Last week, WBUR announced
the cancellation of "The Connection," a daily call-in show it had been distributing (via NPR) to public radio stations across the country. This comes a couple of weeks after WBEZ decided to
cease production of its own show, "Odyssey."It's pobably a coincidence that the announcements come so close together. Shows get started and canceleld all the time in radio. But the symmetry begs for some analysis--an attempt to discern the connecting thread, to puzzle out the greater meaning behind two isolated decisions.
My opinion: About damn time. Let's hope some more shows take the hint, and close up shop right behind them.
Ultimately, both programs suffered from the problem of being extraneous. They were just two of many programs contending for space on the midday schedules of mostly news/talk stations. And stations have plenty of other options to chose from: "The World," "Day to Day," "Fresh Air," and a brace of others. In the face of strong competition, these two couldn't pick up enough affiliates ("The Connection" was on 65 stations; "Odyssey" on 30) to pay the bills.
And, believe it or not, their demise is a
good thing. The loss of these two shows is a preliminary step toward solving the "me-too" phenomenon of having multiple "sound-alike" programs that are essentially indistibguishable in terms of concept and content. It's something I first noticed a couple of years ago, when NPR launched its personal finance show, "Motley Fool." Presumably, the intent was to compete with PRI's personal finance show "Sound Money" (which is now named "Markeplace Money" and distributed by American Public Media). Another example could be the competing one-hour gardening programs "Talking Plants" (NPR) and "You Bet Your Garden" (WHYY).
That's where "The Connection" and "Odyssey" fell short. Whatever its merits, the former was still one of three two-hour midday call-in shows in public radio, along with "Diane Rehm" and "Talk of the Nation." And I never understood who would want to carry "Odyssey" instead of the obvously superior "Fresh Air."
I'm all for more choices when it comes to programming, but come on! Does public radio need THREE midday call-in shows? Is gardening really such a vital topic for our listeners, that we need two full hours of programming to it? I doubt it. Fortunately, these two casualties clear the decks for some of the other shows out there, and make the survivors more likely to survive. Stations still have plenty of options in assembling their schedules.
This also sends a much-needed warning sign to local stations about the temptation to try to turn your local programs into a profit center by marekting them for national distribution. WBUR in particular, was long due for some come-uppance. In the last ten years, they've developed three shows as "local" services, then decided to recoup their investment by trying to take them national. I don't know if the attempt has paid off financially, but it's a shame to see a good station develop a strong local service, then strip it of its local connection.
Making good programming is hard, and takes a real commitment of resources. If you're going to do it, why not develop platforms that speak to and reflect the community you're licensed to serve? Is your mission to serve a national audience, or to do a good job for your listeners and supporters on the issues closer to home?
Which isn't to say that local station's should never pursue national programs. WBUR gave us "Car Talk." WBEZ originated "This American Life." Public radio is better, funnier, and more interesting as a result of the shows they developed. But pursuing national production for its own sake, or to develop additional revenue streams, is a disservice to the system and to your own audience.
With any luck, WBUR and WBEZ will take the staff assigned to those programs, and reassign them to creating high-quality local content.