Could the election results shift talk radio's approach?

[Delete My Account]

Hopefully, we can keep this discussion non-partisan and focused on the radio aspect.

My question is, given that most talk radio in the present day seems to support the incoming party/administration, and talk radio often seems to be more entertaining and successful being the opposition, is there much of a chance that some talkers will see value in either broadening the ideological spectrum offered on their stations, or even shifting to more "non political" shows?

KMBZ in Kansas City is highly successful with shows that for the most part, do not talk partisan politics. It's highly local and lifestyle. Real Radio in Orlando's done it for years.

How entertaining is it going to be when a majority pro-Trump format's party has control of all three branches of government? You can either shift topics and tone, or continue to do beltway baseball play by play. The latter isn't highly interesting to your average listener who just votes on pocketbook issues.

 

[kevtronics]

Just like in 2017-2018, there will still be plenty of opportunity to blame everything on the Democrats, even when they're no longer in power.

 

[Mediafrog+]

Just like in 2017-2018, there will still be plenty of opportunity to blame everything on the Democrats, even when they're no longer in power.

Exactly. One of the defining features of the MAGA movement is complete and unquestioned fealty to Trump and his agenda. I look for even sharper knives to come out with increased vitriol aimed at anyone or anything MAGA regards as being in its way. Much of this will turn quite ugly, perhaps deadly.

Having said that, we should also keep an eye on how the Democratic Party reshapes itself after a crushing defeat. Many have suggested the party needs to dump its associations with celebrities and intellectual types (the “elites”) and focus full bore on working class, blue collar voters. This could result in a total change in messaging, emphasizing wealth inequality, warnings about the increasingly corrosive power of billionaires and huge corporations at the expense of those further down the economic scale, large-scale loss of jobs due to AI, and runaway inflation caused by debt-fueled MAGA economics. This could be the basis of a new type of populist talk radio, this time coming from the political left.

Regardless of all that, AM radio will continue its decline. Social media and podcasts seem to be where the real action has gone.

 

[Hyrum]

You are looking at it wrong. It isn't about the team. It is about the humor. Rush Limbaugh wasn't the best because of the team he supported. He was the best because he saw humor in the stupidity of politics. He once talked about fair taxes and how everyone should pay fairly. He said if poor people didn't have money to pay, their TV should be sold and proceeds given to the government. (or something like that...it was decades ago). The funny part was the callers calling to explain the ways that would not be fair, was morally wrong, and the seriousness at which they took the obviously outrageous statement. Talk America failed because it lacked humor. Regardless of the team you support, the right team seems to be able to have a sense of humor

 

[Mediafrog+]

Talk America failed because it lacked humor. Regardless of the team you support, the right team seems to be able to have a sense of humor

You are right about the humor aspect. The main problem with left-wing talk is that it tends to be pedantic and boring. Conservative talk, at least in its early years, was full of snark and sarcasm, with a zeal for pointing out the ironies and inconsistencies of the other end of the political spectrum. It has become increasingly nasty and vitriolic since then, but humor was a key component in its early success.

 

[radiofan2023]

Talk America failed because it lacked humor. Regardless of the team you support, the right team seems to be able to have a sense of humor

Air America had Al Franken, who on his worst day is and was 10 times funnier than Rush. The only funny part of Rush's show was the parody songs and he didn't even do those. Bill Handel is (sort of) conservative and he's funny.

 

[Hyrum]

Air America had Al Franken, who on his worst day is and was 10 times funnier than Rush. The only funny part of Rush's show was the parody songs and he didn't even do those. Bill Handel is (sort of) conservative and he's funny.

I agree about Bill Handel. Al Franken was about as funny as a guy pretending to feel up a sleeping woman in an airplane

 

[Hyrum]

Yawn. As I said, it's humor that makes it listenable

 

[CTListener]

Yawn. As I said, it's humor that makes it listenable

The British found their homegrown far right-winger, William Joyce, who moved to Germany and broadcast propaganda for the Nazis, so humorous that they nicknamed him Lord Haw Haw.

 

[Mediafrog+]

The British found their homegrown far right-winger, William Joyce, who moved to Germany and broadcast propaganda for the Nazis, so humorous that they nicknamed him Lord Haw Haw.

The British also hanged him for treason.

 

[TheBigA]

It isn't about the team. It is about the humor. Rush Limbaugh wasn't the best because of the team he supported. He was the best because he saw humor in the stupidity of politics.

I wish you were right, but the current crop of hosts aren't entertainers like Rush. His background was as a DJ. Same with other departed talk hosts like Imus. This current generation is mainly made up of ideologues. Especially the ones on Cumulus. They're exactly what made Air America so ponderous. They have NO sense of humor, no creativity, just a lot of anger that needs to be aimed somewhere.

However, I love the OP's question, because I think we're at a point where talk radio COULD shift it's approach towards a broader viewpoint. I just think it takes a new crop of hosts who aren't so single-minded and so angry. There's some good local talk being done that isn't strictly about politics. I'd like to see more of those people hosting the national shows. Clay Travis has background as a sports talk host, so I think he might have potential if he broadens his view. Not sure how funny he is though.

 

[Larry]

Ironically if it was real conservative talk they’d be railing against increasing budget deficits, isolationism and urging following the Constutution. But this isn’t your parents or grandparents R party.

 

[Syfy]

Hopefully, we can keep this discussion non-partisan and focused on the radio aspect.

My question is, given that most talk radio in the present day seems to support the incoming party/administration, and talk radio often seems to be more entertaining and successful being the opposition, is there much of a chance that some talkers will see value in either broadening the ideological spectrum offered on their stations, or even shifting to more "non political" shows?

KMBZ in Kansas City is highly successful with shows that for the most part, do not talk partisan politics. It's highly local and lifestyle. Real Radio in Orlando's done it for years.

How entertaining is it going to be when a majority pro-Trump format's party has control of all three branches of government? You can either shift topics and tone, or continue to do beltway baseball play by play. The latter isn't highly interesting to your average listener who just votes on pocketbook issues.

Conservative talk radio and Fox News is gonna lose a lot of its audience because most people tuned in because they enjoyed being angry at the Biden administration….. they can’t complain about that any more on talk radio.. honestly I think a lot of hosts are either gonna leave or do a new type of show altogether..

 

[boombox4]

It will remain the same. It did last time Trump was in office. Democrats will still come up with plenty of fuel for critical commentary by conservative talk hosts. They always have. It's happening now. Just as everything Trump or the GOP do will be criticized in left leaning podcasts.

That's the nature of politics.

 

[boombox4]

Conservative talk radio and Fox News is gonna lose a lot of its audience because most people tuned in because they enjoyed being angry at the Biden administration….. they can’t complain about that any more on talk radio.. honestly I think a lot of hosts are either gonna leave or do a new type of show altogether..

They didn't leave the last time Trump was in office. They won't now, unless it's just to embrace podcasts instead of radio, which has been a trend since before Trump got into office the first time.

 

[Syfy]

They didn't leave the last time Trump was in office. They won't now, unless it's just to embrace podcasts instead of radio, which has been a trend since before Trump got into office the first time.

Ok they will still lose a large portion of the audience….. additionally there already has been some local conservative station hosts announce they were leaving on some local stations and it’s not even been 2 full weeks…. There also won’t be another rush Limbaugh arise during trumps reign because that’s almost impossible to have that sort of success on conservative talk radio under a republican president so as I pointed out conservative talk will continue to decline under trump.

 

[Hyrum]

They didn't leave the last time Trump was in office. They won't now, unless it's just to embrace podcasts instead of radio, which has been a trend since before Trump got into office the first time.

I agree that a number of people stayed on the air through the election and now are ready to move on. I Heart cleaned house coast to coast after the election and hosts left behind who are not near retirement age (and financial ability to retire) can see the writing on the wall. Revenue decline means that there is little financial future in radio. I wonder how successful the podcast market will be once everyone on the air has a podcast and the 30 billion choices available turns to 30 trillion. I just don't see how it can be monetized well enough to make it worth while below the top tier few. I see it much like the internet radio stations where a radio wannabe starts playing records, and his 12 friends tell him how great he sounds. That's a hobby and not a sustainable income. I equate it to acting. 100 actors tryout. One gets the part and the rest go back to the restaurant to serve dinner to the rush hour diners. Good luck to them all. The very best will make that hard to make money on the internet. The second best will accept an offer by a network radio syndicator at a reasonable salary and we'll hear them on the surviving talk stations. I see more of the same for the immediate future.

 

[TheBigA]

I Heart cleaned house coast to coast after the election and hosts left behind who are not near retirement age (and financial ability to retire) can see the writing on the wall.

It depends on the station. In some stations, they left all the local talk shows in place, and fired the news staff or other staff. In no cases did they change the formats of the stations or the content of the talk shows. Conservative talk is still the format. They may have replaced the local hosts with national shows, but the basic approach remains the same. And if you don't like iHeart talk stations, there are talk stations from Cumulus, Audacy, and NPR that were unaffected.

 

[boombox4]

I agree that a number of people stayed on the air through the election and now are ready to move on. I Heart cleaned house coast to coast after the election and hosts left behind who are not near retirement age (and financial ability to retire) can see the writing on the wall. Revenue decline means that there is little financial future in radio. I wonder how successful the podcast market will be once everyone on the air has a podcast and the 30 billion choices available turns to 30 trillion. I just don't see how it can be monetized well enough to make it worth while below the top tier few. I see it much like the internet radio stations where a radio wannabe starts playing records, and his 12 friends tell him how great he sounds. That's a hobby and not a sustainable income. I equate it to acting. 100 actors tryout. One gets the part and the rest go back to the restaurant to serve dinner to the rush hour diners. Good luck to them all. The very best will make that hard to make money on the internet. The second best will accept an offer by a network radio syndicator at a reasonable salary and we'll hear them on the surviving talk stations. I see more of the same for the immediate future.

Agreed, mostly. What you've described is the general nature of internet content creation and marketing. The competition is vast, and visibility is key to having a door to success, and adequate visibility is hard to come by for the average content creator. And that's what a lot of radio and TV has become -- internet content. News also.

 

[boombox4]

Ok they will still lose a large portion of the audience….. additionally there already has been some local conservative station hosts announce they were leaving on some local stations and it’s not even been 2 full weeks…. There also won’t be another rush Limbaugh arise during trumps reign because that’s almost impossible to have that sort of success on conservative talk radio under a republican president so as I pointed out conservative talk will continue to decline under trump.

If it's declining it's not due to the politics, and neither would it be due to whether a host is funny or not.... None of the big name podcasters I've seen (Rogan, Pakman, Democracy Now's podcast, Young Turks, Shawn Ryan, Tucker Carlson, Russell Brand, the Liberal Redneck guy I've seen posted a few times here and there -- etc.) are particularly funny. And that may be because politics itself isn't really funny anymore. There's no real humor in it like there used to be. Newspapers would have political cartoons that would make you laugh even if they were poking fun at your own party or politician, but they were actually funny. Of course, those don't exist much anymore, and the online version is hard to find.

A lot of the seriousness in political talk is probably because much of the public takes it so seriously when compared to the 1980s or 70s, or even the 90s..

Rush was a one time thing, really. And he became 'national' under a GOP president, Bush1. So relating current hosts now to Rush's success in 1990 is difficult to do because the times have changed, politics itself has changed, news cycles have changed, and media has changed. Not many, if any, of Rush's imitators even back in the 90's and 00's had humor as part of their schtick. I remember hearing some of them. Ken Hamlin, Oliver North, Michael Reagan, Gordon Liddy -- there were a bunch of them. None of them were light hearted or funny. The Air America hosts I listened to daily on local station KPTK 1090 weren't exactly light hearted or funny. Stephanie Miller tried to be funny, but it didn't come across terrific, but she did try.

So even back then it wasn't a necessary part of talk radio. Being personable, the kind of host you wouldn't mind having a beer with -- probably helps, and too many hosts don't have that sort of persona unfortunately. With too many of them it's all the agenda, agenda, agenda....

The concept of a talk host not screaming at you and maybe injecting some humor is an appealing idea, because politics is so heavy these days, but I'm not sure if it would necessarily fly. Dennis Miller, the comedian (?), had a nighttime talk show about 10 years ago and it didn't really last too long. I'm not sure what sort of ratings he got.

If talk radio is declining it's 'cause the audience is drifting online, headed for short form or long form podcasts. This migration isn't just affecting talk radio, it's affecting TV, too. Trump probably reached more people on Joe Rogan than he would have reached on Cable or even network TV.