WPHT and KYW on FM, will it happen?

[PTBoardOp94]

I can't speak to WHYY specifically, but on a national basis NPRnews programming attracted a listener with a median age of 55, according to a post on the network's "nprcurious" blog.

I suspect that's not much different than KYW or WPHT. Or, for that matter CNN or MSNBC.

 

[CTListener]

I can't speak to WHYY specifically, but on a national basis NPRnews programming attracted a listener with a median age of 55, according to a post on the network's "nprcurious" blog.

I suspect that's not much different than KYW or WPHT. Or, for that matter CNN or MSNBC.

The sad truth is that, while under-55s still use radio, the younger portion of the demo seldom uses it for news -- nor does it use newspapers or television. If you're 18-40, it seems, you get your news strictly from the internet or just don't bother with news at all.

 

[TheBigA]

If you're 18-40, it seems, you get your news strictly from the internet or just don't bother with news at all.

And this is a subject that's being discussed a lot at colleges with media programs, because they all know that there are jobs to be had creating news content, either on air or online, but how to make it pay is a problem. I was speaking with a couple recent grads, and they know all the tricks in building websites, creating and editing online video, using social media to attract views, and anything else you can think of as far as content creation. The big sticking point still is making money.

However, what they've demonstrated is that if you make news relatable to the younger demo, present it quickly and in an entertaining way, you might get an audience. Just not one that's big enough to monetize right now. So perhaps we're a few years away from finding a presentation that will work for millennials.

 

[DavidEduardo]

Regarding 25-54 demographics: Dave E., how do NPR FM stations such as WHYY do 25-54? Any better than their AM news/talk counterparts?

WHYY, based on the average of the first 3 books of 2018, is 9th overall, and 17th in 25-54.

KYW is 6th overall, and 14th in 25-54.

Both have about 2/3 of their listenening over age 55.

 

[DavidEduardo]

The whole HD on AM thing reminds me of the old AM Stereo argument. The FCC never chose a standard, so AM Stereo pretty much died with competing systems. There was no requirement for AM radios to have stereo capabilities. Until the FCC steps in to require stations to go HD, it's never going to work. Could you imagine if they didn't require TV stations to go digital?

The FCC never required FMs to go stereo, nor did they require radios to have the FM band. It seems to have worked out anyway, as there was consumer demand. The one thing the FCC did was stop most major market simulcasting of AM/FM combos in early 1967; the variety of new formats was the cause for listener demand for radios.

There is no demand for digital FM. "Digital" as a buzzword ceased to be a factor long ago.

 

[CTListener]

And this is a subject that's being discussed a lot at colleges with media programs, because they all know that there are jobs to be had creating news content, either on air or online, but how to make it pay is a problem. I was speaking with a couple recent grads, and they know all the tricks in building websites, creating and editing online video, using social media to attract views, and anything else you can think of as far as content creation. The big sticking point still is making money.

However, what they've demonstrated is that if you make news relatable to the younger demo, present it quickly and in an entertaining way, you might get an audience. Just not one that's big enough to monetize right now. So perhaps we're a few years away from finding a presentation that will work for millennials.

Anecdotally speaking, I can tell you that, of the last half-dozen young reporters and copy editors who have moved on from the two newspapers I've been with over the past half-dozen years, only one has gone to another, larger newspaper, which 30 years ago was the normal thing ambitious young people in this business used to do. The other five: One went into corporate public relations, one became a writer for a trade publication, one became a social media specialist for a utility, and the other two became staff writers and editors for universities, churning out lengthy pieces on optimistic, oh-so-serious undergrads doing great things in and out of the classroom as they get ready to change the world. None of what these people are producing is "news" in the way stories on murders or elections or city council meetings are news, and the consumers of their end product are largely either in the same business or, in the case of the university writers/editors, alumni for whom a free lifetime subscription to the alumni magazine or electronic publication came with their diplomas. Little of it is being consumed by millennials and none is generating advertising dollars.

So if these jobs are where journalism grads are going for their second or third steps up the ladder, does news have a future at all once the baby boomers -- whose attitudes toward news and news gathering/reporting were heavily influenced by media coverage of the Vietnam War and the Nixon presidency -- have passed from the scene and are no longer reading the Times, listening to NPR or watching CNN?

 

[AbrahamJSimpson]

It’s an interesting thought exercise. I’d suggest it’s possible, because people can come into the role from a different background, or make a return from something that was perhaps a bit different. As much as being open to new technologies and platforms matters, so to does being open to understanding that “career paths” are evolving.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Anecdotally speaking, I can tell you that, of the last half-dozen young reporters and copy editors who have moved on from the two newspapers I've been with over the past half-dozen years, only one has gone to another, larger newspaper, which 30 years ago was the normal thing ambitious young people in this business used to do. The other five: One went into corporate public relations, one became a writer for a trade publication, one became a social media specialist for a utility, and the other two became staff writers and editors for universities, churning out lengthy pieces on optimistic, oh-so-serious undergrads doing great things in and out of the classroom as they get ready to change the world.

Being a reporter in newspaper, television, or radio is hardly a lucrative field. Reporters at Gannett papers make $25k to $30k to start - $12-$13 an hour, assuming you are really only working 40 hrs a week. Stockers at my local Walmart are making that kind of money, with no requirement for a bachelor's degree. And it hasn't been easier for senior writers - Gannett has repeatedly laid off or "offered" (really: forced) early retirement to writers in their 50s and 60s, to shed payroll.

 

[kevtronics]

The whole HD on AM thing reminds me of the old AM Stereo argument. The FCC never chose a standard, so AM Stereo pretty much died with competing systems.

The FCC finally did standardize on the Motorola C-Quam system in 1993, but by then many AM stations had switched to talk formats -- and when deregulation allowed Jacor (later AMFM, then Clear Channel, now iHeart Media) to buy up hundreds of AM stations across the country, they had a policy of turning off the AM Stereo at any station they acquired, even if it had a music format.

There was no requirement for AM radios to have stereo capabilities.

The NRSC did implement minimum performance specifications for AM radio tuners, both mono and stereo (called "AMAX"), but it was only voluntary, so the vast majority of radio manufacturers ignored it.

Until the FCC steps in to require stations to go HD, it's never going to work. Could you imagine if they didn't require TV stations to go digital?

The main reason they were able to pull off the digital TV transition is because it occurred at exactly the same time many people were switching from CRTs to flat-panel TVs, so people were buying new TVs anyway. The impact was also lessened because most people in the USA have cable or satellite TV, so over-the-air broadcast stations shutting off their analog signals was irrelevant to them.

And remember the original plan with HD Radio was to make a similar switch to digital-only broadcasts once there were enough receivers in the marketplace. But now I hear that nobody makes new HD Radio exciters for AM stations anymore, so when one breaks and they don't have a backup unit on hand, the station has to give up on it and revert to analog-only transmission. I wonder if that's what just happened to WPHT...

 

[Miguelito]

And remember the original plan with HD Radio was to make a similar switch to digital-only broadcasts once there were enough receivers in the marketplace. But now I hear that nobody makes new HD Radio exciters for AM stations anymore, so when one breaks and they don't have a backup unit on hand, the station has to give up on it and revert to analog-only transmission. I wonder if that's what just happened to WPHT...

I think the industry really missed the boat with HD. The way they advertised it ("stations between the stations"???) was so bizarre to me. I acknowledge that a lot of radio geeks dislike HD because of it screws up DX-ing. But the sound is just so much better. And the (at-this-point-mostly-wasted) opportunities for interesting formats on the side-channels was something I think could have been a big opportunity for radio. I always felt like stations should have been doing a much better job of advertising what their "commercial-free" side-channels were offering and telling people how to hear them. I felt like that was the way to get people to consider buying new receivers. At the very least, demand could have encouraged many more car companies to have HD stereos as optional equipment.

I don't get to hear radio much these days but when I do (usually during a road trip), HD side channels are mostly what I end up listening to! But I suppose they're going to continue slowly become simulcasts of sister stations until the whole experiment finally dies out. Hopefully, they'll at least come up with some other use for the technology.

 

[Miguelito]

WHYY, based on the average of the first 3 books of 2018, is 9th overall, and 17th in 25-54.

KYW is 6th overall, and 14th in 25-54.

Both have about 2/3 of their listenening over age 55.

I was thinking more about 18-34 but I could certainly be wrong about that too. I wonder how that demo is affected by one being a non-comm. I'm sure there's a study out there somewhere!

 

[TheBigA]

Anecdotally speaking, I can tell you that, of the last half-dozen young reporters and copy editors who have moved on from the two newspapers I've been with over the past half-dozen years,

My anecdotal experience comes from being in the field, from attending industry events, news conferences, and visiting radio stations, and I can tell you that there are a lot of millennials doing the work. I see more people under 35 than over 35. (except at talk stations, which are all grey hairs) It may not pay well, it may not offer a lot of advancement, and the people doing the work may not be the ones consuming the content. But they're there in large numbers, and there are more of them every year.

Part of the problem with both KYW and NPR is they SOUND old. The presentation hasn't changed since the 60s. They need to update the presentation if they hope to attract younger people. The younger people who do the work understand this, and I suspect at some point, things will change.

 

[atthestars]

Part of the problem with both KYW and NPR is they SOUND old. The presentation hasn't changed since the 60s. They need to update the presentation if they hope to attract younger people. The younger people who do the work understand this, and I suspect at some point, things will change.

I would argue that both are ATTEMPTING to sound younger. For NPR, it definitely depends on the show. Old stalwarts like Fresh Air haven't changed much, but if you listen to shows like Marketplace, it definitely sounds fresher and younger.

KYW has attempted too, whether pulling from sister stations for entertainment features, or heavily promoting podcasts they do to tie into stories on-air. I think both are trying, knowing they can't just pull the ripcord and tick off the entire upper end of the demo.

 

[DavidEduardo]

I was thinking more about 18-34 but I could certainly be wrong about that too. I wonder how that demo is affected by one being a non-comm. I'm sure there's a study out there somewhere!

Both stations wander around 20th in 18-34; listening in that demo is likely due to someone else having control of the radio and a few who might check for weather or traffic or the like because radio is easier to use in the car than apps for that purpose.

 

[Miguelito]

Part of the problem with both KYW and NPR is they SOUND old.

Reading through the newer comments this morning, I thought about this too. Are younger people interested in the low-key, soothing sound of NPR or would they prefer something that sounds more like a series of podcasts? (I'd put money on the latter.)

 

[Miguelito]

Both stations wander around 20th in 18-34; listening in that demo is likely due to someone else having control of the radio and a few who might check for weather or traffic or the like because radio is easier to use in the car than apps for that purpose.

These are points I think about a lot too. Captive listening is a thing that really can't be measured along with PPM data. But do advertisers really care "why" the ads are getting heard as long as they're getting heard? I would argue some do because captive listeners aren't listening as attentively so the ads might not penetrate as effectively.

Then there's listening that occurs only because people are checking in for traffic or weather: I simply consider that "listening." It's a strategy and one that has been used for years by stations like KYW and New Jersey 101.5. In fact, back around '95, part of that strategy worked on me: I used to tune to 101.5 on my way to work because I knew what times they did traffic & weather. I thought I hated the station but from checking in for traffic & weather, I accidentally fell in love with the hosts and I spent years listening exclusively to NJ101.5 in the car. Totally lost touch with new music! Glad I ended up breaking that habit. Talk Radio and I are never ever ever getting back together. (They're still in my brain though: Anytime I look at my watch and it's X:18, in my little brain I hear "2:18, time for New Jersey Fast Traffic.")

 

[radiophiler]

Re: KYW sounds old. Reporter's Roundup sounds "different" than the rest of the usual KYW format, and incorporates the use of transition music. It also comes off as slightly more conversational, because the anchor often throws to a reporter by asking a question and sometimes asks a follow-up question.
But, Roundup accounts for only four half hours on weekdays.
KYW tends to use its "breaking news" sounder much less than the average TV station, in my listening experience. Not sure if labeling more stories "breaking news" would freshen the sound or not. TV news sure seems to rely on it.
What else could they do to freshen their sound? Is there a news station or a talk station with a news block with a fresher sound?

 

[Miguelito]

Re: KYW sounds old ... What else could they do to freshen their sound?

Move to FM?

 

[TheBigA]

Move to FM?

If WHYY is tie with KYW in 18-34, moving to FM won't change a thing.

The issue is a stodgy and old presentation. I suspect it's part of the reason why they're changing leadership at the station.


https://www.bizjournals.com/philadelphia/news/2018/07/09/steve-butler-kyw-newsradio-entercom.html

 

[cyber]

So what will be the fate of the Sinatra show? Will it's sixty plus year run end or is its time slot considered harmless allowing Sid to stay on?