-
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
Boston Radio Ratings January 2019
- Thread starter freqlost
- Start date
Including the two sports stations. I'm surprised a format that skews so heavily male would have lost so many listeners to Christmas music in December.
Who do men spend a lot of time with? Women. What do women like during the holidays? Men aren't always the master of their domain.
OK, so when I say what i'm going to say, y'all are going to tell me that these numbers are only 6+ and have little significance, but here goes:
'RKO has dropped to, what, 16th place; well, yeah, they killed their Morning Show, put Kuhner back in AM drive, and gave VB his own midday gig. Nice. But hey - these are only the 6+ numbers, and outsiders like me can't possibly know what the real picture is. Fine. So then I don't put any stock in *ISS 108's being no. 1, either; after all, these are just the 6+ results - right?
'RKO has dropped to, what, 16th place; well, yeah, they killed their Morning Show, put Kuhner back in AM drive, and gave VB his own midday gig. Nice. But hey - these are only the 6+ numbers, and outsiders like me can't possibly know what the real picture is. Fine. So then I don't put any stock in *ISS 108's being no. 1, either; after all, these are just the 6+ results - right?
Right. I don't get your point. The pros are consistent on this point: the 6+ numbers are put out for public consumption because they have no real value to the broadcasting companies or their advertisers. Kiss being No. 1 in 6+ and WRKO 16th certainly means more people are listening to the former than to the latter. But if WRKO's advertisers are willing to pay more money than a station with a low overall number would normally expect in order to reach the sort of people who enjoy conservative talk radio than WXRV's advertisers are to reach an alternative rock audience, then WRKO would be happier with its bottom-line performance than WXRV would be with its.
Chances are WXKS-FM is doing just fine with its advertisers -- almost certainly better than WRKO -- but that doesn't automatically mean it's billing better than WBZ-FM or WMJX. That's where the insiders, who pay to have this information, will always have an advantage over the outsiders, who are merely users of a free service.
On the other hand, there was a very nice full point increase by WBZ-AM. In fact, both WBZ and WBUR saw nice increases.
So perhaps real news is winning over opinion.
This is Boston, remember? Right-wing talk has always been weak in that market.
I was mainly comparing the last four ratings books, noting the drop for WRKO and the rise for WBZ, both owned by iHeart.
Dan Rea seen as conservative though.Howie has survived for over 25 years and has a big regional network. Maybe a dip in ratings though.
WXKS (-FM...) #1..happy 40th anniversary.Their AM station (1200) simply clearing Premiere. If not I suppose they could bring back what they had in their 1430 days-- Music Of Your Life...
WXKS (-FM...) #1..happy 40th anniversary.Their AM station (1200) simply clearing Premiere. If not I suppose they could bring back what they had in their 1430 days-- Music Of Your Life...
Really? The city of Ted, Janet, Burns, Williams, Howie, Brudnoy, Glick, Severin? Always been weak?
Williams was more a libertarian than a conservative, as was Burns. Glick was a comedian doing a talk show. Except for Severin, none of the others came close to the Limbaugh/Beck/Hannity take-no-prisoners attitude on national politics; the liberal listener always felt he was being talked to as someone with a different opinion, not a mental defective who shouldn't be allowed to breed. I put Carr in a category all his own since his specialty is Boston politics, a different animal altogether from Trump-centered circus that dominates national political talk.
They were all right of center. Low tax, small government, etc. And they all did well in Boston.
You mean like RandiRhodes/EdSHultz/BernieWard/TomHartmann/StephanieMiller kinder/gentler style of conversation? ;-)
The only one of those I've ever listened to for an extended period was Schultz, and he was every bit as take-no-prisoners as the trio I mentioned. I admit to leaning left politically, but urgent and mean-spirited doesn't do it for me on either either end of the spectrum.
The right-wingers have always had a better grasp on showmanship than their leftist counterparts, which is why I'll give Rush a listen every so often, but truth be told, I'm not a fan of being told how to think by either side and would much rather hear talk on nonpolitical topics, which can be found only on NPR in these parts -- although it's hard for NPR's hosts to keep politics from seeping into any interview they do, no matter whom the interviewee may be. All the more reason to welcome the imminent return of baseball play-by-play!
By the way, I was complimenting Brudnoy and the others for their civil approach and didn't mention any liberal hosts for the very reason stated above -- I don't want to be lectured to, especially not by someone who is only trying to reinforce what I already largely believe. I listen to spoken-word radio in the hope of either being entertained, learning something new, or hearing different opinions. Let those in need of reassurance goose-step to the strident cadences of their own hate-spewing, fact-bending Goebbels surrogate, be he/she on the far right or far left.
Last edited:
WCVB probably considered Jerry Williams to be at least slightly left of center:
who
who
When Williams was primarily defined by his opposition to the Vietnam war, I suppose people saw him as left-leaning.
One of his most famous stands -- his opposition to a mandatory seat belt law that led to its temporary elimination at referendum before being reinstated a few years later -- was pure libertarian. Avi Nelson was a conservative, 100 percent. Williams was a lot tougher to pigeonhole, which is why he was a more interesting host to a broad-based audience.
I wouldn't say "pure libertarian". Small government and warning about the overreach of government is a conservative value.
It is certainly worth considering what conservatism and libertarianism, broadly defined, have in common.
First, each fears the massive enlargement of the modern nation-state, seeing in it the rise of Leviathan.
Second, each supports—to varying degrees—the free will of the individual person.
Third, each desires real community to be organic, necessary, and voluntary.
Fourth, traditionally, each has supported liberal arts education and the Great Books/Great Ideas of the West.
Of the things that connect the two movements, the final points is the most contentious. Most libertarians in the modern world have neglected the importance of the liberal arts, while a strong number of conservatives have come to embrace war as a necessity in the chaos of the world.
- Status