Re: WSRO sold

[mwaters@wesleyan.edu (Martin J. Waters)]

>Tony Schinella wrote:
<snip>
>Personally, I don't like NPR and don't count it in the same respects as
>commercial talk radio. Maybe that is a flaw on my part. Commercial radio has
>to play by the forces of the dreaded market whereas NPR do not.
<snip>

        This once was very true of public radio, but the reputation lives
on while the reality has changed. The NPR local stations get a decent
percentage of their funding from contributions from listeners, so they are
very oriented toward putting on shows that will attract an audience. In
fact, that's a complaint from a different direction that one hears about
public radio -- that they won't put on some shows that they might have
years back because they think the audience will be too small or the show is
too controversial for the audience and/or the corporations that make gifts.
And when they, and NPR nationally, ask for foundation and corporate grants,
they want to show that people are listening.
        You see public radio getting away from the traditional variety
programming formats and a move in the direction of narrower formats, like
commercial stations. Instead of two hours of jazz followed by two hours of
classical followed by two hours of news and talk, you're getting the
news/talk public radio stations and the music public radio stations, like
WBUR and WGBH.
        Another issue with the perception of public radio, even here in the
geek community and among people in the business, to some extent, is that
Arbitron does not show the public stations in the basic 12+, Mon-Sun
ratings that are the ones usually available to non-subscribers. For
example, doesn't WBUR actually have decent ratings in Boston, but when you
look up the list on the Radio & Records website, it isn't there?

------------------------------