[Kzyxtalk] Local vs syndication

[ann brown]

I am so happy to hear the discussion going forward with such clearly analyzed issues. 

So…as Tim wrote…" It would appear the "hardcore NPR fans" are satisfied with less than 20% of the schedule, but the "community radio" fans are not satisfied with their 50%.  I wonder why that is.  I also wonder if there is any consensus about what proportions would be appropriate."

I wonder if this is true.

Let's conducte a grassroots poll of our listening community.  Lets ask what people individually want.   Let's male it a true campaign.  Announce it everywhere…the Advocate/Beacon/AVA/ KZYX/fliers/etc.  What do YOU want?  Make a clear time frame for responding.  Follow up the poll with some solid statistics and analysis by a team of bipartisan members and then published a report.  

What are the numbers behind the "Hardcore NPR fans?" 
What are the numbers behind the "Community Radio Fans."  
Does either group's interests reflect the statistics that Tim put forward?  
Are they content with their current percentages?

I think this would go a long way in helping to structure and plan the stations programming.

Am more that wiling to volunteer to help this happen.

Very interested in hearing other people's views.  

Let's poll, publicize the results, analyze the returns and MEET our members where they actually live.  

I even have a suggestion for a campaign slogan…

"Let's Not Fight…Let's Program!"

All the best to all the best,

Ann



On May 18, 2014, at 4:46 PM, Tim Bray <tbray at wildblue.net> wrote:

The schedule currently includes 83 hours/week of syndicated programming, of which 32.5 hrs/wk come from NPR; and 85 hrs/wk of locally-produced content.  So, just over 50% of the airtime is in fact "community" radio, just under 50% is "canned".  Less than half the syndicated programming is NPR, the rest includes things like Democracy Now! and other popular programs.  


I don't agree that the NPR audience can be labeled a "silent majority" - every Pledge Drive we hear from many people that NPR is among the things they like about the station.  They just aren't as strident as the NPR-haters.  When there is locally-produced programming they dislike, instead of agitating for its removal, most of them simply switch off the radio.  That's certainly what I do, and many of the people who talk to me about station matters do as well.  But for whatever reason, many NPR-haters aren't       satisfied with that, and want it taken off the air - and don't seem to care about the wishes of the other half of our audience who prefer it.  Why is that?

The numbers show a shift of 9.5 hours/wk from local to syndicated since 2009; that's about 6% of the broadcast schedule (168 hrs/wk since we went to a 24/7 broadcast, which I think happened in 2007).  Does that really constitute "severely reduced?"

The bottom line for me is, KZYX has a diverse audience and some fraction will be dissatisfied with the content at any given time in the schedule.  It's impossible to please everyone.   Most of our audience understands and accepts this - the price of diversity is not always getting your own way. 

We had a PAC at one point and I attended one or two meetings.  The committee members seemed to get bogged down over criteria and process for evaluation, and personality conflicts hampered their efforts.  It's enormously difficult to find people who have the time and enthusiasm to devote to program review, have no personal agendas to advance, and can work through disagreements with others. 

Tim



On 5/18/2014 8:23 AM, doug mckenty wrote:
> Tim,
> I am glad that you have been enlightened as to this issue as it has been central for me for some time.  As the host of Open Lines, I have heard this complaint for years.  That KZYX is going too NPR, too pre-recorded, not enough locally produced material etc.  The surveys the CAB has put out for years have showed at least 50% of the listening audience want to hear more "community" radio and even surveys of our own membership (whom theoretically like the current programming) show that only about half of them are hardcore NPR fans and the other half would still like to hear less canned material and more locally produced content.
> 
> Nonetheless, over the last ten years KZYX has severely reduced this type of content.  Because the programming decision making process is not transparent, nobody but staff knows who has applied for what kind of shows.  I have spoken in the past with many who applied for a program but were never contacted afterwards (over the years I have personally witnessed this about six or seven times and suspect that there are others out there).  Also, our community currently has no ability to affect programming decisions at KZYX so while these complaints and surveys have shown us that more "community" radio would be beneficial to the station, the communities ideas have no way to translate into actual programing changes at KZYX.  
> 
> This is why I have been advocating for the impementation of the current board policy that created the Programming Advisory Committee.  It would solve both these problems.
> 
> It is my belief, after hosting Open Lines, being on the board of directors, and analyzing what survey material is available, that KZYX would have between 4000-.5000 members if the current operational philosophy focused on the "community" aspect of our station rather than its "public" aspect.
> 
> Staff has been pretty adamant that the public radio formula will (and has?) saved the station.  Their feeling is the vast majority of Mendocino County residents rely on NPR for their daily informational needs and this silent but large majority will (and has?) fork up the money required.  They feel so strongly that this approach is working that they have decided implementation of the PAC is unnecessary.  
> 
> One more thing, this top down management style in which the program director decides all the programming is typical of "public" radio stations.  These stations typically have some local news, NPR and some jazz or classical music in the interim.  "Community" radio stations very often have a committee, such as the PAC, that at least reviews all volunteer programs each year, and is responsible for the assessment of applications for new programs.  This ensures the transparency of the process as well as establishing some protocols requiring diversity and ensuring that the station is truly open to "all points of view."  It also prevents one person from inadvertently promoting their own perspectives over the needs of the community.    
> 
> Though I feel that there are only about 2300 really diehard fans of public radio in this County (ie the number of members KZYX has maintained for the last 10 years) and question the decision to promote it over the production of more local content, there is little I can do to promote a change except advocate for the PAC. 
> 
> This has been my central issue for the last twelve months.  I apologize for not being more clear earlier.  The multiple side issues and drama are having a real negative impact on my ability to clearly state what I believe needs to be done to get the station up to the 4000 member mark.
> 
> Thanks to you all for participating with this list.  After over four months of having this communication tool, I am beginning to feel that we have occasionally cut through the BS and disinformation and are beginning to discover the central issues and what our legitimate disagreements about those issues are. 
> 
> Good communication is the key.  Most of the changes I have been advocating, such as a move toward more "community" radio, are pretty common sense, in my opinion, once all the information is revealed.  Why any attempt to make common sense change creates so much drama and contraversy is beyond me, and I really hope we can move past this communication breakdown and start getting some real work done.  
> 
> Doug  
> 
>    
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Tim Bray <tbray at wildblue.net> wrote:
> This is a valid point.  There has been some replacement; my research indicates a net shift from local to syndicated of 5.5 hours/week of public-affairs programming and 4 hrs/wk of music programming since 2009.   I don't think this was a management goal, so much as a series of ad-hoc decisions when situations arose.  Diane is undoubtedly correct that it has much to do with the relative burden on staff of syndicated vs. local production.
> 
> Training and supervision of programmers - old and new - is something I have been requesting more of for years.  We got some excellent pledge-drive training back in 2007, which made an immediate and noticeable improvement.  Vance Crowe and I held some workshops the following year, but since then we've had the financial crisis and lost 4 full-time staff members, so programmer training (which takes a lot of time and effort) hasn't been a priority.  Rich has been training people when new equipment is installed and whenever individuals have specific questions, but it's a huge burden on him to try to improve the skills of 100+ programmers while keeping the equipment operating.  Mary seems to have her hands full just managing all those people and plugging holes in the schedule when someone takes a vacation.
> 
> I think it would be helpful for anyone who shares Diane's concerns about local vs. syndication, and the value of training programmers, to write letters expressing their concerns to station management and the Board.  It would be especially helpful if this were done in a non-confrontational way, without accusing staff of malfeasance etc.  Simply make known your desire for more local programming and better training for programmers.
> 
> This is the kind of change I am wholeheartedly in favor of: improving the quality of our product, especially of the parts we produce locally.  It's not easily done, in part because people get pricklish when you ask them to improve - they often take that to mean you think they aren't quite good enough already.  Some programmers have                 no desire to improve or do anything differently than they are already doing.  Change is always resisted.  
> 
> It's also quite difficult to find and develop talented local programmers who will make the commitment to a regular radio shift.  In that regard, I think it is remarkable that we have so many, given our population and demographics.  From conversations with station staff, I can say they are always looking for new programmers and are frustrated by how difficult the search is.  
> 
> All the best,
> Tim
> -- 
> Oak & Thorn
> Facebook: Oak and Thorn
> 
> On 5/16/2014 5:48 PM, Diane Paget wrote:
>> I would rather address the larger problem of the replacement of local 
>> programming (due both to censorship and to the fact that it is easier to 
>> slip a CD into the machine than to train and supervise new programmers) 
>> with national programming and the deterioration of the quality of what I 
>> can hear on KZYX.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kzyxtalk mailing list
> Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
> http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk
> 
> 


-- 
Oak & Thorn
Facebook: Oak and Thorn
_______________________________________________
Kzyxtalk mailing list
Kzyxtalk at lists.mcn.org
http://lists.mcn.org/mailman/listinfo/kzyxtalk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.mcn.org/pipermail/kzyxtalk/attachments/20140518/b24ba445/attachment-0001.html