In the past, we at least had the appearance of the media serving their consumers. Newspapers were all things to all people with niche papers serving their respective “communities.” The major TV nets did the same thing, with UHF and public TV stations serving the niche audiences. Those radio stations that were on the air up to the mid-70s may have served specific audiences, but these audiences were too large to be considered a niche.
Then our media owners/managers got “smart.” Special interest publications flourished. Cable channels sprang up like the proverbial wildflowers. Hundreds of radio stations, including some with very low power, filled the airwaves with every conceivable format.
The result, of course, was that the “pie,” or the population of media consumers, stayed the same size, but the slices became much smaller. Mass appeal stations like WGN or KMOX (which had a 12+ AQH share of 20!) saw that share dwindle. Now it’s in single digits for both stations, and neither is #1 in the market anymore.
Does this mean those general purpose stations did something wrong? They did, but the audience became harder to please.
We’ve sat here in St. Louis and watched some stations change formats almost as frequently as old rock jocks used to change underwear. Chasing that next, big format has diluted the product and lessened the audience expectations. An audience isn’t going to invest itself in a format that changes less than a year later.
Nowhere was that more prevalent than in California. They had radio formats for everything. Some of them had an impact. Many didn’t.
Tom Donahue was the brains behind the format at KMPX and KSAN in San Francisco that helped make KSHE an iconic station. And Bill Balance tried his short-lived, innuendo-filled Feminine Forum format of KGBS in Los Angeles. We’re lucky it didn’t take in St. Louis. Berkeley’s KPFA has long set the standard for Pacifica’s formatting, similar to what was heard on KDNA in St. Louis.
The problem with today’s media – print and broadcast – is that most appear to be chasing the public tastes instead of setting them. Where, in the past, listeners would ask each other “Did you hear…?,” listeners are now asking “Why don’t they…?” TV viewers are going to websites where they can seek out what they want instead of waiting for the nets to broadcast it. Newspaper readers shake their heads at a lack of pertinent content.
Why? It’s not always about making a profit. Most of the time it’s about finding ways to increase profit. Don’t lead. Follow.
This is where the media, even the heritage stations, have gone wrong. Instead of spending money to set the standard, they hire cheaper talent and chase the standard. It’s less risky. It’s less costly. And if it’s not what the consumers want, well then, something must be wrong with the consumers.
What a bunch of crap!
Discuss on the STL Media Message Board. (Registration required)
