Don’t get me wrong — NPR (and PRI and APM and …) content is great stuff and it is the primary attractor for our audience today. However, what’s the point of a local station if all you do is broadcast national content and toss in a little local stuff to appear relevant? Answer: there is no point. NPR could easily buy our station today, cut our staff to two local people and maintain the same service we have now. The rest could be easily automated. (Indeed, for several months in 2007 we ran our station with two people — literally).

If NPR (and others) released their content to us for free, we’d have more money left to focus on local connection — the only sustainable mission we can have. We’d be more capable of engaging people in our community. Free cash is not the only answer — we also need a strong mission focus and understanding of WHY WE’RE HERE and WHO WE SERVE, but with a clear mission, we’d know how to spend our money wisely.

I’m becoming more convinced that NPR and other national players (e.g. PBS, APM, APT, PRI) need to think and act nationally and not take a paternalistic view of the legacy local stations. Local media entities will have to figure out their missions on their own. And NPR should be making “friends” outside the legacy station group anyway.

Is this a bit like the death spiral at Newspapers - as the paper’s economics get squeezed, they cut the newsroom?

Somewhere in this “Free” debate is an important insight