e-mail Kent
Biography



"I Was There" Archives
1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114  115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160

"I Was There"
One hundred and sixty-one of a series ...


During the past year I was in the exhibition hall of a national radio conference (in Dallas I believe)…and happened to run into a couple of gentlemen I really like. They are Bob Jordan and Phillip Beswick…the head guys at Media Audit. Media Audit, a media research firm, measures all sorts of information regarding media in about 100 markets in the US….and they do a great job.

I took fifteen minutes to look at the research material these two guys were handing out to the attendees of the conference. Then, I chatted with them for a few minutes. I think it was Bob that mentioned that national public radio had very good ratings in quite a few markets. Really??? Yep, I WAS THERE.

And just this week I read somewhere that KUOW in Seattle and KQED in San Francisco…both public radio stations (so the article stated)…scored number one and two respectively in their markets. I opened the Arbitron file but could not find a mention of those call letters…which I already knew…because Arbitron lists only commercial radio stations at this time. I don’t know who published those ratings….could have been Media Audit I suppose….and would like to know. So if YOU know please advise me by e-mail so I can pass the info along to the readers of this column.

I started thinking about what Bob said, and the aforementioned Seattle and San Francisco ratings. Twenty years ago I would not have given public radio a chance to compete with their commercial brothers/sisters. However, a lot of things have changed in twenty years which might benefit public radio listenership.

1. As listeners become older they are inclined to be more interested in current events and historical items….such as public radio broadcasts.

2. As listeners grow older they seem to not like as many on air contests or promotional hype.

3. As listeners grow older they like a reduced announcers pace and pitch….instead they like a more informative personality.

The three points above play into public radio’s future.

For example, I attended a cocktail function a few years ago, and I was surprised to hear in the background the first Nora Jones CD which had just been released (she was to win a Grammy for her performance in the future). The music fit perfectly with the martini group in attendance. I quietly asked the hostess where she became aware of Nora Jones…whose CD was just weeks old. She said, “I heard it on NPR” along with an interview of Ms. Jones (I believe she said.) The hostess thought it would be “perfect” for her cocktail session, and ordered it on-line. Note: The hostess is definitely not the type to listen to terrestrial music stations.

All of the above triggered me to listen to NPR (for the first time in years), and have done so frequently. They really are doing a really nice job particularly with the back ground sounds creating the REAL environment of an interview/subject….something that terrestrial radio doesn’t have time to do because of our brevity of news reports. Terrestrial radio CAN match the back ground sounds/mood during our longer public affairs programming, of course. I’ll write more about this in future columns with specific examples.

We live and learn.
 

e-mail Kent kent@kentburkhart.com
 

  All Content on this Web site © 2004 - 2007 Kent Burkhart
All Rights Reserved