Posted on Thu, May 13, 2010 @ 11:17 AM
Dad always told me not to get too attached to "things," especially cars. They're just machines, he said, that can be replaced - usually with something newer and better. Almost 20 years ago I bought one of those fancy new Dodge minivans. They were newly restyled: spacious, yet sleek and modern. I was proud of that van, and the first weekend I had it I drove it 350 miles to show my dad. Dad had brain cancer, but he almost literally crawled to his front porch, looked to the driveway, rasped out "Nice car," and returned to his bed. Those were the last words I heard him say. So much for not getting attached to a "thing."
I've been driving that van for 19 years. Oh sure, I wanted something new. I wanted fancy electronics and those new safety features. But I just never seemed to get around to it. Buying cars for other family members and paying for my daughter's college tuition always seemed to be the higher priority. Besides, despite Dad's words of caution, I had grown attached to it.
Over the past few weeks, all the "character tra
its" of the car started to bug me. The small dents. The rust spots. The missing hubcap. The hood ornament flopped on its side. And I started to see the van for what it was. Functional. Reliable. But outdated. Inefficient. Yucky.
It was time to make a change.
In many TV newsrooms, it's time to make changes. New technology, and the sleek new practices that have evolved from that technology, have made some traditions look outdated in comparison. New economics have changed the environment, and conservation is more important than ever. Maybe it's time to lose that attachment to some of the old things in your newsroom, and to old ways of doing things.
I have to go now. I'm heading out to my new car to program the NAV system, synch up the cell phone, and set my favorite satellite radio stations. Dad liked new things; he would have approved.
- Mike Anderson
Posted on Thu, Apr 22, 2010 @ 10:32 AM
You're a TV station, right? All this stuff about Facebook and Twitter and even your web site itself... that's all just extraneous busy work that makes sure you keep up with the fads. Right? Uh, we don't think so.
Maybe you saw the good news this week about about the economics of the Internet (a TVB/Borrell study just out says local online ad revenues for TV stations is expected to increase 21% in 2010). But this isn't about cash flow. It's about your identity as a dominant provider of content.
We think the stations that survive to the next stage of this industry's evolutionary cycle will be those seen as powerful and reliable information providers ... seen by the consuming pub.jpg)
lic as being better at it than the other stations in town. WCCO in Minneapolis will likely be a survivor. Check out this blog from MinnPost.com that takes a look at how WCCO has such a strong online presence. Here's an important excerpt from writer David Brauer's blog:
WCCOers -from reporters and weathercasters to producers and promotions people -just seem more jazzed about the future than your average news organization. Twitter seems to crackle with station personnel chattering about the station's latest efforts, seeking and seeming open to feedback, talking up interesting efforts they see elsewhere. Almost every organization has such folks, but ‘CCO's cadre seem to have achieved critical mass, emitting an esprit de corps enthusiasm more authentically charming than those hoary "we all love each other" promos.
Brauer made note that WCCO is the only station that has an easily recognizable "digital mastermind" as a driving force. About three weeks ago, the CJ&N Newsletter distributed an article to our clients looking at how two local TV stations, WNEM in Saginaw and WJZ/Baltimore, have made huge strides in signing up Facebook fans (WJZ now has more than 44,000 fans!). Based on our talks with the news directors of both stations, we realized one thing the two stations had in common was a sharp and progressive digital content manager.
To have a strong digital identity in your market, you must first have a strong digital identity inside your own TV station. Your long-term survival could depend on it.
- Mike Anderson
Posted on Fri, Jan 08, 2010 @ 03:25 PM
Sinclair and Mediacom have reached a one-year retransmission agreement that will keep KGAN and KFXA - here in our backyard - and 20 other TV stations in 14 markets - on the Mediacom cable systems. As local viewers, it's good news for us and our neighbors.
But this is a battle that's far from over, and not becau.jpg)
se it's just a one-year deal. The industry is working hard to set a value on service it offers to viewers, yet we have not yet discovered how much viewers actually value that service. There's a whole mess of stuff that's going to happen over the next few years that will shape the new economics of local television.
It hasn't been long that TV stations have realized they can get cable companies to pay for their product. Companies like Sinclair continue to push to find just how much a local TV channel is worth. But the networks have sniffed the scent of money; ABC says it wants as much as half of its affiliates' retrans revenue. Cable operator Comcast, assuming its purchase of NBC goes through, says its' going to set a new standard for retransmission compensation. So now local TV stations, just having found this stash of cash, are already having their pockets picked.
Meanwhile, cable companies are going to have to find just what customers are willing to pay. How high can rates go to make up for these new payments? Will they have to start offering channels ala carte so people can afford their cable service?
It's going to reach a point where the channels that are most valuable to viewers will be the ones to survive. How much do you think your signal is worth to your viewers? What can you do to make sure your programming is something they'll pay for? And don't count long-term on what the networks feed you - they may not be there forever. The future of local TV is all about providing value.
These retransmission consent disputes are the beginning of a new landscape in the industry. But there is one assurance we can offer. Make your product valuable to your viewers, and you'll have a future. Many other programmers, channels, and stations won't make the cut.
- John Altenbern
Posted on Sat, Jan 02, 2010 @ 09:09 AM
Several CJ&N people live in the Cedar Rapids television market - one of several markets currently caught in the middle of a contentious cable vs. broadcast retransmission fee negotiation. A New Year's Eve reprieve between Sinclair's KGAN, a CBS affiliate, and its LMA, Fox affiliate KFXA, and the market's dominant cable provider, Mediacom, means we and our Iowa neighbors (those who use Mediacom) won't have to find an alternate source to watch the Iowa Hawkeyes in the January 5 Orange Bowl. The extension expires on January 8, which still puts the Super Bowl in question.
Our location gives us front row tickets to a competition that will have more significant long-term repercussions than a sporting event. While the extension is welcome, it's inevitable that both sides are using viewers as pawns, and in the weeks leading up to the end of the year, both Mediacom and Sinclair (click to see respective promos) took their cases to the air.
There are a lot of dollars at stake, and not just in this mar.jpg)
ket, and not just between Sinclair and Mediacom. There are several ongoing disputes, and every one of them is a battleground in the industry's economic war. After a similar Sinclair-Mediacom fight three years ago, stations across the country benefited from Sinclair's aggressive negotiating. Now, Sinclair is again leading the way in an attempt to set a new precedent for retrans fees.
As viewers, though, we can see first hand that it's a costly fight for both sides. KGAN had at one time sunk into afterthought status among the market's TV news viewers, but an amazing commitment over the past 18 months brought the station back to respectability (perhaps a reinvestment of some of those extra dollars squeezed out of Mediacom the first time around?). At least in terms of on-air product, KGAN has made a remarkable turnaround, and ratings are just beginning to follow.
Should KGAN disappear again at some point from the majority of TV homes in the market, however, we can't help but wonder how much of KGAN's goodwill brand equity it'll consume. With the agreement extension, KGAN has to be as happy as the most avid Hawkeye fan. Still, given the public squabble, unless this is resolved, Sinclair will have to work even harder to win back that momentum. It's the price they - and any other broadcaster trying to pave new retrans territory - will have to pay to build a stronger financial foundation.
- Mike Anderson
Posted on Tue, Dec 22, 2009 @ 11:34 AM
As I glance out my window at a foot of snow dropping a flake at a time, I'm watching two local TV stations' morning newscasts describe the disruptive event.
These stations have very different styles. Station #1, the long-time market leader, is content to be very traditional, with two anchors and a weathercaster in the studio, and a reporter out live doing a few scattered head-and-shoulder live shots.
Station #2, an up-and-comer, is trying new things. One anchor and two weathercasters in the studio. Another weathercaster roaming the rural highways with a web video connection. A co-anchor bundled up in the snow outside the studio. Another reporter out live showing that indeed it is snowing in every part of the city. All armed with rulers and yardsticks to prove there's a lot of snow out there. They're making an effort to have a conversation with the viewer, not read or recite or preach.
Flipping back and forth between the two stations, it reminds me of a frisky young puppy annoying the heck out of a grumpy old dog, prancing around in circles, barking up a storm (if you'll pardon the expression).
Station #1 has fine coverage. It built its reputation on going all-out on weather coverage, and is feeding us plenty of information about closed schools and businesses. It has a credible forecast, and video of trouble spots.
But station #2 is putting on a good show. The typical cynical newspaper critic - and perhaps news managers at Station #1 - would point and laugh at Station #2. What fools! Do they really think they have to be out in the cold and the snow to prove that it's cold and snowing? Don't they know enough to come in from the cold!?
Of course they don't. Or maybe they're aware that sometimes there's more to this game than logic. This is television. Pictures rule. Station 2 is trying to shake the market up. It's trying to build a brand to contrast it from the dominant stations.
Whether your station is covering a blizzard (or your climactic equivalent) that shuts down the city, or a more routine story that has caught the attention of other stations, your viewers need to see something different. Something unusual. Something they know they wouldn't see across the street.
Local TV news research shows "sameness" is a common reason why stations lose their loyal audiences. They don't even have to compare news products - if they simply THINK what you do is ordinary, then you are indeed ordinary. And ordinary doesn't build viewer loyalty.
Mike Anderson