Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Welcome to The Happy Hour
Just when you thought things couldn’t get worse, they do. I’m referring of course to the CBC’s re-vamp of CBC Newsworld and 'The National'.
While the topic of this blog is the restructuring of CBC Radio Two and my essentially futile interactions with CBC management, Members of Parliament and other concerned organizations in protest of the CBC Radio Two changes, I have to comment on what the CBC has done to 'The National'.
‘The National’ was my only remaining link to the CBC. I’ve long ago given up on CBC Radio Two and, for that matter, CBC Radio One. I’ve switched to Wi-Fi Internet radio and Sirius Satellite radio for radio. For TV news, I still depended on ‘The National’, watching each evening at either 9:00 PM or 10:00 PM.
Once again, CBC has taken us by surprise, announcing the new CBC News programming merely days before the event – sort of a blitzkrieg of restructuring. While apparently there are many new programs, and changes, on CBC Newsworld, I have only experienced the changes to ‘The National’ to date.
It seems that the management of the CBC has decided that the previous version of ‘The National’ was too serious and that Mr. Mansbridge and the correspondants should ‘lighten up a bit’. How else can one explain the almost bubbly exchanges that take place between Mr. Mansbridge and Wendy Mesley, or the fluffy segments featured on the newscast? The broadcast on Tuesday evening included many examples, such as the report on teeth whitening parties. Surely, there are events taking place in the world of greater importance than the emergence of unlicenced practitioners of teeth whitening? Yet, as far as I noticed, there was not a single report concerning events in Europe, the Middle East, Asia, Africa or South America on Tuesday night’s broadcast. Are we to believe that there are no news-worthy events taking place in these regions?
As well, it seems that someone within the CBC is seeking revenge against poor Ms. Mesley. That is the only possible explanation for dressing up Ms. Mesley in an H1N1 protective suit and sending her out on the streets to determine the reactions of passers-by on Monday’s broadcast, or for sending her out on the street again on Tuesday’s broadcast to ask people to deposit a token in either a jar representing the U.S. budget for Education or a jar representing the budget for NASA. At this point, I found the whole thing too silly to continue watching and turned it off. There may have been more serious news in the remaining fifteen minutes of the Tuesday evening broadcast, but I doubt it.
Sadly, this re-vamp of CBC News follows hard on the heels of the CBC’s similarly disastrous restructuring of CBC Radio Two. Did the CBC not learn anything from the CBC Radio Two experience? Who is responsible for these bungled attempts to make the CBC more relevant to Canadians and, more importantly, why are they allowed to continue wreaking havoc within the CBC?
Friday, July 24, 2009
CBC Radio Two: doing less with less
I see that Tom Allen is now doing double duty, on "Radio 2 Morning" and a new program, "Shift", from 2:00 - 3:30 PM. "Tempo" runs from 9:00 AM to 2:00 PM instead of, I believe it was, 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM. And "Radio 2 Drive" is now on until 7:00 PM, followed by "Canada Live" until 8:00 PM. Finally, "Tonic" and "The Signal" close out the evening.
What is behind all of this schedule tweaking? Is it an attempt to recover lost audience share by trying to find the right time slot for these programs? Could it be that it is not the time slots, but the content of the programming, that is responsible for the lost audience share?
I see also that "Tonic", now beginning at 8:00 PM instead of 6:00 PM, promises a mix of "Jazz, Soul and R&B to wind down your day" - I seem to remember that it began life as strictly Jazz. Could it be that there isn't a large audience for an all-Jazz format? Could it be that CBC Radio 2 is finally admitting that no one really wants to listen to Jazz at 6:00 PM?
You will also notice from the program schedule that CBC Radio 2 now covers 18 hours of Monday-to-Friday programming with only six announcers. I seem to recall CBC Radio 2 having more program hosts before the CBC Radio 2 restructuring, which began March 19, 2007. I suppose you could cite this as an example of doing less with less. Aren't there labour laws to prevent organizations from cutting back staff and dumping the same amount of work on the remaining staff? Isn't there a union for radio hosts? Perhaps not.
And what happened to Jurgen Gothe and "Farrago"? I can't find any announcements on the CBC Radio 2 site concerning the fate of Mr. Gothe. I suppose Mr. Gothe was unceremoniously dumped by the corporation, or perhaps decided to leave on his own. We are all, of course, poorer for this.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Two years later - have the CBC Radio Two changes been a success?
Phase I of the restructuring began March 17, 2009 with the cancellation of the "World at Six" news broadcast, the replacement of "Music for a while" with "Tonic", the replacement of "In Performance" with "Canada Live", the cancellation of "Two New Hours" and the introduction of "The Signal", the cancellation of "Brave New Waves" and the cancellation of "Northern Lights". Phase III was completed in September 2008 with the cancellation of "Here's to You", "Studio Sparks" and "Sound Advice" and the replacement of "Disc Drive" with "Radio 2 Drive" and "Music and Company" with "Radio 2 Morning". So, you may be wondering, has it all been worth the pain and agony that the CBC has inflicted upon its audience? Has the new programming been successful?
To answer this question I continued the analysis of CBC Radio Two's market share that I first did in my October 30 2008 blog entry using audience share data from the Bureau of Broadcast Measurement. Since we now have market share data including the period Sept. 1 2008 - Oct. 26 2008 (S4 2008, in BBM's terminology) and Jan. 5 2009 - March 1 2009 (S1 2009), we can compare CBC Radio Two's market share before the changes were implemented; i.e. before Phase I of the restructuring was implemented and the market share after the changes were implemented; i.e. after Phase III was completed. Since we have data for S4 2008 and S1 2009 we can get a good picture of how CBC Radio Two's market share has changed as this represents seven months of elapsed time since the completion of Phase III.
Much to my surprise, I found from the BBM data that radio listenership has actually increased in the major cities surveyed by the BBM, increasing from 20.7M in S1 2007 to 21.4M in S1 2009, an increase of 3.3%! In an era of MP3 players, internet radio and ubiquitous CD players this should be considered nothing short of astounding. It seems that there is a place for good old broadcast radio in our era of new technology after all!
But what about CBC Radio Two? How has it fared? Well, not as well. In a period of increased radio listenership CBC Radio Two actually lost listeners, losing a total of 49,000 listeners, or 6.9%, during the period from S1 2007 to S1 2009. As anyone with a lick of sense will tell you, to lose listeners in a growing market is very bad indeed, especially if you are trying to become more relevant to your audience, as the CBC apparently is trying to do. The chart below summarizes CBC Radio Two's market share during the period S1 2007 to S1 2009, as well as the total radio listenership in the major markets surveyed by the BBM. You can check this data for yourself using the BBM Top-Line Reports at the BBM web site.

The CBC has responded to reports of declining market share for CBC Radio Two in the past by saying that CBC Radio Two "needs to find its audience". One would think that if the "new 2" hasn't found its audience six months after its launch, it's never going to find it.
Most public corporations have a predictable response to a failed strategy. Either they admit their mistake and revise the strategy, or management is replaced or the corporation fails. The management of CBC Radio - answering to no one, apparently - has the luxury of being able to continue on their merry way to self-destruction, oblivious to declining market share and the ire of their audience. (For radio, that is, television is another story, as recent events have borne witness.)