Most stations, commercial and non-commercial, generate programming and use commercial or underwriting announcements to then support that programming and the other services that the station provides.
Clear Channel about 5 years ago stated (I think it was one of the Mays brothers) that their stations exist solely to deliver ears to advertisers and to generate revenue, with the programming as secondary.
While I don't believe this was malicious or "evil" as some of their critics have said, the fact is that in a market like Columbia, there is no service and the nature and the quality of programming is an afterthought. To take things to the extreme, if WVOC could still attract an audience, Clear Channel would probably go to an all-commercial announcement format and have poor Kev do testimonials from his plumber (really heard that one) to proctologist (haven't heard that one, but you could imagine "Go see the caring hands of Dr. Bottoms, for an insight on your health...").
Sure, there is still a significant audience for what they do, but when you control 6 stations, there isn't a heck of a lot of choice. You want CHR, there's only one place you can get it...
In the end, it really is all about the programming and service. The one sector in radio that was affected by the Great Recession but still grew in audience: non-commercial NPR and religious.
Again, not attributing improper motives to Clear Channel, but I am saying that their approach in a market the size of Columbia is, in the long run, a bad business decision not only for its obligations as licensees and trustees for the public interest, but also economically. If all you are is a mean, lean cash flow machine, you are extremely vulnerable to another downturn. In the end, we will see things start to play out in 18 months when analysts say that Clear Channel will not be able to service its debt and will be forced to restructure in some manner.
Clear Channel about 5 years ago stated (I think it was one of the Mays brothers) that their stations exist solely to deliver ears to advertisers and to generate revenue, with the programming as secondary.
While I don't believe this was malicious or "evil" as some of their critics have said, the fact is that in a market like Columbia, there is no service and the nature and the quality of programming is an afterthought. To take things to the extreme, if WVOC could still attract an audience, Clear Channel would probably go to an all-commercial announcement format and have poor Kev do testimonials from his plumber (really heard that one) to proctologist (haven't heard that one, but you could imagine "Go see the caring hands of Dr. Bottoms, for an insight on your health...").
Sure, there is still a significant audience for what they do, but when you control 6 stations, there isn't a heck of a lot of choice. You want CHR, there's only one place you can get it...
In the end, it really is all about the programming and service. The one sector in radio that was affected by the Great Recession but still grew in audience: non-commercial NPR and religious.
Again, not attributing improper motives to Clear Channel, but I am saying that their approach in a market the size of Columbia is, in the long run, a bad business decision not only for its obligations as licensees and trustees for the public interest, but also economically. If all you are is a mean, lean cash flow machine, you are extremely vulnerable to another downturn. In the end, we will see things start to play out in 18 months when analysts say that Clear Channel will not be able to service its debt and will be forced to restructure in some manner.