Technology360

Misunderstanding public broadcasting in the U.S. | #pubmedia

One of the difficulties that public media face as they struggle to maintain tax-based and viewer/listener-sensitive income is that the recommendations of so many people betray a misunderstanding of the very structure that exists in the U.S.  This even includes our most distinguished supporters.

Case in point is an article in the April Atlantic by the great Newton N. Minow, the former FCC chairman in the Kennedy Administration and a former PBS board chairman and author of the famous “vast wasteland” speech. Surely he would get it right:

…we need to give greater support to public radio and public television. Both have been starved for funds for decades, and yet in many communities they are essential sources of local news and information—particularly public radio, which is relatively inexpensive to produce and distribute and is a valuable source of professionally reported news for millions of Americans. There is virtually nothing else like it on the air. Public-television stations, as I saw when I was the chairman of PBS, are overbuilt, sometimes with four competing in the same market. Where that is so, stations should be sold and the revenue dedicated to programming a national news and public-affairs service, built on the foundation of the splendid PBS NewsHour. And a crucial part of that service—as with public media around the world—should be to promote the country’s arts and culture. [emphasis added]

Well, not really. Here he calls for the 30 or so independently-owned overlapped stations to be sold (requiring 30 separate sales) with the money aggregated somehow (sorry, Licensee, you can’t use it to fund other problems you have), to enhance a program service that probably none of the 30 carry now. At the announced sales price of public TV stations in two top-25 markets, that could raise roughly $90 million, which, invested after sales costs, would generate about $4 million per year – again if, miraculously, you could somehow aggregate it. The CPB base grants these stations have would be easier to aggregate and yield more – $12 million per year – but then we have the problem of the remaining 140 or so eligible recipients also feeling the big hurt and needing relief. Even if these problems could be solved and the money aggregated, it’s too small.  While not chump change, is a long way from being sufficient to build the kind of service Minow envisions – even if it was done far more cheaply in radio or on the web.

Mr. Minow is one of public media’s most distinguished and articulate champions, but this misses because it misunderstands the nature of what brings NPR, PBS and other programs to Americans every day.

--Dennis

Jeffrey Dvorkin on developments in #pubmedia funding

Jeffrey Dvorkin is a Canadian [update] and American, a former head of NPR News and its ombudsman, and now heads up the Organization of News Ombudsmen. He’s been writing recently on the threat to U.S. public broadcasting’s federal funding. Here’s a collection of recent posts worth reading:

April 15: Public Broadcasting is Saved! Now What?
April 5: NPR’s Condition: A timely warning for the CBC
March 22: Government Funding: A Blessing or a Curse?
March 17: De-Funding NPR: Just Political Theatre or Something More?
March 10: The Stumbles of Two Public Broadcasters

--Dennis

Jessica Clark’s [@beyondbroadcast] “Pubcasting Battle” series | #pubmedia

Jessica Clark (@beyondbroadcast on Twitter) has added a post to her “Pubcasting Battle” series on the Center for Social Media Blog.

April 16:  Pubcasting Battle: Unlikely Bedfellows

Here are the others, all worth your time.

• April 5: Pubcasting Battle: Government Shutdown Edition
• March 30: Pubcasting Battle: Sifting Through the Evidence
• March 23: Pubcasting Battle: Top Five Pieces this Week
• March 17: Pubcasting Battle: Highlights and Low Blows from the Past Week
• March 9: Pubcasting Battle: Breaking Responses to Schiller's Ouster
• March 8: Pubcasting Battle: Now it Gets Ugly
• March 3: Pubcasting Battle: A Slight Reprieve, and a Push for Reform
• February 22: Defend or Defund? Advocacy Ramps up as House Nixes Pubmedia Budget
• February 14: Public Broadcasting Faces Harsh Congressional Challenges

--Dennis

Martin Busch, public broadcasting pioneer, died today | #pubmedia

 

My good friend and professional mentor, Martin Busch – died today in Kansas.  He began his broadcasting  career at KUSD-AM in Vermillion, S.D., and was executive director of South Dakota Public Broadcasting from 1960 to 1984.  Along with his engineering colleague, Jim Prusha, he built a statewide network of public television stations and began a statewide public radio network as well before his retirement – which itself was a statement of principle with a former governor.

Martin and his friend, the late Jack McBride, from whom he took inspiration, were among the pioneers of regional broadcasting – efficient operating models for rural states that now increasingly look like efficient models for the rest of public broadcasting.

I saw Martin last in October when South Dakota Public Broadcasting dedicated its television studio to him.  In spite of suffering from one of the insults of old age (I think he was 89 87 in March), he gave a nice speech and, as always, looked debonair.  Here is the citation for this event on the SDPB web site:

On Friday, October 1, 2010, during the USD Dakota Days celebration, SDPB dedicated our TV Studio in honor of Martin Busch. Martin was the Executive Director of SDPB from 1960-1984, and hosted "The Bookshop" on SDPB Radio from 1960-2002. Speakers included Julie Andersen, Executive Director of SDPB; James Abbott, President of the University of South Dakota; Ted Muenster, former member of the ETV Board; Dr. Tom Kilian, an early supporter of SDPTV; Stephan Busch, Martin's son; and Martin Busch. View the ceremony here: MARTIN BUSCH STUDIO DEDICATION

RIP, friend.

Update 18 April 2011:  Rapid City Journal article on Martin.  Thanks to Ron Hull and Burnie Clark for updated picture and news article link.  South Dakota Public Broadcasting's "Dakota Midday" 4/18/2011 program on Martin.

--Dennis

Moyers: test case for #pubmedia disintermediation?

Yesterday evening, I sent the following on Twitter: “BM: If anyone doesn’t need common carriage, it’s you – Go direct…”  This is an expansion of that thought.

A few days ago, I published a guest post by Howard Blumenthal of MiND TV on public television and disintermediation.  By the standards of this modest blog, it got a lot of attention, including some thoughtful comments.  Then I read Elizabeth Jensen’s New York Times piece saying that Bill Moyers had ended his effort to return to PBS with a weekly series because: “PBS has informed us there is no time slot available in which the series could be designated for simultaneous common carriage across the country. …”

I’ve spent 38 of my 41-year career in stations and now in semi-retirement work half-time as executive director of a station organization, so I certainly believe in the value of local stations.  And I’ve argued for the power of common carriage in both the station community and as a former PBS board member.  But we can’t deny the disintermediation that’s going on all around us on multiple platforms and we need to figure out how to make it work for public media.

There’s a lot of room between denial and embracing, but it seems to me that if anyone could be successful in doing self-distribution – going direct to viewers – it’s Bill Moyers.  Unless his proposed show’s content would be fishwrap a few hours later, he has the brand, following, and (probably favorable) demographics to make disintermediated distribution work.  Amazon, FORA.tv, Hulu, Netflix, Roku, YouTube and many more are all waiting – not to forget non-common carriage public TV distribution via American Public Television, etc.  And a plethora of social media tools can both get the word out and encourage the conversation that Moyers’ programs have always generated.

--Dennis 

Stephen Hill: Six steps to a user-supported #pubmedia system

The following quotes from a dear colleagues email sent by Hearts of Space producer, Stephen Hill, earlier today.  See also this related post.  --Dennis

SIX STEPS TO A USER-SUPPORTED PUBLIC MEDIA SYSTEM

FOR STAKEHOLDERS
1. Re-define the role and identity of stations as "locally-focused public media network nodes."

2. Extend the Public Media Platform to every station web site as a matter of system policy, so all public media content is available at every point of entry to the network. This can be as elegant as a single Public Media Player on mobiles or the web, or a full service embedded "site-within-a-site."

3. Re-align the financial relationships and incentives between networks, stations, content producers and affiliates so everyone has a stake in the success of the network as a whole.

4. Define a practical set of revenue-sharing policies between stations, networks, producers and affiliates. (For example: ultimately stations might not pay dues and program fees to NPR, but receive a net revenue share from it.)

FOR THE PUBLIC
5. Create a comprehensive set of free, voluntary and paid digital service models for the public as a means of attracting significant new revenue for the system.

6. Create a national Public Media Network membership for end users, with multiple tiers of service and access to premium digital services and archival content as benefits of paid membership.

Funding the future of #pubmedia - a new proposal from Stephen Hill

Stephen Hill, whose Hearts of Space program is familiar to public radio listeners, is out with a new proposal for funding public media.  Stephen has built a successful online and radio business in a "niche of a niche" and has learned a lot along the way about content economics.  This is a long document but well worth your time to read and discuss.

The following quotes from an email he sent out today:

Colleagues:

I've posted the paper I've been working on since June 2010 to my blog and sent a text version to the Pubradio list. (The list appears to be down at the moment due to a hosting change, but it should show up soon.)

The ideas I'm advancing in this paper for reform of the business and service models of public media have taken on added relevance in recent weeks, and have convinced me that now is the time to go public with it. It is very strange to find myself ready to agree to phasing out Federal funding, but for the radically different reasons than those who are pursuing a partisan political agenda. I am convinced that

If public media is to secure its future, it must be with the public.

You may have received a draft in the past. I've revised the paper substantially, and I hope the attacks on public media will encourage you to reconsider it in the light of the challenges we face. Frankly, it's a long and demanding read, but there is nothing like being threatened to focus the mind.

I solicit your comments and criticism. Please email me links to any blog or public forum in which you post responses.

Web version:  http://heartsofspace.typepad.com/spatialrelations/2011/03/funding-the-future-of-public-media.html [or http://tinyurl.com/66xmrhu]

Printable PDF: Funding the Future of Public Media.pdf

Regards :: SH

--Dennis

Development continuity at NPR (not) | #pubmedia

Counting whoever just picked up the marker for this in the wake of Ron Schiller’s departure from NPR, since I joined its board in mid-2005 (I retired as an SVP there at the end of 2010), there have been six “permanent” or interim heads of fundraising development.  NPR will now be recruiting a 7th.  Development is also a major task of the CEO and in that same time, there have been five such CEOs (I was one of the interims). 

NPR just can’t catch a break in this, leaving what should be one of the most compelling philanthropic cases greatly under-achieving.  Lack of continuity in leadership leads to “coin-us interruptus.”

Major gifts fundraising is more important now – when  tax-based sources are under assault – than ever.  It’s a high-touch, long-term relationship activity.  In NPR’s case, there is also a volunteer NPR Foundation board and the sometimes difficult relationship with 280 or so station managers to manage.  Ron, and also-departed CEO Vivian Schiller (no relationship), were making what is probably the first real progress in both those sets of relationships when Ron announced his original May resignation before the now-infamous Georgetown videotaped lunch.  That progress is now problematic.

Journalism is Job One at NPR, but development has to be Task One for the new interim and permanent executive teams.  Stations (where I spent 38 years) also need to coalesce around the need for collaboration and new fundraising models.  It will be tempting in a financial squeeze to throw up the barricades and stick to what’s safe.  Wrong, wrong, wrong.  I’ve seen one interesting proposal in draft form (which I hope will be released soon) and I hope others will get creative also.

For the 7½ years I’ve been doing this blog, its masthead has quoted Jerry Garcia:  “Somebody has to do something, and it’s just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us.”  Never more true.

--Dennis

My take on the NPR situation | #pubmedia

Not sure if this is an effort to relieve or relive my sadness over the events of the past few days at NPR.  Or, it may just be a way to answer the dozen or so people who wrote or called yesterday to ask what I thought of Vivian Schiller’s departure as president & CEO, Ron Schiller’s (SVP development and no relation) videotaped meeting with bogus potential donors and subsequent departure, and what it all means for public broadcasting.

By way of disclosure, I was a senior VP at NPR until retiring at the end of December and, although I’ve gone on to work half-time for a public television organization, I still have a big part of my heart living there in the person of friends and colleagues and their daily work.  By way of further disclosure – and more significant for what I’m writing here – I was chairman of NPR’s board three years ago this month when we had a parting of ways with Vivian’s predecessor, Ken Stern, and I took over for 10 months as interim CEO and later interim president & CEO.  I wrote about it at the time on this blog.  I’ve been on many other boards over the years, including the executive committee of the PBS board when we had a parting of ways with its then president.

Having communicated with no one on the NPR board or with the executives directly involved, I can say I know nothing about the specific circumstances of the current NPR situation.  I’m going to write instead from the perspective of one who’s seen how many boards work and how public broadcasting functions over 41 years.

First, if you don’t know about this situation, here are links to some good coverage:  David Folkenflik at NPR.  Mark Memmott at NPR.  Karen Everhart in Current.  Staci Kramer in paidContent.  Ben Nuckols for Associated Press.  Jeffrey Brown for PBS NewsHour.  Or, browse Google News on the subject.  Update 3/11/11: Also see a review of the week's news at Nieman Media Lab.

Boards and CEOs rely on mutual trust and confidence.  Boards and CEOs part ways when this is out of whack.  It’s that simple and that complicated.  It’s tempting to speculate beyond this, as the Washington Post did when I took over in 2008 and as Jeff Jarvis, who I highly regard, did in a post today (by the way, I think his interview by APM’s Marketplace tonight was good).  But this speculation is almost always wrong.

In his post, Jeff stated, “The board fired the last station because he pissed off the stations” and implied this was true of Schiller’s departure as well.  In March 2008, Paul Farhi wrote in the Post that the “Stern and the…board had clashed repeatedly over several of Stern’s initiatives, including NPR’s expansion into new media.”  From personal first-hand knowledge, both statements are just flat wrong.  As CEOs, Ken, myself as an interim, and Vivian were all strong proponents (most effectively Vivian) of digital investments and there was an acceleration of those investments throughout three administrations of NPR because it was and is the right thing to do.  The board supported each of us with leadership and approved budgets.

I have never seen, in the case of NPR nor any other board on which I’ve served over many years, a split in policy between station managers and lay reps.  It doesn’t happen that way.  And it’s been my experience that lay reps are especially valuable because of their corporate experience when it comes to making a leadership change.  So what’s the significance of station managers having a slight edge in representation?  It’s a non-issue in the governance of our national public broadcasting organizations.

Yes, any organization’s leader in a similar situation has some stations that push back and some stations that love them.  It’s impossible to generalize.  By the way, commercial broadcasting networks and retail franchise operations experience the exact same push and pull.  That’s life in the real world.

Jeff is absolutely right to say, “There is a strategic cliff ahead.”  Vivian saw it – so did Ken – so did I.  We invested in solutions which the board supported.  But NPR isn’t going to make the jump to internet distribution without writing off 90% of its listeners and be forced to win them back over the long slope of wireless growth.  The audience isn’t ready for it; the mobile internet won’t scale to that level of use (just do the math) for many years, if ever; and local journalism and community outreach – plus more mundane but necessary things like local traffic and weather – depend on tax-based support and the income that audiences attracted to NPR programs voluntarily subsidize.  The reality of operating public radio in the 200 or so markets in fly-over country is probably not apparent from our major cities, but it’s arguably more important to citizenship and quality of life in those communities than it is, because of alternatives, where Jeff and I live.

So, was the NPR volunteer board “ball-less” when it did whatever it did – appearing to some as dismissing its CEO to appease Republican critics?  No, I think they were working to regain confidence in their ability to govern the organization and move it and public radio forward in the face of “Christensen disruptions” and challenges to funding.  That is their tough job.

--Dennis

Keillor’s will be big (red) shoes to fill | #pubmedia

Garrison Keillor was born 107 years after Mark Twain and now, 100 years after Twain’s death, GK has used his first guest host on APHC.  Will Rogers overlapped Twain about 30 years, but it’s hard to name someone else in the company of these three.  It’s hard, too, to believe APHC will survive the retirement of its creator.  It’s about the writing, not the music.  --Dennis