• 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

aar SWITCHING TO OLDIES

FightingIrish said:
AAR is fortunate to be rid of KOMY. The owner is nuts.

Quite frankly, AAR should have stepped in and pulled the programming off the station themselves long ago.

http://ltradio.blogspot.com/2007/01/komy-finally-pulls-plug.html#comments
Click to expand...

nice hit piece on the Zwerlings, FI. ::)

Talk about irony. You call them the 'nuts' for apologising on air about ridiculous 9-11 comments broadcast by Peter Werbe in October, 2001, and for condemning the Afghan war before the first bomb even fell. This guy is not the modicum of reason: he is another one of those 'Bush did 9-11' loonies.
http://www.peterwerbe.com/911.htm

I don't know if you recall late September and early October, 2001, but immediately jumping to the conclusion that Bush was complicit in the 9-11 tragedies and speaking out against going to war in Afghanistan was not very popular, IIRC. Seems to me only one member of Congress voted against the use of force back then, right? Well, the FACT is that's exactly what Werbe did, and the Zwerlings were in the right to apologise and yank his show off thier station. Oh well. Crazy like a Fox.

You will not accept it, but the guy said the decision was business related, like him also pulling the plug on Savage.

The trend continues:
Clear Channel puts AAR on, they are 'genius' and 'openminded'.
Clear Channel pulls AAR off, they are 'evil' and 'owned by the GOP'
Zwerlings put AAR to get liberal listeners in thier market: good business.
Zwerlings pull AAR due to bad revenue, bad business.

Honestly ::)
 
evnlee said:
FightingIrish said:
AAR is fortunate to be rid of KOMY. The owner is nuts.

Quite frankly, AAR should have stepped in and pulled the programming off the station themselves long ago.

http://ltradio.blogspot.com/2007/01/komy-finally-pulls-plug.html#comments
Click to expand...

nice hit piece on the Zwerlings, FI. ::)

Talk about irony. You call them the 'nuts' for apologising on air about ridiculous 9-11 comments broadcast by Peter Werbe in October, 2001, and for condemning the Afghan war before the first bomb even fell. This guy is not the modicum of reason: he is another one of those 'Bush did 9-11' loonies.
http://www.peterwerbe.com/911.htm

I don't know if you recall late September and early October, 2001, but immediately jumping to the conclusion that Bush was complicit in the 9-11 tragedies and speaking out against going to war in Afghanistan was not very popular, IIRC. Seems to me only one member of Congress voted against the use of force back then, right? Well, the FACT is that's exactly what Werbe did, and the Zwerlings were in the right to apologise and yank his show off thier station. Oh well. Crazy like a Fox.

You will not accept it, but the guy said the decision was business related, like him also pulling the plug on Savage.

The trend continues:
Clear Channel puts AAR on, they are 'genius' and 'openminded'.
Clear Channel pulls AAR off, they are 'evil' and 'owned by the GOP'
Zwerlings put AAR to get liberal listeners in thier market: good business.
Zwerlings pull AAR due to bad revenue, bad business.

Honestly ::)
Click to expand...

Here's an example. Let's say that you have a station. And on that station, you decide to put AAR programming on it. Okay then. A month later you go crying to the local paper, complaining that you can't sell advertising. At the same time, you have virtually no sales staff anyway, and make your own local talk show hosts go out and sell ads for their shows as a condition of staying on the air. Your local hosts are classified as 'freelancers', since making them employees merely costs more money.

You record blistering on-air 'editorials' insulting your listeners, calling them 'hypocrites' and demanding that they send money to the station, or the programming will be pulled. A year later, wash, rinse, repeat. Do the same thing. Threaten once again to pull programming. At the same time, you're really not airing that many AAR shows. In fact, most of the schedule consists of infomercials, reruns of shows from your conservative sister station (which gets horrid ratings, BTW), ridiculous right-wing editorials from the owner, and more infomercials.

Finally, after a year and a half, you finally change formats. To automated oldies.

Now, do you honestly think anyone is going to advertise on that trainwreck? Or even listen to that? Come on!

As for selling advertising, KRXA, in the same market with the same format, has virtually no problem selling ads. I listen to their stream on occasion and always hear local business spots. So if they can do it, why can't KOMY?

As for the 'hitpiece' comment, you of all people should know. Everything you post on this board is a hitpiece. I never see you post anything positive or constructive. Nothing but smarm. Yet you take offense when other people do it. Then again, conservatives have never been known to have thick skins.
 
At the same time, you're really not airing that many AAR shows. In fact, most of the schedule consists of infomercials, reruns of shows from your conservative sister station (which gets horrid ratings, BTW), ridiculous right-wing editorials from the owner, and more infomercials.
Click to expand...

AAR, conservative talk, editorials, and infomercials.

Sounds to me like everything the "fairness doctrine" did and a new one would (ostensibly) do was being done in Santa Cruz.

Hmmmm...
 
FightingIrish said:
evnlee said:
FightingIrish said:
AAR is fortunate to be rid of KOMY. The owner is nuts.

Quite frankly, AAR should have stepped in and pulled the programming off the station themselves long ago.

http://ltradio.blogspot.com/2007/01/komy-finally-pulls-plug.html#comments
Click to expand...

nice hit piece on the Zwerlings, FI. ::)

Talk about irony. You call them the 'nuts' for apologising on air about ridiculous 9-11 comments broadcast by Peter Werbe in October, 2001, and for condemning the Afghan war before the first bomb even fell. This guy is not the modicum of reason: he is another one of those 'Bush did 9-11' loonies.
http://www.peterwerbe.com/911.htm

I don't know if you recall late September and early October, 2001, but immediately jumping to the conclusion that Bush was complicit in the 9-11 tragedies and speaking out against going to war in Afghanistan was not very popular, IIRC. Seems to me only one member of Congress voted against the use of force back then, right? Well, the FACT is that's exactly what Werbe did, and the Zwerlings were in the right to apologise and yank his show off thier station. Oh well. Crazy like a Fox.

You will not accept it, but the guy said the decision was business related, like him also pulling the plug on Savage.

The trend continues:
Clear Channel puts AAR on, they are 'genius' and 'openminded'.
Clear Channel pulls AAR off, they are 'evil' and 'owned by the GOP'
Zwerlings put AAR to get liberal listeners in thier market: good business.
Zwerlings pull AAR due to bad revenue, bad business.

Honestly ::)
Click to expand...

Here's an example. Let's say that you have a station. And on that station, you decide to put AAR programming on it. Okay then. A month later you go crying to the local paper, complaining that you can't sell advertising. At the same time, you have virtually no sales staff anyway, and make your own local talk show hosts go out and sell ads for their shows as a condition of staying on the air. Your local hosts are classified as 'freelancers', since making them employees merely costs more money.

You record blistering on-air 'editorials' insulting your listeners, calling them 'hypocrites' and demanding that they send money to the station, or the programming will be pulled. A year later, wash, rinse, repeat. Do the same thing. Threaten once again to pull programming. At the same time, you're really not airing that many AAR shows. In fact, most of the schedule consists of infomercials, reruns of shows from your conservative sister station (which gets horrid ratings, BTW), ridiculous right-wing editorials from the owner, and more infomercials.

Finally, after a year and a half, you finally change formats. To automated oldies.

Now, do you honestly think anyone is going to advertise on that trainwreck? Or even listen to that? Come on!

As for selling advertising, KRXA, in the same market with the same format, has virtually no problem selling ads. I listen to their stream on occasion and always hear local business spots. So if they can do it, why can't KOMY?

As for the 'hitpiece' comment, you of all people should know. Everything you post on this board is a hitpiece. I never see you post anything positive or constructive. Nothing but smarm. Yet you take offense when other people do it. Then again, conservatives have never been known to have thick skins.
Click to expand...

Yeah, FI, all the posts I put up praising Stephanie Miller fall into your 'hitpiece' category ::)

But as to what you posted: "Now, do you honestly think anyone is going to advertise on that trainwreck? Or even listen to that? Come on!"

Well, according to the Sentinel ( uh-oh , another right wing rag ::)) "Zwerling put Air America on the air as an alternative to the Limbaugh program, which plays on KOMY's sister station KSCO 1080 AM every morning.

Limbaugh is a major moneymaker for the station, Zwerling said.

However, in Santa Cruz, where the vast majority of registered voters are Democrats and voted for Sen. John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election, Zwerling wanted to give listeners a program that better plays to their political beliefs."

Now, I'm wondering what kind of posts FI put up around 2005 praising the business acumen of one Zwerling back then? Especially since his 'horrible' conservative sister station has the #1 billing host in the market. Yeah, crazy like a Fox.

Poor FI. You should have bought more tote bags ;)
 
Of course, the fact that another station (KRXA) is running progressive talk may have been a factor here as well. Perhaps KRXA can get some of the Air America product and grow now that it is alone in the market.

BTW, the Zwerlings are also syndicators of the program "Dead Doctors Don't Lie", in which a veterinarian gives people health advice, and which launched the famous urban legend "The average age at which doctors die is 58 (it's actually in the 70's)."
 
smedge2006 said:
Of course, the fact that another station (KRXA) is running progressive talk may have been a factor here as well. Perhaps KRXA can get some of the Air America product and grow now that it is alone in the market.

BTW, the Zwerlings are also syndicators of the program "Dead Doctors Don't Lie", in which a veterinarian gives people health advice, and which launched the famous urban legend "The average age at which doctors die is 58 (it's actually in the 70's)."
Click to expand...

Ladies and gentlemen~ The Amazing Smedge!

If you haven't seen his act before: when a station owner dumps AAR, The Amazing Smedge jumps through multiple hoops to slander and insult them. The first time I saw his act, on Joe Weber, I finally got him to admit that he didn't have any actual proof that Joe Weber was a neo con, only that he read it on some other 'blogs', and that he once put on a show that was 'kind to Isreal'.

Never mind that the guy is apolitical, runs an 'Arts Format' ( the Georgia voice of the Arts), and even agreed to keep Franken on his station as an olive branch to disenfranchised lefties, since he pulled the majority of AAR programming, the Amazing Smedge went to work. ::)

I know Weber, but I do not personally know Zwerling. But, I'm willing to assume he would put on any program he thought could make $$$. And, I'm sure he would pull any program that was hurting his pocket, like he did with another famous 'quack', Micheal Savage.

Smedge does make a good point: there was competition on the liberal talk front, so that couldn't have been too good for AAR. But, he left out thier main competition, NPR on KUSP.Plus, they also have six noncommercial radio stations (KKUP, KUSP, KSPB, KAZU, KZSC and KHDC). Not bad for the nation's 121st biggest market. Nearly all of thier "noncoms" have local programming, from shows such as KZSC's Closet Free Radio to the kaleidoscope of alternative music shows, to KUSP's Talk of the Bay. ;)
 
I am very sonfused by this thread. The title claims that AAR is switching to oldies, yet the launch post only mentions one single AAR affiliate making a format change.

So what is it? Is the entire Air America Radio network switching to oldies, which would be a big deal, or is it just one small affiliate in a tiny little market switching, which is about as "ho-hum" a non-topic as I can imagine?
 
Radio_Realist said:
I am very sonfused by this thread. The title claims that AAR is switching to oldies, yet the launch post only mentions one single AAR affiliate making a format change.

So what is it? Is the entire Air America Radio network switching to oldies, which would be a big deal, or is it just one small affiliate in a tiny little market switching, which is about as "ho-hum" a non-topic as I can imagine?
Click to expand...

well, actually I would have responded to the " Clear Channel flips prog talk to oldies' thread from some time ago, but I did not want to post incorrectly ;)

Methinks the story here is a guy who has a liberal market, really wanted to try to sell to them, and the market chose not to spend thier $$$ there..The surrounding bread and circuses about thier downfall, and thier apologists protestations, only fuels my Schadenfreude.
 
Well, the history of this station's owner is well-documented. He's not exactly the poster child for good radio ownership.

Yes, he does well with Rush on KSCO. You could hardly not do well with Rush, even in "liberal Santa Cruz" - he's the gold-standard brand name in conservative talk, and the format itself has done well in "enemy territory".

But to not mention the competitive liberal talk situation, and say "liberal talk died in liberal Santa Cruz", is disingenous. KRXA is not exactly burning up the 12-plus numbers last I saw, but it's still there and apparently making enough money to hang in...and is run about 20 times more professionally than KOMY or KSCO.

The "freelance hosts" thing has been accurate for KSCO/KOMY in the past. Heck, even the guy known as "The Radio Equalizer", Brian Maloney, started his career this way on KSCO - before moving to larger markets. He's well aware of Mr. Zwerling's history and, umm, quirks, and for whatever reason does not mention this when he covers the station. (That "whatever reason" could just be that he's being charitable, or wishes to avoid lawsuits from Santa Cruz.)

I don't believe KSCO still does many of the host-owned-sold/brokered shows anymore. The morning drive news is in-house with paid staff.

The story in Santa Cruz may be two fold - the, umm, odd ownership and its mishandling of the format, and the competitive liberal talk situation. But that last part could be deeper than KRXA.

Simply put, Santa Cruz may not have ROOM for commercial liberal talk, with much of the potential listener community tied up in public and community stations. The AAR offerings on KOMY may have been too "bland" for the listener base in question, and the commercial stuff on KRXA may be too "commercial".
 
Simply put, Santa Cruz may not have ROOM for commercial liberal talk,

As I've said in other threads, I've seen plenty of market research and focus group studies that all say the same thing: Very, very few people who vote liberal want to listen to liberal talk radio. So almost any time anyone says that a given market is "good for liberal talk radio because the majority there vote liberal", they are probably wrong.

If you want liberal talk radio to succeed, you need a market where there are lots of people who want to listen to liberal talk radio. That's a very different thing from a market where there are lots of people who vote liberal.
 
OhioMediaWatch said:
Well, the history of this station's owner is well-documented. He's not exactly the poster child for good radio ownership.

Yes, he does well with Rush on KSCO. You could hardly not do well with Rush, even in "liberal Santa Cruz" - he's the gold-standard brand name in conservative talk, and the format itself has done well in "enemy territory".

But to not mention the competitive liberal talk situation, and say "liberal talk died in liberal Santa Cruz", is disingenous. KRXA is not exactly burning up the 12-plus numbers last I saw, but it's still there and apparently making enough money to hang in...and is run about 20 times more professionally than KOMY or KSCO.

The "freelance hosts" thing has been accurate for KSCO/KOMY in the past. Heck, even the guy known as "The Radio Equalizer", Brian Maloney, started his career this way on KSCO - before moving to larger markets. He's well aware of Mr. Zwerling's history and, umm, quirks, and for whatever reason does not mention this when he covers the station. (That "whatever reason" could just be that he's being charitable, or wishes to avoid lawsuits from Santa Cruz.)

I don't believe KSCO still does many of the host-owned-sold/brokered shows anymore. The morning drive news is in-house with paid staff.

The story in Santa Cruz may be two fold - the, umm, odd ownership and its mishandling of the format, and the competitive liberal talk situation. But that last part could be deeper than KRXA.

Simply put, Santa Cruz may not have ROOM for commercial liberal talk, with much of the potential listener community tied up in public and community stations. The AAR offerings on KOMY may have been too "bland" for the listener base in question, and the commercial stuff on KRXA may be too "commercial".
Click to expand...

My point is that the same 'usual suspects' that are quick to label the Zwerlings... the 'fill in the blank' station owners ,that gave AAR it's first opportunity (and were originally heralded as 'pioneers' and 'courageous' ,) are left at the end of the day branded as 'evil' , or worse yet, 'uneducated in the radio business' for any decision that pulls the plug on this Terry Schiavo-like abberation of liberal talk radio.

Even when confronted with the evidence that other libtalkers succeed in these markets, there must be some other reason that they would give up on AAR. Even if a certain market is oversaturated with liberal talkers, to remove any signals is a clarion call to all bloggers that these owners have ulterior motives. A comical note is that in alot of these markets, the liberals there just won't change the channel from thier NPR affiliate, and why should they? They are already getting what they want without the added inconvenient truth of 'advertisers', so why bother buying the tote bag, or changing the channel? yawn.

Radio Realist has it right. "Very, very few people who vote liberal want to listen to liberal talk radio. So almost any time anyone says that a given market is "good for liberal talk radio because the majority there vote liberal", they are probably wrong.
 
I think the issue is that commercial talk radio, in general, does poorly in this market. KSCO, the only conservotalk station in the market, gets terrible ratings. In any other market, it should be doing way better. Then again, there is the Zwerling factor...

Non-coms are where the action is here. I have seen the overalls for the entire market, including the non-coms. KAZU, the NPR affiliate, is far and away the #1 station overall in the market. KUSP does slightly better than KGO.

Also, a big factor here is the demographic makeup. People of Hispanic origin make up about 39% of the population in the market - not a big news/talk crowd. Almost half of the top-rated stations cater to this market (including Rhythmic CHR KDON). The only commercial news/talk station doing anything substantial is KGO. There is a Spanish-language NPR-like station, and they get just under a share.
 
evnlee said:
My point is that the same 'usual suspects' that are quick to label the Zwerlings... the 'fill in the blank' station owners ,that gave AAR it's first opportunity (and were originally heralded as 'pioneers' and 'courageous' ,) are left at the end of the day branded as 'evil' , or worse yet, 'uneducated in the radio business' for any decision that pulls the plug on this Terry Schiavo-like abberation of liberal talk radio.

Even when confronted with the evidence that other libtalkers succeed in these markets, there must be some other reason that they would give up on AAR. Even if a certain market is oversaturated with liberal talkers, to remove any signals is a clarion call to all bloggers that these owners have ulterior motives. A comical note is that in alot of these markets, the liberals there just won't change the channel from thier NPR affiliate, and why should they? They are already getting what they want without the added inconvenient truth of 'advertisers', so why bother buying the tote bag, or changing the channel? yawn.

Radio Realist has it right. "Very, very few people who vote liberal want to listen to liberal talk radio. So almost any time anyone says that a given market is "good for liberal talk radio because the majority there vote liberal", they are probably wrong.
Click to expand...

Where did you read that the Zwerlings were "originally heralded as 'pioneers' and 'courageous'?" They've never had a good reputation with left-leaning listeners in town. While some of their intentions may have been good, they always found a way to piss them off.

Not too long after they added the programming (which consisted of three shows and a lot of negotiations with AAR), they lashed out at their listeners on-air, calling them 'hypocrites'. This, despite the fact that they barely have a sales staff. Instead, for the syndicated fare, they expect potential sponsors to contact them. Let's be real - this never works. Sure, they wanted to sell ads for it. But they didn't want to do the work required to do it. That's not a business plan, that's a weak prayer.

They also scaled back to two AAR shows (Franken and Rhodes) and filled the rest of the schedule with infomercials and whatever else they put on the air. Oh, and of course mother's reactionary and rambling 'on-air editorials'. Listeners were offended by the Zwerlings' boorish behavior, and rightly so. Insulting and alienating your listeners is never a good idea. Anyone who's ever worked in radio, apart from grabbing coffee and donuts for the morning guys, knows that.

Remember, AAR only supplies the programming. It's up to the affiliates to make it or break it. If the Zwerlings don't put forth the effort, well, they certainly can't blame anyone else. And if the Zwerlings are such geniuses at running radio stations, how come they can't make a success of the only conservotalk station in town? KSCO gets awful ratings, and while they claim to sell out Limbaugh's show, we don't hear much about the rest. Oh, and the local hosts sell their own shows.

BTW, in an update of sorts, KRXA has picked up some more AAR programming, including Randi Rhodes.
 
FightingIrish said:
I think the issue is that commercial talk radio, in general, does poorly in this market. KSCO, the only conservotalk station in the market, gets terrible ratings. In any other market, it should be doing way better. Then again, there is the Zwerling factor...

Non-coms are where the action is here. I have seen the overalls for the entire market, including the non-coms. KAZU, the NPR affiliate, is far and away the #1 station overall in the market. KUSP does slightly better than KGO.

Also, a big factor here is the demographic makeup. People of Hispanic origin make up about 39% of the population in the market - not a big news/talk crowd. Almost half of the top-rated stations cater to this market (including Rhythmic CHR KDON). The only commercial news/talk station doing anything substantial is KGO. There is a Spanish-language NPR-like station, and they get just under a share.
Click to expand...

A correction to this post.

I went back and checked the non-com numbers. And what do ya know? I read the wrong danged column! I was looking at cume and comparing that to the commercial stations, while I should have been looking at AQH, to compare it with the other stations. Sunday mornings can indeed be brutal sometimes.

So, what does this all mean? KAZU's in the mid-two range, and KUSP, also airing some NPR stuff, is about a share behind. In essence, people here are indifferent to talk radio.

Sorry about the error. Hey, we all make mistakes, right?
 
Thanks for the clarification, FightingIrish.

The true "damper" on local talk radio there, conservative, liberal or otherwise, is the giant known as KGO. The station booms into the Monterey Bay, and is consistently in the top of the ratings there. Even at KSCO's highest numbers, they were getting beat by KGO pretty handily, as I recall.

This makes sense when you consider that KGO is not your typical talk station. While it's not necessarily a "liberal talker" (except for the 10 PM-5 AM hours weeknights), it's not a KSFO-style conservative talk station, either. Its most popular local host is moderate Ronn Owens in mid-mornings.

In essence, KGO appears to fill the bill for much of the talk radio appetite in the Monterey Bay region, and whatever's left, Rush on KSCO does the rest. Without Rush, it wouldn't be a surprise to see KSCO's 12-plus numbers drop to the kind of numbers KRXA is seeing. Indeed, KSCO lost Rush for a while to crosstown CC-owned KION/1460 (which only recently went back to talk), and its ratings did suffer...if I remember right.

My whole point is that the quick rush to "look! Liberal talk radio is so bad it even doesn't work in a liberal stronghold!" is a bit much.

There are examples of success in such areas (the much noted KPOJ/Portland OR for example), and also examples of a lack of success. Meanwhile, a 24/7 libtalker run much better than KOMY is still on the air in the market, using programming that's generally considered more commercially-friendly than AAR. Whether that station succeeds in the long run very much remains to be seen.

I've also said many times that AAR has an Advertiser Problem, considering that many of its hosts take pains to excoriate large companies that, well, might advertise.

I don't operate in the "ideological realm", so I apologize if this is not what you're used to.
 
Hmmm... very interesting, OMW. I didn't realize CC blew up KABL. Now, it appears they are indeed running news/talk. Dr. Laura has the late morning shift that Rush is in. Also running Hannity, Noory, Doyle, Humphries and Savage. Wonder how long it will be until they take back Rush (as CC has done in other markets). It appears as if they already yanked Coast to Coast from KSCO.

Regardless, this is gonna hurt KSCO in many ways. I really don't think they get much in ratings outside of Rush.
 
For all you lib talk foes out there who love to say that talk radio is business and stations have to be able to sell advertising consider this statement by Zwerling regarding why he flipped lib talk in Santa Cruz

"We weren't able to sell one ad in a year and a half."

If you believe this bs, you are more deluded than a supporter of Bush's war in Iraq.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom