WABC ratings collapse

[TheBigA]

No. If a client comes to you with an obtuse scheme like that, you ask the question, "Mr. Advertiser, how does that arrangement build awareness and sell your product?" Then you go on to explain how radio works differently from social media.

Sounds to me like you just don't like social media. It's not an "obtuse scheme." You just don't like it.

The advertiser has the money. The guy with the money wins, regardless of your own personal agenda or bias. If one radio station has a closed mind about social media, then he'll take his money to someone who'll take it. That's what competition is all about. You can keep your head buried in the sand. But that doesn't mean everyone else has to.

 

[wadio]

I'll ignore the personal "head in the sand" attack but, tell me, what does an advertiser have to gain by inserting radio into his social media plan? I have trouble buying your premise.

BTW, I'm not calling social media an obtuse scheme, only the entanglement of social media with radio -- specifically where it affects programming, such as contests, and where it takes the listeners focus away from the programming at hand. Ad buyers are fully capable of creating their own media mix. Radio's job is to grab as large a slice of the pie as possible.

 

[TheBigA]

I'll ignore the personal "head in the sand" attack but, tell me, what does an advertiser have to gain by inserting radio into his social media plan? I have trouble buying your premise.

That's probably a question better asked of the advertiser, not me. But what we see are integrated proposals that include on-air/online/social media. They HAVE to buy an on-air package. It's not a one-or-the-other thing. So the way to grab a bigger slice is to offer other things IN ADDITION TO on-air advertising. Branding, contesting, personal appearances, and social media are a part of that package.

 

[FredLeonard]

Also, I don't get the absolute hatred expressed here by some against conservative talk and of older people and people of non-color (angry old white men.) I try to steer clear of the political aspects of talk radio because I think there's a lot to discuss besides that. But since you brought it up ...

"Absolute hatred" is a bit strong, at least for me. And, for the record, I am a post money demo Celtic-American.

From a business viewpoint, the audience is one mainstream advertisers don't want to buy. Some people think that's wrong or unfair but as someone with experience in marketing, I say it makes sense.

Also from a business viewpoint, I see no reason why the major group owners have chosen to shut out and alienate a major portion of the potential audience. People who hold the views expressed in right-wing talk radio are not the entire radio audience, not even the majority of it. But political talk has become almost completely one-sided. Sounds like somebody has an agenda. Given the extent of Bain Capital's holdings in Clear Channel and Cumulus, not hard to see who has an agenda.

From a personal viewpoint, there is not need for talk radio to be so absolutely nasty and viscous. If some do "hate" right-wing talk, it's because hate begets hate. For the last 50 years, the right-wing talk style has thrived on nastiness. Joe Pyne, Bob Grant, Morton Downey, Jr. Compare them to radio's class acts like Michael Jackson and Brad Crandall.

No, Kars for Kids in my brain until I read your post. I can't remember a radio commercial that has embedded itself in 40 years.

 

[TheBigA]

Given the extent of Bain Capital's holdings in Clear Channel and Cumulus, not hard to see who has an agenda.

I'm pretty sure the FCC ownership rules prevent Bain from having a large stake in both Clear Channel and Cumulus. My understanding is that Bain's role at Cumulus was replaced by Crestview Partners several years ago, probably before the Citadel acquisition.

 

[mohawk82]

You make good points. There is scattered usage of big signals well outside the individual stations' metros.

But radio is bought by advertisers based on audience delivery in the local metro. It's a classic "X" number of listeners at "X dollars" per thousand. Unmeasured listeners are a bonus, and likely KFI mentions that as an added benefit in their pitch when appropriate.

Not only KFI, but many of the big LA FMs get large ratings in the separate Riverside / San Bernardino market. But none of them can add that to their pricing, and none can sell much of anything locally in the Inland Empire. Even though some of those LA stations get an extra 15% to 20% more listeners from the IE, they can't sell it... other than as a bonus or a tie breaker.

On the other hand, I'll bet that those local, non-agency accounts do notice that the reach is better and they might even prefer a big coverage station over a little one. They know that the LA resident "sold" while driving to Vegas is still sold... and that's something other AMs can't offer. Of course, it takes a really good seller to make that an added value point.

On 9/8/2001, I drove to LA with my wife to buy a car. I heard an ad on KFI that none of the local Phoenix, AZ dealers would match the price or warranty. We were there for 6 hours negotiating because we had an approved loan and the dealer wanted to beat that rate. During that 6 hours, we were asked several times why we drove from Arizona. Each time we told them that we heard their ad on KFI. We still have that 2001 car now. They beat our approved credit union loan by 0.5%. I know that this is also anecdotal, but I like to think there are a lot of people like me that listen to AM radio in the west. Thank you for reminding me of this transaction when you mentioned Las Vegas.

Cheers
mohawk82

 

[wadio]

Also from a business viewpoint, I see no reason why the major group owners have chosen to shut out and alienate a major portion of the potential audience. People who hold the views expressed in right-wing talk radio are not the entire radio audience, not even the majority of it. But political talk has become almost completely one-sided. // From a personal viewpoint, there is not need for talk radio to be so absolutely nasty and viscous.

I agree completely. As for an agenda, I'm not so sure. I think it's more likely that management likes to milk a good idea to death. If a little of something is good, a lot more will be much better! Of course it seldom works that way. If edgy is good, outright hate will be better. Hate begets hate, as you say. I think it's as simple as that.

No, Kars for Kids in my brain until I read your post. I can't remember a radio commercial that has embedded itself in 40 years.

Then I think either your brain is different from most people's or you haven't been listening to radio for the past decade! ;-)

 

[davideduardo]

Given the extent of Bain Capital's holdings in Clear Channel and Cumulus, not hard to see who has an agenda

As BigA stated, Bain has zero interest in Cumulus. Crestview, LLC, now has 27.8% of the shares, while Thomas Lee only has 4.68%.

And thus dies another conspiracy theory.

N.B. If there was money to be made in progressive talk, Bain, Crestview. Madison Dearborn and Thos. Lee et. al. would be extremely happy to be invested in a stable of so programmed stations. In fact, Clear Channel dedicated more than a dozen stations to such an initiative, only to have most never gain traction and, in the case of the few that did, lose salable audience after a brief period.

 

[Jul]

WPHT and WABC should flip to CBS sports radio

WPHT and WABC should flip to CBS sports radio. both stations should not be held hostage with a failing format and airing another format would release the grip they have with political talk.

 

[FredLeonard]

WPHT and WABC should flip to CBS sports radio. both stations should not be held hostage with a failing format and airing another format would release the grip they have with political talk.

And what should happen to the other stations in their respective markets which already air CBS Sports Radio?

 

[JeffM]

From a personal viewpoint, there is not need for talk radio to be so absolutely nasty and viscous.

No, Kars for Kids in my brain until I read your post. I can't remember a radio commercial that has embedded itself in 40 years.

VISCOUS: Thick or sticky, not flowing easily...heavy, slushy, turbid, gluey. (From www.merriam-webster.com) Fred got it right without even realizing it! Talk radio is nasty and thick, and so are most of its listeners.

(All together now, OHHH! One-eight-seven-seven-kars for kids, k-a-r-s, kars for kids...)

 

[mikerock]

VISCOUS: Thick or sticky, not flowing easily...heavy, slushy, turbid, gluey. (From www.merriam-webster.com) Fred got it right without even realizing it! Talk radio is nasty and thick, and so are most of its listeners.

(All together now, OHHH! One-eight-seven-seven-kars for kids, k-a-r-s, kars for kids...)

Many times I leave the radio station I am listening to on during the commercial block unless they are running a really annoying commercial. That annoying jingle is a perfect example of why I don't listen to wabc.

 

[wadio]

Not only is the jingle incredibly annoying, it's misleading:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/11/20/kars4kids-steers-donors-in-the-wrong-direction/

There no disclosure of where the money is funneled, nor the terms and conditions of the "free vacation" offer, nor the outfit's risky real estate investments:

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/investiga...tate-Investments-Investigation-140955003.html

So, here's another element of terrestrial radio that, 1) causes listener tune-out and, 2) reinforces the belief that anything you hear advertised on the radio is most likely a scam.

 

[Small Market Guy]

Kars 4 Kids at least provided us with the hilarious Imus open mic bit.

 

[mikerock]

Kars 4 Kids at least provided us with the hilarious Imus open mic bit.

I had to check that out, pretty funny. Here is O&A covering Imus open mic. Funny bit. Warning language.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uvy_VXnpoe8

I was thinking what the heck is wrong with me that this one commercial drives me nuts. Well at least I am not alone.