PUBLIC RADIO ENGINEERS ARE TRANSITIONING FROM “NUTS & VOLTS” TO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

As radio moves away from sole reliance on transmitters and embraces multi-platform audio delivery, the term “Chief Engineer” has become dated. As the Association of Public Radio Engineers (APRE) plans their April 2020 gathering in Las Vegas [link], the organization is surveying its members, and potential new members, to learn what topics they would like to hear discussed.

The survey [link] includes old-school stuff like production skills, remote recording, remote transmitter operation soldering techniques and studio fundamentals such as mix-minus, bussing, levels, etc. But also included in the survey are newer topics that station engineers need to deal with today like digital editing platforms, IT and networking and IP audio/streaming. 

To learn more about the evolving changes in station engineering, we spoke exclusively with Aaron Read, I.T. & Engineering Director at Public’s Radio in Providence (formerly Rhode Island Public Radio).

Aaron Read

SPARK NEWS: Years ago, your job title might have been "chief engineer," but the scope of the job is changing. How would you describe the changing menu of responsibilities?

AARON READ:  “Depending a little on how many years ago we’re talking about, the biggest change would be the shift away from mechanical engineering and electrical engineering, and instead more towards information technology, networking, and overall computer skills.  This is kind of an old story, but the difference is that we’re nearing the end of the transition.” 

“I’m of the belief that within the next five to ten years, maybe sooner, we’ll start seeing stations that do not have an “engineer” anymore.  They will have an ‘I.T. guy’, and/or a ‘network guy’ who handle similar duties to the old “engineer”. 

“But all the actual “engineering” work will have been removed due to simplified products, or due to the company that used to just sell a product (like a transmitter) will now also sell the installation, testing and service/maintenance of that product.   It’ll be far more lucrative for the company; they can now charge ongoing service fees instead of having to bake all that into the initial purchase price.   And it’ll be cheaper for the radio station, as I.T. guys are a dime a dozen whereas good broadcast engineers are rare and expensive.”

“On a related note: I’m finding that I must continually re-invent the wheel to find ever-cheaper solutions for more mission-critical projects.”

SPARK NEWS: Why should someone who is in college consider working in public media tech and engineering?

READ: “They shouldn’t, frankly.  The only reason to do it is if you’ve decided that you want to work in radio broadcasting, come hell or high water.  If that decision has been made, then engineering is a good idea because of the job security and compensation tend to be a lot better than most other aspects of the biz.” 

“Certainly it’s way better than anything in content creation.  The only better part of the field to get into is fundraising or sales; something to do with money.  If you can excel at those you’ll have little trouble getting work inside or outside of radio.”

“Even then, since radio broadcasting has such a huge I.T./networking component to it these days, you’re generally better off getting work in I.T. itself.  The field can be brutally competitive and ageism (and sexism) are far more rampant than they are in radio…but the job prospects are far better and the pay ceiling is much higher.”

SPARK NEWS:  A smart manager of stations, whether the station is commercial of noncommercial, has tech/engineers as part of the management team. But in the radio business, some in management consider engineers to be like Larry the Cable Guy. Why does this happen and is this old perception changing?

READ:  “I don’t think there’s quite a “Larry the Cable Guy” mentality so much anymore, but there’s no getting around the fact that most high-level managers come up either through sales, fundraising or (sometimes) content creation.  All of these fields prize personality characteristics that are anathema to most engineers, and vice versa.”

“Engineering is almost always a cost center.  Rarely does engineering actually make money for the enterprise.   So it’s viewed as something to be minimized as much as possible.  And worse, you often can minimize far more than you should for several years before the problems start becoming glaring, in a foolish attempt to buy more time for your revenue centers to get caught up.  And by then the problems are so glaring they get much more expensive to fix so resentment is common.”

SPARK NEWS:  Is there anything that APRE can do to enhance the image of the profession?

READ:  “While I doubt most stations would care enough to pursue this, I would suggest APRE create a “good housekeeping seal of approval” program by which stations who adhere to the best practices of engineering are eligible to be certified by APRE as “well-run shops” or whatever you want to call it.”   

“The carrot is that such a thing would be useful in attracting good engineering talent.  It also provides an impartial framework to help non-engineers (like perhaps your Board of Trustees) understand why all that money has to be spent on new transmitters when all the Trustee cares about is the newscasters.  The stick is that lack of certification would tacitly mark your organization as ripe for hacking, phishing or ransomware schemes, etc.”