Pew - State of Local TV News

Pew has just released its State of the News Media 2015 report, and I'll be sharing some results and comments.

2014 saw local TV station revenues increase (mostly from huge rise in political advertising), and some increased viewing for most local news programs.  Overall revenues increased 7% from the previous year, but still remained below 2012 numbers (when even more political advertising and the Presidential race helped spike local TV revenues).

The year also saw a continuation of the rise in the share of revenues coming from news programs, accounting for 84% of over-the-air revenues.  While good news for potential growth of local news programs and coverage, I'm not convinced that such a level of reliance on one programming source for station revenues is good for the long-term financial health of local broadcast TV.

The study also predicted a substantial growth in retransmission consent fees (from SNL Kagan numbers) over the next few years.  This comes with three big caveats, however;

• Broadcast networks are demanding an increasing share of retransmission consent fees from local broadcasters, so it is unlikely that local stations will benefit that much from projected increases
• It's starting to look like multichannel rights fees are starting to plateau.  Larger MSOs are starting to resist network demands for licensing fees, as the amounts are approaching audience perceptions of value.  This is contributing to cord-cutting and the push for a shift to "a la carte" pricing.
• The economics of "a la carte" are likely to be substantially different than the existing business model, and are unlikely to sustain current revenue levels.  Particularly for local TV broadcasters, which must provide their primary service broadcasts free to the public (by FCC regulations)

As for local TV news, Pew notes that the number of hours of local TV news seems to have reached a plateau.  That's one factor contributing to limited growth in news staff salaries.

(I'm trying Pew's embed function for the graphics - my apologies if it's not working right)

Source - The State of the News Media 2015, Pew Research Center report

Copyright Decision on Aereo

Aereo is a recent technology service that offered online access to local TV broadcasts in selected markets in the U.S.  For a fee, they grabbed programs that a subscriber requested, from "free" over-the-air local broadcasters, digitally converted the broadcast into a IP stream that was sent directly to the subscriber's connected device.

And when TV networks and cable systems  heard about it, they sought to pre-emptively ban it.  Cable because it was a much cheaper alternative to a service they sought to provide.  The networks' objection was pithily stated by one network CEO: "If anyone makes money from local broadcasts, we demand a share of it."  A consortium of networks and MSOs filed suit claiming that Aereo violated copyright law and seeking an immediate injunction against deploying the system; however, the judge in that case ruled against an injunction as Aereo offered a reasonable argument that its service was not a violation of copyright - but did not initially rule on the viability of that argument.  Both parties wanted to expedite matters, so they sought to bring the case to the Supreme Court to get a final ruling on the basic copyright issues.

Copyright law is fairly simple, yet complex.  The law gives the owner of the copyright the legal authority to determine the conditions under which the copyrighted material is made available to others.  It also, however, permits a "fair use" exemption under certain general conditions - allowing others to access and use the content under restricted conditions.  The rise of broadcasting created an issue, however - what counts as a "copy"?  This came to a head with the rise of cable systems, and their retransmission of over-the-air broadcast signals from local (and eventually distant) stations.  As a result, Congress amended copyright law to include "public performance" of audiovisual signals, and specifically applied that term to carriage ("retransmission") of over-the-air television broadcasts. 

Around the same time, the Supreme Court issued a ruling on what behaviors were considered "fair use" of audio and video content.  Specifically, they ruled that - for legally acquired content - individuals could record content for their later use (time-shifting), transfer and translate content for use in different locals or on different devices (place-shifting), and make a back-up (archive) copy, but only for their own use.

Aereo's service was designed to fit those "fair use" guidelines and the "free" nature of over-the-air broadcasting (stations are prohibited from charging viewers for access to public broadcasts).  Each Aereo subscriber was assigned their own antenna for receiving the free broadcasts, and unlike cable, content was not retransmitted unless specifically requested by that subscriber, and was made available only to the device the subscriber sent the request from.  Aereo argued that they were not engaging in a public performance, but a private one that essentially amounted to the time-shifting and place-shifting aspects of fair use.

The big media consortium (ABC et al.) argued that the Aereo service was simply a retransmission service, and was engaged in "public performance" because it offered its service to the public at large.  Therefore, Aereo was in violation of U.S. copyright law.

The recent Supreme Court ruling (6-3) was that Aereo's service was "substantially similar" to cable, because it offers a service that allows subscribers to watch TV programs, and that it is a "public performance" because several subscribers may be watching the same program, thus constituting a "public."

It's not terribly surprising, although it is disappointing, that the majority decision is technologically ignorant and focuses on outcomes rather than processes and behaviors.  To the majority, any technology that delivers TV programs to members of the public is essentially no different than a cable system and thus any retransmission right for that content must be granted by the copyright owner (presumably, but not necessarily, for a fee).  In addition, the majority nonsensically assumes that since the copyright act does not explicitly define "public", it is any group of individuals beyond what may be watching on a single device. The majority also finds that it makes no difference who is initiating and controlling the retransmission - an individual subscriber or a cable system; rather, they shift the focus to Aereo because it offers a "service."

There is a weird yet nonsensical example given, where the majority suggests that Aereo's problem is that it doesn't provide a service to the copyright owners, but to the public.  The majority repeatedly focuses on copyright owner's right to set the terms of "performance" or consumption.  This ignores the fact that, under law and the terms of their licenses, local broadcasters must provide their copyrighted content freely and without restriction to the public.  Not only to those watching live at home on a TV set, or through a cable system paying retransmission fees; the viewer, or Aereo subscriber, already has the legal right to view or listen to broadcast content.  The copyright owners have already been paid for that performance by the broadcaster - the majority seems to think that viewers need to pay a second time to engage in time-, place- or device-shifting.

The majority decision argues that this ruling does not prejudge future technologies, saying that it is not their intent.  It's hard, though, to see how this is possible, when the decision sets down three extremely broad definitions - 1) that any system for delivering TV content to consumers is "substantially similar" to cable and thus subject to cable's rules; 2) that any group of individuals is considered to be "the public"; and 3) that the driving purpose is not protection of a copyright owner's rights, but the networks "right" to offer a "public performance" of copyrighted material.  Combine that with the majority decision's total disregard for the specific elements of technology and service offered by Aereo - and thus not providing any hook for a narrow argument - and you set a precedence for overreach.

Further, this case offered the opportunity to re-examine which activities are covered by "fair use."  In light of the wretched quality of the decision, I'm relieved that this Court didn't take up that opportunity.

The dissent shreds the majority decision, arguing that the service provided by Aereo was not even a "performance" as defined by copyright law, much less a "public performance."  Rather than looking at the end stage of the service (providing TV programs to viewers) and making an indefensible leap to equate it with cable, the dissent treats Aereo as an Internet content delivery system.  And supports their argument by actually looking at what the service does, then examining the actual case law relevant to those actions (rather than relying on problematic anecdotes).  The dissent eviscerates the majority's "looks like" argument, noting how it conflicts with other recent decisions (including some authored by the same Justice who wrote the majority decision), and ignores both the question of the type of copyright violation being considered (primary, secondary violation, and whether Aereo is acting as an ISP and thus exempt), as well as the issue of "fair use" and the role of the subscriber (not the system) in selecting content for viewing.

The majority decision has turned a copyright case into a "performance" result, achieved only with mystical inference of Congressional intent, over-broad definitions of "public" & "performance", and a "looks like a duck" equivalence of two video delivery systems that could hardly be more polar opposites in technology and operation.  And by doing so, making the application of copyright to new technologies and content delivery systems even more problematic for the future.

And of course, the TV & cable industry hailed the decision, seeing a potential source of revenues (or a protection of current retransmission rights fees).  However, that's likely to be a short-term and low-value source for broadcasters and networks for two reasons - first, that while they think they're soaking the service operator for these revenues, eventually viewers will figure out that stations and broadcast networks are asking them to pay for "free TV"; second, that it's the content that generates the value for viewers, not their "public performance" of that content.  In fact, to the extent that the broadcast "performance" has any value for the station or network, it comes from the broadcast's ability to reach an audience; as such, any mechanism that will extend or expand their reach should be welcomed, rather than challenged.

Sources -  Supremes Rule Against Aereo, Broadcasting & Cable
ABC et al. v. Aereo, Supreme Court decision No. 13-461

Local TV faces mobile challenge for weather and traffic

As mobile continues to expand, it's challenging two of the key foundations for local TV news: local weather and traffic reports.  Already, multiple free mobile apps offer up-to-the-minute weather information most anywhere, including weather alerts and radar maps to follow storms, zoomable to neighborhood levels.  And unlike local TV news, you can get the report any time you want, and any place (with cell coverage).

(I used weather apps this summer when Dad and I drove across the country - to check storm tracks when the clouds on the horizon looked ornery, and to know when to pull off the road, or choose an alternate route if they looked too bad.)

Almost all smartphones come with built-in weather apps, and many display weather on the opening screen.  A recent survey found that 79% of smartphone users in the 18-44 demographic have their devices with them almost all day.  More specifically, the IDC study found that 89% of 18-24 year-olds are using their smartphones within 15 minutes of waking.  And weather is among the top three categories of importance in using news apps.

Now, the globally popular Google Maps is adding real-time traffic coverage, from recent acquisition Waze.  With the addition of real-time traffic in many areas, Google Maps provides extra functionality to basic mapping and navigation.  But the critical difference here is adding local real-time value in the ability to assess the quickest routes, and avoid road construction and closures.

In the meantime, Google Now is breaking ground in terms of anticipating user wants and needs.  As users build up their profile, Google Now can pre-emptively notify users of traffic reports when they're headed out, and if there are other accidents on the route, notify travelers when they happen.  There's also reports that Google Now is experimenting with adding local news reports to the information it filters through.

The latest Pew State of the Media Report shows that local broadcasters have been increasing the proportion of air time devoted to weather and traffic (29% last year, opposed to 25% in 2005).  Still, the Pew report noted that audience demand for the topics were “ripe for replacement by any number of Web- and mobile-based outlets.”

The massive reach and prominence of mobile devices and apps are impacting how people get news and information.  The ability of major national and international apps like Google Maps and The Weather Channel to provide localized (and increasingly personalized) content makes them at least somewhat competitive with local TV newscasts.  The ability to do so at any time, at any location, and the growing ability to personalize content and delivery provides additional levels of value and service, and over time will likely lead to such apps being the place to go for weather and traffic information.  Local TV news needs to prepare for that eventuality.

Source  -  Local TV facing increasing competition in weather and traffic,  LostRemote
79% Of People 18-44 Have Their Smartphones With Them 22 Hours a Day (STUDY) All Twitter
Always Connected, IDC-Facebook research report
Local Media App Trends: Summer 2013, Stepleader Digital

CBS-TimeWarner battle continues - people notice

CBS and Time Warner Cable (TWC) have yet to reach an agreement on retransmission consent, and people are noticing.
  To recap, CBS and TimeWarner (as a cable operator) are required to regularly reach an agreement on the terms under which CBS's owned-and-operated (O&O) local broadcast stations are carried on cable systems in their broadcast areas.  During the last round of retransmission consent negotiations, reports indicate, CBS insisted on more money for carriage than Time Warner was willing to pay.  Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, if agreement isn't reached within a certain time frame, the cable system is required to stop carrying the local station's signal.  As part of CBS's negotiating strategy, allegedly, was to also force Time Warner to pay higher carriage fees for CBS cable-only channels, Time-Warner dropped all of those channels as well.  CBS responded by cutting access to cbs.com (and the programs it provides access to) to all Time-Warner internet service customers.

The programming blackout extends to some 3.5 million homes in some of the largest TV markets in the US, and will inevitably have an impact on ratings as well as the value of the CBS and TWC brands.  CBS trumpeted that it remained in first place in Nielsen ratings for the first full week of the blackout, despite a small decline in total viewers.  But CBS shouldn't crow too much, it's top prime time show only grabbed a 1.4 rating and saw a 30% drop in viewing. (I'll note that August is traditionally a low viewing month, and that the ratings don't include the estimated 5 million people who get their programs online).

The impact on local station ratings - particularly for their local news programs - has been much more significant.  At LA's KCBS, viewership for their main local news programs fell 25-33% from the previous week; NY's WCBS saw 17% declines, and Dallas-Ft Worth O&O KTVT saw their news numbers fall 13-19% (depending on which news broadcast).  The declines are enough to trigger make-goods and is impacting last-minute ad sales.  Their is significant concern at the local level about continuing impacts, particularly if the blackout continues into the fall sweeps period (which traditionally determine local advertising rates).

That both parties are concerned about the impact of the blackout can be seen in some recent deals between CBS and TWC to temporary lifting of the blackouts - to carry the NY mayoral and comptroller campaign debates in New York, and offering the Tennis Channel during the U.S. Open Tennis championships.

This week, current FCC interim chairman Mignon Clyburn weighed in, expressing frustration that CBS and TWC haven't reached a settlement.  The FCC, though, has limited authority to intervene in negotiations or to order interim carriage of the signals in violation of current law.  Former FCC commissioner Michael Copps weighed in, arguing that CBS's actions may violate the FCC's Network Neutrality provisions.

“CBS is perpetrating an audacious violation of the FCC Open Internet ('net neutrality') rules... These rules guarantee consumer access to lawful content. They are designed to prevent just this sort of corporate censorship.”

Time Warner didn't go quite so far as to allege CBS wrongdoing, but in a filing with the FCC (which is looking into retransmission consent rules), they argued that CBS attempted to use the retransmission consent rules to "leverage the must--have nature of its broadcast network programming to force a multichannel video programming distributor (“MVPD”) to accept massive and unwarranted fee increases and oppressive carriage terms."

As I posted earlier, this ought to be fun to watch, unless you're a Time Warner customer and like CBS programming.

Sources - CBS tops ratings, but don't declare victory over Time Warner yet, Los Angeles Times

CBS stations' ratings drop as Time Warner Cable blackout continues, Los Angeles Times

Former FCC Commisioner Bashes CBS For Web Blackout, Daily Online Examiner

FCC filing on behalf of Time Warner Cable, FCC website

edited - fixed some language and grammar issues.

Is TV Everywhere Legal? For now, maybe...

The last year has seen several new start-up services that seek to provide users access to programs they legally receive at home when they aren't in front of the TV.  And that's part of the goal of TV Everywhere - being able to access and view programming regardless of time, location, or type of screen.

  Aereo is a new start-up that offers subscribers access to their local TV stations through the internet, particularly via mobile devices.  It works by providing subscribers with a small antenna/tuner connected to their home Internet connection portal; allowing subscribers to take their free broadcast TV signals beyond the home.  As soon as the Areo started its service, they were sued by a consortium of networks and broadcasters for copyright infringement.  Part of the suit asked the courts to ban the service while their suit was in litigation - i.e., they wanted to kill the service while the challenge dragged out in court for years.
  An appeals court has now affirmed the trial court ruling against an injunction, allowing Aereo to continue operating through the litigation process.  Normally, such an injunction banning some behavior or service is awarded only if the party asking for the injunction is considered likely to win the case on its own merits.  As such, it's not a clear indication that Areo's service is legal, although judges indicated that Areo had a viable legal precedent for their system falling under "fair use" guidelines (as place-shifting of an otherwise legal signal).  That was enough to suggest that the challenge wasn't a cut-and-dried winner.

While I'm not a lawyer, the economist in me does wonder why broadcasters would object to a service that would make their signals more widely available and more valuable to viewers.  Perhaps it's not TV Everywhere access they object to, but not being offered a cut of Aereo's subscription revenues.

Source -  Appeals court denies broadcaster request to shut Aereo,  Consumer Electronics Net

The State of Local TV News

The Pew State of the News Media 2013 report is out, and addresses a range of news outlets by media type. This post will look at Local TV News, and I'll start off noting that the report and numbers actually cover 2012.
The quick report - amount of local news programming is up, local TV advertising revenues are up (thanks to high levels of political advertising), but audiences for local TV news programs continues to decline.  Local TV broadcasters also experienced revenue gains from retransmission fees (growing 30-40% a year recently), and continued growth in digital revenues and online advertising - although these segments account for only 10-12% of station revenues on average. Most revenue forecasts for 2013 expect a small decline, as modest basic growth in some areas are offset by the loss of political advertising.  Long term forecasts suggest modest improvements in revenues over time, although stations will also face growing programming and personnel costs.

Local News Audiences

Audiences for local TV news has been generally declining for years.  Some stations tried to counter this trend by expanding the amount of local news programming they scheduled.  While this may have added some viewing, the numbers show that total audience numbers were declining across all broadcast times and all age groups. The report notes that the small gain in viewership in 2011 was wiped out in 2012.
  In almost every sweeps period, both the ratings and shares for the main local news time slots declined.  Local stations affiliated with the major networks saw audience decline an average of 6% (9% for the prime-time news programs common on Fox affiliates). While the decline in shares was smaller, the problem is that the overall ratings decline indicates that fewer people are watching any kind of TV at those times.  As the report notes:

With fewer people watching broadcast TV in general, local stations have little hope of reversing the long-term decline in audience for news in key time slots.

Another indicator of long term decline is that the drop in viewing is highest among younger adults.  Only 28% of 18-29 year olds indicate that they "regularly" watch local TV news broadcasts

There are indications that local TV news outlets haven't lost all of those users. People are increasingly going to online sources for local news and information. 

“Are they watching us as much? No. But our online numbers are up dramatically,” said Scott Blumenthal, executive vice president for LIN Media. “We are not a TV station anymore as much as a provider of news on multiple platforms.”

Local TV news websites have been helped recently by the expanded use of paywalls for newspaper websites. Online tracking data suggests that when newspapers introduce paywalls or restrict free access to their online news sites, much of their traffic shifts to local TV news websites.  Many local TV news websites are also pushing mobile-friendly sites and apps.

“Our audience proportionally is growing faster on mobile than on Web,” said Chip Mahaney, senior director of local digital operations for E. W. Scripps. “It used to be mobile was a small fraction [of our digital audience]. In some cases mobile has overtaken Web.”

Other research suggests that younger mobile audiences are leading this transition to alternative access to, and delivery of, local news and information.  Some of the viewership decline, particularly among younger adults, may reflect a shift to alternative (digital and mobile) access behaviors, rather than a loss of interest in local news.

Local TV News Programming
2012 saw a continuation of recent trends in local TV news programming.  There continues to be some expansion of local TV news hole, and in the number of news staff (in aggregate and on average - individual station numbers vary widely), and most TV news managers anticipate continuing to add staff over the near term.

  As for staffing, surveys  show an increased reliance on solo journalists (also known as "one-man-bands" or backpack journalists) who can cover news, shoot video, and produce stories for multiple media delivery.

“They’re looking for people who can do everything,” said Micah Johnson, president of MediaStars, an agency that represents TV news employees in contract negotiations.

Asking for more skills has not meant that local stations are willing to pay more.  Average news salaries increased just 2% in 2011, and stations moved to lock in more news staffers into long-term contracts as a means of controlling costs.

  Another way to keep costs under control is to share resources.  Roughly one-fourth of broadcast TV stations airing local news have that news produced by another station in the market.  More than half of the stations originating local news report feeding news stories to other TV stations, radio stations, or local cable channels in their market.  The Pew report suggests that some types of sharing have stabilized and may be declining, as technologies continue to shift production preferences and costs.

The increasing news hole over time has not necessarily resulted in more local news stories.  The number of edited package stories has dropped over time, and average story length has also fallen. In 2012, half of news stories ran under 30 seconds, while only 20% ran a minute or longer. A sampling of local newscasts showed that news packages accounted for only about a third of local TV newshole (down 20% from a 2005 study).  In contrast, the program time for sports almost doubled from 2005 to 2012, and time for weather and traffic also increased.  Combined, sports, weather and traffic coverage account for more than 40% of local news program content (by time). Those topics are also assuming greater importance - Pew reports that 20 of 48 morning and evening local newscasts they examined led with a weather report or story.

The Digital Front
Broadcasters were among the first news media to develop websites, and local news and information was a frequent focus (Bates et al., 1997).  For a while, local stations sought to limit online news coverage for fear that it might impact traditional viewing.  Well, viewing of local TV news broadcasts declined anyway, and now local stations are giving more emphasis to expanding their digital offerings as a way to expand their reach, and particularly to recapture the younger audiences that are rapidly deserting local TV news broadcasts.

“For TV, online generates what TV considers ‘extra revenue’ and helps bring at least some additional audience to the TV screen,” said Bob Papper, who produces the annual RTNDA broadcast news reports.

As a results many local TV stations and newsrooms (who often have separate websites and social media feeds), are pushing into social media and mobile feeds.

Mobile is becoming a larger driver of Web traffic, particularly outside of working hours. At WRAL in Raleigh, N.C., it accounts for 15% of digital visits and could double in six months, according to the station’s general manager, John Conway. “It’s a good way for us to grow our audience at times when historically you’d see somewhat of a trail off of your traffic,” he said.

Research does show that these online digital efforts are attracting users and generating traffic.  Perhaps most importantly, research is starting to suggests that mobile users actually seek and consume more news and information than typical news audiences.  With the rapid expansion of mobile technologies, those in the news industry are hopeful that mobile may lead to a news renaissance of sorts.
  The problem with these digital efforts has been that its been difficult to evaluate their impact and effectiveness.  Online local digital advertising revenues, while growing at a faster rate, are still tiny compared to broadcast advertising revenues.  Similarly, with all of the current focus on online metrics, there aren't any widely accepted (or industry-standard) measures of whether a local station's online, mobile, and social media users have actually expanded their audience.  Nor is there any clear indication of whether social media is delivering on its potential to increase audience engagement.  The potential is there, and stations are optimistic that good things are happening, but stations will need better measures to get top dollar from advertisers.

In sum, the prospects for local TV news is perhaps best described as "hopeful."  Revenues, employment, and newshole appear to be slowly growing over time, even as traditional viewing of local TV news broadcasts continue to decline.  The rise of digital, online, and mobile are providing a plethora of new opportunities for local TV news outlets, although revenue gains from these activities have yet to really kick in.  The real clear change is in the nature and packaging of local news and information - with less focus on investigative and serious news reporting, and more reporting of sports, weather, traffic, and quick headlines, promotions, and social buzz (on social media).  There's growing concern that these shifts in news content might be economically beneficial to local broadcasters, but perhaps not as broadly helpful to society.


Sources -  Local TV: Audience Declines as Revenues Bounce Back, Pew State of the News Media 2013
The Changing TV News Landscape, Pew State of the News Media 2013
"WebTV: How Broadcast Television is Using the World Wide Web,"  Bates et al. research paper.

Pew 2013 State of the News Media Report released

The Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism has released its annual "State of the News Media" report for 2013.  I'll try to take a closer look at some of the components over the next week or two, but here's some highlights from the overview.

Resources for newsrooms continue to decline.  Estimated cuts for 2012 put full-time professional news staff numbers under 40,000 in the U.S., the lowest employment level since 1978 (and down 30% from its peak in 2000).  This contributed to shifts in news coverage - sports, weather, and traffic reports account for 40% of local news program content.  On CNN, the number of produced news packages in 2012 were half that of five years ago.  Across the cable news networks, live coverage of news events fell 30%, while interview segments rose 31%.  The sole remaining news magazine, Time, cut 5% of its staff earlier this year.

Pew interprets this as resulting in "a news industry that is more undermanned and unprepared to uncover stories, dig deep into emerging ones or to question information put into its hands."  In fact, they suggest, this fall has been noticed by news consumers.  A recent survey found that 31% of respondents had indicated that they had stopped using a news source because it no longer provided the amount and quality of news they expected and wanted.

Source - The State of The News Media 2013 Report, Pew Research Centers.

Edit - fixed some typos, phrasing (19/3/2013)

"Licensed to Serve"

The NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) has a new promotional effort to illustrate how local broadcasters have served their communities.  The "Licensed to Serve" monthly eNewsletter posts stories about various local broadcasters' community service initiatives and their partnerships with nonprofit groups.  You can find the Sept. 2012 Issue here; and the NAB's Public Service page links to prior issues and other public service efforts.
  Yes, it's self-serving, but you can also pick up some good ideas for initiatives in your community.

Source -  Broadcaster's Efforts Highlighted in "Licensed to Serve", NAB SmartBrief eNewsletter

Radio Evolution Conference Proceedings

Last year, an academic conference was held in Portugal with the theme "Radio Evolution".  The conference proceedings, comprising 47 research papers in 7 thematic areas, is now being made available online.
  You can access and download individual papers, as well as the entire proceedings, here -

Radio Evolution: 2011 ECREA Conference Proceedings

How much News on Local TV?

While industry surveys show incremental growth in local TV news schedules in the last few years, one report suggests that it's the few mega-news broadcast stations that are really profiting from the expansion of local news operations.  In particular, there's a group of stations, predominantly Fox O&Os or Fox affiliates, that have been very successful while airing more than 60 hours of local news a week. 
   As a network, Fox has no network news broadcast, the smallest primetime schedule, and offers very little daytime network programming - which translates as more potential time for news or other content. 
   The report suggests that several factors can contribute to the growth in local TV news.  Locally produced programming, like local news, is one of the few areas where the station controls all of the advertising spots, and thus gets all the revenues.  Historically, even with more traditional levels of news content, local news brings in about 50% of a station's total revenues.  Expanding the amount of news programming is also fairly inexpensive, as added programs can recycle stories, use stories and content that didn't make their primary newscasts, and offer significant opportunities for soft news coverage of local events and community activities.  New newscasts in the fringe hours (between midnight and the start of the morning network shows) can be done with minimal cost, while offering a means for local broadcasters to stay relevant in an era of 24/7 cable news channels and the Internet.  In addition, the relative low cost and increased revenue potential of newscasts can be a better bargain that filling mid-day schedules with increasingly high-priced syndicated programs.

Station leaders say that airing local news when others can’t — for, say, four to five hours in the morning, or from late afternoon straight until 7 p.m. — has given them an edge with viewers, who see them as the closest things to 24/7 news on broadcast TV.

“You almost can’t get away from us,” says Dana Hahn, news director at WJBK, which airs two hours more news before lunch (7.5 hours) than the average station airs all day. Morning news, which starts at 4:30 a.m., runs straight until noon. News returns for another 90 minutes at 5 p.m., and again at 10 for another 90 minutes.

WJBK's efforts in Detroit seem to be paying off, with their morning and late afternoon newscasts coming in number 1 among adults in the 25-54 age demographic, and coming in second in direct competition with local Big Three affiliates' newscasts.
   Going long with local news can also provide the buffer and time to follow through with breaking news and to pursue enterprise stories.

“Because we’re effectively in news 24/7, it gives us the opportunity to makes sure our stories are accurately researched so that we have really strong hooks into the story,” says Bill Schneider, GM of Fox-owned WAGA Atlanta... “We’re not pressed for news and sound bites.”

   The longer news schedule also allows more opportunity for community outreach, and can help to build engagement and trust with the local community -

“For our viewers, it doesn’t matter what time you’re heading out to work or whether you’re sleeping late,” Hahn says. “We are going to be there for you.”

   The strategy may not work for everyone, but is something for news directors, station managers, and station owners to consider.

Source -  More News Turns Out To Be Good News,  TV Newscheck

Local TV big winner this election cycle

A report from Moody's Invester Service predicts that the winner of the November elections will be...

Local Broadcast Television Stations

Moody predicts that when it's all said and done, $2.8 billion will be spent for political advertising on local TV, which will account for 9% of all local TV ad revenues.  Moody suggests that the heaviest spending will come in October, and will be heavily targeted at markets in swing states.  It also notes that which states are considered as "swing states" could vary as the campaigns continue and and the opinions of the electorate shift.
  Wells Fargo analyst Marci Ryvicker concurred, noting that the top markets for political ad spending has already shifted several times over the last few months.  She also upped her prediction for total political ad spending this cycle to $5.2 billion, as August's political ad expenditures were 77% higher than July's total.

Political advertising has always given a boost to local TV ad revenues, despite FCC rules mandating that stations provide them at their lowest rates.  But as regular ad revenues stagnate or fall in a weak economy, and as political campaign spending has exploded, the regular injection of political funds can become a critical (if transient) source of station profits.  And that's not necessarily a good thing.

Source - Local TV Stations the Real Winners This Election,  TV Spy blog

Some good news for local TV (news)

Analysis of recent trends in advertising expenditures suggests that retailers are shifting more of their ad budgets to local TV and radio.  The analysis, from BIA Kelsey, predicts that  retailers will be putting a larger proportion of their advertising dollars into online marketing, as well as increasing the share of local TV, radio, and cable, over the next few years.  The added budgets will come at the expense of newspapers and direct response advertising, who should see declining shares.

  The greatest increase in share will be for online, which should see its current 13% share to 16% by 2016.  The report also indicates that local TV's share will grow from 7.9% this year to 8.4% in 2013; radio will increase from 10.2% to 10.6%; and local cable from 2.5% to 2.6%.  In contrast, the share of ad budgets for newspapers are expected to shrink by almost a fifth between now and the end of 2016 (from their current share of 19.5% to 15.5%).
  In addition, research from the proprietary 2012 College Marketing Report from Barnes & Noble's College Marketing Division indicates that for all the talk of Internet and social media, that college students consider TV to be the most influential and effective advertising medium.  The survey found that while Email was rated at the best way to reach them (20% cite Email, 19% cite TV ads), 42% of the sample felt that TV advertising was the most effective form of marketing, and input from friends was the most influential in terms of helping them make a buying decision.
  Meanwhile, TV trade group TVB will present research at its upcoming TVB Forward Conference that shows that local news program audiences remain significantly larger that the audiences for cable news networks.  Using May results from Nielsen, the report notes that the top five cable networks attract between 3% and 8% of TV viewers in top markets in the U.S., while the early evening and late night local news in top markets averages 38% for the prime 35-54 demographic, and rises to 62% among 55+ viewers.

Steve Lanzano, president of the TVB, states: "With the vast disparity in audience numbers, the significantly more attractive audience demographic and the broad gulf in credibility levels, it’s clear that in terms of reach and cost, advertising spending is maximized by purchasing spots during local broadcast news programming.”

The projections from BIA/Kelsey suggest that retailers have figured out where the value is.

Sources -  TV, Radio Ad Spend in Local Markets On Rise,  MediaDailyNews
Local News Trumps Cable in Viewer Numbers,  MediaDailyNews
TV Advertising to Students Most Effective; Email Best Reach,  Research Brief from the Center for Media Research

Local TV News Tops Cable for Voters

A TVB analysis of Nielsen Media Research data from last spring suggests that local early and late news audiences in the top 10 US markets are a closer match for "American Voters" than are the audiences for any of the major cable news networks.  As such, they suggest that advertising on local TV news may be a better deal for political advertisers.

It’s long been established that television remains the most effective and influential medium for political campaigns to reach voters and hard data shows that local broadcast news viewership is far more in line with today’s voting population than the national cable news networks,” said Steve Lanzano, TVB president.

I'm not really surprised by the argument - local news audiences tend to reflect, more or less, market demographics, while the cable news channels target different audiences.  Fox, CNBC and MSNBC are fairly honest about it, but CNN tilts older and a bit liberal as well.  Besides, the demographic mix of actual voters has fluctuated in the last two major election cycles (and I suspect further shifts in 2012) - so it's a bit like trying to match a moving target.
  Then again, a lot of political advertising is targeted, and for those ad buys it may be better to find an outlet that matches up with the target population rather than going for a broad reach.  Placing local ads on highly targeted cable nets (news or other) is one of the better advertising buys for highly targeted campaigns.

Local TV news will get a lot of needed revenues from political advertising revenue this year, in either case.

Source -  Local TV News Tops Cable In Reaching Voters,  TVNewsCheck
TVB Report available here

Legislative Moves by Broadcasters

American broadcasters and their trade group, the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) are actively lobbying Congress and the FCC on two current issues with possible economic impact.
  In one case, radio broadcasters are lobbying against some possible changes in intellectual property law.  Recorded music embodies several separate intellectual property rights - copyright, which covers the authors/composers of music, performance rights, which covers the artist's performance of that music, and mechanical reproduction rights, which address the right to make and sell copies of performances.  The last, mechanical reproduction, are held by the record companies.  And broadcasting has always had to pay for copyright permissions.  However, in the early days of radio, there was an informal quid pro quo on performance rights and radio that became formalized in copyright law - since radio was (and still remains) the ore-eminant promotional tool for music, artists and labels waived performance rights fees to maximize radio's capabillity to play new artists.  The logic behind this is solid - adding performance rights fees to copyright fees raises the costs of music to stations.  This may be less of a problem with music that has an established value, as long as that value is higher than the rights costs - but it will discourage playing of lower valued (special interest or limited interest) recordings, whose value is less than the costs of rights fees, and new music whose value is uncertain.  Positive costs in terms of rights fees will discourage broadcasters from serving minority tastes, and reduce stations' interest in airing new music from new artists (where the value of that music is unknown and uncertain. 
   On the other media, most other media channels, where music is often more peripheral to their main service value, has been paying performance rights.
  The music industry, who short-sightly sees this as a new revenue stream for existing music catalogs, has been pushing Congress to overturn what amounts to radio's waiver from paying performance rights.  It may be "fair" to treat all media the same, but not all media have served as a primary (and free) promotional tool for the industry.  Adding costs through adding rights fees may generate more revenues for the performances that artists have already recorded.  However the vast bulk of revenues for music companies and artists comes from reproduction rights, not copyright or performance rights.  And the added costs of performance rights will likely have a negative impact on the demand for new performances and recordings - as radio outlets reduce the amount of new recordings played, and as artists and labels would likely have to pay more to get new music out in front of potential audiences and consumers.
  There are two competing bills circulating in the House. A draft of the proposed "Interim FIRST Act" authored by Democrat Jerrold Nadler was released this week, and would force cable and satellite radio stations to pay performance rights, and would require online streams from broadcast radio stations and other Internet radio services to pay performance rights at an even higher rate.  While proclaiming that it would level the playing field and treat all players equitably, it would embody three different sets of rates - broadcast radio, which would still be exempt; cable and satellite radio, which would pay one rate for performance rights, and online and Internet radio (including streams of broadcast stations) which would have to pay a still higher rate.  Republican Jason Chaffetz is working on a bill that would impose the same performance rights fees on all digital music sources - cable and satellite radio, Internet radio stations, and music streaming services.  It would also call for the rates to be negotiated between music outlets and the music industry, rather than being set by a Federal tribunal.
  While broadcasters would prefer to avoid paying performance rights fees altogether, they are more supportive of the Chaffetz approach rather than the Interim FIRST Act - and the latter's attempt to make broadcast radio stations pay more for their digital streams that other digital music outlets.

  The NAB and broadcasters are simultaneously continuing to lobby for legislation that would require smartphones to be capable of receiving and playing FM radio broadcasts.  Most smartphones already have a chip built into their devices that would do that, but that application is turned off by virtually all U.S. wireless operators.  The initial arguments were phrased as a trade-off for reintroducing performance rights fees.  Broadcasters are adding a new argument - public safety.  They point to the role that radio plays as the primary means of distributing information to the public during natural disasters or other emergencies, when normal information services are interrupted.  In filings to the FCC, the NAB argued that most broadcasters have built-in redundancy in case of emergency, and that the broadcast nature of their service and the widespread availability of receivers make radio particularly well-suited for emergency communications.  Besides, it's already the designated government Emergency Broadcast System.

"It is time to seriously consider steps needed to improve consumer access to free, over-the-air radio via smartphones and other mobile devices,"  (the) NAB said.

While analysts generally doubt that activating FM chips in smartphones will dramatically change radio and music listening behavior, it at least expands the options for consumers.  And its likely that it could prove useful when traditional communication channels (and wireless service in particular) is interrupted.

Sources -  Nadler circulates draft legislation on music royalties,  The Hill
NAB: Broadcasters Are Answering Call for Reliable Emergency Info,  Broadcasting & Cable

Going Off-Air with Local TV News

The latest RTNDA/Hofstra TV & Radio Newsroom study looked at the growing tendency for local TV newsrooms to look for other ways to distribute (and profit from) their content.  More than three-quarters of stations reported providing content from their newsroom to one or more other media (beyond their station’s newscasts or websites).

  The study found that, over all, there was no significant change in the proportion of newsrooms distributing content externally.  There were some small changes in the mix of channels/distribution preferences.

  Looking forward, more than 80% of local TV newsrooms were now (or would soon) embrace the 3-Screen strategy of providing content on air, online, and to mobile.  This was higher than the number of stations reporting that they were broadcasting their local news in high definition (60%)

	All TV	Big 4 Affiliates	Other Commercial
Another Local TV Station	23.6%	24.7%	5.6%
TV in another market	12.7%	12.5%	22.2%
Cable TV Channel	8.6%	9.1%	0
Local Radio	43.3%	44.3%	27.8%
Website (not their own)	10.2%	10.5%	5.6%
Mobile devices	41.1%	43.2%	27.3%
Other	8.9%	9.1%	11.1%

Interestingly, stations in the Top 50 markets were slightly less likely to seek additional distribution channels for their news than were outlets in smaller markets. 

The study also looked at newsrooms’ cooperative/collaborative ventures.  One recent trend is for some newsrooms to also produce the local news programs for another station in the market.  A different type of arrangement is to collaborate with other local media in news gathering and coverage.  The study found a small decline in the number of such agreements – 21.2% had agreements with another local TV station; 25.2% had arrangements with local newspapers; 23.8% were with local radio stations; and 4.6% had arrangements with other local news outlets.  Almost half (47.5%) had no collaborative or cooperative agreements with other local media outlets.

  Some of the agreements called for sharing pool video (33.6%) or use of a helicopter (15.1%) – but most were for sharing information (81.6%). Another 14.5% reported sharing other things, such as video, vosots, packages, live shots, and web content.  In these economic times, it was not surprising that almost half of Top 25 market stations had arrangements for sharing helicopters.

The report found that almost half of stations were using their newsroom content on their stations extra digital channels.  TV newsrooms in 5.1% of stations were also programming and producing for all-news digital channels; 19.9% for weather channels (a decline from last year); and 26.3% provided content for digital channels affiliated with a network, or providing a mix of content.

Source  - RTNDA/Hofstra 2012 TV & Radio Newsroom Staffing and Profitability Study, Part III - TV News Business Isn't Limited to Just TV Anymore

Broadcast Newsrooms expand use of social media

RTNDA recently released part five of its annual Radio and TV News Staffing study - examining broadcasters' use of social media.

  The study suggests that social media is becoming an established and integral part of newsroom operations, with only 2% of newsrooms indicating they had no use of social media.  In contrast, 87% of newsrooms reported covering stories about or from social media, 87% reported incorporating social media into their storytelling, and 93% had social media integrated into their websites.
  The survey indicated that every station in their sample reported having a Facebook page, and about half had more than one page.  About half of stations said their newsroom use of Twitter was "constant", and another 30% indicated that their use was daily.

Quite a few stations are running at least some of the Facebook comments on various newscasts. Even more stations mentioned asking for viewer feedback via Facebook, and nearly as many news directors wrote about having a "conversation" or "interacting" with viewers. Lots of stations noted using social media for promotion, but much of the promotion was geared toward the station website rather than just on air. Quite a few stations run contests via Facebook and a lot of polling takes place via Facebook as well. Several news directors noted that they had hired social media producers or reporters. Stations had polls of the day, questions of the day, friends of the day and fans of the day. And although Facebook and Twitter were near universal mentions, they weren't alone. Other social media in use (in order of mention): Google+, LinkedIn, YouTube, Storify, Tumblr, Yelp, HootSuite, Googlet and Instagram.

About one in ten reported having plans for some form of "innovative" use of social media - gathering information about specific topics, running contests, supporting charity fund-raising efforts. 

"Then there's the effort at anchor-less news at KIAH-TV in Houston -- called "NewsFix."

  Radio newsrooms are also incorporating social media into their operations, but not to the same degree as TV newsrooms.  The study found that 42% of radio newsrooms covered social media, 31.1% incorporated social media into their storytelling, and 62% integrated social media into their websites - and 29.7% indicated that they did not use social media.  Very few radio newsrooms had their own Facebook page (14%), and more than half (51.8%) reported no use of Twitter. Interestingly, and a change from previous studies, non-commercial stations were more involved with social media than commercial stations.

Source - Part V: Social Media Expands on TV and Radio,  2012 RTNDA/Hofstra TV and Radio News Staffing and Profitability Study

Local TV News and Websites

Local TV station websites have seen increases in traffic and use over the last year, with more than half paying for themselves.  Just about every local TV station with a newsroom had an affiliated website.

  The most recent RTNDA/Hofstra Broadcast Newsroom Study found that the number of unique visitors to local TV websites grew by 35% over the last year, while the number of pageviews increased by 19 %.
On average, websites had two full-time workers and 1.2 part-timers.  More than three-fourths (78%) of all TV newsrooms reported that other staffers "help out" with the website.
  In terms of website news content, 25% of websites had some news content that was "exclusive" to the web, and only 8.1% included user-generated content (both slight declines from the previous year's findings).  There was also little change in the relationship between the website and news directors - 20% reported they were in charge of the station's entire website efforts, while 70% reported that they were responsible only for the news content on the site.  (3% reported having no role, 5% reported having some other type of relationship).
  Perhaps the best news of the study was that websites were much less likely to be a drain on station or newsroom resources.  Just under forty percent (39.7%) websites were reported as generating a profit, with another 8.6% "broke even", and only 10.3% were said to generate a net loss.  As with radio station websites, a lot of TV station website operations were folded into other departments, or did not have associated revenues broken out - thus 41.4% of news directors could not tell whether the website was profitable or not on its own.  But given the high proportion of profitable websites where known, it is quite likely that most TV stations are now finding that their websites contribute positively to station operations.

Source  -  40 percent of TV websites report profitability; survey finds page views, traffic climb,  Broadcast Engineering.
Part 4 of 2012 TV and Radio News Staffing and Profitability Survey,  RTNDA

edit - Forgot the header...

Radio uses Web for News

Another portion of the RTNDA/Hofstra study of broadcast newsrooms focused on their use of websites to post local news.  The study reports that almost all radio stations, and every TV station airing local news, have websites, and that 80% of those sites have at least some local news.  Even when breaking results by market size, the proportion remained fairly consistent (83.3% in major market websites, 84.6% in large markets, 78.9% in medium markets, and 76.7% in small markets).
  The study also found that few radio stations offered their own apps.  Roughly a quarter of radio station websites included web-exclusive content, and only 6.7% included user-generated content.  In other words, most news on radio station websites is ported from regular station news content.  Also, almost 60% of radio news directors couldn't tell if their web news operations was profitable or not - which is more likely to reflect a situation that web operations and revenues are bundled with other operations (and not considered as a separate cost center) than it is reflection of news director's ignorance.  For those who did separate out website operations, about 13% reported they were profitable, 13% broke even, and 15% reported losses.

Sources -  2012 RTNDA/Hofstra Newsroom Study Looks At Station Websites,  AllAccess.com
Full Study -  2012 TV and Radio News Staffing and Profitability Survey

Diginets to the rescue?

Since digital TV in the U.S. was authorized, the FCC has allowed local TV broadcasters to use part of their digital signal for other applications, as long as their primary channel remained a free TV channel.  Part of the reasoning at the time was that stations could explore using any excess bandwidth to generate additional revenues to offset the cost of the switch to digital.  The problem has been that there didn't seem to be much demand for that bandwidth, and thus not much revenue generated.
  Research from BIA/Kelsey suggests that that may be about to change.  They suggest that D2 & D3 channels - which can operate in that additional bandwidth - currently accounts for 3% of TV stations' ad revenues.  That may not sound like much; the study indicates that not all stations that multicast are generating significant revenues - while more than 1300 stations were using their digital channels to also multicast diginets (multicast-only networks like This TV, Me-TV, and Antenna TV), only 277 currently earn more than $50,000 annually from multicast operations.  BIA/Kelsey VP Mark Fratrik talked about what stations were most likely to be successful:

“If you look over the past three or four years, where they have been able to get cable carriage and they’ve been able to get good programming, whether it’s an established network or an up-and-coming network, they’re seeing an increase in revenue.”

In short, while the individual station numbers may not be significant yet, they are growing and look to be able to continue to grow in the future.  While individual station numbers aren't huge, the aggregate revenues are beginning to be respectable.  According to the report, broadcast network affiliated stations were generally most profitable

CW (affiliates were) most lucrative, pulling in $27 million for its multicast affiliates, followed by Fox at $19.2 million. The other multicast majors: MNT ($12 million), ABC ($4.5 million), CBS ($3.7 million), Telemundo ($3.4 million) and NBC ($3 million).

(The report also indicated revenues for) three multicast-only networks or diginets: MGM and Weigel Broadcasting's This TV ($18. 4 million), Weigel's Me-TV ($10.7 million) and ABC Owned Television Stations' Live Well ($4.8 million).

The future of diginets and multicasting is aided by the growing interest from advertisers.  Diginets offer highly targeted audiences and rates that a significantly lower than those for the primary channel, and often lower than what local cable systems charge for similarly targeted channels.

“They have better CPMs than local cable,” says Lindy Sieker, senior broadcast specialist at media buying agency Empower MediaMarketing. “I have told cable providers that they need to come down in their rates because I can get the same ratings or better ratings than cable. And these networks cover the entire DMA, as opposed to just appearing in cable zones.”

Multicasting with diginets may not be the full solution to local broadcast station revenue concerns, but they do seem to be a viable strategy that can bring in additional revenues.  And as the programming choices and quality offered by these networks improve, they should be able to continue to grow audiences and revenues.

Source:  Diginets Delivering Dollars For More Stations,  TV NewsCheck

Local Radio News Stable - But Limited Hiring

The first part of the RTNDA/Hofstra annual survey of broadcast news directors is out, and there are some interesting results concerning the state of local radio news.  All in all, the report shows that local radio news operations are more or less maintaining employment levels, budgets, and profitability.  The worst news for radio journalism students is that there seems there was very little hiring done in radio last year.

• Local radio news operations remain small, and highly centralized when there are groups.  While the average staffing for radio newsrooms is 2-3 full-time and 2 part-timers, the median radio news staff size is 1 full-time and 1 part-time.  That means that more than half of all radio have only a single full time news person, aided by a single part-timer.  Furthermore, about 78% of all multi-station operations have a centralized newsroom providing news for multiple stations.
• Employment levels and budgets in radio news are fairly static - three-quarters of local radio newsrooms had no change in staffing levels in the last year, and 62.9% reported that there was no change in the news budget.  Only 16% reported and increase in staffing levels, and only 15.7% saw and increase in newsroom budget.
• Only have the sample responded to a direct question about how many hires they had made in the last year - and of those, more than half indicated they made none.
• Interestingly, more than half the local radio news directors did not know whether their news operations were profitable or not. About 20% felt their newsrooms broke even, 14.5% felt they turned a profit, and 10.4% felt they ran a loss.  Those numbers are more or less in line with survey numbers going back to 2000.
• There was and interesting relationship between market size and profitability - stations in the largest markets were the most likely to report profits, and the most likely to report losses

The radio results are based on responses to surveys sent to a random sample of 3000 radio stations.  A total of 260 surveys were completed from news directors or general managers representing a total of 743 stations.

Source -  Full study report - 2012 TV and Radio News Staffing and Profitability Survey, Part 1