Why Stations Succeed
(And Other Myths)

Myths are amazing things. They can offer satisfying explanations of the underlying forces that cause a phenomenon, and yet be dead wrong about these forces or how they work.

It’s no myth – it’s fact – that some stations are better than others at turning listeners into givers.   But many commonly held explanations of this ability are unproven – theories at best, myths at worst. This analysis tested five groups of theories, and none survived the rigorous reality checks that would have raised them above the level of myths.

Although AUDIENCE 98^® identifies certain listener characteristics related to giving, it finds no station characteristics that explain why some are better able to convert listeners into givers.

Myth 1: Location, location, location. This cardinal rule of retailing suggests that stations in the largest markets, or in markets with the highest concentrations of potential listeners, have an easier time generating givers. Certainly location affects the size of their audiences. But when it comes to getting givers much more is at work.

Fact: Market characteristics do not explain a station’s ability to turn listeners into givers.

Myth 2: It’s the format, stupid. Some kinds of programming attract listeners with more education and therefore more money. The theory states that stations offering news or classical music have got it made. Those serving less educated, poorer people face a greater struggle for listener support.

Fact: Format alone does not explain a station’s ability to turn listeners into givers. Givers have a wide income range.

Myth 3: The rich get richer. This theory holds that the stations with the most money have the resources to generate more givers. They probably have bigger development staffs; they probably have more fundraising techniques available. More resources, more givers, more money – it’s an inevitable upward spiral of success.

Fact: A station’s operating budget does not explain its ability to turn listeners into givers.

Myth 4: The drive to survive. Some stations have cushions of support from universities or other institutions. Others, like community licensees, depend more heavily on listeners and are forced to focus on listener support. Although the need to turn listeners into givers may be more keenly felt at these stations,

Fact: Neither the type of licensee, nor the extent to which a station relies on listener support, explains its ability to turn listeners into givers.

Myth 5: Pictures help. Don’t radio operations that share development staffs with public television stations have a competitive edge over other radio stations?

Fact: Radio stations held as joint licensees are no better or worse at turning listeners into givers.

There’s one important theory that AUDIENCE 98 does not have the data to test:

Successful stations’ development staffs may simply be smarter, more ambitious, and more in touch with the values and lifestyles of their listeners than the rest.

Myth-in-the-making? Maybe. Only further research will tell.

 – Leslie Peters
 – David Giovannoni
AUDIENCE 98 Core Team

Footnote

Analyzed simply, in purely descriptive terms, many joint licensees do have higher than average listener-to-giver conversion rates. So do many stations in large or "dream" markets (Madison, Chapel Hill, Boston, Washington). So do many news and classical stations. So do many community stations.

But once the underlying causes of giving are taken into account, none of these station characteristics matter. The stations that are best at generating givers are heavily relied upon by their listeners, are more important in listeners’ lives, engender a greater sense of community, and better communicate their reliance on (and the importance of) listener support.

 

Audience Research Analysis
Copyright © ARA and CPB.  All rights reserved.
Revised: September 01, 2000 12:38 PM.