 |
 |
 |
|
Re: Sunday, March 28, 2004
I think the distinctions you've suggested could be refined a bit further. Salem and the like fall into the "for profit" category. They exist to make their shareholders money. They really look at "Christian Talk", "Preaching/Teaching" or "Contemporary Christian Music" as just being another format. The CEO and Chariman of the company started the company with a dedication to a world view, but much in the same way a jazz lover might launch a jazz radio station. Salem is very politically active, as they do push a very specific agenda on a lot of their talkers, so it might be argued that they could change hearts and minds (and votes). At the end of the day, ratings, audience, and everything except for the profits are irrelevant. Crawford generally falls under this category, as well. Ratings fluctuate wildly for these kind of stations. In some markets, they do well. In others, not even a blip on the radar. Family Radio (Camping), American Family Radio (Wildmon), and Dick Bott's network all fit under what I would call "propaganda not-for-profit". They are headed by charismatic leaders who are actively pushing a political and religious agenda that falls into a very narrow theological spectrum. They bang the drum hard for listener donations, and they camp out on the low-power freqs, translators, etc. They are self-perpetuating entities. They attract listeners who agree with them and send in money to support the station so that it can continue it's agenda. Small audiences and very little effectiveness in terms of changing hearts and minds. The last category I'd suggest would be "not-for profit ministry", which would include KLOVE (and AirONE), Moody Broadcasting, and numerous independent stations like WRBS-FM in Baltimore, WGTS-FM in Washington, DC and others, many of whom are connected to colleges or churches. I think these outlets, some of whom have big sticks that reach big markets, genuinely are trying to minister to listeners -- believers and non-believers. Sometimes it's through preaching & teaching, but increasingly it's through music and more mainstream talk formats. They rely largely on listener support, but are hesitant to make a hard-sell. They usually run share-a-thons or other pledge drives to generate revenue. Some attract decent audiences. Many of these stations have anecdotal evidence of religious conversions, so I think they might be more effective than you might expect. Their message and their pitch use the same soft-sell approach.
|
