SaveKUTAustin

Fuzzy Math: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics
Craig Hattersley

In a heart-felt letter to contributors, KUT’s Stewart Vanderwilt once waxed poetic about the mission of public radio:

“KUT is . . . a community for music lovers. From adult rock to folk, from blues to world music, KUT seeks out music that isn’t promoted, packaged, or hyped. Music you wouldn’t find without us. . . .

KUT is a community of people like you – principled and independent, curious and intelligent. People who cherish their rights as individuals to think, speak and act for themselves. Citizens who get involved when they know that they can make a difference”

Whoa, whoa. Hold the phone. It’s hard times in the land of plenty, and things have changed. And, as Hawk Mendenhall has noted, “change is never easy for anyone.” The soft spin today is of “hand-picked” and “home-grown” music, seeking to blunt the attack of concerned citizens who think they can make a difference, who would challenge the assertions of “home-picked” numbers trotted out as proof.

But numbers are funny things, and can be stacked in endless variety for innumerable objectives. Piled straight up and down, the numbers show a disturbing trend, for those who cherish their radio: Today public radio is in trouble, as noted in the research project “Audience 2010”:

While 93% of Americans use radio each week, the typical American is listening less today than any time in modern history. Americans now average 19.5 hours of listening per week, compared to more than 22 hours just 10 yrs ago. Public radio listeners have been yielding radio listening at an even faster rate – about 25 minutes per week per year. Today they listen to radio four hours a week less than ten years ago. Studies have shown that the loss in public radio corresponds to an increase in regular FM listening – public radio is losing listening time to FM radio.

And as the 2009 Mid-Year Report for the University Station Alliance (an organization for university-licensed stations, which make up 63% of the public radio system) reports, “The more a member listens the more they give.” These are definitely numbers that give pause to stations like KUT with their manifest-destiny model of management.

In part, the problems can be traced to the struggles of NPR flagship programs “Morning Edition” and “All Things Considered,” whose listenership has remained “flat” or actually declined since 2002 (“Grow the Audience,” funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, see chart here). (Keep in mind that the word “flat” is the descriptor used to characterize ratings for Phil Music and Paul Ray’s Jazz over the time period.) These struggles are particularly vexing for public radio, given the makeup of the radio-listening day, in general, which changes little from year to year (“Public Radio Today,” 2009 edition, see chart).

Note that listening is high for the morning and evening drive times, dipping slightly to plateau in between, then diving precipitously in the evening to near zero overnight. From a strictly economic viewpoint, it’s easy to see why KUT would want to put a canned show like “Undercurrents,” which costs $3,000 a year, into the overnight time slot rather than pay a live deejay. Times are tough, right? And nobody listens then anyway — despite Hawk’s spinning it as some sort of failure on the part of a Larry Monroe or a Paul Ray (after they’d been shunted into these time spots). Even the popular show “Car Talk” — the most successful show on public radio — failed miserably when aired on a Monday evening, and Vanderwilt noted in a January 2002 Austin Chronicle article that KUT was the only station in the top 150 where it was a “failure,” necessitating the move to Saturday morning.

A look at the money raised during the spring fundraiser will give you an idea of what draws the support of Austin listeners (see spring fund drive chart from open records, courtesy Austin Airwaves, below). The big haul comes during those peak morning-to-afternoon hours (indeed, the “goal” for “Morning Edition” on the last day of the fall fund drive was $55,000), with the NPR news shows drawing the lion’s share, and recent “retiree” John Aielli’s Eklektikos close behind. Music shows on the far side of the evening drive times show rapidly diminishing returns — and expectations, given the goals. If, as “KUT member services” suggested, they wished to “change the evening music programming on three weeknights in hopes of duplicating the success of our popular daytime music,” that ostensibly might lead to all Aielli all the time (and, in fact, classical listeners represent public radio’s most loyal supporters). But management has other ideas.

In fact, the flattening of the public radio growth curve and a ratings seepage to commercial FM radio provide a blithe rationale behind the moves of KUT management, a management that wants to keep growing the pie, making it not just number one in Austin, but in the cosmos. As noted in the article “How Much Is Enough?”, the Vanderwilt vision encompasses expensive, dicey new technologies like HD radio (see “Is KUT Throwing Your Money Down a Rat Hole?” and “Canned Music”) , a whole new level of high-paid executives (the “best and the brightest”), a brand-new building, and more radio stations (despite the failings of the San Angelo station, KUT has applications in for two new stations, says Jim Radio). That’s the price of progress station donors are paying.

There is a hint of desperation in the changes to KUT this year, with cost-cutting moves made despite repeated record-setting pledge drives. A whole lot of “vision” has to be funded each year — not to mention the 65-odd positions in the station workforce. Why would management otherwise make such sweeping changes, possibly endangering an existing demographic in the upheaval, incurring the wrath of longtime listeners, gambling on a new demographic, and decimating what has been the money-making core of local deejays? Some insight may be gained in the pages of a report from the Radio Research Consortium entitled “Audience 2010”:

Managing the business of public service was difficult enough while listening and revenues continued to rise. It will be exceptionally challenging when both are stagnant. Development professionals will be called on to earn more from listeners per listener-hour – a feat they’ve heretofore been unable to sustain. Programmers will be called upon to generate more public service per programming dollar – putting pressure on high cost, low return local programming.

Management initiatives that presume audience and revenue growth over the long term will be called upon to prove out sooner, or be adjusted mid-course, or be abandoned. As an industry, we seem to be at a real point of inflection. We might wait a couple years to be sure, but by then it may be too late. If listener-sensitive resources do not grow, our ability to invest in new endeavors will be limited.

The threat of a downward spiral looms. The reinvigoration of public service and public support calls for clear foresight and able management.

In this report, we address the central finding that public radio is no longer a growth industry. Or at least it won’t be for the immediate future, as its ability to earn listener-sensitive revenues (particularly individual giving) is predicated on (and predicted by) listening. This finding has significant ramifications for those used to budgeting on the presumption of financial growth.

This presumption of financial growth has been the hallmark of current KUT management. The hope is, of course, that this ambition doesn’t bankrupt our public radio station as it did the Indiana station Stewart Vanderwilt left to come here. As noted by the GM succeeding him in Indiana:

The Online 1999-2001 Biennial Report that you see before you is an attempt to keep an earlier promise to Indiana Public Radio’s members and supporters. The previous general manager, Stewart Vanderwilt, promised that Indiana Public Radio would annually provide a broad financial report about the radio station. That promise has been altered by circumstance.

WBST has been a success almost from its inception. The thing about success is that it inevitably leads to a new idea, how to make something successful even more successful. An idea always looks good on paper. And the idea that looks good on paper should work when it’s implemented, but that’s not always the case. In 1997 the idea was to expand WBST, creating Indiana Public Radio by adding four transmitters in new communities. It was believed that the new communities would respond as favorably to their new stations as Delaware County had to WBST. When this idea was implemented, IPR had the financial reserves to cover the multiple transmitter costs and absorb the added expense; on paper, it looked as if new membership would soon establish itself in those new communities, thus recouping the initial investment. . . .

Rather than fantastic financial growth, the past two years at IPR have been about retrenching and reallocating resources. The financial reserves are now gone. Several staff positions have not been filled. So, we did not attempt an annual report last year, but we want to recognize the people who carry the station financially, especially during tough times.

John Conquest, writing for Ragblog, was not so charitable:

The top KUT managers came to Austin from Indiana (where GM Stewart Vanderwilt saddled WBST with massive debts — ironically, the station where Larry Monroe started his radio career), Utah, Vermont and Alabama, and will doubtless depart when they get better offers elsewhere, the point being that they have no roots, hence no understanding of local tradition.

Careerists, whose priorities are ratings and fundraising, use standard industry strategies — if this worked in Seattle, it’ll work here — too bad if shows that have long been part of the fabric of Austin life become roadkill in the process.

The strategy that seems to be evolving at KUT is emulating KGSR’s AAA programming, with restrictive playlists, heavy to light rotation, so many new album tracks per hour, all the mechanical controls that make the station such horrible, repetitive shit. The fatal flaw in this, of course, is that there’s already one KGSR and it doesn’t hit you up for money every five minutes.

Only don’t use the word “playlist,” as Hawk and minions take great offense. This is nothing but semantic obfuscation. Okay, so maybe he doesn’t call it a “playlist,” but the deejays operate under strict rules that require them to include selected tracks from CDs that fall within the categories “heavy rotation,” “light rotation,” “core artists,” and “new arrivals. These CDs are “hand-picked” by The Committee, which includes Hawk, Jeff McCord, and “others from management.” Deejays can suggest, but the committee rules, as far as what goes in the library and which tracks can be played. The assertion that this means deejays are “asked” to play just “a few” of these is disingenuous at best.

Actually, KUT does have what it calls “playlists.” These are the songs played during each shift, and they can be found at the KUT website. Easily deduced is where this music is drawn from, as you can check the lists yourself. You can see, for instance, that KUT reports to Americana Music Association and Triple A Radio, where KUT appears on “The Panel.” You wondered why you’re hearing Pearl Jam on the public radio station? There it is, in black and white. Perhaps more interesting is a perusal of the list of hot sellers from Waterloo Records, another source for the committee. Simply put, much of the music is drawn from what’s selling in AAA radio, Americana music, and at Waterloo Records. Which, naturally, limits these lists to consumers with what those in the mangled middle class jokingly refer to as “disposable income.”

“On the Media” details many more problems associated with this kind of buyers’ list, not the least of which is an underground economy that doesn’t pay for music (half of all teenagers, for instance, didn’t buy one CD last year). Eric Garland, whose company tracks legal and illegal downloads, streams on MySpace and YouTube, merchandise sold on tours, and more, says, “If we’re just talking about the breadth of the audience and not the depth of interest, I don’t think we’re really getting at the value of the music.” And as OTM’s Eric Garland notes: “If you look at the top of the airplay charts, the top of the sales charts, how many songs, on average, do you think people are interested in from those artists? . . . It’s about 1.1.” In other words, they conclude, the average artist on top of the charts is a one-hit wonder. This, of course, doesn’t even begin to speak of the limitations on the reach of local Austin acts, say, who aren’t already on the CD-buying public’s radar – a Timbuk3, for instance, an unknown act when Larry Monroe first aired them on his show (as Barbara K notes).

The Man’s Plan

So what does this say of the grand plan to keep the pie growing? The total “take” at KUT has tripled in the past nine years, with the surge in corporate underwriting and “Leadership Circle” largesse, but increased expenses still threaten to outstrip these gains. With the economy as it is, new ways must be found to fund the bangles and baubles of the Vanderwilt vision or face the “downward spiral” warned of in the Audience 2010 report. Sure, listenership at KUT has blossomed, according to Hawk (“doubled,” he says): some 225,000, he claims, with 130,000 listening to music. But in fact, the number of people who actually contribute is a small fraction of whatever shifty Arbitron number you choose to employ (Arbitron warrants a separate story of its own and will be dealt with in a future rendering). And the number of contributors has been shrinking, while the size of the individual donation has been increasing. A worrisome trend, according to Sylvia Carson, marketing and development director at KUT, who said in 2007, “We don’t want it to be an exclusive club.”

But it may be too late for that already. Look at the business memberships on the KUT website — some 700 strong, each giving a minimum of $500 apiece for the honor of being listed and cited during the pledge drive (or a total of a minimum $350,000 a year). Of course, if you’re a business underwriter, the cost goes up to $1,200 minimum and you get the annoying non-ad as well. Look then at the 2007 annual report (the last year finances have been made available to the public) on the website, where you’ll find a list of Leadership Circle names — where the elite come to meet. These folks pay a minimum of $1,200 for that honor, with the 300 strong in 2007 thus ponying up at least $360,000. Throw in the matching pledges from Austin’s captains of industry, and you’re talking a significant chunk of change.

So how do you promote a more egalitarian yet profitable nonprofit? Or do you even care, is more to the point.

“Don’t take your eye off the ball,” Vanderwilt said. “You need to know where your audience really is and why they are coming to you on a daily basis, rather than getting caught up in the Next Big Thing. You need to focus on your content and work to join the next wave, rather than lose your focus and spend your time trying to create one” (“Music Discovery,” by James Careless).

And which next wave is that? Enter AAA radio. In a memo (from the material released in an open-records request), Hawk notes that the station most turned to by listeners when not listening to KUT is KGSR. And since public radio is losing ground to its FM counterparts, this is their next wave. But with an Austin radio listenership, will KUT ride this wave to feed the machine? Consider if you will the average listener of public radio:

Note that the demographic always attached to KUT — 35 to 64 — represents 66% of public-radio listeners, and if you add in older listeners, you’re talking about 90% of all listeners. You can find a similar yet different set of numbers on the KUT website, though they tell a completely different story to potential advertisers. That’s “statistics.” The younger folks, 18 to 34, are seen as much more tech savvy, attuned to new technologies and delivery methods such as iPods and web streaming and listening less to FM radio. (In iTunes alone —a freebie easily downloaded — you can access hundreds and hundreds of radio stations of all genres.) The average age, then, of the public radio listener is 54, with 90% over age 35.

Among the conclusions of the overall Jacobs study were the following:

• AAA fans are younger, less “into” Public Radio exclusively & far more tech-active. They are more apt to own iPods, download podcasts, stream audio and video, text, and participate in social networking sites.
• Classical devotees are older, less enamored by technology. But they are the heaviest radio listeners.
• Clearly, there’s a division within the Public Radio audience that transcends format. The younger and emerging demographics profile quite differently from the 55+ core (which still makes up more than half this sample).
• Stop worrying about satellite radio. Interest is waning and of the many different media/gadget options, it is well down the list.
• HD Radio is challenged. Adoption rates are low & satisfaction trails even satellite radio.

These numbers can be manipulated to fit any agenda: When citing the vaunted AQHs from Arbitron reports, Hawk uses as KUT’s demographic 25 to 54, adding in the 25 to 34 demographic that shows up in this chart as only 9% of public radio listeners — and skewing the results. This has the effect of dropping some of the shows that they “dumped,” as Hawk so daintily says in one of the open-records memos about Paul Ray’s Jazz and Phil Music, from possibly a top-three finish (when the traditional, older demographic is used) down towards the bottom of the Austin ratings — when compared with commercial stations. This, according to Arbitron. This drastic of an effect only illustrates the small size of the sample from which these numbers are drawn, a major criticism of Arbitron diary methods. (Conversely, what size of a sampling of KUT donors — the small fraction of listeners who actually donate — who oppose the radical changes made in Austin’s public radio station would be large enough to influence management decisions?) The inclusion of the 25-34 demographic makes sense in Hawk-speak if you consider one key factor: The 25-54 demographic is considered the prime group in the ad-buying segment of the public.

For the money must keep flowing for this machine to keep running. As one Facebook critic pointed out months back, as long as record money flows in and the awards keep coming, management is safe. Well, the awards will come. How many public radio stations have a million dollars a year to put into local news? Not to disparage the local newsroom employees (who do a good job), but that’s a little like saying Lance Armstrong is the world’s best Tour de France-winning cancer survivor. But money is a problem now, and that’s gotta make some people nervous, especially given some of the chances taken that don’t look so attractive in retrospect.

And the latest gamble bets that young people will flock on board to a AAA “non-commercial” station, wallets in hand, old folks will dry up and blow away (or just keep giving to their public radio), and nobody will think twice about the shabby treatment given the folks who’ve built this station from the ground up. That’s just the way the good old boys do things at the University of Texas, spending millions on a Gutenberg bible or the next famous dead guy’s papers. You got a legendary football coach? Pay him $60,000 a year in perpetuity. We take care of our own (kind).

A bit harsh? You bet. But one hopes that amongst the beneficence funding this latest gamble, there stirs at least a bit of queasiness because of the callous conduct of public radio bidness. Noblesse oblige, indeed. Okay, real harsh. You can’t totally trash affluent supporters who, to their credit, seek to bankroll public radio and the myriad pro bono efforts that have always been a part of the station. National Public Radio, despite what’s seen by some as a drift away from progressive politics, still represents the best news readily available on the radio.

Yet to an extent that’s increasingly more apparent on the local, music side of the equation, the current management is holding the public’s radio hostage with their bottom-line, no-holds-barred approach. You’re with us or you’re agin us . . . This, apparently, is how we do things in the New Austin. And you can’t expect a dean educated in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania to learn by osmosis the “institutional memory” (as Peyton Wimmer calls it) that endowed Old Weird Austin. Dean Hart, who ironically is also director of the Annette Strauss Institute for Civic Participation, is certainly paid well to do his job overseeing the station — some $260,000 a year well. But to put that into the perspective of a UT ethos, that’s about what they pay the football team’s running-backs coach.

Maybe that’s a cheap shot, but the point remains that the dean — and all the well-heeled “leadership” supporters (witness: the $5,000 matching pledge from “anonymous” on the first morning of the pledge drive this fall during “Morning Edition”) — are complicit in these changes. One would hope that at least some of the chablis-and-brie set would feel a bit squeamish at the dispassionate manner in which the KUT “legends” have been shoved out of the way, sacrificed at the altar of corporate solicitude.

But perhaps they’re part and parcel of the attempt at supremacy, enamored of the chance to rub elbows with visiting NPR celebs and share in the glory, however faded it may be in the autumn of the NPR bloom. Recall the quote from the Audience 2010 report: “Management initiatives that presume audience and revenue growth over the long term will be called upon to prove out sooner, or be adjusted mid-course, or be abandoned.” Management hubris, however, has so far been unwilling to admit any error in judgment, and that may prove to be their ultimate undoing.

The grand plan and massive changes once ascribed to a tough economy have now been re-badged as strictly an appeal to a broader Austin audience, “for our own good,” so to speak. You can claim you altruistically desire only to serve more listeners, but how can you know what listeners want if you never ask them – the 100,000 or 300,000 or million listeners, and not the handful of monied supporters — relying instead on your take of a defective rating system for commercial radio stations? (The legally beset Arbitron PPM system, touted as a major improvement over the diary system used here — and giving far different results — itself carries this disclaimer: “PPM ratings are based on audience estimates and are the opinion of Arbitron and should not be relied on for precise accuracy or precise representativeness of a demographic or radio market.”)

Truth be told, the upheaval is just the latest management gamble in the heretofore frustrated ambition of empire building, with employee roadkill collateral damage in pursuit of the dream. The money now spent solely to secure advertising is the size of the entire KUT budget when Vanderwilt took over. The station may boast a budget three times that of San Antonio (and still somehow be not enough), but look what you’ve got when the bill becomes due: the new reality in your public radio station, where the soul purpose [sic] is maximizing market share, completing the overpass to the dealers of luxury automobiles and the landed gentry. Where once it was said that “KUT seeks out music that isn’t promoted, packaged, or hyped, music you wouldn’t find without us,” now it’s what’s hot nationwide and being played everywhere, what’s on the charts, what advertisers will pay to support. We’ve come a long way to go nowhere at all.

This entry was posted on Monday, November 23rd, 2009 at 2:13 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.