New host, new name? Can CBC's 'Q' survive its rebranding effort?

The CBC Radio program at the centre of the Jian Ghomeshi scandal has undergone some significant changes since removing him as host last month, and by the time the dust settles it could look very different still.

The future of “Q” remains up in the air in the wake of the Ghomeshi sex scandal, in which several women have accused the radio personality of sexual impropriety and Toronto police have launched an investigation.

With a hunt for a new host underway, a new producer at the helm and the possibility of a new name for the show, the show is set for a significant rebranding. But can it survive?

Several radio and television talk shows have life through massive changes in the past, thought as many if not more have stumbled while trying to distance themselves from the names and personalities they once orbited.

Jeffrey Dvorkin, director of the University of Toronto Scarborough’s journalism program, says “Q” should be able to survive the transition, but it will need to give listeners a reason to keep tuning in.

“Radio audiences are kind of conservative. They don’t embrace change that easily. They are slow adopters to change. Part of that is because radio is intimate,” Dvorkin told Yahoo Canada News. “If you listen to something, you listen to a person, that person gets inside your head and you the listener become complicit in the act of imagination.

“When that audio landscape is changed suddenly it is very jarring. Re-inventing ‘Q’ is going to be a challenge. It is kind of like alchemy, really: Mixing the right set of circumstances, the right tone and host. Some of it is skill and some of it is luck.”

Due to circumstances well beyond the purview of the Canadian media landscape, CBC Radio’s flagship arts and culture program has been forced into this drastic rebranding process.

Ghomeshi has been removed as host, which would be a difficult transition on its own, considering “Q” has become a personality-driven program since its inception in 2007.

But add on top of that the allegations and dark clouds of controversy surrounding Ghomeshi’s firing and the issue becomes not just replacing a host but replacing a show’s culture.

Arif Noorani, the show’s long-time producer has since left the program and CBC is now considering changing the name of “Q” as part of its rebranding effort.

"We’ve heard from a lot of people who think we should scrap it and a lot who want to keep it," Cindy Witten, senior director of talk radio, told the Canadian Press.

"We’ll continue to listen to the audience and our partners and we also plan to do some targeted research."

The search for a new permanent host will begin in earnest next week. But regardless of who is selected, it is obvious the show won’t be the same. Going forward, “Q” may have the same time slot, and it may have the same general focus, but it might be a wildly different show.

Dvorkin says the show runners should survey their audience to determine what path they would prefer – which the show has already said it is doing.

“If I were re-inventing a program, I would want a host that could transcend what the show had been before,” he said. “Maybe at this point a big change is better than incremental change.”

Surviving a culture shift isn’t impossible in the radio and television industry.

Late-night talk shows change hosts at the whim of those chosen to be the face. The most notable of these shifts is likely the one spawned by Johnny Carson’s retirement in 1992 when the show was ceded to Jay Leno – asking audiences to move from a beloved, comfortable face to a stand-up comedian with markedly different sensibilities and staggering jawline. But these shifts rarely happen under a cloud of controversy.

The closest the late-night talk show scene has come to a Ghomeshi-type scandal was when David Letterman admitted to breaking his wedding vows by having sex with a female staff member who then tried to blackmail him.

Letterman made an on-air admission in 2009 and was widely forgiven by his audience. The show received a brief spike in ratings. He is set to retire next year, a decision unrelated to the controversy.

If we’re willing to consider all types of personality-driven television, there is precedent to be found in the world of reality television. A number of reality shows have been forced to deal with scandals brought on by their titular hosts.

Last year, the Food Network cancelled Paula Deen’s cooking show after she used racial slurs. Alec Baldwin’s short-lived talk show was cancelled by MSNBC after he used a homophobic slur in a fight with a photographer.

Most recently, Discovery Channel cancelled a pro-gun reality show after the star was charged with the aggravated rape of a 12-year-old child. TLC cancelled their once-hit show “Here Comes Honey Boo Boo” after TMZ reported the child’s mother began dating a convicted child molester.

The comparison between “Q” and reality television may not be entirely fair. On the CBC radio program, a personality delivered content. In reality TV, personality is the content. Still, it does point to the problems that come with building a brand around an individual’s personality.

A more relevant comparison perhaps comes from Britain, where the BBC was rocked several years ago by a massive sex-scandal surrounding former “Top of the Pops” host Jimmy Savile.

Savile died in 2011 at the age of 84. Shortly after his death, a flood of victims stepped forward alleging to have been sexually abused by the star in his heyday.

Considering the accusations came after his death, there was little impact on his former shows, though the BBC to a credibility hit in the wake.

Dvorkin suggests a better comparison for what “Q” currently faces comes from National Public Radio’s Morning Edition, which in 2004 forced out 25-year host Bob Edwards. This instance was void of scandal or controversy, other that the sudden departure of a beloved personality. (Edwards vocally opposed being shifted out of the hosting chair and eventually found a new home on satellite radio.)

The result was a drop in ratings and a furious audience base. NPR survived the rough waters, according to Dvorkin, by reaffirming its commitment to excellent programming and solid journalism. It reported a larger audience base on the anniversary of the rocky transition.

Dvorkin says “Q” - whatever name is moves forward with - can make the same transition as long as it mixes the components properly and gives audiences a reason to keep tuning in.

“It has to have that sense of being a companion,” he said. “In radio terms, being a companion for the listener is very powerful. And that has got to be part of the magic that CBC has to find.”