One of the first moves made by the new head of NBC’s television stations, Valari Staab, was to rename her group from NBC Local Media to NBC Owned Television Stations. While I applauded the introduction of Local Media four years ago, the time is now right for the new moniker. Staab has smartly focused the attention of every one of her employees on strengthening the 10 stations. And the name change also tells the world that the new controlling owner of NBCUniversal, Comcast, believes in the vitality and growth potential of broadcasting.
JESSELL AT LARGE
What’s In A Name? A Lot, Apparently, To NBC
Four years ago in this space, I praised John Wallace, then the newly installed president of the NBC Owned-and-Operated Stations Group for changing the name of the group to the NBC Local Media Division.
I went on about how the move signaled that Wallace and his then boss Jeff Zucker “get it” — that they understand that it’s a multimedia world and that the TV stations have to embrace the digital media in all their endlessly proliferating forms.
Having lauded Wallace, I guess I can’t also congratulate Wallace’s successor, Valari Staab, for changing the name back to what it was or to very nearly what it was.
Oh, sure I can. Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, isn’t that right Mr. Emerson?
By rechristening the group the NBC Owned Television Stations, Staab has smartly focused the attention of every one of her employees on strengthening the 10 stations, which have fallen into disrepair in daytime (sort of like NBC in primetime).
NBC daytime is so bad that broadcast syndicators, always desperate for major market outlets, see NBC as the last resort for launching new shows. That means that even when syndicators come up with something exciting, NBC doesn’t get first shot at it.
BRAND CONNECTIONS
Staab has got to get the stations right before she does anything else. They are not only the principal revenue producers, but also the engines driving the new media initiatives.
It’s about priorities. I can’t tell you how much NBC is making from its stations and its websites, but I can tell you (because BIA/Kelsey tells me) that online media accounts for just 2%-3% of the local broadcast industry’s total annual revenue — $600 million out of $18 billion this year. I bet that ratio, or something close to it, holds true for the NBC stations.
Resurrecting the stations will not be an easy task. As in the natural world, inertia is a powerful force in broadcasting. An evening newscast in second or third place tends to stay in second or third place.
Just a few weeks into Staab’s watch, things have begun to change. WNBC last week announced that it is shifting its low-rated LX New York lifestyle show from 5 p.m. to 3 p.m. to make way for another hour of conventional news at 5. I’m told to expect more such moves in the weeks and months ahead.
Another reason Staab and her troops need to focus on broadcasting is because they simply have a lot to do. In addition to straightening out the 10 O&Os, they must figure out how to make a buck on NBC’s 24-hour Nonstop news and lifestyle multicast channels. NBC is now committed to them in nine markets, having announced in May a plan to expand the franchise into California (San Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco), Miami and Dallas.
Also last month, the group announced that it is seeking partnerships with outside nonprofit news organizations in four more markets. They would be modeled on the arrangement between KNSD San Diego and voiceofsandiego.org, and will take considerable time and resources to organize and manage.
It’s not like NBC is abandoning the new media. During the Wallace regime, NBC was as aggressive as any group in the country in trying to figure out and monetize the digital opportunities. It’s a strategy worth pursuing and, in the widely distributed memo announcing the name change, Staab promised that she would.
“We are committed to continuing our focus on distributing the content we produce across multiple platforms to connect with our audience wherever they want us, whenever they want us and however they want us. We are engaging viewers in more ways than ever before and that is exciting.”
What else is in a name? Staab dropped the traditional “and operated,” underscoring that it will be the local managers, not she in New York, who will be managing the stations. “Our markets are separate and distinct, and the people running the stations are in the best position to serve the needs of their communities each and every day,” her memo says.
This suggests that she will be bringing to the NBC stations some of the same local autonomy that she enjoyed in her last job as GM of KGO San Francisco under the banner of the ABC Owned Television Stations and leadership of the retired Walter Liss.
Of course, with greater autonomy comes greater accountability. It will be interesting to see how many of the GMs survive the first year of the Staab era.
I don’t want to overstate this, but I think the name change also tells the world that the new controlling owner of NBCUniversal, Comcast, believes in the vitality and growth potential of broadcasting.
That should cheer every broadcaster and give confidence to every broadcast investor.
All in all, it’s a good start for Staab.
Harry A. Jessell is editor of TVNewsCheck. He can be reached at 973-701-1067 or mailto:[email protected]. You can read his other columns here.
Comments (8)
tom denman says:
July 1, 2011 at 9:19 am
I agree Harry. NBC O&O stations have not had much attention from the parent for a long time. Here in Washington DC at the local NBC station, the number of local news gaffs and sometimes small market appearance are simply astounding. Sure mistakes occur, but the overall presentation, marketing and on-air promotion seems rather amateurish at times. It’s almost like from an appearance-to-the-viewer perspective, everyone is ‘mailing it in’. Certainly not befitting an NBC O&O in our nations capital.
Doug Halonen says:
July 1, 2011 at 10:23 am
NBC stations for years suffered from disoriented goals. In 1981, WNBC in New York was atop the world thanks to the genius of Ron Kershaw, who created one of the most successful early news programs in history, “Live at Five.” Within a few years, as competitors from CBS and ABC entered New York’s 5 pm news race, folks at WNBC began to lose their nerve. They tinkered with success. Eventually, with GE running the show, the stations came under abnormal pressure to cut costs. There are two kinds of cost cuts in TV: Those that viewers don’t notice and those that send viewers somewhere else. Unfortunately WNBC chose the latter. WABC-TV, by contrast, chose the former, and continues to be markedly successful in early news. What the long-term effect of the demise of Oprah as a news lead-in will mean is anyone’s guess, but at least WABC-TV followed the adage that the best lead-in to news is news and scheduled an hour of local news to replace Oprah. WABC-TV, like every TV station in America, had its share of drastic cuts recently, but I defy anyone other than a TV professional to identify them by what goes on the air.
The LX-NY program, while clearly cheap to produce, was a throwback to WNBC’s 1970s “NewsCenter4”, a rigidly formatted program built around a cadre of feature reporters with regular segments. Those ignorant of broadcast history are condemned to repeat it.
Let’s hope that the new direction from the top of the NBC station group will erase much of what Yogi Berra would call, “the wrong mistakes.”
Gregg Palermo says:
July 1, 2011 at 10:28 am
Stations were once a necessity for distributing a network signal, back in the pre-cable, pre-satellite days, before 92 percent of homes got rid of their antenna reception. But stations chug along, making money, aiming their signals at the 8 percent who receive them. I am reminded of the railroad business, when it took a while for trains to be marginalized. Rather than conceive itself as the transportation business, the railroads got locked into the idea that they were in the train business. Local electronic media organization make the same mistake when they cling to outdated words like ‘broadcasting’ and ‘stations’ — so I think the NBC O&O name change is just dumb.
mike tomasino says:
July 1, 2011 at 11:32 am
Rustbelt, Do you have any other song that you can sing? J.D. Power and Associates just did a survey that showed that 6% of surveyed Gen-Yers (17-34 year olds) have already cut the cord on Multi-channel video, and that 4% of Gen-X (35-46 year olds) had done the same. The fact of the matter is you and your made up CEA statistics are behind the times.
Tonia Thompson says:
July 1, 2011 at 11:42 am
For as long as I remember, the image of NBC was a “untouchable, gigantic, corporate structure” with little human personality and no heartbeat. The broadcast people did their thing; GE looked down with detached approval and everybody seemed happy with average performance. Generally, prime time ratings were always just ok, but that was ok. The news division had big names that kept the news ratings better than average – fine. Daytime ratings were never exceptional but it was only daytime. As long as the Today Show and the Late Show were solidly number 1, corporate seemed pleased with the network’s performance. And, this line of thought filtered down to the station level. The stations ended up being run like mini NBC networks. How Comcast may change things is still up in the air. But I would say that ANY local station changes that create more creative local management decisions based on the unique competition and conditions in the local market – away from 30 Rock – is a good start towards improving their local stations’ performance. The name change is a small but good start.
r small says:
July 1, 2011 at 12:01 pm
Agree, Harry, And WNBC alone was a juggernaut for years, because they were focused and intent. During that time, external image notwithstanding, all of NBC was a grreat place to work, and it definitely had a lot of warm, human people with hearts. And some others, of course.
Hope Yen and Charles Babington says:
July 1, 2011 at 9:54 pm
Both Howard and Ted touched on how the NBC stations were suffering from disoriented goals, and were not getting much attention. Contrast that with what Harry is praising, i.e., leaving GM’s alone to make their individual stations the best they can be, consistent with their individual markets! Aren’t these two directions sort of mutually exclusive? It is hard to understand a GM, possibly facing the axe at the end of the first year under Staab, as brought up by Harry at the end of his piece, for doing what THEY thought best, whilst being ostensibly told by Staab that they had her complete trust and autonomy! What type of velvet glove control does a Group Head have that simultaneously gives ‘complete freedom and autonomy’ and yet still draws lines in the sand? Just making a budget? Giving the right answers at Corporate Meetings? Being total yes men/women? Arguing their points but somehow, invisibly, knowing when to acquiesce to the Group Heads’ wish? Reminds me of being a Military Officer and knowing how to properly read the General…..touchy, stressful, but it can, has, and evidently will be done by NBC’s GM’s should they wish to succeed in the Staab realm!
len Kubas says:
July 1, 2011 at 10:08 pm
It’s still an open question as to whether the NBC television network(s) and the stations they own are failing. In many large markets, their Telemundo affiliates get higher prime time ratings than do the NBC stations. NBC ‘s highest-rated shows (the Voice, perhaps, an exception) have been repeatedly cancelled for low ratings, then added back when the cost and risk of new programming was considered, with the ratings bar being lowered all the time. This can be turned around, but Comcast has yet to establish that they will do much more than investing in hype and name-changes. The problems go so much deeper than that …