Radio station WIBC losing programming director

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WIBC-FM 93.1 is looking for a new program director.

Alan Furst, the radio station’s program director since January 2010, this week informed Charlie Morgan, market manager for WIBC parent Emmis Communications Corp., that he is leaving to take a job with Radio One’s News 92 FM in Houston.

Indianapolis-based Emmis has launched a nationwide search for Furst’s replacement, Morgan said, adding that WIBC News Director Stacy Conrad will serve as interim program director until a full-time replacement is hired.

The program director's position at WIBC is one of the plum radio jobs in the local market. WIBC has been one of the most listened to radio stations in central Indiana for decades, and last year was third in advertising sales behind country powerhouse WFMS-FM 95.5 and classic rock behemoth WFBQ-FM 94.7, according to BIA Financial Network Inc., a Virginia-based research firm.

Furst has a lengthy background in radio programming, including serving as program director for WLW-AM 700 in Cincinnati, vice president of programming for CapStar Broadcasting, senior vice president of programming for Clear Channel, and director of country programming for Cumulus. Before joining Emmis, Furst was senior vice president of content for Austin, Texas-based DMX Inc., a provider of customized music for commercials and other applications.

Furst is moving to be closer to family, Morgan said, and to help take care of his father, who is in failing health.

“[He] lived in Texas before he moved here for this job. Houston is a Top 10 market. It all makes great sense for Alan,” Morgan said. “Not so much for us, but how could I argue?”

Furst, who replaced Kent Sterling at Emmis, was one of Morgan’s early hires at the Indianapolis radio station.


  • secret income14.com
    I heard this advertisement on WIBC and went to the web and all it is is a fraud. I don't think WIBC should give it any air time. I listen to WIBC daily.
  • My application attached
    I'd be honored to continue moving the programming forward as a market leader. With my considerable industry contacts, I'm sure I could quickly get favorable syndication terms for "The Attila the Hun Show", as well as "The Klan Today".

Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. You are correct that Obamacare requires health insurance policies to include richer benefits and protects patients who get sick. That's what I was getting at when I wrote above, "That’s because Obamacare required insurers to take all customers, regardless of their health status, and also established a floor on how skimpy the benefits paid for by health plans could be." I think it's vital to know exactly how much the essential health benefits are costing over previous policies. Unless we know the cost of the law, we can't do a cost-benefit analysis. Taxes were raised in order to offset a 31% rise in health insurance premiums, an increase that paid for richer benefits. Are those richer benefits worth that much or not? That's the question we need to answer. This study at least gets us started on doing so.

  2. *5 employees per floor. Either way its ridiculous.

  3. Jim, thanks for always ready my stuff and providing thoughtful comments. I am sure that someone more familiar with research design and methods could take issue with Kowalski's study. I thought it was of considerable value, however, because so far we have been crediting Obamacare for all the gains in coverage and all price increases, neither of which is entirely fair. This is at least a rigorous attempt to sort things out. Maybe a quixotic attempt, but it's one of the first ones I've seen try to do it in a sophisticated way.

  4. In addition to rewriting history, the paper (or at least your summary of it) ignores that Obamacare policies now must provide "essential health benefits". Maybe Mr Wall has always been insured in a group plan but even group plans had holes you could drive a truck through, like the Colts defensive line last night. Individual plans were even worse. So, when you come up with a study that factors that in, let me know, otherwise the numbers are garbage.

  5. You guys are absolutely right: Cummins should build a massive 80-story high rise, and give each employee 5 floors. Or, I suppose they could always rent out the top floors if they wanted, since downtown office space is bursting at the seams (http://www.ibj.com/article?articleId=49481).