Posted by Walt on November 06, 2009 at 10:20:39:
In Reply to: Board Reflections for November 5 posted by Allan Sniffen on November 05, 2009 at 08:37:39:
Allan, the one thing missing from your discussion of election night coverage is the very point you keep making yourself -- radio isn't just about information -- it's about ENTERTAINMENT!
First of all, I'm not disputing whether or not local AM's can afford to cover elections -- that's another discussion. At this point they probably can't -- how they got to this point is also another discussion.
But when you make a blanket statement that all the information is available on the Internet and Cable TV, you're ignoring how the information is presented and how people use radio as opposed to other media. I think radio owners and management have forgotten that too.
Each medium has its strengths. The Internet is interactive, Cable TV is good at serving news and information to a more passive audience who doesn't (at that moment) want to dig for it. Radio is great at being a "companion." It's easy to use, unobtrusive, portable and appeals to a passive audience wanting "companionship," often while doing something else. Eavesdropping on a conversation works well for radio listeners. Talking heads can be boring on TV (think C-SPAN's phone-in stuff.) The Internet may be able to do it all someday, but not yet.
So election night coverage was, and still could be, very different on the radio from the other media, and it no longer requires dragging "tape recorders" out to election headquarters. All that's needed is some staff and volunteers (local political types) to engage in conversation about the facts in (hopefully) an entertaining way. And, BTW, radio needs to stop constantly beating listeners over the head to go elsewhere for more information! Concentrate instead of delivering the same information in a way that will appeal to PASSIVE listeners. THAT's radio's audience!
Again, I'm not suggesting that local radio stations have any obligation to cover election results as a "public service." If they can get local sponsors and use it as an image builder for the station, then fine -- they should do it. But I do see a very prevalent "defeatist attitude" about radio's ability to compete among other media.
Suppose in the late 1950s, radio management decided that they couldn't compete with TV and took the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" attitude. They would have concluded every newscast with, "If you want to see pictures of this, turn on your TV!" How is that different from, "For more information, go to our Website?"
Yes, radio and TV stations should have a Web presence to keep in touch with listeners, enhance revenue potential and hopefully drive more listeners to the radio station. But, for God's sake, while they're listening to the radio, encourage them to PLEASE STAY TUNED ... not PLEASE GO AWAY!
If radio management doesn't recognize and truly believe in the power of it's own medium and program according to its strengths, the end will indeed be a self-fulfilling prophecy.