T
Tom_
Guest
Post deleted by Tom_
-
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
D
doc9464
Guest
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
http://www.azcentral.com/php-bin/clicktrack/print.php?referer=h> ttp://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0618leftyradio18.html#
>
>
> The article states:
>
> "Gary Krantz, president of New York-based Air America, said
> the network is financially stable and revenue is growing.
> Air America has grown to 64 from 15 affiliates. The liberal
> talk network is in 18 of the nation's top 20 radio markets
> and has increased its audience by 265 percent to more than 3
> million people, he said."
>
> ...article also quotes Michael Harrison...
>
>
> How are they calculating the 3 million listeners?
>
> Are they EX-cluding ratings from hosts from other networks
> such as Ed Schultz, Lionel, Stephanie Miller, etc. that are
> on some AAR stations?
>
> Does the 3 million include on-line listeners? Several web
> sites stream AAR programs - e.g. AAR's own site, radiopower.
>
>
> Is this 12+, 25-54, etc.?
>
> EDITED BY "THIS TOM:" oops...that was a coincidence...Looks
> like Charles posted his post re: AAR (below) while I was
> typing my post...so mine is on top of his... This ARTICLE
> LINK is indeed Cranky Yankee's post (see what Charles has to
> say about it) with an EXCELLENT article link. I re-posted
> it since it's an excellent article and it was unfortunate to
> see it get buried under dozens of posts under the Randi
> Rhodes in Arizona thread. I hope my questions about the
> article are fair questions about ratings and that someone
> here will have some insights. As you may have seen from my
> posts, I have suggested here that Air America release some
> ratings info to the public, and they have in this article.
> MANY THANKS to CRANKY YANKEE for this EXCELLENT ARTICLE
> link!!!
>
Tom, with all sincerity...i appreciate you wanting to break down the way AAR came up with their listener numbers.....id like to ask a civil question, have you also asked the other side to break down the numbers for Rush....i havent been on the site long enough to have seen that question asked. Why always frame the question that AAR has to justify every single utterance?....In general and in my opinion, its seems possible that AAR may have this audience. Can you find articles, printings, clips, etc...that show without a doubt that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate listeners they claim to have?
Do you accept those numbers as "gospel" and if you do, Id like to know why you do? AAR may have used similar ideas as rush or hannity does.....i certainly don't know the answer on if any of the numbers are accurate.....but they seem reasonable 3 million viewers...and it not being for an individual host but for the entire effort .....or not
http://www.azcentral.com/php-bin/clicktrack/print.php?referer=h> ttp://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0618leftyradio18.html#
>
>
> The article states:
>
> "Gary Krantz, president of New York-based Air America, said
> the network is financially stable and revenue is growing.
> Air America has grown to 64 from 15 affiliates. The liberal
> talk network is in 18 of the nation's top 20 radio markets
> and has increased its audience by 265 percent to more than 3
> million people, he said."
>
> ...article also quotes Michael Harrison...
>
>
> How are they calculating the 3 million listeners?
>
> Are they EX-cluding ratings from hosts from other networks
> such as Ed Schultz, Lionel, Stephanie Miller, etc. that are
> on some AAR stations?
>
> Does the 3 million include on-line listeners? Several web
> sites stream AAR programs - e.g. AAR's own site, radiopower.
>
>
> Is this 12+, 25-54, etc.?
>
> EDITED BY "THIS TOM:" oops...that was a coincidence...Looks
> like Charles posted his post re: AAR (below) while I was
> typing my post...so mine is on top of his... This ARTICLE
> LINK is indeed Cranky Yankee's post (see what Charles has to
> say about it) with an EXCELLENT article link. I re-posted
> it since it's an excellent article and it was unfortunate to
> see it get buried under dozens of posts under the Randi
> Rhodes in Arizona thread. I hope my questions about the
> article are fair questions about ratings and that someone
> here will have some insights. As you may have seen from my
> posts, I have suggested here that Air America release some
> ratings info to the public, and they have in this article.
> MANY THANKS to CRANKY YANKEE for this EXCELLENT ARTICLE
> link!!!
>
Tom, with all sincerity...i appreciate you wanting to break down the way AAR came up with their listener numbers.....id like to ask a civil question, have you also asked the other side to break down the numbers for Rush....i havent been on the site long enough to have seen that question asked. Why always frame the question that AAR has to justify every single utterance?....In general and in my opinion, its seems possible that AAR may have this audience. Can you find articles, printings, clips, etc...that show without a doubt that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate listeners they claim to have?
Do you accept those numbers as "gospel" and if you do, Id like to know why you do? AAR may have used similar ideas as rush or hannity does.....i certainly don't know the answer on if any of the numbers are accurate.....but they seem reasonable 3 million viewers...and it not being for an individual host but for the entire effort .....or not
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
> Can you find articles, printings, clips, etc...that show without a doubt
> that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate
> listeners they claim to have?
Limbaugh articles here
Hannity articles here<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
> Can you find articles, printings, clips, etc...that show without a doubt
> that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate
> listeners they claim to have?
Limbaugh articles here
Hannity articles here<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
> Do you accept those numbers as "gospel" and if you do, Id
> like to know why you do? AAR may have used similar ideas as
> rush or hannity does.....i certainly don't know the answer
> on if any of the numbers are accurate.....but they seem
> reasonable 3 million viewers...and it not being for an
> individual host but for the entire effort .....or not
I don't trust numbers coming from any show host or network because they all play fast and loose. I look for independent third party numbers. I can easily imagine 3,000,000 listeners find AA programming nationwide, but whether that represents hourly, weekly, monthly, or they ran into it once-listeners is another question.
> Do you accept those numbers as "gospel" and if you do, Id
> like to know why you do? AAR may have used similar ideas as
> rush or hannity does.....i certainly don't know the answer
> on if any of the numbers are accurate.....but they seem
> reasonable 3 million viewers...and it not being for an
> individual host but for the entire effort .....or not
I don't trust numbers coming from any show host or network because they all play fast and loose. I look for independent third party numbers. I can easily imagine 3,000,000 listeners find AA programming nationwide, but whether that represents hourly, weekly, monthly, or they ran into it once-listeners is another question.
T
Tom_
Guest
Re:
I am not going to discuss the authenticity of AAR ratings on this forum. I was just asking questions about the methodology for calculating the reported ratings in the article from the Arizona Republic. Thanks... -T
> Tom, with all sincerity...i appreciate you wanting to break
> down the way AAR came up with their listener numbers.....id
> like to ask a civil question, have you also asked the other
> side to break down the numbers for Rush....i havent been on
> the site long enough to have seen that question asked. Why
> always frame the question that AAR has to justify every
> single utterance?....In general and in my opinion, its seems
> possible that AAR may have this audience. Can you find
> articles, printings, clips, etc...that show without a doubt
> that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate
> listeners they claim to have?
> Do you accept those numbers as "gospel" and if you do, Id
> like to know why you do? AAR may have used similar ideas as
> rush or hannity does.....i certainly don't know the answer
> on if any of the numbers are accurate.....but they seem
> reasonable 3 million viewers...and it not being for an
> individual host but for the entire effort .....or not
>
I am not going to discuss the authenticity of AAR ratings on this forum. I was just asking questions about the methodology for calculating the reported ratings in the article from the Arizona Republic. Thanks... -T
> Tom, with all sincerity...i appreciate you wanting to break
> down the way AAR came up with their listener numbers.....id
> like to ask a civil question, have you also asked the other
> side to break down the numbers for Rush....i havent been on
> the site long enough to have seen that question asked. Why
> always frame the question that AAR has to justify every
> single utterance?....In general and in my opinion, its seems
> possible that AAR may have this audience. Can you find
> articles, printings, clips, etc...that show without a doubt
> that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate
> listeners they claim to have?
> Do you accept those numbers as "gospel" and if you do, Id
> like to know why you do? AAR may have used similar ideas as
> rush or hannity does.....i certainly don't know the answer
> on if any of the numbers are accurate.....but they seem
> reasonable 3 million viewers...and it not being for an
> individual host but for the entire effort .....or not
>
D
doc9464
Guest
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
> > Can you find articles, printings, clips, etc...that show
> without a doubt
> > that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so
> approximate
> > listeners they claim to have?
>
> Limbaugh articles here
>
> Hannity articles here
>
Jerry, while i thank you for the post. I have used Google in my own efforts before and am not unfamiliar with the ability to search. You may not have access for this resource but I also search on other resources (lexis/nexis for example, which Al Franken uses too btw when hes trying to debunk a non-credible point). Taking a cursory view through the 10 pages, what i see is a lot of agreement on the idea that rush has 20 million viewers. Let me make sure i make my point clearly:
I don't doubt or question that Rush or Hannity has a large viewer base. Like Dampier's comment and my point to Tom...many viewers simply accept Rush and Hannity's numbers as valid while people seem to take any word from AAR as not true. AS of this point, current AAR management has not been "hyping or faking" any info they speak of...so they should be given what i believe to be a reasonable thought. In left of the dial, we saw the only AAR person, Evan Cohen, who was guilty of false PR...he is no longer part of AAR...as of today, I dont find any false reports from AAR. I certainly don't mind being shown that i am wrong...i simply doubt that AAR management would do something like that while trying to build the AAR business.
...after i review many of these postings, I doubt I will find a break down of the numbers equal to that information that Tom seems to require of AAR management declarations. His reluctance to discuss and his subsequent deletion of his post makes me believe that I may have hit a sore spot...or made a reasonable arguement...i could be wrong but i think im reasonable to ask the questions i did.
> > Can you find articles, printings, clips, etc...that show
> without a doubt
> > that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so
> approximate
> > listeners they claim to have?
>
> Limbaugh articles here
>
> Hannity articles here
>
Jerry, while i thank you for the post. I have used Google in my own efforts before and am not unfamiliar with the ability to search. You may not have access for this resource but I also search on other resources (lexis/nexis for example, which Al Franken uses too btw when hes trying to debunk a non-credible point). Taking a cursory view through the 10 pages, what i see is a lot of agreement on the idea that rush has 20 million viewers. Let me make sure i make my point clearly:
I don't doubt or question that Rush or Hannity has a large viewer base. Like Dampier's comment and my point to Tom...many viewers simply accept Rush and Hannity's numbers as valid while people seem to take any word from AAR as not true. AS of this point, current AAR management has not been "hyping or faking" any info they speak of...so they should be given what i believe to be a reasonable thought. In left of the dial, we saw the only AAR person, Evan Cohen, who was guilty of false PR...he is no longer part of AAR...as of today, I dont find any false reports from AAR. I certainly don't mind being shown that i am wrong...i simply doubt that AAR management would do something like that while trying to build the AAR business.
...after i review many of these postings, I doubt I will find a break down of the numbers equal to that information that Tom seems to require of AAR management declarations. His reluctance to discuss and his subsequent deletion of his post makes me believe that I may have hit a sore spot...or made a reasonable arguement...i could be wrong but i think im reasonable to ask the questions i did.
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
Everyone lies about their numbers. Last week, Leykis claimed an "audience of 3.5 million people" - more like 1 million. And so on.
As to Limbaugh, Talkers estimates his listenship at just under 15 million, with Hannity not far behind. This is the benchmark source in the industry and is well researched. AAR does not show as any particular host, nor does Ed Schultz, although I would expect that to change as he gains clearances (including non-libtalk biggies like KTRH/Houston).
Everyone lies about their numbers. Last week, Leykis claimed an "audience of 3.5 million people" - more like 1 million. And so on.
As to Limbaugh, Talkers estimates his listenship at just under 15 million, with Hannity not far behind. This is the benchmark source in the industry and is well researched. AAR does not show as any particular host, nor does Ed Schultz, although I would expect that to change as he gains clearances (including non-libtalk biggies like KTRH/Houston).
T
Tom_
Guest
Re: reply
Doc:
I usually try to delete my own posts when others find them controversial or people challenge me. In the deleted post I was only asking questions about the ratings listed in the article, yet you have challenged me in two posts in this thread.
-tom
Doc:
I usually try to delete my own posts when others find them controversial or people challenge me. In the deleted post I was only asking questions about the ratings listed in the article, yet you have challenged me in two posts in this thread.
-tom
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
> Everyone lies about their numbers. Last week, Leykis claimed
> an "audience of 3.5 million people" - more like 1 million.
> And so on.
>
> As to Limbaugh, Talkers estimates his listenship at just
> under 15 million, with Hannity not far behind. This is the
> benchmark source in the industry and is well researched. AAR
> does not show as any particular host, nor does Ed Schultz,
> although I would expect that to change as he gains
> clearances (including non-libtalk biggies like
> KTRH/Houston).
>
Of course, Talkers says that its estimates were as of last fall, and here we are almost in the summer of the following year. And Talkers seems to be basing its estimates on Arbitron's terrestrial radio ratings, which don't take into account satellite and Internet listeners. As far as I know, Limbaugh and Hannity aren't available on satellite or for free on the Internet, while many other talkers are (including Schultz and all the Air America talkers).
> Everyone lies about their numbers. Last week, Leykis claimed
> an "audience of 3.5 million people" - more like 1 million.
> And so on.
>
> As to Limbaugh, Talkers estimates his listenship at just
> under 15 million, with Hannity not far behind. This is the
> benchmark source in the industry and is well researched. AAR
> does not show as any particular host, nor does Ed Schultz,
> although I would expect that to change as he gains
> clearances (including non-libtalk biggies like
> KTRH/Houston).
>
Of course, Talkers says that its estimates were as of last fall, and here we are almost in the summer of the following year. And Talkers seems to be basing its estimates on Arbitron's terrestrial radio ratings, which don't take into account satellite and Internet listeners. As far as I know, Limbaugh and Hannity aren't available on satellite or for free on the Internet, while many other talkers are (including Schultz and all the Air America talkers).
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
> As far as I know,
> Limbaugh and Hannity aren't available on satellite or for
> free on the Internet, while many other talkers are
> (including Schultz and all the Air America talkers).
>
Good point. If Limbaugh and Hannity had free streams, they might have many millions more listeners than they do.
> As far as I know,
> Limbaugh and Hannity aren't available on satellite or for
> free on the Internet, while many other talkers are
> (including Schultz and all the Air America talkers).
>
Good point. If Limbaugh and Hannity had free streams, they might have many millions more listeners than they do.
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
<div align="justify"><font face=arial size=3>
"I don't doubt or question that Rush or Hannity has a large viewer base. Like Dampier's comment and my point to Tom...many viewers simply accept Rush and Hannity's numbers as valid while people seem to take any word from AAR as not true."
I only sent the links to make the point that the "articles, printings, clips etc.. that show without a doubt that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate listeners they claim to have" are so readily available that I wondered why you would ask.
As you can see, the 1st five sources are: Wikipedia, WRKO, Palm Beach Post and Al-Franken.com "The Official Website For Al Franken's Books". According to Franken's site, the third paragraph, of the first page of the first chapter begins: "I was not, after all, totally unfamiliar with Limbaugh. He is the king of talk radio, with an estimated twenty million listeners in a given week."
I'm very direct so it's difficult for me to understand why you asked for articles that you don't really need because you don't question the the numbers. Instead, you say, you were trying to make a point that "many viewers simply accept Rush and Hannity's numbers as vaild". It's your right to be oblique but just saying so right up front would have been faster.
It's disconcerting for me, and perhaps Tom, (I see he deleted his original post) to pose a question or comment and then for people to draw conclusions based on what "many people" have done. If he's doing it, I suggest you call him on it and quote previous posts to support it. Right now, it's like buckshot. Make a comment about AAR and suddenly someone will remember something <u>someone</u> said and shoot everyone in sight.
My impression of this forum is that AAR fans have been verbally assaulted by a few harebrained partisans for so long that they are like a dog who is beat with a rolled up newspaper too many times. Eventually, the dog flinches at the sight of any newspaper.
"As of this point, current AAR management has not been "hyping or faking" any info they speak of...so they should be given what i believe to be a reasonable thought."
I agree and if someone is accusing AAR management of hyping or faking, it makes perfect sense to ask them to cite their sources. I notice that very, very few people on this board site any sources at all to support their premises.
But defending AAR management against a charge no one is making is silly. It reminds me of a hilarious scene in the Woody Allen classic: Sleeper. Having disguised themselves as doctors and slipping into a hospital operating room without detection, they are approached by one of the doctors who gives no indication he suspects anything. Woody Allen looks at him and nervously says: "We're not impostors. We're real doctors."<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
<div align="justify"><font face=arial size=3>
"I don't doubt or question that Rush or Hannity has a large viewer base. Like Dampier's comment and my point to Tom...many viewers simply accept Rush and Hannity's numbers as valid while people seem to take any word from AAR as not true."
I only sent the links to make the point that the "articles, printings, clips etc.. that show without a doubt that Rush and Hannity have the 20 million or so approximate listeners they claim to have" are so readily available that I wondered why you would ask.
As you can see, the 1st five sources are: Wikipedia, WRKO, Palm Beach Post and Al-Franken.com "The Official Website For Al Franken's Books". According to Franken's site, the third paragraph, of the first page of the first chapter begins: "I was not, after all, totally unfamiliar with Limbaugh. He is the king of talk radio, with an estimated twenty million listeners in a given week."
I'm very direct so it's difficult for me to understand why you asked for articles that you don't really need because you don't question the the numbers. Instead, you say, you were trying to make a point that "many viewers simply accept Rush and Hannity's numbers as vaild". It's your right to be oblique but just saying so right up front would have been faster.
It's disconcerting for me, and perhaps Tom, (I see he deleted his original post) to pose a question or comment and then for people to draw conclusions based on what "many people" have done. If he's doing it, I suggest you call him on it and quote previous posts to support it. Right now, it's like buckshot. Make a comment about AAR and suddenly someone will remember something <u>someone</u> said and shoot everyone in sight.
My impression of this forum is that AAR fans have been verbally assaulted by a few harebrained partisans for so long that they are like a dog who is beat with a rolled up newspaper too many times. Eventually, the dog flinches at the sight of any newspaper.
"As of this point, current AAR management has not been "hyping or faking" any info they speak of...so they should be given what i believe to be a reasonable thought."
I agree and if someone is accusing AAR management of hyping or faking, it makes perfect sense to ask them to cite their sources. I notice that very, very few people on this board site any sources at all to support their premises.
But defending AAR management against a charge no one is making is silly. It reminds me of a hilarious scene in the Woody Allen classic: Sleeper. Having disguised themselves as doctors and slipping into a hospital operating room without detection, they are approached by one of the doctors who gives no indication he suspects anything. Woody Allen looks at him and nervously says: "We're not impostors. We're real doctors."<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
> As you can see, the 1st five sources are: Wikipedia, WRKO,
> Palm Beach Post and Al-Franken.com "The Official Website For
> Al Franken's Books". According to Franken's site, the third
> paragraph, of the first page of the first chapter begins: "I
> was not, after all, totally unfamiliar with Limbaugh. He is
> the king of talk radio, with an estimated twenty million
> listeners in a given week."
As you may or may not know, Wikipedia is a site where anybody can post anything and then someone else can come along and edit the first post. It's hardly an authoritative site. For example, I've just edited the Limbaugh post to reflect the fact that Talkers Magazine estimates that Limbaugh has a weekly cume of 14.75 million, not 20 million. Somebody else could change the number to 100 million or zero. WRKO carries Limbaugh and therefore is hardly an unbiased source. And I suspect that both the Palm Beach Post and Al Franken just accepted Limbaugh's claim, since it's been repeated so many times by the media and on the Internet.
All this reminds me of a recent controversey on a prostate cancer list-serve after the New York Times and other media outlets, without giving a source, said that "27 million men" had taken Viagra. It turned out that the source was the drug company that manufactures Viagra and which had no way of knowing how many men had taken it -- all they knew was how many pills they'd sold. My point being that the news media often accept as fact what are really guesses by parties that have something to gain by estimating in a way that makes them or their product look good.
> As you can see, the 1st five sources are: Wikipedia, WRKO,
> Palm Beach Post and Al-Franken.com "The Official Website For
> Al Franken's Books". According to Franken's site, the third
> paragraph, of the first page of the first chapter begins: "I
> was not, after all, totally unfamiliar with Limbaugh. He is
> the king of talk radio, with an estimated twenty million
> listeners in a given week."
As you may or may not know, Wikipedia is a site where anybody can post anything and then someone else can come along and edit the first post. It's hardly an authoritative site. For example, I've just edited the Limbaugh post to reflect the fact that Talkers Magazine estimates that Limbaugh has a weekly cume of 14.75 million, not 20 million. Somebody else could change the number to 100 million or zero. WRKO carries Limbaugh and therefore is hardly an unbiased source. And I suspect that both the Palm Beach Post and Al Franken just accepted Limbaugh's claim, since it's been repeated so many times by the media and on the Internet.
All this reminds me of a recent controversey on a prostate cancer list-serve after the New York Times and other media outlets, without giving a source, said that "27 million men" had taken Viagra. It turned out that the source was the drug company that manufactures Viagra and which had no way of knowing how many men had taken it -- all they knew was how many pills they'd sold. My point being that the news media often accept as fact what are really guesses by parties that have something to gain by estimating in a way that makes them or their product look good.
C
ChemE
Guest
Re: Air America article reports 3 million+ listeners...
Rush isn't streaming for free on his site, but is freely streamed through many stations online and available. Hannity has a link on his website for streaming daily from 3-6ET.
> > As far as I know,
> > Limbaugh and Hannity aren't available on satellite or for
> > free on the Internet, while many other talkers are
> > (including Schultz and all the Air America talkers).
> >
>
> Good point. If Limbaugh and Hannity had free streams, they
> might have many millions more listeners than they do.
>
Rush isn't streaming for free on his site, but is freely streamed through many stations online and available. Hannity has a link on his website for streaming daily from 3-6ET.
> > As far as I know,
> > Limbaugh and Hannity aren't available on satellite or for
> > free on the Internet, while many other talkers are
> > (including Schultz and all the Air America talkers).
> >
>
> Good point. If Limbaugh and Hannity had free streams, they
> might have many millions more listeners than they do.
>
- Status