Radio never warned me (regarding Spfld tornado)

[Laurence Glavin]

>----- Original Message -----
>From: Mark Laurence
>Sent: 06/11/11 06:28 PM
>To: Bill O'Neill (billohno@gmail.com)
>Subject: Re: Radio never warned me (regarding Spfld tornado)

 >On Jun 11, 2011, at 5:23 PM, Bill O'Neill (billohno@gmail.com) wrote: > News coverage is expensive as is breaking news coverage. What prevents stations from contracting advertisers to commit to sponsoring breaking events so that when the added >resources are expended, there is new money behind it (and a listener spike that goes with those events)? >It's not a bad idea, and it's been done to some extent with snowstorms. Campbell's Soup, for one, has place spots to run adjacent to weather reports during blizzards. But I >think it would be tough to sell most companies upfront on "breaking news" of an unknown story. Think about the stomach-churning nature of some news bulletins: the President is >assassinated, the space shuttle explodes, Wall Street has a meltdown, the nearby nuclear plant has a meltdown, inner city riots erupt, the list could go on. Who wants to be >selling cars and recliners and fee-free checking accounts in that kind of atmosphere? >Mark 
 As I recall, American Airlines, when they sponsored "Music Through the Night" did exactly the opposite when there was a major
 crash involving a passenger airline resulting in fatalities. Then they would refrain from inserting any commercials between the
 selections for a few days. Of course, they were sponsoring the show. Nowadays, with spot radio and television, you can
 hear or see a prescription drug commercial right before or after a negative story involving the pharma industry, but not
 the particular offender.