J
Jul
Guest
This show is one of the worst in Philadelphia talk radio history. He doesn't need to be on the air anymore.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
During his so-called "news" segments (really just reading posts from right-wing blogs), Dick Morris plays a teletype sound effect in the background, to make it sound like he's on KYW.
But with the kind of voice he's got, Dick wouldn't even be answering phones at KYW, let alone be on the air...
But with the kind of voice he's got, Dick wouldn't even be answering phones at KYW, let alone be on the air...
He promised WPHT landslide ratings.
J
Jul
Guest
how are his ratings and will the Rush listeners keep it on 1210 to hear Morris, or will they turn to another station and the move backfires?He promised WPHT landslide ratings.
A friend told me about Dick Morris' web site and there he has some interesting 6 minute video commentaries on various topics including history going back to WWI, the Depression, New Deal, Cold War, etc. They're pretty interesting. Given that I decided to try listening to his radio show on WPHT today. Greatly disappointed. Lasted 20 minutes before I tuned out.
I prefer NPR or SportTalk, both national shows like CBS Sports Radio/Fox Sports Radio/ESPN Radio, or Phillycentric Sports talk to the babbling same ole same ole one sided talk that conservative talk radio has become. I get it, you hate Obama and the Democrats are evil. Next show, you hate Obama and the Democrats are evil, and on and on and on it goes. Then they wonder why only TEA extremists are listening to right wing talk radio???
I believe the earlier poster on page 1 made the point, that Philly, and the tri-state area generally are more liberal than conservative. I find it interesting that NPR programming on WHYY-FM gets pretty near the same if not better ratings 12+ PPM than either WPHT or WWIQ [my guess is those with access to the real numbers would see that NPR programming is pulling in the same if not better numbers than the conservative talkers in Philly and of a more desirable demo]. So a middle of the road leaning left talk/info programming might be a better fit for this area or at least mix it up, one conservative host, a liberal host, a middle of the road host, etc, so it isn't the same ole same ole every day all day long. It's like playing one song over and over all day long, just performed by same three or four artists. Gets boring rather quickly.
So for those of you who enjoy that same ole same ole, then 1210 WPHT is your radio station, it sure isn't mine. That CBS PD who said he only wanted conservative talkers isn't in touch with his audience in the Philly metro. THAT's why WPHT isn't doing better and won't do better. Live and Local talk is probably where WPHT would do the best, but make it a mixture as WWDB did in its hey day.
I prefer NPR or SportTalk, both national shows like CBS Sports Radio/Fox Sports Radio/ESPN Radio, or Phillycentric Sports talk to the babbling same ole same ole one sided talk that conservative talk radio has become. I get it, you hate Obama and the Democrats are evil. Next show, you hate Obama and the Democrats are evil, and on and on and on it goes. Then they wonder why only TEA extremists are listening to right wing talk radio???
I believe the earlier poster on page 1 made the point, that Philly, and the tri-state area generally are more liberal than conservative. I find it interesting that NPR programming on WHYY-FM gets pretty near the same if not better ratings 12+ PPM than either WPHT or WWIQ [my guess is those with access to the real numbers would see that NPR programming is pulling in the same if not better numbers than the conservative talkers in Philly and of a more desirable demo]. So a middle of the road leaning left talk/info programming might be a better fit for this area or at least mix it up, one conservative host, a liberal host, a middle of the road host, etc, so it isn't the same ole same ole every day all day long. It's like playing one song over and over all day long, just performed by same three or four artists. Gets boring rather quickly.
So for those of you who enjoy that same ole same ole, then 1210 WPHT is your radio station, it sure isn't mine. That CBS PD who said he only wanted conservative talkers isn't in touch with his audience in the Philly metro. THAT's why WPHT isn't doing better and won't do better. Live and Local talk is probably where WPHT would do the best, but make it a mixture as WWDB did in its hey day.
I know lots of stations did hosts of varying ideologies throughout the day back in the early 90s, but I'm wondering if, today, doing that would be akin to a music station airing hip hop in middays and country in afternoons. They call it a "format" because it's supposed to be consistent. People need to know what they're getting when they tune in.
Also, you can't really compare AQH ratings between a station that airs programming 43 minutes an hour and a station that airs programming 58 minutes an hour. It's not a fair comparison.
Also, you can't really compare AQH ratings between a station that airs programming 43 minutes an hour and a station that airs programming 58 minutes an hour. It's not a fair comparison.
I know lots of stations did hosts of varying ideologies throughout the day back in the early 90s, but I'm wondering if, today, doing that would be akin to a music station airing hip hop in middays and country in afternoons.
770 WABC was highly successful throughout the '90s with a schedule of live, local talk shows of varying political perspectives, all the way from Rush Limbaugh to Lynn Samuels. But that depended on hosts who were willing to communicate and engage in meaningful discussion, not just repeat partisan talking points and yell at anyone who disagrees with them.
770 WABC was highly successful throughout the '90s with a schedule of live, local talk shows of varying political perspectives, all the way from Rush Limbaugh to Lynn Samuels. But that depended on hosts who were willing to communicate and engage in meaningful discussion, not just repeat partisan talking points and yell at anyone who disagrees with them.
Exactly right.
We constantly hear that misleading analogy about how a music station wouldn't play a mix of rap, country and rock, so a talk station can only have one type of opinion on the air. It's ridiculous. As was stated earlier, that's akin to a music station playing the same song over and over. Think about it: host after host after host, all saying basically the same thing. Talk about limiting your potential.
CONVERSATION about current events, whether they be political, entertainment oriented, or about life in general, is the format. Having a variety of interesting and passionate people talking about those things on the air is what makes a great station, just as a mix of great artists on a music station makes a great format. Country artists on a country station. Rock artists on a rock station. Current events talkers on the talk station. And when I say talk hosts, I don't mean the musicradio equivalent of playing the same song all day long.
Dedicating a whole station to one ideology is like dedicating a whole station to nothing but Genesis music.
Last edited:
As was stated earlier, that's akin to a music station playing the same song over and over. Think about it: host after host after host, all saying basically the same thing. Talk about limiting your potential.
Some people like hearing the same song over & over again. That's the theory behind Top 40 radio. Play a small group of songs over and over, and it's ratings gold.
The problem with talk, specifically political talk, is you have a solid core group who absolutely refuse to listen to anything but talking points. Anything that diverges is sin. They are religious about it. You dare mention Obama in a good way and you could get shot. So you're playing with your career when you mix ideologies on a radio station. And people have tried. Compare all the successful talk hosts with those who aren't. Go through the roster one by one. Who are the big successes who haven't embraced the talking points? You tell me. What happened to Smerconish? To attempt to compare today with the 90s ignores how bitter things became after the 2008 election.
Some people like hearing the same song over & over again. That's the theory behind Top 40 radio. Play a small group of songs over and over, and it's ratings gold.
The problem with talk, specifically political talk, is you have a solid core group who absolutely refuse to listen to anything but talking points. Anything that diverges is sin. They are religious about it. You dare mention Obama in a good way and you could get shot. So you're playing with your career when you mix ideologies on a radio station. And people have tried. Compare all the successful talk hosts with those who aren't. Go through the roster one by one. Who are the big successes who haven't embraced the talking points? You tell me. What happened to Smerconish? To attempt to compare today with the 90s ignores how bitter things became after the 2008 election.
I don't disagree with that assessment.
You have to know though, that the fringe has ALWAYS been there. There was always that far-right crank who would call in with tea-party-style righteous indignation, sometimes feathered with bigotry---but their ridiculousness was often tempered by the rational people who would also chime in. That more accurate reflection of the masses helped keep some of the fringe from descending completely into a delusional bubble.
When programmers started hiring nothing but Limbaugh clones, that fringe felt empowered and stations started pandering to them more and more, letting in less and less light.
They have created their own monster. It wasn't necessary, but they did it and will have to live with the consequences. It was a mistake that is costing the format it's future.
Last edited:
their ridiculousness was often tempered by the rational people who would also chime in.
Maybe. But radio ratings are driven by passion, not by rational people. In the 60s, you had Beatle-mania. The rational people stood on the side and watched. Rational people aren't habitual radio users. They listen when it's convenient, and when something catches their ear. Once again, I ask who of the talk show hosts are attracting large numbers now? The rational ones or the other group? If you answer that question, you'll understand why radio wants more of those kinds of hosts.
They have created their own monster. It wasn't necessary, but they did it and will have to live with the consequences. It was a mistake that is costing the format it's future.
Nothing stays the same forever. It changes. So right now, we see talk radio going through a ratings decline. It will probably continue, unless something else revives passion. In the meantime, another group of talkers has emerged in sports radio. That is where all the action is as far as radio programming. So in Philly, you have several sports talk stations, but just one news/talk station. In the next few years, talk radio will reinvent itself. Some new hero will emerge from somewhere, and he'll be the new face of talk. It won't happen in the next three years, but it WILL happen. It's inevitable.
Once again, I ask who of the talk show hosts are attracting large numbers now? The rational ones or the other group?
That's not a fair question, considering the playing field has been skewed considerably to one side over the last 20 years. There came a point where ideology---not ratings became the litmus test.
What happened to Smerconish?
Smerconish wasn't kicked off of WPHT because of bad ratings. He was kicked off because he was too centrist, and the PD wanted the station to be exclusively right-wing.
Smerconish wasn't kicked off of WPHT because of bad ratings. He was kicked off because he was too centrist, and the PD wanted the station to be exclusively right-wing.
Actually, he wasn't kicked off at all. He left of his own accord to go to Sirius. Of course he might've felt some idiotic ideological heat coming from management, but that's pure speculation.
Actually, he wasn't kicked off at all. He left of his own accord to go to Sirius. Of course he might've felt some idiotic ideological heat coming from management, but that's pure speculation.
I recall an interview with WPHT's PD in which he said he was glad Smerconish left, because he was upset that Smerconish had turned centrist, and he wanted WPHT to be an all-conservative station.
I recall an interview with WPHT's PD in which he said he was glad Smerconish left, because he was upset that Smerconish had turned centrist, and he wanted WPHT to be an all-conservative station.
I'd love to see that interview. Also, is that PD still there?
I'd love to see that interview. Also, is that PD still there?
The post was all in bold. You're not supposed to question him.
Smerconish was offered a lot of money by Sirius, who wanted a "moderate" for their POTUS channel. Sirius has a habit of overpaying names, and Smerconish is smart, so he took the money and ran.
Meanwhile, my buddy who basically CARRIED a show on a major channel for several years had to resign because Sirius wouldn't give him a $5k per year raise to cover his commute expenses.
That's not a fair question, considering the playing field has been skewed considerably to one side over the last 20 years. There came a point where ideology---not ratings became the litmus test.
Not in any conservative station I ever worked at. And that's ALL I've worked at. In fact, the only guidance I ever got on content was "don't badmouth the sponsors".
Smerconish was offered a lot of money by Sirius, who wanted a "moderate" for their POTUS channel. Sirius has a habit of overpaying names, and Smerconish is smart, so he took the money and ran.
I'm not questioning WHY he did it, but rather WHEN.
Not in any conservative station I ever worked at. And that's ALL I've worked at. In fact, the only guidance I ever got on content was "don't badmouth the sponsors".
Maybe that's because they knew what they were hiring. There is absolutely a litmus test now that did not exist 15-20 years ago. If you're not a solid right-winger, good luck getting any consideration at a top 50 market talk station. It wasn't like that 15-20 years ago, you know, back when many of those same stations were doing much better than they are now.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.