Should NPR attempt to reach a broader segment of the U.S. listening audience, given that about 87% of NPR’s listeners are white? Further, of NPR’s ten highest-rated stations, only one is a Southern station, WUNC of Raleigh, NC. How might this be accomplished?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Should NPR seek a broader audience?
- Thread starter JM Dempsey
- Start date
The station part of your question doesn't have much to do with NPR itself. They are a program provider for public radio stations. The stations themselves decide which of the programs from NPR or the other non-commercial program providers they will air.
I can tell you from what I've read, the folks at NPR would like to broaden their audience, and have launched some shows aimed at a other groups. Certainly the news/talk programming their produce or distribute are their most popular, and they also appeal to a mainly older, white audience. But they also produce a number of other shows aimed at Latinos and Blacks. They just aren't as well known. One is Jazz Night in America. They once distributed AfroPop Worldwide, but that show is now distributed by PRI. They also once distributed the Tavis Smiley show. Not any more.
Based on what I've read, they seem to feel their future as far as reaching other audiences will be with podcasts and other non-broadcast programming. Those will be more direct to the listener, rather than depending on member stations for distribution. The fact that their mission and mandate is to produce educational and informational content may limit the popularity of what they do. It's pretty doubtful you'll see them attempt to compete with the commercial program suppliers or stations.
Last edited:
A different measure of the reach of NPR programming is the educational level of listeners. When measured on that metric, NPR does comparably well within the group of college graduates from different ethnic groups.
Jazz is featured on many public and college stations that program music. It appeals to much of the affluent, older white audience that classical does. I doubt it draws many African-American ears to the stations at all.
It depends. The stations I'm familiar with get a lot of black listeners, but they're also older. If they only program a few hours a week of jazz, I'd agree.
Jazz is definitely not a young format, which is why the smooth jazz format was ultimately dropped from commercial stations.
Wait what about WAMU-FM, KXJZ-FM and KQED-FM the top news/talk stations in their markets that happen to be NPR affiliates. As far as I know these three NPR affiliates have to do segment on their local talk shows and local news segments about diversity in their areas. San Francisco, Sacramento and Washington D.C. cannot just rely on a white majority audience in their areas these areas also have to depend on non-white audiences too for their donations and ratings.
What about Joshua Johnson the current WAMU-FM talk host and Former KQED Forum fill in host. He's making the attempt to make specific NPR News/Talk affiliates lower their median age for talk radio.
Last edited:
I'm most familiar with New England Public Radio (WFCR Amherst, MA, and its translator network in Western Massachusetts). Its weekday programming is Morning Edition, then classical music until 4 p.m., All Things Considered and other news until 8 p.m., then three hours of jazz, then more classical until Morning Edition. Curiously, there's no jazz on weekends, just more classical and a variety of public radio talk and music offerings. In that context, I'd imagine the jazz show shares at least a portion of its audience with the classical and NPR news fans. Jazz -- along with Broadway tunes -- seems to be a common side musical interest among many fans of classical music I've met over the years -- many of them friends of my classical-loving dad (most of whom have now passed on, unfortunately).
Yep, I agree. However, stations like KLON or WBGO, which program all jazz with an occasional newscast and no classical music has a different audience. But in both cases, the audience is much smaller than the NPR news/talk station in town. The former KPLU in Seattle plays more jazz and no classical, but also does a lot of news, and its audience is probably similar to WFCR.
WFCR is the big public radio signal in Western Mass. The news/talk programming (including duplication of Morning Edition and All Things Considered) is on AM (WNNZ 640) and a bunch of weak translators. Springfield is too small a market for public radio stations to show up in the ratings, at least those we non-insiders can see, but I can't imagine that the AM/translators combo is finding a bigger audience than the FM/translators combo. WFCR does show up -- usually in the 1.0-1.5 range -- in the Hartford book. Connecticut Public Radio (WNPR Meriden 90.5 for the Hartford area), which has no music at all on weekdays, usually does a 4.5 to 5.0. But Hartford listeners aren't asked to seek out an AM signal or a flea-power translator for their NPR news fix.
Jazz music does attract a relatively high African-American audience. A 1992 report by the National Endowment for the Arts found that while only 12% of Americans are African-American, they represented about 19% of jazz radio listening. I saw a report newer than 1992 at one point, but I don't have it handy to reference right now. It also suggested that jazz listeners oversampled blacks. Certainly moreso than classical.
However, I very much agree with BigA that is going to be an old audience. Not a lot of 30 year olds of any ethnicity who are looking for Alphonse Mouzon records.
What about him? Just because he is a minority and under 50 doesn't mean much by itself. If you weren't listening to Diane Rehm, would you even know that "1A" exists? Also, "1A" doesn't even air in several of the major markets where so many minorities live. Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, to name a few.
However, I very much agree with BigA that is going to be an old audience. Not a lot of 30 year olds of any ethnicity who are looking for Alphonse Mouzon records.
What about him? Just because he is a minority and under 50 doesn't mean much by itself. If you weren't listening to Diane Rehm, would you even know that "1A" exists? Also, "1A" doesn't even air in several of the major markets where so many minorities live. Chicago, Atlanta, Miami, to name a few.
Good points too though
Absolutely. Fix the formats. CPB, NPR & PBS have the "P" in common. That means "public" - and should mean that the programming is not fringe and, instead, reflects the true taste, culture and educational needs of today's American public. Many people think it rarely does in its current form.
Nielsen has long-term and, some say, more accurate research studies for what America wants and doesn't want in every populated market. PBS doesn't look much like the results of those studies to me.
Nielsen has long-term and, some say, more accurate research studies for what America wants and doesn't want in every populated market. PBS doesn't look much like the results of those studies to me.
Don't you think there's a difference between people's tastes and their needs? For example, I love bacon. I need fiber. There's a difference.
When public radio was created, the problem was commercial broadcasting was mainly aimed at the lowest common denominator. That situation really hasn't changed.
The point many people use to compare our national public radio offerings with those of the CBS in Canada or the BBC in England.
The problem is that those are unfair comparisons. The CBC and The Bebe own their own stations and fully control them. In the case of Canada, there are two services, English and French. In the case of England, the BBC has multiple national and regional services.
England provides the BBC with significant funding via a "radio tax". Canada considers state-run radio essential in a huge nation with many sparsely populated zones.
In the US, "public radio" stations are local. Many are well run, but some are not. Many are fairly well funded, others are in areas where funding is hard to come by.
I see the biggest obstacle to be the fact that, out of the worlds major countries, the US is the least centralized. States and local governments have much more influence than in other nations, and that is why no two significant regions of the US are identical. So a national radio service is far less likely to be as broadly accepted as it is in more centralized countries.
But where there are well done local public stations, such as San Francisco and Washington, DC, we see them at the top or near the top of the ratings. Where public stations are not at the top, we have issues with local programming, management and, often, inferior signals.
Exactly, especially since the national service primarily gets its funding from the local stations, and the local stations dominate its board of trustees. The one thing those stations DON'T want is a national competitor.
How is NPR and PBS programming Fringe?? Please explain? In cities like San Francisco, Washington DC and Sacramento where the NPR News/Talk affiliate is in the top 5 or top 10 the programming is the norms for these markets.
Some might find its approach to news as being too "highbrow." Some might find the classical or folk music programming on NPR stations to be fringe. But that's a local station issue, not something NPR itself does.
You mean.....like......Conservatives? 
Too Highbrow? Wow that's an interesting argument here. But in cities where NPR affiliate is doing well the audience wanted sanity in their content and not buried in the spin of politics and yes "alternative facts" as the presidents cabinet member once said.
- Status