« Snow! | Main | Amanda on High School Graduates Going to College »
KSL Transparency
Posted by Russ Hill on October 10, 2005 at 02:43 PM | Permalink
There is much discussion in the newsrooms of America these days about the effect the Internet is having, should have, and will have on our business. Everyday we read in our industry publications and on media blogs about how traditional media must change and adapt in order to compete for listeners, viewers, and readers.
Let me declare right off the bat, I'm a believer. As someone who has more than a decade of experience in the news business, but also finds myself in Generation X, I don't need any convincing on the power of the Internet. I have written before in this space about the need for traditional media to adapt. I subscribe to the theory that cultural news consumption habits have dramatically changed requiring substantive innovation from media veterans. Not all agree with that assertion, however. They have not given up hope that they can yet convince the audience of the need to slow down this transition.
If satellite and cable's 500 channels changed the television landscape than the Internet's 4 million blogs and 11 million websites (rough figures from various Internet sources) will certainly change the media playing field. I got into this business because newsrooms were where information first flowed. That is no longer always the case. The audience can now get news anytime anywhere and from anyone. I'm definitely a member of the pro-choice movement, as I believe more selection requires all to improve or step aside.
Now, for my point. I'm interested in your feedback. One of the reasons I created The KSL Blog more than a year ago was to make our organization more transparent and to allow the audience greater access to the people who brought them the news on KSL. I believe one of the adjustments the Internet demands of news organizations is for us to pull up the blinds. Listeners, viewers, and readers want to know why we select certain stories, why we ignore others, and the process we have followed at arriving at various decisions (like KSL Radio changing to ABC News, etc).
I believe this blog is a great tool in providing some transparency and accountability of KSL. If you read the comments throughout the blog you will see that plenty of comments from individuals who are quite critical of us and some of our decisions. Some in our operation are sensitive to KSL using its own space to publish feedback critical of ourselves. I believe it is incredibly healthy. We should be confident enough to invite others into the discussion rather than posting virtual bouncers at our online doors.
Please note this blog is certainly in its infancy as it recently celebrated its first birthday. It will improve in usefulness with some changes in the near future. It is one way for us to continue to adjust to the Internet news age.
We have adjusted in other ways when it comes to providing news content immediately and giving listeners and viewers access to some of our raw material and programs on demand. KSL.com is a national leader as it has won the Edward R. Murrow Award for the best radio news website in the country for two years in a row.
But, we can do better. I'm interested in your feedback on how. How can we provide more accountability and transparency of our news operations? What role do blogs or our website in general play in that area? How important is that in today's media market? How do you think KSL should continue to adjust to this new information age?
If you wouldn't mind, leave your comments below. I thank you, in advance, for your thoughtful response.
Editor's Note: Russ Hill is news and program director of KSL Newsradio.
Comments
It's hard to believe the blog has been going for a whole year now! Where did the time go? I really like what you are doing. I really like the blogs and the reporters notebooks etc. I know that you all are very busy in your work, but I would personally love it if you could do a little more blogging. Even stuff that's not particularly related to the news that you are specifically reporting on is good. But also I enjoy reading your experiences of how it is affecting you, and some of the things that happen to you in the course of reporting the story (ie. Marc Jeuque's diary of his trip to the south to cover Katrina, Ben losing a pair of shoes to the virgin river, etc.) I rememeber being really touched by Jon Dunn mentioning how emotional it was covering the search for Lori Hacking before it was known that it was a murder. I can remember at the time that it was revealed that she had been murdered that what a hard job you and your coleagues on the TV side had and that it must really get to you sometimes.
It's not that I am trying to be voyeristic about this all. But to be able to see the human side beneath the very polished exterior makes the news more meaningful in a way. As I mentioned before I have really enjoyed being able to hear the reporter notebooks. It would be great if more of those could be made available.
On a side note I did want to let you know that you sound great on FM. It's nice because my mp3 player has a built in FM radio and I can actually hear KSL now on it. But as far as the web site and the blog, just more frequent writing on it would be great.
Take care,
Eric
p.s. Did I mention that I really appreciate all the hard work that you guys do?
Posted by: Eric | Oct 10, 2005 5:49:44 PM
I like KSL, but I feel like you all are being a little to politically correct. I feel like you are trying to accomodate everyone. If you are a church owned station, why do you ignore some church stories and offend church members by some of the views expressed on KSL.
Posted by: Joe | Oct 10, 2005 9:08:49 PM
Well, I tuned in at 7pm tonight (Monday) expecting to hear Ed Schultz. Instead I found Lars Larson going on and on about "grandparents rights." Then at 10 pm there was a rebroadcast of Sean Hannity.
Transparency? Seems you're not shooting straight with your listeners. On the website there's still a page on the Ed Schultz Show, "heard evenings on KSL." and on another page it indicates that the Lars Larson Show is heard "starting at midnight."
But according to a posting here by Richard, he called the station on Friday and spoke with "Ross" (Russ?). He says he was told that you wanted to get a reaction to a liberal host, and that Ed Schultz "won't be back."
So this was a stunt? Or a hoax? Or are you caving in to the complaints of the conservative listener base you have developed? Or maybe creating a controversy so that you can then appear to be responding to listener complaints?
It's very sad that you don't seem to be able to tolerate even a moderate-left Democrat voice on KSL. Ed Schultz is a down-to-earth, common sense liberal speaking truth to power.
So while the Republican Party implodes, it seems KSL Radio will march along with the extreme right. "Opening the Blinds" at the mighty KSL is kind of like pulling back the curtain on the Wizard of Oz. What appeared to be a bold step on your part was just a hoax aimed at generating some negative reaction, to which you could "respond" by dumping the offending liberal.
Posted by: Don | Oct 10, 2005 11:00:07 PM
Your blog isn't that great. But to tell you the truth I don't care too much. I don't look to the KSL blog as my main source of news information. I like reading the different insights on stories like the hurricane or other things when you send your people out of town. I personally don't think a blog is for transparency of your own organization, it's supposed to be about transparency of others, that's what reporting is or is supposed to be. Why do I want to read blogs about yourself? It appears the blog is just a side factor of KSL, not a full-time concentration because it's not very consistent in content or posts. The best blogs are from people who only concentrate on that being their main source. You guys are best at the radio, that's where I think accountability comes in. I don't judge KSL on a part time blog, but by what you put on the air. I hold you accountable for traffic, weather and news. And just another thing, the other day when I drove to work all I heard was President Bush and I wondered why is he on for so long? When I left my house and then got to work I had not heard one thing about traffic, weather or news. That really bothered me, I depend on you for certain things each day, concetrate on those things. Plus you need to fix up your website. Navagation is not very easy to try and find stories. I don't know if you stopped posting every story or if you are just impossible to find. You could sure make it easier. Fix those things then work on the blog. Thanks.
Posted by: Michael McKay | Oct 11, 2005 8:13:15 AM
I have always thought after listening to the Prophet and other leaders of the church (LDS Church) that it endorsed no political party. If KSL is affiliated with the LDS Church then why is the station programming biased towards Republican views? You have The Doug Wright Show; The Sean Hannity Show; The Lars Larson Show all Republican hosts. You bring on a moderate liberal talk show host (Ed Schultz) and dump the show after a week. Political neutrality?
Continue to feed the flock one viewpoint KSL. We mustn't allow the other sides views to contaminate the majorities minds.
I do hope in the future that KSL will gain a backbone and not capitulate to Republican zealots who want nothing but their views expressed.
Republican hosts. You bring on a moderate liberal talk show host (Ed Schultz) and you dump the show after a week. Political neutrality?
Posted by: Charles McConnell | Oct 12, 2005 8:51:42 AM
KSL is a for-profic company, it's about money and ratings not political neutrality. If Ed Schultz was able to pull in the ratings that Doug, Sean, and Lars do I he'd still be on the air.
BTW I can't stand Hannity or Wright and only listen to KSL during news hours.
Posted by: Steve James | Oct 13, 2005 9:29:47 AM
You station is one of the best in the free world and yet when you open up that transparency window, freaky people start looking in. I can't believe some of these comments. Gutsy move on the station's part.
Posted by: Braxton Hicks | Oct 13, 2005 10:14:06 AM
KSL is supposed to be politically neutral? I thought KSL was a business? They may be owned by indirectly by the LDS church but they are still a for-profit buisness.
If the ratings and advertising revenue support right wing talk shows then why would KSL want to loose money by having a show that gets poor ratings?
BTW I liked Ed Schultz and won't listen to the hate the spews out of Sean Hannity's mouth.
Posted by: James Smith | Oct 13, 2005 2:52:33 PM
A different viewpoint is a very healthy thing. Viewpoints should be backed up by facts and listeners should be encouraged to read sources themselves. How could KSL possibly have received actual ratings in just one week?
One would think that a station owned by a church that experienced extreme persecution during its early days would want to expose its’ audience to more than one view. In case your listeners have not kept up, the country is currently run by a group of NEOCONS who want America to have one "Christian" religion. I can assure you that evangelical "Christian" religion will be very different from “Mormonism.”
I hope the patriotic Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints does not support: a government that lies to Americans to trick us into a $6 Billion per month war; creates chaos in a country (Iraq) so the corporate friends of our rulers can steal; puts every American in bondage by borrowing billions of dollars from the communist Chinese that I am sure they will want back; spits on the poor (Hurricane Katrina); is hell bent on destroying the middle class (encourages the outsourcing of our jobs to other countries); rips up the Constitution and the Bill of Rights with the Patriot Acts; imprisons people (Quintanimo) without due process; wants to declare martial law during the coming avian flu plague because our crony government has not prepared for it; tortures and rapes innocent children and adults (Abu Grab).
I notice you broadcast a disclaimer during the short time that you broadcast the Ed Schultz show. The disclaimer said that the views expressed were not necessarily the views of the station or management. You must also be using this disclaimer when you broadcast the bold faced lies that come out of Hannity's mouth.
KSL's evening programming could be a thought provoking mountain beacon of truth and light heard throughout the West. Instead it fills the air with lies and hate. You should be ashamed of your evening programming.
Posted by: Mark Soper | Oct 15, 2005 12:34:38 AM
"Instead it fills the air with lies and hate"
Kind of like the hate and lies you are trying to spread?
Have some more Kool-Aid
Posted by: James Smith | Oct 18, 2005 9:56:22 AM
Thanks for putting your airwaves on FM. I always had so much static interference on the AM. Keep up your current programing, it is great. I can't start my day without Grand and Amanda and your talk show hosts are so articulate and enjoyable to listen to.
Posted by: Mim | Oct 21, 2005 10:38:19 AM
WHAT HAPPENED TO CLARK HOWARD???
We LOATHE Lars Larson! Not because he's a conservative, but because he's so pompus and arrogant and you can't hear anyone speak except his constant shouting into the mike. And though we're pretty conservative, we're certainly not facist liberal haters! No wonder this country is becoming so devisive. And does KSL have some sort of secret agreement with him that you play him for FIVE hours? That's more than 20% of your broadcast day! More time than you devote to any other program.
We breathed such a sigh of relief when we tuned in one night for the news, forgot to turn the radio off as we normally do when this egotist comes on, and were THRILLED to hear a non-political, soft-spoken Clark Howard graciously giving out practical, sensible economic and consumer smart advice that the people in this state need to hear! We've listened faithfully every night since as we're going to sleep and several times I've gotten up to bookmark something he said on the internet. The guy is a genious!
But apparently Clark wasn't paying the bills or something because tonight (10/21) we tuned in as usual to listen to him, but instead we heard that loud-mouth jerk Lars was back again. We're about as conservative as they come, but we think everyone in this country deserves a voice whether we agree with it or not and for that, we can't STAND Lars. We're shutting the radio off again after 4 minutes of news at the top of the hour. Sorry, KSL.
Posted by: Rod | Oct 22, 2005 12:45:05 AM
In the interest of the Republic, I stand by my statements. Do not assume anything is fact or fiction until you do your own research.
When asked where they get most of their news, most Americans today say television (unfortunately Fox or “Faux” news is getting the highest ratings); second place has long belonged to newspapers (though newspaper circulation is shrinking). But a substantial minority--15 to 20 percent in most polls--says that radio is one of their principal sources of news, (the questions generally allow respondents to name more than one medium).
In a 2002 Gallup survey, 22 percent of the sample said they listened to "radio talk shows" every day, 10 percent listened several times a week, and 29 percent tuned in "occasionally."
It appears that a significant portion of the population gets their news from talk radio. Since the Fairness Doctrine was abolished from the public airwaves by President Reagan in the 80s, broadcasters are allowed to provide one sided and unchallenged views. The responsible talk radio hosts offer a free website and provide links to the sources of information they use so their listeners can educate themselves. If station hosts are all self declared conservatives then a station is not providing a balanced view.
KSL could not possibly get official ratings on a talk show in one week! Ed schultz is one of the few talk shows that does not screen calls. There are many highly rated liberal political talk radio shows out there that are not available in the Salt Lake market. Thom Hartmann, Stephanie Miller, Al Franken or Randi Rhodes could offer a national perspective, help balance views and keep the Bonneville Corporation at the top of the ratings war.
Why is real debate important?
I suggest that our national and personal economic health, security, legal, religions, voting and political systems are under attack from within our own government. Our National government has admitted that they created “news” (propaganda) segments with Armstrong Williams using our own tax dollars that have been broadcast on stations without any disclaimer showing that they came from the government. Our personal freedoms are in danger and the Constitution is hanging by a thread.
So please start opening the blinds at your house and do your own research, read more books and get your “NEWS” from KSL and a variety of sources both domestic and foreign. Please question OUR politicians daily about whether they are representing OUR best interests.
Posted by: Mark Soper | Oct 23, 2005 10:04:14 AM
I believe your 100% correct... The Internet is growing. I am a fact junky and the following altough not directly related is intresting:
The Washington Post had a short blip on there web site.
quoting the US Census Bureau
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/27/AR2005102701474_pf.html
It shows that utah leads the nation in Computers in the home(74.1%), and is high(62.6%)n the list of those with Internet Access. And this was in 2003.
It only goes to show that more and more of audience will be online.
Posted by: Robert Love | Oct 27, 2005 10:28:48 PM
It is going to be interesting to see if Bonneville stations will pull back from being part of the Bush administration's "echo chamber" when more and more of the fraud committed by said administration in the run up to war is made manifest. I'm not asking you to be "neutral" between the two major parties, I just would like some hard analysis on your station instead of the long running pro-Bush crap. The foreign policy of this nation is a disaster for which both members of the political duopoly share blame, and for which the mass media share even more (including KSL).
Posted by: Lew Jeppson | Oct 28, 2005 1:18:24 PM
I just received a card from Bateman and Company of Ogden, UT. Apparently Fred Ball is doing a spot on their "founder and company" on Nov. 3, 2005. They claim to be celebrating the 60th anniversary of their company, serving Utah families since 1945. In a sense that is true, but the Bateman company hasn't been around that long. Horald M. Bateman and Ivan C. Iverson started a branch office of the Thorpe B. Isaacson insurance agency selling for the Lincoln Life Insurance Company in Ogden in that year. Ivan died of a heart attack in 1964. It was still the Lincoln Life Office and Thorpe B. Isaacson agency at that time. From the announcement I received, I think Mr. Ball needs to be careful that he doesn't get sucked into promoting and promulgating untruths. Just want the facts.
Posted by: Ned Iverson | Oct 30, 2005 10:11:18 PM
I live near Sacramento and use to listen to KLS at night. I was wondering if there is anyone there at KSL or the Salt Lake area that remembners Herb Jebico and the "Mighty Nightcaps" from the 1960's? Is Herb still around? By the way, I passed by the KLS Building when I was in Salt Lake about three months ago.
Posted by: Bruce Sebrian | Oct 31, 2005 12:05:18 AM
My previous remarks fed into the fiction that KSL and other Bonneville properties have independence from their ownership. They may have some, but like most communications conglomerates they must largely reflect the views of their owenrship. The pro-Bush propaganda will only be tmpered when and if the LDS church leadership comes to disagree with Bush and his Iraq war.
Posted by: Lew Jeppson | Nov 1, 2005 10:21:01 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.