Addition By Translation?

[flybynight]

First of all, your original post wasn't about the "vast majority," but the entire format. So now you've backpeddled a bit in the light of conflicting information.

Yes I spoke in general terms because It's true about MOST of the format. I'm not going to say Afghanistan is safe just because there's a very small area where it's safe. Use your head.

The other thing is that up until about two years ago, that "vast majority" you talk about also had pretty good ratings with conservative talk. To move away from it would have been stupid. The "Rush rabbit hole" you talk about served them well for an entire generation. That's not bad for something you abhor.

What I abhor is a format riddled with radicalized morons who lie and misrepresent material facts to feed P1's who would've listened anyway. They needlessly blew off more moderate listeners to pander to a shrinking, dying demo. Any chance of getting younger more open-minded listeners was snuffed out when they decided to go that route. It was not an issue of how the ratings are today, but how do you maintain them tomorrow. Painting your whole stations into an ideological corner was DUMB.

Ahhh the old copout. There's a right wing conspiracy in radio ownership that forced conservative talk on its listeners. Next you'll lecture me about Mitt's role in Bain and how he masterminded the whole thing. Go back to your basement bomb shelter. In 1995, the old talk format you loved was dying. Not in the ratings, but from old age. Larry King, once the King of the Night, was the canary. He realized it and left for TV right about the time Mainelli got fired. Michael Jackson retired. The old guard was leaving. The same thing is happening now, 25 years later. And not because Obama is out to get Rush, but because everything has its time, and after 25 years, it's time is usually up. Not because of ideology, but because the fad is finally over. The only problem is that AM radio is also done, and there's nothing anyone can do to save it.

You haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about. Not in the least.

First of all, Mainelli wasn't fired, he quit after getting burned out, which he had also done at the end of his previous tour at WABC. He did this after he brought them to #2 12+ during that year. He actually helped select his replacement, Phil Boyce out of WJR, who (unbeknownst to many) had a religious/ideological bent that he intended on having reflected across the board on WABC, right down to the call screeners. And that's exactly what he did. No right-wing conspiracy, just the reality of the situation according to several I know who worked there in different capacities, both on and off-air, and witnessed it firsthand.

And anybody who knows anything about the way radio works, knows that what happened at WABC was watched by programmers and GM's across the country---and many happily followed suit.

You are merely guessing, while I am telling you what actually happened, but you reject it because it flies in the face of your "theory".

 

[TheBigA]

What I abhor is a format riddled with radicalized morons who lie and misrepresent material facts to feed P1's who would've listened anyway. They needlessly blew off more moderate listeners to pander to a shrinking, dying demo. Any chance of getting younger more open-minded listeners was snuffed out when they decided to go that route.

You're making a lot of assumptions there. The "radicalized morons" attracted a large mass of young listeners 20 years ago. They were very loyal and very dedicated. Problem is they're in their 60s now.

Your views remind me of people who feel The Beatles ruined music, with their long hair and their attitude. But they brought a large audience with them who changed music at that time. That's what radio responds to. Large, active, passionate audiences. You speak in generalities about moderate, open minded people, and they don't act in a mass like the other folks. Hard to build a radio station around a blob of people who might listen, or might not listen, depending on their schedule. The right wingers were appointment listeners, and they hung on for 25 years. Now they're old, just like the boomers who love doo wop and the Beach Boys.

In the meantime, lots of major stations have adapted to the changes, shifted Rush and his ilk to smaller, weaker stations, and they're now attracting younger listeners with younger, local talkers who aren't Rush clones. All of this flies in the face of your lies that major programmers were "lazy" or "short sighted." Something that lasts over 20 years is not short sighted.

A lot of your "moderate, open minded" people went to public radio. The problem with them is they're also older, and less likely to support radio with their own money. What we're not seeing is a talk format that appeals to people in their 30s and 40s. That generation isn't as willing to be talked AT the way their parents were. They want to talk back. Thus the popularity of message boards and social media. So it's not simply an issue of radio stations that had a political ideology, but a generational shift that began in the late 90s away from traditional radio, coupled with noise levels on AM that have made the band unlistenable. Talk stations that anticipated this (and I've mentioned a handful that did) have weathered the storm. Those who stayed status quo haven't.

 

[davideduardo]

First of all, Mainelli wasn't fired, he quit after getting burned out, which he had also done at the end of his previous tour at WABC. He did this after he brought them to #2 12+ during that year. He actually helped select his replacement, Phil Boyce out of WJR, who (unbeknownst to many) had a religious/ideological bent that he intended on having reflected across the board on WABC, right down to the call screeners. And that's exactly what he did. No right-wing conspiracy, just the reality of the situation according to several I know who worked there in different capacities, both on and off-air, and witnessed it firsthand.

And anybody who knows anything about the way radio works, knows that what happened at WABC was watched by programmers and GM's across the country---and many happily followed suit.

You are merely guessing, while I am telling you what actually happened, but you reject it because it flies in the face of your "theory".

First, few programmers were looking at a station in New York City that averaged in the high 3-share to low 4-share range.



Further, looking specifically at Fall of 1995 we see the under-55 performance was, although salable, not stellar:



Fall of '95 was the "end" of Mainelli's tenure... a snapshot as he departed and well before the "new" PD could have any impact.

In that era, programmers of other talk stations were looking at what folks like Gabe Hobbs were doing at WFLA or what Jack Swanson was up to at KGO. Or the things David Hall was up to at KFI as he slaughtered KABC. Or, of course, the new variations on the format in Orlando and Central New Jersey and the younger demo things like KLSX with Stern as the anchor. At the "Talkers" and "R&R" talk seminars / conventions those were the subjects in the presentations and what all of us talked about over dinners and drinks afterwards.

 

[flybynight]

You're making a lot of assumptions there. The "radicalized morons" attracted a large mass of young listeners 20 years ago. They were very loyal and very dedicated. Problem is they're in their 60s now.

Your views remind me of people who feel The Beatles ruined music, with their long hair and their attitude. But they brought a large audience with them who changed music at that time. That's what radio responds to. Large, active, passionate audiences. You speak in generalities about moderate, open minded people, and they don't act in a mass like the other folks. Hard to build a radio station around a blob of people who might listen, or might not listen, depending on their schedule. The right wingers were appointment listeners, and they hung on for 25 years. Now they're old, just like the boomers who love doo wop and the Beach Boys.

In the meantime, lots of major stations have adapted to the changes, shifted Rush and his ilk to smaller, weaker stations, and they're now attracting younger listeners with younger, local talkers who aren't Rush clones. All of this flies in the face of your lies that major programmers were "lazy" or "short sighted." Something that lasts over 20 years is not short sighted.

A lot of your "moderate, open minded" people went to public radio. The problem with them is they're also older, and less likely to support radio with their own money. What we're not seeing is a talk format that appeals to people in their 30s and 40s. That generation isn't as willing to be talked AT the way their parents were. They want to talk back. Thus the popularity of message boards and social media. So it's not simply an issue of radio stations that had a political ideology, but a generational shift that began in the late 90s away from traditional radio, coupled with noise levels on AM that have made the band unlistenable. Talk stations that anticipated this (and I've mentioned a handful that did) have weathered the storm. Those who stayed status quo haven't.

You remind me of a college professor who stridently defends his theories, regardless of facts presented to the contrary.

I witnessed much of what I have described and knew many of the programmers who I've been referring to. I know what went on at the time and why, having been in the trenches in a nunber of major and large market talk stations. I discussed these very issues with these guys at that time and beyond....and when I say many PD's were lazy and gutless, I meant it.

Have you actually ever worked in talkradio? It's hard to believe, given the misinformation you're spreading.

And your comparing of me to someone who thought the Beatles "ruined music" is typically assinine. I am critical of what most talk has become because they literally lie and obfuscate reality just to please their P1's, alienating anyone who's got a shred of intelligence or integrity. You think that's the same thing? Not surprised.

 

[TheBigA]

You remind me of a college professor who stridently defends his theories, regardless of facts presented to the contrary.

The difference is I actually work in the business. I have given you specific examples, and you're the one holding on to your opinions. David has also chimed in with facts that also dispute your posts. The bottom line is it doesn't matter what you think. These stations do what they do because it works at the time. No format, host, or station was designed to operate forever. To you, that's a sign of laziness. So what? What are you going to do? Post on a message board. Great job. I'm sure history will reward you for your efforts.

 

[TheBigA]

I am critical of what most talk has become because they literally lie and obfuscate reality just to please their P1's, alienating anyone who's got a shred of intelligence or integrity.

Pleasing their P1s is their job. Try to understand that.

 

[davideduardo]

Have you actually ever worked in talkradio? It's hard to believe, given the misinformation you're spreading.

BigA's comments are right on target, and represent the actual ratings-and-bottom-line reality of radio both in the early 90's as discussed in the context of WABC and today in the context of the format generally.

I find no defect in his statements, and I've done talk in markets ranging from LA and New York to San Juan and Buenos Aires.

I am critical of what most talk has become because they literally lie and obfuscate reality just to please their P1's, alienating anyone who's got a shred of intelligence or integrity. You think that's the same thing? Not surprised.

At any given moment, a Program Director's job is to "please the P1's". In greater depth, the job is to please those listeners who spend several hours or more a week with their station. That's part of being aware of the fact that over 90% of all listening comes from less than 50% of the cumers.

Any change intended to bring in newer, or in the case of talk, younger listeners has to first be able to retain the existing listeners. So if we want to entice those younger listeners in, we can't do it at the expense of the existing core... it has to be a consensus change that may appeal to younger light listeners or non-listeners as well as those existing listeners who are under 55.

The biggest issues facing talk are related to younger generations not taking to the format or even its adaptations and the whole AM problem of noise, fidelity, limited coverage and un-hipness. This is not a problem of anyone being passive or lazy; there is much to be said for preserving the cash flow on already impaired assets.

 

[flybynight]

First, few programmers were looking at a station in New York City that averaged in the high 3-share to low 4-share range.

WRONG. Many programmers paid attention to WABC because it was WABC and in the #1 market. I'm not guessing this. I know it to be true.

Fall of '95 was the "end" of Mainelli's tenure... a snapshot as he departed and well before the "new" PD could have any impact.

WRONG again. Mainelli left in March of '95. Boyce started in April. I actually had conversations with both gentlemen at the time of the transition.

In that era, programmers of other talk stations were looking at what folks like Gabe Hobbs were doing at WFLA or what Jack Swanson was up to at KGO. Or the things David Hall was up to at KFI as he slaughtered KABC. Or, of course, the new variations on the format in Orlando and Central New Jersey and the younger demo things like KLSX with Stern as the anchor. At the "Talkers" and "R&R" talk seminars / conventions those were the subjects in the presentations and what all of us talked about over dinners and drinks afterwards.

I don't disagree with that, but WABC under Boyce was far more influential than you are admitting. All three of those were terrific programmers, particularly Hall & Hobbs. Unfortunately Hobbs decided to homogenize and followed the trend to the right, which was already underway when he was still a regional PD at Jacor.

 

[flybynight]

Pleasing their P1s is their job. Try to understand that.

Not if you needlessly alienate and turn off everyone else! That's just foolish.

 

[TheBigA]

Not if you needlessly alienate and turn off everyone else! That's just foolish.

"Needlessly" is a subjective word. Format radio is built around specific targets. No single format is designed to appeal to everyone. That's why you don't play rap in certain adult contemporary formats. Formats have become increasingly more narrowly focused over the past ten years.

Conservative talk radio has become its own format. It attracts its own very large and passionate audience who are alienated by moderate talk, which is viewed as far left. So you have a choice in who you want to alienate, and the choice was made knowingly, not needlessly.

Tom Taylor wrote an article on this subject in his newsletter today. I'd suggest you read it.

 

[flybynight]

Conservative talk radio has become its own format. It attracts its own very large and passionate audience who are alienated by moderate talk, which is viewed as far left. So you have a choice in who you want to alienate, and the choice was made knowingly, not needlessly.

Far right listeners weren't going anywhere. They already listened to talkradio and are the least likely demo to seek out something new. They had them as locked in as you can have a listener. The only thing talkradio really accomplished by pandering to them even more, was disengaging with anyone left of tea party. THAT was a dumb decision. There were plenty of less-than-tea-party talkradio listeners who had lots of money to spend on advertisers products, and they stuck around through much of the Rush cloning---but the radicalization of the format courtesy of the tea nitwits sealed any hope of keeping those listeners.

 

[TheBigA]

The only thing talkradio really accomplished by pandering to them even more, was disengaging with anyone left of tea party. THAT was a dumb decision.

In your opinion. Your welcome to have that opinion, but doesn't give you the right to call others lazy, short-sighted, or dumb. Grow up.

 

[Rusty Bridges]

I work with a bunch of men and women who are probably between 35 and 45, Maybe a few are over 45, but there isn't ONE of them who listens to AM political talk or news on WBEN, Most of the guys listen to AM sports talk radio, notably WGR and the Edge on FM. They get a lot of the news, weather and traffic from about a dozen sources using smart phones. Regarding the title of this thread, not one of my co-workers listens to 107.7 or 104.7. One guy's a musician. The loading dock guys listen to the Edge or WYRK sometimes, which is kind of strange. Most guys think the bands that are played on alternative radio stations are Nickleback or Maroon 5 wannabees, but as one guy put it, "in a way that's unfair because most bands don't suck that bad. The new bands and groups just are not really interesting and chances are nobody will know them or miss them in three years. They could be out here working with us on the loading dock."

 

[flybynight]

In your opinion. Your welcome to have that opinion, but doesn't give you the right to call others lazy, short-sighted, or dumb. Grow up.

What if they ARE a combination of lazy, shortsighted and dumb? It's your opinion that they weren't. I disagree. My experience in the trenches (ever been there?) tells me otherwise.

And grownups don't always have to have the last word. I'm awaiting your predictable last word..

 

[flybynight]

I work with a bunch of men and women who are probably between 35 and 45, Maybe a few are over 45, but there isn't ONE of them who listens to AM political talk or news on WBEN

Why would they? It's insultingly stupid, rife with misinformation and outright falsehoods. Having a legit back-and-forth over an issue is one thing, but having an alternate set of regularly made-up "facts" is insultingly stupid to anyone with a shred of intelligence. Remeber: We're talking about a crowd who still mostly believes Obama was born in Kenya and is a Muslim.

For pandering to that crowd, in that way, the format really deserves to go out of business.

 

[davideduardo]

WRONG. Many programmers paid attention to WABC because it was WABC and in the #1 market. I'm not guessing this. I know it to be true.

I never got that impression, and was never particularly impressed with WABC when I was in New York and had a chance to listen. It just wasn't very exciting and was rather predictable. And before you say that such stations are all predictable to some extent, then you did not listen much to KFI or KGO or even stations like WLW and KOA.

WRONG again. Mainelli left in March of '95. Boyce started in April. I actually had conversations with both gentlemen at the time of the transition.

That's exactly what I was referring to. Summer and Fall were the result of what Mainelli did, not what Boyce would do. They are the final testament to his achievements as PD were. There is nothing that Boyce could have done on such short notice, save running the honking of geese all day, that would have changed the basic use of the WABC that Mainelli created.

In any case, I posted the Winter and Spring numbers,which are not much different.

I don't disagree with that, but WABC under Boyce was far more influential than you are admitting.

Maybe you were blinded by proximity. I did not sense that WABC was much discussed at the various talk conventions and seminars during that time.

All three of those were terrific programmers, particularly Hall & Hobbs.

For sheer staying power, Swanson was my hero of the era. It was the one station I'd recommend my crew listen to, and Ronn Owens was the one talent I would point out.

Unfortunately Hobbs decided to homogenize and followed the trend to the right, which was already underway when he was still a regional PD at Jacor.

No, Hobbs tried to modernize. My favorite was how he got the WFLA talents to refer to senior women who called as "another blue haired lady..." in and effort to make the pre-geezer crowd realize the station was for them, not the Senior Specials and Denny's crowd.

 

[Element9]

No, Hobbs tried to modernize. My favorite was how he got the WFLA talents to refer to senior women who called as "another blue haired lady..." in and effort to make the pre-geezer crowd realize the station was for them, not the Senior Specials and Denny's crowd.

Isn't that precious: the pre-geezer crowd of the early and mid-90s is now the geezer crowd. After all, it is 25 years later, it is AM talk radio, it is south Florida. Gray, blue haired, bald, sagging and bulging awaits even the hippest news-talk PDs. And WFLA wasn't really hip. It just thought it was, and the talk radio mavens bought in. KFI and KGO were unique, but not so much as we'd want people to believe. They were still selling tens pounds of horse shit, but the bag was more colorful, recyclable and had handles.

 

[tbolt909]

The Alternative format on 107.7 was Entercoms reaction to the
failed WBEN FM simulcast. The WBEN simulcast didn't "buy them time"
on a dying format. Their ratings declined WITH a second signal.
The cluster was desperate to "get younger".

Alternative is theoretically supposed to get them younger demos.
It's another flawed strategy that's not working in Buffalo.
Fly By Night is correct that many potential listeners have
been disenfranchised by stale Rock and Talk formats.

The Lake format had the flexibility to mix in Classic Alternative, Rock
and AAA that would reach 25-60 year olds who still use Radio.
Buffalo demographics are not the same as Portland or Seattle.
The evidence bears that out...

 

[dand5780]

I work with a bunch of men and women who are probably between 35 and 45, Maybe a few are over 45, but there isn't ONE of them who listens to AM political talk or news on WBEN, Most of the guys listen to AM sports talk radio, notably WGR and the Edge on FM. They get a lot of the news, weather and traffic from about a dozen sources using smart phones. Regarding the title of this thread, not one of my co-workers listens to 107.7 or 104.7. One guy's a musician. The loading dock guys listen to the Edge or WYRK sometimes, which is kind of strange. Most guys think the bands that are played on alternative radio stations are Nickleback or Maroon 5 wannabees, but as one guy put it, "in a way that's unfair because most bands don't suck that bad. The new bands and groups just are not really interesting and chances are nobody will know them or miss them in three years. They could be out here working with us on the loading dock."

I'm younger than 35 and listen to, as you call it, AM political talk or news on WBEN, along with the MANY other talk shows on that station that are not political. I probably wouldn't listen to it at work, unless there was something I know I needed to hear. If someone had WBFO on, I might start playing WBEN. I don't know, I'm too busy working anyway. Music is different, you can hear the music and not need to think about it. WBEN is a learning experience. You hear hosts and callers stating facts and then providing an explanation regarding the important news of the day.

Alt 107.7 is advertising a "Kerfuffle," whatever that is. They play some music during this ad, which, I wouldn't exactly consider to be Alternative music myself. I'm not on FM too often but when I am, I don't go to 107.7 anymore now that the news is off of there. But when I did, it didn't sound like what they had played in the ad. Maybe their low numbers are due to mass confusion? Similar to WECK when I hear Michael Buble?

 

[flybynight]

WBEN is a learning experience. You hear hosts and callers stating facts and then providing an explanation regarding the important news of the day.

Please tell me you don't really mean that. There is so much intentional misinformation disseminated by those local talk shows that you need to take everything with a grain of salt. They are not interested in being honest, they are interested in telling hardcore ideologue listeners the spin they want to hear...and sometimes you have to cut the corners off the facts to make them fit in those round holes.