AGENDA DRIVEN LIFESTYLE TALK NEW CONCEPT

[ponderosaAZ]

Air America/Jones/NOVA-M stations aren't selling as well as they could be. What I mean in posts below by "lifestyle talk" is actually "agenda driven lifestyle talk." Just a new term to stimulate thought about this. I'm talking about hosts who cover lifestyle topics (VERSUS OBAMA/MCCAIN), and take a political point of view.

For Example

Dr. Dean Edell - Medical Advice, generally from a liberal viewpoint

Bill Handel - Legal Advice and he is very socially liberal

Midnight Truckers, Gary and Eric - Oil, Diesel, Energy, Conservation from more of a conservative (but not necessarily) point of view

Bob Brinker - Oil, Alternative Energy, Nuke Power, from a politically unpredictable but always opinionated point of view

I think programs like these will increase ratings evenings and weekends to these progressive stations instead of re-runs of the weekday Bush bashers.

That's my clarification of what I mean.

And adding the programs in my opinion has nothing to do with whether the station has below one share or not. They are all top rated programs and would increase any station's ratings. Weekends are tough.

 

[Biz Listener]

I neither agree nor disagree. I simply think you're addressing something that's beside the point. I don't think it's so much an issue of what talk show hosts talk about, it's how they say it. The term "agenda driven lifestyle talk" may well be an accurate description but I don't think that it's an exploitable trend. The hosts you mention are good at attracting an audience. But I don't think that the primary reason is because that description fits their content. I think the primary reason is that they are interesting people to listen to. To a lesser degree there's also the fact that their areas of specialization are interesting.

If stations were to start searching for more hosts for evenings and weekends based on whether or not those hosts engaged in "agenda driven lifestyle talk" I think the success rate would be less than it would be if stations simply looked for "hosts who were interesting".

However, if any of the handful of local hosts out there hoping to make the jump to the big leagues of syndication could master the art of "agenda driven lifestyle talk", that might be the gimmick they need to stand out from the bunch and get noticed. It would help to actually be an expert on that speciality, and if the speciality would be interesting to large groups of people.

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

As I noted in a similar thread a few days ago on here...


People listen to radio for entertainment.

For example, how often have you heard someone say:

* "I don't agree with host XYZ all-the-time, but I can't stop listening to him/her."

* "I usually agree with 99% of what host XYZ says, but today he/she said ... and I don't think that's right because ..."

Even in non-commercial radio, people come for the ideology (or agenda) - but hope to be entertained along the way.

If it is ideology (or agenda) you want - you'd probably be better off enrolling in a college political science class, or volunteering in a political campaign - because radio is not the best place to get it.

 

[ajhenderson]

This is Tom, isn't it?

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

This is Tom, isn't it?

Well, it does have the requisite Bob Brinker As Liberal Talk Show Host mention...

 

[Biz Listener]

People listen to radio for entertainment.

For example, how often have you heard someone say:

* "I don't agree with host XYZ all-the-time, but I can't stop listening to him/her."

* "I usually agree with 99% of what host XYZ says, but today he/she said ... and I don't think that's right because ..."

Even in non-commercial radio, people come for the ideology (or agenda) - but hope to be entertained along the way.

If it is ideology (or agenda) you want - you'd probably be better off enrolling in a college political science class, or volunteering in a political campaign - because radio is not the best place to get it.

The thing is, when talking about getting a 3 share instead of a 2, you're still talking about minorities of people, and really small cross sections of the population. Though I have heard those statements or words to that effect, more often than not they were cliche/disclaimers, followed by a "but". And we all know that everything before a "but" is usually BS.

It's a sad but accurate observation of the human condition that there are possibly more people who like watching someone kick the snot out of someone they disagree with watching a fair and balanced debate. Sure, there are enough people who like to pretend to be above such pettiness, but deep down inside, I think most human beings like it when the champion of their tribe or clan beats up on the members of the other tribe or clan.

Is it petty, childish, and something to be ashamed of? Probably yes. Is it what motivated enough people to make the difference between a 2 share and a 3 share? Probably yes.

The people who can be counted on to tune in to their favorite talk show host ripping the opposition a new one on a regular basis are totally and thoroughly entertained by such content. Hearing someone defending the side of good against the forces of evil is an enjoyable and cathartic experience, not unlike the appeal of pro wrestling.

The people who find such displays of outrageous "hooray for our side" one-sidedness to not be entertaining greatly outnumber those who do enjoy it. There's no question about that. Which explains why even the best talk show hosts get a 3, 4 or 5 share, not a 95, 96, or 97 share. So, put a safe, mild-mannered, polite talk show host on the air, and you won't be embarrassed at the country club when people find out you're responsible for putting some controversial partisan on the air. You'll just probably pull lower ratings in most markets.

 

[ABQTom]

This is Tom, isn't it?

No, not worth the arguing from those who don't have a clue about the industry. Haven't logged in for awhile but I did see your question.

 

[livingfruitvirus]

Handel's legal show is excellent, but it's all about the callers and less about his opinions. He'll open the hour with a litigation news story, but after that it's nonstop calls for the rest of the show so Bill can dish out marginal legal advice.