whose attention it sells to sponsors). Commercial radio targets the lower end SES scale and sells their attention to bottom-feeder advertisers. Commercial radio had more "quality content" when it targeted a quality audience for blue chip advertisers.

 

[DG]

Will Public radio be hurt by HD the way Public TV was hurt by basic cable?

No.

1) Commercial HD Radio doesn't appear to be much of a competitive threat to itself, let alone Public Radio. Case in point, the PubRadio station here is the ONLY HD station in our small market. And there's plenty of places across the fruited plain where PubRadio is the ONLY radio, operating in places commercial groups consider too small for their margins.

2) Commercial radio evidently doesn't see duplicating Public Radio programming as a profitable endeavor, otherwise they'd all be doing it already. Yes, some commercial stations have and continue to do well with similar programs, but not on a national scale like PubRadio does today. The Grand Ole Opry is an excellent example of this, but it isn't available in my market.

3) Niche-casting is why there are so many channels on cable and satellite today. That doesn't mean that all are equally competitive or profitable. And PBS wasn't the only network hurt by cable and satellite. The Big 3 networks are still around, but their market share these days is a mere pittance of what it was 30 years ago.

"...Also, there's no reason why a public radio station couldn't put together and air a similar show, and even syndicate it..."

I can think of several reasons why:
- Overall Cost
- Lack of production capability
- Duplication of format
- Cost of marketing and promotion
- Lack of performance venue
- Shortage of staff or equipment

Seriously Talk_Dude, you make it sound as if producing such a show was as easy as posting to this thread, and it doesn't require any in-depth knowledge of radio to know that's not the case.

PubTV lost audience to cable and satellite because those other outlets began offering similar/better content that appealed to the PubTV viewers. Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom and The Wonderful World of Disney were some shows I recall that were not on PBS back in the day- and they drew HUGE audiences on commercial TV. Now you have entire channels devoted to what those shows offered, and then some. Somehow I don't see commercial radio, HD or otherwise, offering what NPR, APM or PRI now does. The reasons are many, but the biggest is always the same: there's no money in it, because if there were, they'd be doing it already.

 

[DG]

...Does adding product comparisons or calls to action to the "spots" on major public radio stations really have anything to do with "quality?" I say no. Public radio targets an elite, high income and well educated audience (whose attention it sells to sponsors). Commercial radio targets the lower end SES scale and sells their attention to bottom-feeder advertisers. Commercial radio had more "quality content" when it targeted a quality audience for blue chip advertisers.

I agree with you Matt, but what isn't being mentioned here is that PubRadio is also asking those same well-educated, high-income listeners for money.

Underwriting accounts for very little of the total revenue in small-market stations (which are the bulk of PubRadio), but for markets large and small, listener donations are always a major revenue stream. Sponsors are great, but DONORS are better. If commercial stations were as beholden to their audiences as Public Radio is, it would be a very different medium indeed. But they are not. Commercial stations are more beholden to their advertisers, and that is the key difference I see here.

I seriously doubt that many commercial GMs sit around and wonder how to counter the PubRadio threat. I'll argue that most don't even see PubRadio as a threat, let alone try to counter-program what their local PubRadio station might be doing. It makes me grin thinking that a local commercial station is going to do a live remote from the symphony hall and giveaway station bumper stickers and t-shirts, but hey, they could I guess...

 

[Talk_Dude]

Will Public radio be hurt by HD the way Public TV was hurt by basic cable?

No.

1) Commercial HD Radio doesn't appear to be much of a competitive threat to itself, let alone Public Radio. Case in point, the PubRadio station here is the ONLY HD station in our small market. And there's plenty of places across the fruited plain where PubRadio is the ONLY radio, operating in places commercial groups consider too small for their margins.

2) Commercial radio evidently doesn't see duplicating Public Radio programming as a profitable endeavor, otherwise they'd all be doing it already. Yes, some commercial stations have and continue to do well with similar programs, but not on a national scale like PubRadio does today. The Grand Ole Opry is an excellent example of this, but it isn't available in my market.

3) Niche-casting is why there are so many channels on cable and satellite today. That doesn't mean that all are equally competitive or profitable. And PBS wasn't the only network hurt by cable and satellite. The Big 3 networks are still around, but their market share these days is a mere pittance of what it was 30 years ago.

1. It's true that HD hasn't caught on, yet. Part of that could be because there hasn't yet been some compelling reason for anyone to make an attempt to create compelling HD programming.

2. When you say "Commercial radio", you're basically saying that the current radio mega players like Clear Channel haven't taken a shot at HD radio. I think everyone will agree that the next time Clear Channel has a good and innovative idea for programming, it will be the first.

3. The commercial networks were hurt by cable TV, but PBS was devastated.

"...Also, there's no reason why a public radio station couldn't put together and air a similar show, and even syndicate it..."

I can think of several reasons why:
- Overall Cost
- Lack of production capability
- Duplication of format
- Cost of marketing and promotion
- Lack of performance venue
- Shortage of staff or equipment

Seriously Talk_Dude, you make it sound as if producing such a show was as easy as posting to this thread, and it doesn't require any in-depth knowledge of radio to know that's not the case.

PubTV lost audience to cable and satellite because those other outlets began offering similar/better content that appealed to the PubTV viewers. Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom and The Wonderful World of Disney were some shows I recall that were not on PBS back in the day- and they drew HUGE audiences on commercial TV. Now you have entire channels devoted to what those shows offered, and then some. Somehow I don't see commercial radio, HD or otherwise, offering what NPR, APM or PRI now does. The reasons are many, but the biggest is always the same: there's no money in it, because if there were, they'd be doing it already.

Once again, the old "the new idea won't work because no one tried it yet" argument raises its head. The cost of audio production have plummeted thanks to new technologies. The same new audio production tools that enable a garage band to make a recording of their song in their garage that is technically better than what came out of professional studios in the 50's and 60's can be used by anyone with talent and imagination to create old-school radio shows.

You might want to consider watching a TV show called "Bitchin Kitchen" on the Cooking Channel. It started out as a home-made, do-it-yourself internet webcast in Canada. Food Network Canada picked it up last year, now it's on the Cooking Channel in the US this year.

Maybe you need to get your perceptions out of the 50's and 60's and into the 21st century. Just because something had to cost mega-bucks to produce back in the day doesn't mean it still is prohibitively expensive today.