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.”
