KUOW kicks commercial radio ass in seattle winter arbitron ratings

In a huge lead the likes of which we've never seen, public radio's talker KUOW  smashed the commercial opposition in the Seattle market.

Dig it:

• KUOW   6.1
• KUBE     5.2
• KRWM    4.8
• KIRO      4.1
• KOMO     3.8
• KING-FM 3.1
• KPLU      3.0
• KTTH     2.6
• KVI        2.3
• KPTK      1.6

A six share in this market? Unheard of.

We've been critical of KUOW's programming, and we're working on PD Jeff Hansen to sit down and talk to us. We believe that KUOW, while doing a great job snagging the dominant radio demographic (45 years and older) is not doing much to attract younger listeners.

But that said, we think that NPR, and KUOW in particular has proven that smart, commercial-free programming sells in this and most markets.

We'd agree with our loyal reader rev that "KUOW is benefiting as much from the poor performance of the commercial folks as from anything they're doing..."

With only one exception,(KIRO's TBTL) the commercial talkers are doing nothing new. Rev writes: With the possible exception of Dave Ross, there's really nobody fighting KUOW for the audience that wants something more than blather. Seems like a market opportunity for somebody...

We believe another huge deal that sends listeners to NPR, is the onerous spotload -- the seemingly endless commercials that dog commercial radio.

Television is dealing with that so much of their advertising is being jumped over with the use of TiVo, and DVRs. They're figuring out other ways to pay the freight: product placement, etc. (We haven't seen a teevee commercial since approximately 2002).

Radio, on the other hand,  has been bought up by Wall Street investors who want to squeeze every penny possible out of their investment without any reinvestment. These beancounters have insisted on a heavy concentration of advertising which has driven away listeners in droves.

It's not a sustainable model, the pie is shrinking and these investors are already divesting.

We're always asking -- and no one has been able to explain -- why a commercial station using the public radio business model (pledge drives withholding content, fundraising, underwriting, etc) couldn't be successful.

Rev asks:  It would be interesting to know how much KUOW charges for their "underwriting" commercials, as compared to what the commercial stations charge for a 30-second spot. And if there's any research on
the comparative effectiveness of ads on KUOW vs, say KIRO or KING-FM."

Most commercial stations are run by huge out-of town media conglomerates who by definition don't give a shit about serving the local listeners. (Fisher Communciations, (KOMO, KVI,) is a locally owned exception but unfortunately it seems less concerned with saving the medium of radio than most). KPTK, owned by CBS, which is progressive talk, gives all manner of lip service to "community," but skips the most important community service they could make: investment in local programming.

Maybe the only hope for the revivification of radio, will be after Wall street pulls their collective dicks out of the stations and gone on to other things still redolent with cash.

Maybe then we can reinvent radio. It just seems like such a wasteful, roundabout way to do it.

Comments

[mike]

Pledge drives are what KEXP uses, correct? I don't listen to them much but seem to remember them doing that in the past. And Paul Allen presumably would like to make a profit and so uses a model that works, right? Or is it that he couldn't in good conscience start running commercials when the station had been commercial free for so many years when owned by the UW?

Thanks for the blog.

[abob]

If KUOW is getting such great ratings, why dont they stand on their own two feet in the free market instead of sucking off the public teat with taxpayer funded subsidies?

[rev]

abob, according to their 2007 annual report, KUOW only gets 9% ($726K out of $9,657,000) from the Corp. for Public Broadcasting and the U of Washigton. All the rest comes from individual, business and foundation support. That sure looks like they're "standing on their own two feet."

As for KEXP, they're still a non-commercial license. They can't run commercials under the terms of their license.

One more point that isn't clear from those ratings shares: How does the size of the total pie compare to say, five years ago? How much of the Seattle radio audience has gone off to podcasts, satellite and streaming internet radio? I know I listen to NPR from WNYC and KCRW as well as KUOW and KPLU, and I also listen to the BBC and Irish Radio through my computer. Those hours are not part of the Seattle cume any more. On the other hand, KUOW also gets out of area listeners, but they don't show up in the market share numbers either.

[sparky]

Come to the 21st century, abob. Most of the funding comes from corporate underwriters, foundations and public donations. You would know that if you actually watched PBS and saw their fundraising about every other week.

Andre' Reiu lives!

[Gay Gary]

Amy Goodman's "Democracy Now!" and other non-NPR public radio programming receives no CPB funding and accepts no corporate underwriting and still manages to put out a fine crypto-socialist broadcast. Why can't NPR?

NPR and PBS station so-called "underwriting guidelines" are so loosey-goosey it's ridiculous and modern advertising tactics find outright "calls to action" as passe anyway so the prohibition on them is no longer a differentiating point between underwriting and advertising. To call these stations "non-commercial" is a complete sophistry. They need to make a decision to either accept corporate underwriting or CPB funding, but not both.

If the CPB contribution is so paltry and insignificant there should be no problem or objection in giving it up and shutting-down the CPB.

[blathering michael]

abob: less than 1% of NPR's money comes from public financing. I wonder if Boeing can say the same?
The free market is killing privately owned, commercial radio.

[Coiler]

Amy Goodman is great, she is up to 700 outlets that broadcast her show.

[Gay Gary]

Even as a gay fascist I still tune-in to Amy Goodman at least 2 or 3 times a week, if only to support the way that public radio should be run.

The only complaint I have is that you can tell when they took the day off because they have 15 minutes of news/features followed by a 45 Noam Chomsky monologue.

[rev]

Michael, it's actually about 9% from CPB and the U of W. That's from the online version of their annual report. But it's still a small piece of the total pie.

[abob]

The airwaves are inundated on a daily basis by nationally syndicated progressive radio talk shows. Why should taxpayers be forced to pay even one cent for NPR left wing biased broadcasts?

Where is the equal time for right wing propagandists on the radio to counter the likes of Bill Press, Ed Schultz, Mike Malloy, Neil Rogers, Mike Newcomb, Amy Goodman, Lizz Brown, Rachel Maddow, Roland S Martin, Doug Basham, Jim Hightower, Bruce Burch, Jon Eliot, Duke Skorich, Peter Collins, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Lynn Samuels, Christine Craft, Bev Smith, Michael Eric Dyson, Stacy Taylor, Lynn Cullen, Jay Marvin, Mark Levine...just to name a few.

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

I understand the complaint that we say "only 9%" as if it is nothing because if it is nothing, then why do they need it? I'm for giving them the 9% and more; but, I understand the protest.

Also, I sent Nova M money. They are taking donations to support their progressive radio. From what I understand, the hosts don't make as much as those in the more established media - Randi notwithstanding - but they are working it anyway.

Also, I've said for a very long time that KUOW's biggest advantage is that it is commercial-free. If you listen to podcasts, you can hear an hour's worth of Dave Ross in twenty minutes. And they wonder why listenership is down?

It is one simple word: GREED.

A-boob, somebody should put you out of your misery. Anybody who can't think of more people than that on the left (and I notice you borrowed a few from the right to make your case) and then rests his case that liberal talk overshadows right-wing crazy talk needs a serious brain transplant.

Now, go back to fondling yourself to fantasies of Peggy and Mama Partridge.

[sparky]

HEY, that's an insult to Shirley Jones.

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

Yeah, you're right, Sparky. Noonan's right up his - umm - alley doncha think?

Now Duhff, what do you think of these apples?

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) on Friday afternoon seized the superdelegate lead from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), giving him command of every aspect of his party’s presidential nomination race.

That constitutes a key milestone in the race and a shocking reversal of fortune for Clinton.

Obama once was behind by more than 100 superdelegates. But according to at least two counts, more superdelegates are now in his camp. Politico’s tally now shows him ahead of her by 270 superdelegates to 268.5, with 208.5 uncommitted. (Superdelegates from U.S. territories count as one-half.) ABC News shows him ahead by two."

Poor baby, maybe you'll have to go back to SP for some consolation.

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

If you can't link it and want to, this is where I found it: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10245.html

For some reason, it says page not found or moved.

[AuthenticAndrew]

The people who ask Hillary to drop out now are opposed to a fair contest. When a team is behind in the suer bowl they don't throw in the towel at just because it's presumed they'll lose.

If Obama is the nominee I will most likely not vote because I won't soon forget what bitches you Obama supporters have been about this whole thing and how Obama hasn't done a thing to civilize his base - because deep down we all know he's kind of a wimp, he talks about change in the abstract when details are the most critical.

Between Obama, Hillary and McCain, Obama is by far the most vague and the least experienced, remind me again why I should give a crap about Obama?

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

suer bowl...

hmm...typo or misspelling? Either way, for you Clinton/McCriminal fans, it fits doesn't it?

I don't need to sell my candidate. He does that all by himself and his marketing tools are integrity, experience, and honesty. Too bad, Andrew, you still need the "big sell." You're like a couch potato munching nachos while waiting to see which gladiator wins and you're waiting for the death throes of one or the other. What an admission.

I don't really care who you give a crap about.

[JustinAtheropinion]

I have a question, joanie--if Obama were conceding, would you be voting for McCain in November?

Just curious to see how deep your Hillary-hatred goes.

[Duffman]

My guess is she'd be exercising her right not to vote or voting for Ralph Nader!

[J.Hova]

who is acting like the the sore losers now? If anything, Obama has had to put up with a lot innuendo about his race, he did not say he'd have trouble with white voters, Hillary is the one still pitching that old saw. I find it funny that she is the victim here, while Barrack runs a classy campaign through it all.

[abob]

Every TV news network employs a brigade of talking head analysts who meticulously break down the voting patterns of racial demographic groups. When Hillary Clinton repeats the same information...she is labeled a racist.

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

Justin, I've always given you more credit than you deserve, I think.

Don't you read this blog very much? You should be able to answer that question very, very easily if you do.

Unlike Duhff, I don't expect to have to repeat myself over and over. I have been and always am very clear about my politics, how I choose my candidates, and even my feelings about Hillary and McCain.

I don't mind giving sh** back to Duhff, puts and chucks because they don't seem to comprehend a lot of things. But, I didn't think you had that difficulty.

Do you really not know what my intentions, my issues and my feelings are about Hillary and the McCriminal?

a-boob: ...a brigade of...

Like the "brigade" of retired generals pushing the Iraq war for the corporations? Well, like I quoted before: there's a sucker born every minute and it seems he stays a sucker for as long as he lives.

You are good for a joke, a-boob, but that's about all.

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

Michael: The free market is killing privately owned, commercial radio.

I just noticed this gem but it isn't the free market. It is the greed of men and women in suits. Nobody has to pay Ross and Monson their six figures a year for twenty minutes of work an hour. Scher and Reynolds don't get that and they talk a whole lot more than twenty minutes an hour.

More radio stations in more hands would lower the cost of radio considerably. That would be the free market.

We liberals give greedy conservatives too much powder in their arsenals sometimes. We have to quit that.

It is corporate and shareholder greed that is killing radio and our economy. And our society along with it. We need a huge cultural shift in this country but it ain't gonna happen. Too many people suffering the "S" factor and "G" factor diseases.

[joanie hussein elitist for obama]

BTW, GiGi, it is not possible to listen to Amy Goodman 3x a week and remain a fascist, my dear.

Goodman, Zinn and fascism are incongruous to say the least.

I consider Zinn the print version of Goodman.

[joanie]

And, finally, what in the world does conveying superdelegate information have to do with Hillary bashing?

God, you guys, get a life and, perhaps, while you're at it, a brain between you.

[joanie]

And my final finally (for now) ... "LIVS" - low-information voters - per Bender on Ring of Fire. I love it! He must have read this blog!

Seems like Indiana and North Carolina voters finally figured out what pandering is given that the old "vacation from taxes" meme didn't work this time.

C'mon Justin, you're smarter than that.