Liz Mantel Joins The Wolf Buffalo - RadioInsight
radioinsight.com
Liz Mantel will join as morning host at The Wolf.
-
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
Liz Mantel Joins The Wolf Buffalo
- Thread starter Y2kTheNewOldies
- Start date
Liz Mantel will join as morning host at The Wolf.
Does the lack of posts here suggest that in spite of Liz being the lead on the WOLF morning show she is likely going to be a non-factor? This, even after being a co-host with Clay Moden on the highly popular WYRK morning show. I know I never heard of her. Guess I'm not alone.
No, we've been discussing this at length in the other thread about The Wolf.
In the meantime, the PD at Liz's former station, WYRK, is leaving at the end of the month, and there's also a thread about that.
The fact is that even though it's perennially a market leader, WYRK gets a 9 share in Buffalo. Which means 91% don't listen.
I too have long subscribed to this ↑ theory. ("You pulled a ten share. Wonderful! What about the other 90 shares?")
But it's not so much that "91% don't listen" as it is 91% of the slices of the AQH pie are going to other radio stations. 91% don't listen long enough or as consistently enough to accumulate credit per Nielsen's metrics. Cume may be an entirely different matter. And it's always interesting to note which stations share audience, and how that sharing pans out.
Just a guess, but if we were to sample 100 randomly selected men and women between the ages of 25 and 54 in Erie and Niagara counties, a substantial number, certainly more than 9%, would credit WYRK as "the radio station in Buffalo that plays country music." Same thing for 97 Rock being "the radio station in Buffalo that plays classic rock." Legacies.
But would they be able to name the morning show host? That was the context of my post.
Nobody cares. Bring back The Lake.
Feh! Bring back WUWU.
Last edited:
Not necessarily if they don't listen to those stations (or Radio in general). The "legacy" stations that you mention have their base, but no real growth. Based on the current ratings for The Wolf, over 99 percent of the population isn't listening to it. The majority of the people who listen to any station probably cannot name the morning hosts...
There are no "current ratings" for The Wolf yet. The station flipped in July, and Nielson diary for Buffalo works on a three month average. So there won't be actual numbers for The Wolf until October.
True enough. They inherit the ashes of the 0.7 that Alternative left behind. Don't expect any change...
There was a concerted effort by consultants and corporate programmers (often former consultants) to "focus on the format" and devalue talent because "building up a talent might mean that they'll take listeners with them if they leave. They'll also want more money." It really began in the '80s. The typical exception to that thinking was the morning show because it set the dial for the day for a lot of listeners. Consultants told GMs (today's "market managers") "It's my format, not the jocks who bring in listeners." GMs and PDs signed on. If the consultants were right, they'd save money and not have to worry about a popular personality making demands, leaving for a competitor, or disturbing ratings if they moved on or out of broadcasting. If the consultant was wrong, the consultant got blamed and thrown under the bus instead of the PD and/or GM and they moved on to a new consultant.
These days, outside of morning drive, the opportunities for talent to distinguish themselves are generally so limited that people new to a station or to a market have to work hard to separate themselves from the card readers and format jocks. When you add in VT, syndication, "additional duties" for talent, and a woeful lack of radio promotion you get radio that sounds like a satellite or streaming jukebox, but with more commercials.
There are a lot of consultants these days who recognize that radio has to distinguish itself as more than a music delivery system. There needs to be some added value. They recognize they value of personalities who entertain and inform. Even the big consolidators "reward" those air personalities who build an identity, build a following by extending their reach to additional stations through VT and syndication. Of course, that reduces even more the number of opportunities for younger talent to learn their craft and grow a following.
Buffalo has a number of recognizable personalities on the heritage stations here. If you count down the top stations in town, most are manned by people that their listeners recognize. Those people have value. WECK established itself as a station to at least sample by bringing back a bevy of "names" recognized by the people in their target audience. They were people who brought the music that WECK wanted to play to that audience in the first place. Covid came along and most were replaced because it was too dangerous to bring them into the studio and they weren't savvy enough - or willing - to work remotely. Or, that was the excuse to dump salary and replace them with fewer, younger talent who would wear more hats and "do more with less."
The simple fact is that the delivery system isn't what will keep "radio" alive in the future. That WILL change. Stations that survive will be the ones who deliver content that listeners want. Most surveys say that "companionship" is the biggest reason that people listen to radio, not pure music streams. Companies who've realized that "all radio is local" and have served local audiences are the stations who have done best. Some national content fits that bill. Much of it doesn't which is why TSL continues to shrink and cume is slowing seeping away because younger listeners don't have a relationship with 50-year-old CHR jocks telling dad (or mom) jokes.
These days, outside of morning drive, the opportunities for talent to distinguish themselves are generally so limited that people new to a station or to a market have to work hard to separate themselves from the card readers and format jocks. When you add in VT, syndication, "additional duties" for talent, and a woeful lack of radio promotion you get radio that sounds like a satellite or streaming jukebox, but with more commercials.
There are a lot of consultants these days who recognize that radio has to distinguish itself as more than a music delivery system. There needs to be some added value. They recognize they value of personalities who entertain and inform. Even the big consolidators "reward" those air personalities who build an identity, build a following by extending their reach to additional stations through VT and syndication. Of course, that reduces even more the number of opportunities for younger talent to learn their craft and grow a following.
Buffalo has a number of recognizable personalities on the heritage stations here. If you count down the top stations in town, most are manned by people that their listeners recognize. Those people have value. WECK established itself as a station to at least sample by bringing back a bevy of "names" recognized by the people in their target audience. They were people who brought the music that WECK wanted to play to that audience in the first place. Covid came along and most were replaced because it was too dangerous to bring them into the studio and they weren't savvy enough - or willing - to work remotely. Or, that was the excuse to dump salary and replace them with fewer, younger talent who would wear more hats and "do more with less."
The simple fact is that the delivery system isn't what will keep "radio" alive in the future. That WILL change. Stations that survive will be the ones who deliver content that listeners want. Most surveys say that "companionship" is the biggest reason that people listen to radio, not pure music streams. Companies who've realized that "all radio is local" and have served local audiences are the stations who have done best. Some national content fits that bill. Much of it doesn't which is why TSL continues to shrink and cume is slowing seeping away because younger listeners don't have a relationship with 50-year-old CHR jocks telling dad (or mom) jokes.
This is what they call in the political world a conspiracy theory. As with typical conspiracy theories, there are no actual facts or attributions linked. Just a lot of opinion. I find it ironic that at the same time the above alleged conspiracy between consultants and programmers took place, we saw the rise of several radio major talents who would define the platform for their generation.
If there was listener demand for on air radio talent, we'd see that demand satisfied in all of the new platforms that have come along in the last 20 years. Name all the big DJs that have been developed by Pandora, Spotify, Apple Music, and even Sirius. Name all the big names who are stealing listeners away from broadcast radio. BTW it's not because they haven't tried. All of the digital services offer curated and hosted programs on their platform. They just haven't attracted the listeners that on-air radio gets.
This has nothing to do with consultants and radio programmers. It has everything to do with the audience. We have moved from a top-down world, where radio stations and programmers provide content for listeners, to a world build around user-generated content. This message board is one example. TikTok, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and all of the other places people go are all built around user-generated content. The non-professionals who create this content have built up their own fan bases, the way music stars do. They're the ones stealing audience from broadcast radio. That's where talent creation is taking place, The talent on social media isn't restricted to morning drive. They exist ON DEMAND. You can see these people all day and all night. THIS is what broadcast radio competes with. And the best part is that all these people who create user-generated content don't work for big corporations or get salaries & benefits. They're all self-employed. Most do it for free or for a portion of the YouTube revenue generated by their content. Who are they? You've probably never heard of any of them. They don't exist in a traditional media world. But they're attracting an audience and they're doing it their way.
It's a whole new world. If you're really talented and can attract an audience, you don't need a big corporate programmer to hire you. You just do it. Put it on YouTube or start your own podcast. Sell yourself. Keep your profits. Say whatever you want, regardless of FCC rules or consultant limitations. But it requires real talent and a certain amount of risk. Most people don't want to take a risk on themselves. So they send resumes to corporate radio looking for a job. But if they really have talent and can attract an audience, they don't need consultants or corporate programmers any more. Just take their talent directly to the people. That's what radio and in fact media is all about in the 21st century.
You've heard of podcasting, right? In effect, that's listener demand for on-air talent in multiple formats. There are plenty of music-based podcasts that do well. When you talk about TikTok and YouTube you reinforce the point that people seek out individual personalities who have found a platform that's NOT as restrictive as radio, where they can express themselves and build an audience. Have you noticed the lack of young people who want to get into radio, or stay there once they find out what it's really like these days? The only exception is sports broadcasting where people get to develop a personality and create passionate followers. What you're advocating is simply bypassing radio which will lead to the death of radio and radio companies. Why be a liner-card reader for paltry pay when you can build your own audience while you make more money at a "job" while you try to build a career? How much support does radio give new talent these days? It's more like an abusive relationship at most stations.
You talk about "undocumented conspiracies." You apparently weren't in the room the in '80s and '90s. That era redefined radio into the bland pap we have today. Since then technology made voice-tracking and syndication easier and cheaper. It's not that there's so much demand for "big market talent" in multiple markets. There has been a major demand for cost reduction because of bad fiscal management and an ongoing cycle of consolidation and bankruptcy. Both have hurt radio as a medium.
I agree with all that. The difference between all of those platforms and radio is Nielsen. If radio didn't have to deliver Nielsen ratings to advertisers, it would be much better. But that means that listeners, not advertisers, would have to support radio. That's why public radio doesn't care if its audience is over 50. That's why you see AAA and classical music on public radio stations and not commercial.
BTW there are "music based" podcasts, but because of restrictive royalty laws, they typically don't actually play any music. They just have hosts and guests talking about the music. And if you saw actual usage statistics about those podcasts, it would show you that a lot of listeners only stick around for a short time, and then tune out. Not unlike broadcast radio. But because the users subscribe to the podcast, it gets credit for a download, and the pre-roll commercial still is heard by all users.
No, the other exception is TALK radio, where people tune in to hear talk from a personality. That's where a lot of the heritage personalities from the past went. You want to hear personalities talk? There's an entire format for that. You want to hear music? Then you should be able to hear music without interruption.
No, what I'm advocating, and what most big radio companies are doing, is diversifying. The ratings show that people want less talk and more music on their music stations. But those same radio companies are deep into podcasting and online content. What I'm advocating is move the personality content where it isn't forced to be judged by Nielsen.
And yet at that exact same time, you had the explosion of Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh, paid millions of dollars by the same companies you claim created this conspiracy to kill off high priced talent. If they wanted to kill talent, why did they support Rush and Howard? If Cumulus is so anti-talent, why do they continue to pay for Shredd & Ragan? Because they deliver ratings. And because they can use that same talent for podcasts and other online platforms.
Exactly. It means everyone can do radio. In a world built around user-generated content, radio is the perfect thing for people to do in their homes. No need for million dollar studios or FCC licenses. Just buy a personal computer, a mic and a pre-amp. You're in business. And because of the world wide web, you're not forced to exist in the confines of your city. You can be heard everywhere! If you're talent, that's what you want. Every local talk show host would LOVE to be national. With podcasting, they can. So that's the world we live in now. You see it as restrictive, and I see the opportunities as endless. Depends on your point of view.
Meanwhile, getting back on topic, it's been a week, and we still don't see Liz Mantel on The Wolf's website. Go to their social media, and the only host who gets a mention is Scotty Kay, but he's based in Chicago, not Buffalo. Wake up Audacy! You hired a local host, she's in your building, and you need to promote her.
107.7 is extremely low priority for Audacy. They have given up on that signal. It's a bit odd that they even bothered hiring someone.
They just recently terminated the afternoon guy at the CHR station. I guess they need a few local bodies to do some of the clerical chores...
I'm not talking about the signal. I'm talking about digital. The digital guy is asleep.
If I sent a note to his boss, bet it would wake him up.
The digital guy has higher priority stations to deal with first. The Wolf in Buffalo is near the bottom for the "things to do" list. With every station running lean, don't expect attention to details...
How would you know?
I guess the digital guy woke up. Liz Mantel is listed on the website with a picture too!
- Status