Rural Programming Initiative
Final Report, KZYX

Back to Rural Programming Initiative

Participation in the Rural Radio Project came at an advantageous point in our station's history. When I came on as manager, in the summer of 2001, the station had just embarked upon a process of Strategic Planning. We joined the project just as we were collecting data to inform that process. The additional data gathered through the project meshed well with strategic planning, giving us valuable information about the community we serve and the potential listenership in our area. Survey results obtained through the project were invaluable, helping to identify the need for increased outreach and expansion of our signal into some areas where it is not now well received. With the data to support this need, we applied for, and received a Construction permit from the FCC to increase the power output at our repeating transmitter in the most populated area of our County. Guided by the clear need for improved signal in some areas of our County, we submitted two applications to the NTIA for PTFP grants---one for signal extension, the other for equipment upgrades. The cume data provided by the project surveys became part of our argument for these grants. Both applications were approved. As we proceed with these improvements, we look forward to adding 7,000 new listeners and improving reception to hundreds of homes within our existing contour. As a new manager with fresh perspective, I have perhaps been in a better position than most to observe the effects of this new body of information on the overall direction of the station.

Over the course of the Rural Radio Project, according to the data made available to us, our station has seen an increase in listeners. This has helped us to accomplish one of the goals we set for ourselves when we joined. Many factors have contributed to the increase. One of the greatest impediments to progress throughout our station's 14-year history, is a high turnover of staff, especially station managers. With the same manager over the past two years, and very little turnover in the rest of staff, we have made real progress in improving the cohesiveness of our station culture. This has resulted in more volunteerism, and a higher level of community confidence, participation and resultant financial support. The project has been influential in this process, as a tool with which an increasingly stable and productive staff has become better informed about the community it serves. Information from the project has given us a real advantage, providing clarity of direction, and helping to guide decision-making. We are in a better position to quickly and more effectively respond to the needs of our listeners, as we learn more about who they are and how they listen.
While we have not seen the increase in TSL that we identified as one of our goals, we have come to believe, through our improved understanding of the way people listen to radio, that it will happen over time. The research shows that we have increased our listenership overall. We attribute this increase to accelerated efforts in outreach and awareness building, assisted by our information about the demographics of the potential listenership in our region. Through the project, we have come to understand that an increase in listeners may be reflected in lower TSL figures, as new listeners may not initially tune in for long periods of time. The ability to monitor these trends in listening puts us in a better position to work on developing our core from this body of fringe listeners.

Our income figures demonstrate a steady growth in community support. Over the past three years, our membership income has gone from $140,000 to $190,000. This increase can arguably be attributed, at least in part, to the influence of the project. While listener contributions are up more than 35%, we do not see 35% more names on our membership roster. Although we are adding members steadily (about 12% over the last three years), much of the increased revenue is a result of current members giving at higher levels, and more frequently. We feel we are better serving our core audience and they, in turn, are supporting us to a greater extent. Thanks to the project, we are more aware of our core and we understand more clearly how to serve them well, and the importance of doing so. This understanding informs decision-making at many levels, not the least of which is programming. When current events, or the availability of new offerings, result in program changes, these changes are made with better clarity about what the resulting response will be. We have a good idea who will be affected by the changes and in what ways.

Our underwriting income has also increased similarly. Two years ago, our underwriting revenues were about $65,000 a year. This fiscal year, we expect the department to generate $80,000. While we do have more business underwriters than we had then, the increase in clients is not proportional to the increase we've seen in revenues. Again, we feel we are better serving our clients and in turn, realizing better support from them. Our underwriting department has, especially in the last year, begun to use the audience research data much more effectively. We draw upon the demographic information about our listeners as we create promotional materials. We also use it when soliciting new accounts and when matching sponsors with the programs that will give them optimum exposure. Prior to our participation in the project, solicitation of sponsorships was based on our ability to identify businesses that were good "matches" to public radio. Those businesses who supported the concept of community radio and wanted to encourage the kind of programming we offer were the ones we approached, or who approached us. With the help of audience research data, we can now approach a broader range of prospective underwriters with information about the audiences they can target through our station. Whether the business and its owners are a "fit" with public radio or not, we can now show them the kind of exposure they will enjoy on our airwaves.

In terms of understanding programming and listening at our station, the project has been invaluable. The ability to compare consecutive survey results has helped us identify our strengths and weaknesses. While the first survey may have given us glimpses into some of those strengths and weaknesses, the composite picture provided by the series has elucidated some clear areas for improvement. Through the research and associated consultations we have learned that our listenership is highly educated and that it has a strong preference for news and information programming. One of our greatest strengths is the wide variety of news and information we offer: many sources of national news, information and cultural programming, along with local news and a diverse menu of local public affairs shows. Having identified this as a strength, we keep it in mind when reviewing potential new programs. We also use that knowledge as a pitching point during pledge drives, pointing out our commitment to offering diverse perspectives and citing our respect for the listeners' need to consider many points of view. The response to this approach has been very good. While there has also been clear indication of our audience's dedication to quality music, we have received interesting information about how we've positioned those programs. We now know, thanks to trends the research has revealed, that one of our weaknesses is the inconsistent scheduling of our music programs. Specifically, we have been looking since the first survey, at how we position our classical music programming. Our biggest drop-off in listening comes at 10 a.m. when we switch format from news and information to classical music. We are aware that when we change programming we change audience, and we now feel that we have sufficient data to inform a rather significant adjustment in the timing of our classical music offerings. We know, again thanks to the survey data, that our listeners value the music we provide. So we have concluded that the reason for the drop-off at that time of the morning is not lack of audience for classical music, but rather lack of compatibility or commonality between the news/information audience and the classical audience. We have not yet made the programming change we are seeing indicated. We feel we need to take sufficient time to adequately prepare for such a change. Our station has a history of deep entrenchment and very little program change. We are aware of the impact on the lives of our listeners and also of our volunteers that such a change will bring, and are proceeding cautiously with plans to gain the buy-in we'll need to be successful.

Programming in rural areas is a delicate balancing act. In a rural region like ours, especially given that we are the only radio service available to many residents, we are not free to serve only our most devoted listeners, but must also seek to provide "niche" programming that many feel is essential to public radio. Lacking the luxury of catering to a narrow constituency, we often must do the difficult task of providing something for everyone. This is a complicated challenge. But understanding the concepts of "core" and "fringe" listeners, and where they fit into the picture of a whole listening community, has helped us to do that balancing act in a more deliberate way. We can be clear-minded about our need to pay attention to the core, as we remember to give some ground to the less-frequent listeners. Understanding of those different types of audiences, which the Rural Radio Project provided, helps us to be clearer about the decisions we make, who will be impacted by them, and in what ways.