.
The staff and many local listeners of KVEC (920 AM) were worried several years ago when Clear Channel Communications took over several area radio stations. As best I can tell, the worry was for naught, and I could detect no substantive changes.
History repeated itself recently as El Dorado Broadcasting took over KVEC and a few other local stations from Clear Channel, and the KVEC staff again got nervous. This time the worry was justified as El Dorado cleaned house like a new broom in the early morning (6-9 am) slot. Out were nice young energetic Ben Greenaway (Program Director) and long-time local media fixture King Harris (News Anchor).
If El Dorado did a focus group first (as the Tribune did before its recent changes), one has to wonder who was in the group. Apparently local listeners were not, and the change flopped (sound familiar?). Early morning listeners were not shy about letting the new owners know what they thought about replacing local radio in the morning with yet another syndicated talk show. Advertisers may have had a few things to say as well.
The flip had flopped, but El Dorado got the message and (sort of) flipped back. Harris is back, but Greenaway is not -- no explanation why that I've seen.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Friday, December 14, 2007
Trib Flips, Trib Flops, Trib Flips (Back)
.
One of the last things that most of us would want to do or would be good at would be publishing a daily newspaper like our local Tribune. There have been a rash of ownership changes throughout the publishing world, and our local paper has not been immune to them. There is no need to dwell on the changes except to say that with each change of ownership, the pressure to increase profits apparently increases as new owners try to quickly recapture their investment dollars and wring maximum profits out of the newspaper that they purchased.
Somewhere along the line, readers often seem to be forgotten. Over the past few years, there have been numerous commentaries from the Tribune's several publishers and editors about the focus groups that they have held on planned "improvements" to what most readers seem generally satisfied with. One has to wonder where they find the focus group participants.
During one of my recent lengthy absences, Sandra Duerr, the current Executive Editor, touted a money-saving improvement. It may have saved money for the Tribune, but apparently many readers did not find the improvement portion of the change. I have to admit that when I got back to SLO, the first thought that came to mind when I picked up a copy from my driveway was that we now had Trib-light. I was not impressed that I was able to finish reading that day's edition before I finished my first cup of coffee. I kept trying, but I had no success in getting excited about either the fluff that had been added or the news that had been deleted. It struck me as a flop.
Another focus group must have convened and reached the same general conclusion. The Tribune has now flipped back and is somehow saving even more money; I can hardly wait for the rollback in my annual home-delivery subscription, but I won't hold my breath.
Some readers will never be happy no matter how much the Tribune saves money while improving its product. That's the nature of readers that the editor and publisher have to deal with as they go about trying to put out a good product.
The Tribune is not the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, or the Wall Street Journal. It can't cover national or international affairs as those papers can, but it can cover San Luis Obispo and the surrounding area better than any of those papers can. In fact, the Tribune can cover our county better than all three of them put together. It should focus on doing that and on tying what's happening nationally and internationally to our area. As Sandra Duerr has pointed out several times, people can and do get much of their national and international news on-line, from television and radio, and from the newspapers mentioned above. Let's hope the Tribune simply gives us the best possible coverage of our area.
One of the last things that most of us would want to do or would be good at would be publishing a daily newspaper like our local Tribune. There have been a rash of ownership changes throughout the publishing world, and our local paper has not been immune to them. There is no need to dwell on the changes except to say that with each change of ownership, the pressure to increase profits apparently increases as new owners try to quickly recapture their investment dollars and wring maximum profits out of the newspaper that they purchased.
Somewhere along the line, readers often seem to be forgotten. Over the past few years, there have been numerous commentaries from the Tribune's several publishers and editors about the focus groups that they have held on planned "improvements" to what most readers seem generally satisfied with. One has to wonder where they find the focus group participants.
During one of my recent lengthy absences, Sandra Duerr, the current Executive Editor, touted a money-saving improvement. It may have saved money for the Tribune, but apparently many readers did not find the improvement portion of the change. I have to admit that when I got back to SLO, the first thought that came to mind when I picked up a copy from my driveway was that we now had Trib-light. I was not impressed that I was able to finish reading that day's edition before I finished my first cup of coffee. I kept trying, but I had no success in getting excited about either the fluff that had been added or the news that had been deleted. It struck me as a flop.
Another focus group must have convened and reached the same general conclusion. The Tribune has now flipped back and is somehow saving even more money; I can hardly wait for the rollback in my annual home-delivery subscription, but I won't hold my breath.
Some readers will never be happy no matter how much the Tribune saves money while improving its product. That's the nature of readers that the editor and publisher have to deal with as they go about trying to put out a good product.
The Tribune is not the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, or the Wall Street Journal. It can't cover national or international affairs as those papers can, but it can cover San Luis Obispo and the surrounding area better than any of those papers can. In fact, the Tribune can cover our county better than all three of them put together. It should focus on doing that and on tying what's happening nationally and internationally to our area. As Sandra Duerr has pointed out several times, people can and do get much of their national and international news on-line, from television and radio, and from the newspapers mentioned above. Let's hope the Tribune simply gives us the best possible coverage of our area.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Tribune Notices David v. Goliath
.
After an extended and much-enjoyed Thanksgiving holiday with family, it was nice to return to SLO and start getting caught up on happenings. A quick look at the back issues of the Tribune that had piled up on the kitchen counter during my absence popped up a front page article (Nov 26, 2007) by Bob Cuddy, one of the Tribune's more reliable reporters.
A week or so after the little SLO City News broke the news (see post below) about the questionable actions in the upcoming race for the 3rd District Supervisor, the Tribune finally noticed what was going on. It must be nice to have a relatively new-in-town weekly throw-away paper find your news leads for you, but I suppose you take what you can get when you're trying to save money (as editor Sandra Duerr constantly reminds us).
Cuddy essentially rehashed what the SLO City News had reported about the actions of Jerry Lenthall's (apparent) supporters but added a few details. According to Cuddy, the a spokesman for the Sacramento law firm that did the "opposition research" into Adam Hill's life had never heard of Lenthall and couldn't say who hired her, how much they paid, or how the information would be used. Sounds typical of Sacramento-types.
Cuddy also reports that Lenthall is apparently equating the work done on his behalf to someone coming by and taking pictures of his house. Gosh, that must have been a shocker and certainly sounds like dirty politics. But rather than imply that it is Hill's doing, Lenthall might look elsewhere. Seems that a few weeks ago (Oct 31, 2007) the New Times had a couple of items on where Lenthall does or doesn't live (options include either in or out of the 3rd District). Perhaps he should call the New Times and speak with The Shredder or Patrick Howe, the Managing Editor, who wrote the articles and ask if they are taking photos for a future article on "The Homes of Jerry Lenthall."
This is getting interesting.
After an extended and much-enjoyed Thanksgiving holiday with family, it was nice to return to SLO and start getting caught up on happenings. A quick look at the back issues of the Tribune that had piled up on the kitchen counter during my absence popped up a front page article (Nov 26, 2007) by Bob Cuddy, one of the Tribune's more reliable reporters.
A week or so after the little SLO City News broke the news (see post below) about the questionable actions in the upcoming race for the 3rd District Supervisor, the Tribune finally noticed what was going on. It must be nice to have a relatively new-in-town weekly throw-away paper find your news leads for you, but I suppose you take what you can get when you're trying to save money (as editor Sandra Duerr constantly reminds us).
Cuddy essentially rehashed what the SLO City News had reported about the actions of Jerry Lenthall's (apparent) supporters but added a few details. According to Cuddy, the a spokesman for the Sacramento law firm that did the "opposition research" into Adam Hill's life had never heard of Lenthall and couldn't say who hired her, how much they paid, or how the information would be used. Sounds typical of Sacramento-types.
Cuddy also reports that Lenthall is apparently equating the work done on his behalf to someone coming by and taking pictures of his house. Gosh, that must have been a shocker and certainly sounds like dirty politics. But rather than imply that it is Hill's doing, Lenthall might look elsewhere. Seems that a few weeks ago (Oct 31, 2007) the New Times had a couple of items on where Lenthall does or doesn't live (options include either in or out of the 3rd District). Perhaps he should call the New Times and speak with The Shredder or Patrick Howe, the Managing Editor, who wrote the articles and ask if they are taking photos for a future article on "The Homes of Jerry Lenthall."
This is getting interesting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)