Air America picks up new flagship station: WWRL-AM in NYC

[NewsVet]

... the original claim made by Franken that he Beat Limbaugh in that key demo in NYC was a classic LIE, not even a 'weasel word'. He beat O Reilly, not Rush,in a TREND, and was thoroughly debunked by RNR and Billboards record monitor.You might want to lighten, up Frances!

The way I remember it, Franken did beat Limbaugh (in the 25-54 demo) in a "trend," but when the full Spring book came out, Limbaugh (on WABC) beat Franken. However, Franken did beat O'Reilly (on WOR) in the full book (in 25-54) in the hour that they were against each other and has done so in other books too.

 

[evnlee]

Scribbler~first you say Joe Weber dumped AAR because of a political mindset. When pressed to prove your allegations, you can't. Subjective hearsay.

I said I'd read that and you've said that you've seen it on various blogs. I said that if he didn't say it, I apologized, but also said I wouldn't blame him if that was his motive. It's his station, to carry any programming he likes.

Then you claim that the guy uses his signal as a 'hobby' . But as the AJC points out, he's a local bakery magnate that made his money being a shrewd businessman. He now owns 2 signals. Perhaps since you know so much, you can elaborate on how much his billing is? He does sell commercials, you know. Who are you to say he regards his station as a 'hobby'? If that were true, why bother buying out a stronger signal for 12 million $$ ( pretty expensive 'hobby' )? He already HAD a decent signal, if it were a 'hobby', why bother acquiring the new signal?

I haven't heard either station, but it doesn't sound like he's in it for the money -- otherwise he wouldn't be running an "arts" format on TWO AM's and doing PM drive himself.

Then you compare XM and Siruis startup funds to AAR's. Satellite radio was in it's infacy, just as cable news was when Turner built CNN. But N/T radio was already well established. Apples and oranges again!

Conservative talk was already well established on AM. Most liberals regarded AM radio as poison and listened to music or public radio on FM. Liberal talk radio is also in its "infancy."

Show me where Westwood One or other such syndicators spent so much $$ to keep thier programming ON THE AIR. Not getting clearances, but actually paying for the operating costs and overhead through something other then AD BILLING. And not just for a short time, but for 2 years.

Air America is only doing this in New York City, just as Disney is doing (by leasing WQEW from the New York Times). Randy Michaels, your hope to bring down Air America, will be doing the same thing with WLIB.


I guess anyone that disagree's with Scribbler or points out how awful AAR is MUST be conservative. That must be that 'open mindedness' you liberal New Yorkers are so known for :

I'm not a New Yorker and if you're not a conservative, I congratulate you for your good sense.

Finally, the quote I used was the '25-34 year old ponytailed skateboard demo', a demo that doesn't exist. That's called satire.

Huh? Your answer to the only important rating numbers is to dismiss them as "skate boarder" numbers and then when you're called on it to fall back on "it's only satire." Right.

By the way, the original claim made by Franken that he Beat Limbaugh in that key demo in NYC was a classic LIE, not even a 'weasel word'. He beat O Reilly, not Rush,in a TREND, and was thoroughly debunked by RNR and Billboards record monitor.You might want to lighten, up Frances!

I don't know anything about that, but I do know that Premiere put out a press release last year bragging about how Rush was beating all the liberals -- but if you looked at the 25-54 numbers they showed that Franken had 2/3 the audience that Rush had in New York, on a station with a puny signal that could be heard clearly in much less than half of the market and up against a 50,000 watt flamethrower.

lets see. first Scribbler reads on various left wing blogs that Joe Weber has a problem with AAR. When called on it, he backtracks, and says "I wouldn't blame him if that was his motive. It's his station, to carry any programming he likes"

then he follows up with "I haven't heard either station, but it doesn't sound like he's in it for the money -- otherwise he wouldn't be running an "arts" format on TWO AM's and doing PM drive himself."

But as usual, Scribbler is ignorant. A simple internet check would reveal that he does not run his stations simulcast, one is business talk, the other, voice of the Arts. Strike 2.

Scribbler can't understand what everyone else ( except Fighting Irish and other AA apologists ) have already comprehended : this guy had a signal he COULD have put AAR on, but chose not to. Now Scribbler want's to assign blame, without looking at reality: AAR did not do well enough in this community to merit Weber giving it his other signal ( in his estimation, an already successful businessman) and no other rich left leaning type tried to raise $$ to save it ( as in Phoenix ).

Then you have to just loooove this quote "Most liberals regarded AM radio as poison and listened to music or public radio on FM." ahhh yes. I guess that's why they decided to jump in the old brier patch, huh? I have actually HEARD plenty of liberal folks call in to all kinds of right wing talk shows, but seems I never hear any right wing types on alot of Air America shows, unless it's Rhodes. Franken has his 'dittohead', but the rest are ALL center for american progress, media matters, or various other left wing wonk type guests.

You also have to assume, going by [EDIT] logic, that somehow Rush reinvented AM talk radio without moderate and liberal people listening and posting that in the Arbi's. Folks, that just plain stupid. Like the guy or not, there is no disputing what he has accomplished and how he got there, and [EDIT] you can preach from the mountaintop, but if it looks, smells, and feels like dogpoop, it most likely is ( unless Drobny says it's gold ).


Now you can spin the numbers anyway you want, or blame local affiliates for dropping AAR, make outlandish claims, but there ain't enough lipstick to put on that pig known as Air America radio,and make it purty. Now go back to watching the XFL on your Betamax vcr, and listening to your 8trax. Because AAR will be just as obsolete soon ebough ;D


[EDIT=personal attack]

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

I don't think it's beyond reason to say that Joe Weber runs one of his stations, WMLB, as a personal station. "The Voice of the Arts" is not really commercially friendly, and he's admitted more than once that it's more of a labor of love for him than a business.

The second signal may well be a way for him to attract brokered programming, to make money to help him continue to run 1690 (the new home of WMLB) without commercial pressure.

 

[doc9464]

the argument below reminds me of when AAR first launched and stumbled and then survived.....if you were to google now....there are a multitude of writings filled with anger, satire, nastiness, and whatever you want to call it directed at liberal radio.

On this board, people like Scribbler, Irish, myself, Phil D, TomBetz, and others were discussing liberal radio's future and existance while constantly getting blasted for actually expressing the idea that liberal radio should exist. I was so glad to have a choice on the radio, I know I was practically cheering...LOL. To rthis day, you still have people that think AAR and other progressive/liberal radio has no reason to exist despite the fact that no alternative to the hannity/limbaugh/severn/etc machine existed until Randi Rhodes and others saw it was time to really work to offer an effective alternative...

You would think after a couple of years, the deathwatch would end....but nope, it continues...

To this day, none of us have ever said or believed that conservative radio's advantage, built up over 20 years, with no competition was going to magically disappear OR that liberal/progressive radio was going to put
Conservative radio back on its haunches....until liberal radio gets out of its infancy, its going to be like store openings, here we grow again and every setback (minor or large) is going to be attacked by naysayers i guess...

but I doubt its going away........and that you can't do anything about despite all the blather...

Scribbler~first you say Joe Weber dumped AAR because of a political mindset. When pressed to prove your allegations, you can't. Subjective hearsay.

I said I'd read that and you've said that you've seen it on various blogs. I said that if he didn't say it, I apologized, but also said I wouldn't blame him if that was his motive. It's his station, to carry any programming he likes.

Then you claim that the guy uses his signal as a 'hobby' . But as the AJC points out, he's a local bakery magnate that made his money being a shrewd businessman. He now owns 2 signals. Perhaps since you know so much, you can elaborate on how much his billing is? He does sell commercials, you know. Who are you to say he regards his station as a 'hobby'? If that were true, why bother buying out a stronger signal for 12 million $$ ( pretty expensive 'hobby' )? He already HAD a decent signal, if it were a 'hobby', why bother acquiring the new signal?

I haven't heard either station, but it doesn't sound like he's in it for the money -- otherwise he wouldn't be running an "arts" format on TWO AM's and doing PM drive himself.

Then you compare XM and Siruis startup funds to AAR's. Satellite radio was in it's infacy, just as cable news was when Turner built CNN. But N/T radio was already well established. Apples and oranges again!

Conservative talk was already well established on AM. Most liberals regarded AM radio as poison and listened to music or public radio on FM. Liberal talk radio is also in its "infancy."

Show me where Westwood One or other such syndicators spent so much $$ to keep thier programming ON THE AIR. Not getting clearances, but actually paying for the operating costs and overhead through something other then AD BILLING. And not just for a short time, but for 2 years.

Air America is only doing this in New York City, just as Disney is doing (by leasing WQEW from the New York Times). Randy Michaels, your hope to bring down Air America, will be doing the same thing with WLIB.


I guess anyone that disagree's with Scribbler or points out how awful AAR is MUST be conservative. That must be that 'open mindedness' you liberal New Yorkers are so known for :

I'm not a New Yorker and if you're not a conservative, I congratulate you for your good sense.

Finally, the quote I used was the '25-34 year old ponytailed skateboard demo', a demo that doesn't exist. That's called satire.

Huh? Your answer to the only important rating numbers is to dismiss them as "skate boarder" numbers and then when you're called on it to fall back on "it's only satire." Right.

By the way, the original claim made by Franken that he Beat Limbaugh in that key demo in NYC was a classic LIE, not even a 'weasel word'. He beat O Reilly, not Rush,in a TREND, and was thoroughly debunked by RNR and Billboards record monitor.You might want to lighten, up Frances!

I don't know anything about that, but I do know that Premiere put out a press release last year bragging about how Rush was beating all the liberals -- but if you looked at the 25-54 numbers they showed that Franken had 2/3 the audience that Rush had in New York, on a station with a puny signal that could be heard clearly in much less than half of the market and up against a 50,000 watt flamethrower.

lets see. first Scribbler reads on various left wing blogs that Joe Weber has a problem with AAR. When called on it, he backtracks, and says "I wouldn't blame him if that was his motive. It's his station, to carry any programming he likes"

then he follows up with "I haven't heard either station, but it doesn't sound like he's in it for the money -- otherwise he wouldn't be running an "arts" format on TWO AM's and doing PM drive himself."

But as usual, Scribbler is ignorant. A simple internet check would reveal that he does not run his stations simulcast, one is business talk, the other, voice of the Arts. Strike 2.

Scribbler can't understand what everyone else ( except Fighting Irish and other AA apologists ) have already comprehended : this guy had a signal he COULD have put AAR on, but chose not to. Now Scribbler want's to assign blame, without looking at reality: AAR did not do well enough in this community to merit Weber giving it his other signal ( in his estimation, an already successful businessman) and no other rich left leaning type tried to raise $$ to save it ( as in Phoenix ).

Then you have to just loooove this quote "Most liberals regarded AM radio as poison and listened to music or public radio on FM." ahhh yes. I guess that's why they decided to jump in the old brier patch, huh? I have actually HEARD plenty of liberal folks call in to all kinds of right wing talk shows, but seems I never hear any right wing types on alot of Air America shows, unless it's Rhodes. Franken has his 'dittohead', but the rest are ALL center for american progress, media matters, or various other left wing wonk type guests.

You also have to assume, going by Dribblers logic, that somehow Rush reinvented AM talk radio without moderate and liberal people listening and posting that in the Arbi's. Folks, that just plain stupid. Like the guy or not, there is no disputing what he has accomplished and how he got there, and Glibbler ( your glib, your glib! ) you can preach from the mountaintop, but if it looks, smells, and feels like dogpoop, it most likely is ( unless Drobny says it's gold ).


Now you can spin the numbers anyway you want, or blame local affiliates for dropping AAR, make outlandish claims, but there ain't enough lipstick to put on that pig known as Air America radio,and make it purty. Now go back to watching the XFL on your Betamax vcr, and listening to your 8trax. Because AAR will be just as obsolete soon ebough ;D

 

[evnlee]

the argument below reminds me of when AAR first launched and stumbled and then survived.....if you were to google now....there are a multitude of writings filled with anger, satire, nastiness, and whatever you want to call it directed at liberal radio.

On this board, people like Scribbler, Irish, myself, Phil D, TomBetz, and others were discussing liberal radio's future and existance while constantly getting blasted for actually expressing the idea that liberal radio should exist. I was so glad to have a choice on the radio, I know I was practically cheering...LOL. To rthis day, you still have people that think AAR and other progressive/liberal radio has no reason to exist despite the fact that no alternative to the hannity/limbaugh/severn/etc machine existed until Randi Rhodes and others saw it was time to really work to offer an effective alternative...

You would think after a couple of years, the deathwatch would end....but nope, it continues...

To this day, none of us have ever said or believed that conservative radio's advantage, built up over 20 years, with no competition was going to magically disappear OR that liberal/progressive radio was going to put
Conservative radio back on its haunches....until liberal radio gets out of its infancy, its going to be like store openings, here we grow again and every setback (minor or large) is going to be attacked by naysayers i guess...

but I doubt its going away........and that you can't do anything about despite all the blather...

If you look hard enough, or listen closely enough,or read previous posts, you will see there are lot's of guys like me, who wan't another voice on the radio, just not one that sounds like what AAR is providing.

C'mon! AAr just plain stinks! The guys in charge are pickin the smallest weenies on the playground, and then whining when they get thier collective dodge-ball 'progressive-ness' handed to them.

what's it gonna take? look at how they perform! man they SUCK! they are the Mondale of AM radio! Even Al Gore's slides are more entertaining then HALF thier talent!

Local,local,local is the only was for progressive talk to work.You can't 'nationally' syndicate the programming for the non-republican party when they can't even get thier own message straight.

Meanwhile, Rush and the and his little blue friends keep the GOP afraid of **** marriage, flag burnin, and them dern Mes-cans! And that crap sells all across ther fruited plains!! Hello?!

Duh!!!

 

[Scribbler]

Wow, what a brilliant post by evnlee! (not to be confused with the Radio Equalizer, no matter the similarities)!

Sacrificing part of his Saturday night, he pounded out a devastating attack on me, Air America, and liberals in general! Calling me "Dribbler" and "Glibbler" was an especially creative touch, worthy of Rush Limbaugh! That's entertainment!

And I now have to admit, Joe Weber's brilliant idea of putting an "Arts" format on an AM station that cost him $12 million is a surefire money-maker! Too bad he's no longer simulcasting this winning concept on both of his AMs, since that doubled the fun!

Joe's very own "opera narratives," along with "acts ranging from Benny Goodman to Bach, James Brown to Billy Joel, Patsy Cline to Jimi Hendrix ," are sure to send those all-important 12+ ratings through the roof!

What was I thinking when I said it sounded more like a hobby than a business! I'm sure that this exciting new AM format will be picked up in every market (with other bakery owners doing PM drive!).

Six months from now every Clear Channel cluster will have an "Arts" AM -- and bye-bye Randi Rhodes!

Speaking of entertainment, evnlee's line about my having a "Betamax" and an "8trax," was a laugh riot!

Actually. most of us long-haired, sandal-wearing, pot-smoking, freedom-hating liberals have iPods to store Al Franken's comedy bits and Media Center PC's to burn DVDs of Michael Moore's documentaries -- but that's what made that Betamax/8trax image so hilarious!

lets see. first Scribbler reads on various left wing blogs that Joe Weber has a problem with AAR. When called on it, he backtracks, and says "I wouldn't blame him if that was his motive. It's his station, to carry any programming he likes"

then he follows up with "I haven't heard either station, but it doesn't sound like he's in it for the money -- otherwise he wouldn't be running an "arts" format on TWO AM's and doing PM drive himself."

But as usual, Scribbler is ignorant. A simple internet check would reveal that he does not run his stations simulcast, one is business talk, the other, voice of the Arts. Strike 2.

Scribbler can't understand what everyone else ( except Fighting Irish and other AA apologists ) have already comprehended : this guy had a signal he COULD have put AAR on, but chose not to. Now Scribbler want's to assign blame, without looking at reality: AAR did not do well enough in this community to merit Weber giving it his other signal ( in his estimation, an already successful businessman) and no other rich left leaning type tried to raise $$ to save it ( as in Phoenix ).

Then you have to just loooove this quote "Most liberals regarded AM radio as poison and listened to music or public radio on FM." ahhh yes. I guess that's why they decided to jump in the old brier patch, huh? I have actually HEARD plenty of liberal folks call in to all kinds of right wing talk shows, but seems I never hear any right wing types on alot of Air America shows, unless it's Rhodes. Franken has his 'dittohead', but the rest are ALL center for american progress, media matters, or various other left wing wonk type guests.

You also have to assume, going by Dribblers logic, that somehow Rush reinvented AM talk radio without moderate and liberal people listening and posting that in the Arbi's. Folks, that just plain stupid. Like the guy or not, there is no disputing what he has accomplished and how he got there, and Glibbler ( your glib, your glib! ) you can preach from the mountaintop, but if it looks, smells, and feels like dogpoop, it most likely is ( unless Drobny says it's gold ).


Now you can spin the numbers anyway you want, or blame local affiliates for dropping AAR, make outlandish claims, but there ain't enough lipstick to put on that pig known as Air America radio,and make it purty. Now go back to watching the XFL on your Betamax vcr, and listening to your 8trax. Because AAR will be just as obsolete soon ebough ;D

 

[evnlee]

Too bad he's no longer simulcasting this winning concept on both of his AMs, since that doubled the fun!

Joe's very own "opera narratives," along with "acts ranging from Benny Goodman to Bach, James Brown to Billy Joel, Patsy Cline to Jimi Hendrix ," are sure to send those all-important 12+ ratings through the roof!

What was I thinking when I said it sounded more like a hobby than a business! I'm sure that this exciting new AM format will be picked up in every market (with other bakery owners doing PM drive!).

[/quote]

Hey [EDIT], lets make a bet. I'll wager that the next 2 books are going to show that moving AAR off the signal and putting on his idea of music will not hurt him one bit. I bet if you take the median Arbi ratings from the last 2 AAR books and compare then to the next 2 Arbi's, you will either see that the 12+ ratings will improve or remain flat ( which means no one listened before, and no one's listening now .) Since you have seem to know what's going on, a little pride wager like that wouldn't concern you, right?

If you read the Atlanta boards, there is a guy that everyone knows, is not a conservative, and buys ad time on WMLB 1690 am. That means that Weber is actually BILLING ad time, something the previous owners were unable to do with AAR on the air.

So lets' get the wager straight: if 2 books from now, Weber's format outperforms AAR's programming, you will come out and admit you were wrong, and Weber knew what he was doing. If Weber suffers 2 books from now, I will bow [EDIT].

Sound fair?


[EDIT*=name calling][EDIT**=ad hominem attack]

 

[dampier]

That's an understatement. News Corp. paid a ton of money to cable systems in the beginning to get FOX News carried. Typically, it's the other way around.

And Westwood One paid large sums of money to get big market clearances for O'Reilly. No such luck in Chicago, so he's tape delayed to the wee hours on Free FM. At least they can say he's on in Chicago.

In fact, Fox News paid the largest launch bonuses (up to $10 per subscriber) in the history of the cable industry. Even the religious networks couldn't pony up that much. Time Warner rolled them out on their NY state systems as part of an antitrust deal and an agreement resulting in millions of dollars changing hands from News Corp to Time Warner. MSNBC fought their way on though a ton of hostility because cable did not want competition for CNN. In fact, they had written into CNBC's carriage agreements that the channel could never become an all-news channel. MSNBC got on a lot of systems because cable operators were offered discounts for a program package that included the channel.

 

[dampier]

You would think after a couple of years, the deathwatch would end....but nope, it continues...

The wishful thinking deathwatch. What is extra amusing to me is that AAR's demise is "breaking news" every month... since 2004! AAR adds four stations, drops one and all you'll hear is "they lost a station." What is especially amusing to me is the newbies who show up here and then proclaim facts they honestly believe but the rest of us know came off a right wing blog or O'Reilly and was discredited at least six months earlier, and then they actually want to argue the point. A lot of them are hit and run posters who end up either off the board or pulling a quick handle change in hopes they can get their credibility back. Speaking as someone who posts with his real name, I have never had to run away from my views about libtalk and the fact that it isn't the "agenda" or the "politics" that will make or break the format (as much as people like Unequalizer, O'Reilly and Malkin may suggest and hope), but rather its pure entertainment value to bring in listeners and ad dollars. And it isn't even about AAR as a company as much as it is about the provisioning of entertaining radio for people who hold a different point of view, no matter where it comes from. Which is why Stephanie Miller is my favorite libtalk host, and she's not even a part of Air America. It matters not to me.

To the new batch of AAR bashers, sour grapes are good for vinegar, not for an honest discussion of liberal talk radio.

 

[doc9464]

Great to see you in fine posting form btw Phil....

taking your points....and running with them...its back to the future again.....you and scribbler and irish and betz and I are almost posting the same thoghts from the same hit and run posters.....with the same old tired thoughts.

Don't you wish some of these guys on the right had their own thoughts for once instead of something taken from RW media, punditry, or blogs....? It might make the exchange here a bit more fresh for once.....but i digress.

AAR sucks..... Liberal Radio sucks..... (fill in the blank sucks).... => its like some weird mantra, some of it (a small amount) was jealousy due to their not being radio people getting high profile gigs but now there are a lot of experienced radio people getting more progressive gigs all over yet they all suck....every single one of them. In the Right leaners mind only conservative radio doesn't suck......

Then you hear the lies about the content....and you know they arent listening......They all hate America and plot to destory our government day after day. When you hear the right say its hate Bush 24-7, you know they arent listening, just lying.

Then of course its fun to jump on Al Franken, the one host who really didn't improve, across the board, but his show's content has always been top notch....just wish he had taken more callers. But its really off base when people complain about Al being "shrill" and "unhinged".

They also have no counter for Stephanie Miller so there are plenty of sour grapes just as there are sour grapes for Jon Stewart on Television. Both have found a place for humor in their respective areas with biting satire. Its working. Its not AAR. No Liberal is upset that is isn't AAR.

Then they criticize that AAR is "gasp" getting some help in the financing area. I have always put the question out to conservatives (without a logical answer) why Sheldon Drobny's support of AAR during its growth period is any different than Rupert Murdoch's support of Fox during its growth period? Why is Drobny's and others money considered bad when Murdoch's and others money was Ok?

All that aside .....

Like you , I have never had to back down on my support for lib/progresssive radio. I am into the "cause" part of what liberal radio does but I do not disagree with you (because its just good sense) to know that AAR and other ventures must survive on their ability to make money. Where I have a problem with the honesty of the discussion here and in other places is that naysayers suspend normal rules when liberal radio is discussed. 12+ ratings mean nothing unless you discusss liberal radio, then they given absolutely critical importance. Key demos are critical unless the liberal station is doing well. Signal and Promotion of a station matters not in looking at how a station is performing. This seems to be the naysayers worst offense so far...and scribbler, you, irish, and tom do well to debunk most of the claptrap anyway....

the mysteries of right leaning logic.......continue...

The wishful thinking deathwatch. What is extra amusing to me is that AAR's demise is "breaking news" every month... since 2004! AAR adds four stations, drops one and all you'll hear is "they lost a station." What is especially amusing to me is the newbies who show up here and then proclaim facts they honestly believe but the rest of us know came off a right wing blog or O'Reilly and was discredited at least six months earlier, and then they actually want to argue the point. A lot of them are hit and run posters who end up either off the board or pulling a quick handle change in hopes they can get their credibility back. Speaking as someone who posts with his real name, I have never had to run away from my views about libtalk and the fact that it isn't the "agenda" or the "politics" that will make or break the format (as much as people like Unequalizer, O'Reilly and Malkin may suggest and hope), but rather its pure entertainment value to bring in listeners and ad dollars. And it isn't even about AAR as a company as much as it is about the provisioning of entertaining radio for people who hold a different point of view, no matter where it comes from. Which is why Stephanie Miller is my favorite libtalk host, and she's not even a part of Air America. It matters not to me.

To the new batch of AAR bashers, sour grapes are good for vinegar, not for an honest discussion of liberal talk radio.

 

[evnlee]

Hey [EDIT], lets make a bet. I'll wager that the next 2 books are going to show that moving AAR off the signal and putting on his idea of music will not hurt him one bit. I bet if you take the median Arbi ratings from the last 2 AAR books and compare then to the next 2 Arbi's, you will either see that the 12+ ratings will improve or remain flat ( which means no one listened before, and no one's listening now .) Since you have seem to know what's going on, a little pride wager like that wouldn't concern you, right?

If you read the Atlanta boards, there is a guy that everyone knows, is not a conservative, and buys ad time on WMLB 1690 am. That means that Weber is actually BILLING ad time, something the previous owners were unable to do with AAR on the air.

So lets' get the wager straight: if 2 books from now, Weber's format outperforms AAR's programming, you will come out and admit you were wrong, and Weber knew what he was doing. If Weber suffers 2 books from now, I will bow [EDIT].

Sound fair?


[EDIT*=name calling][EDIT**=ad hominem attack]
[/quote]

wow you guys are something else! saying if I lose a bet, I will bow to another's 'superior intellect' is an ad-hominem attack? somebody flagged me for something as ridiculous as that? Phonetically making fun of a handle? you guys sure are thin skinned.

I notice no one taking my wager, which means there was some merit to my argument that horrible,non humorous AAR programming wouldn't fare better then horrible, eclectic opera or jug band music in Atlanta

BTW, if you want to see 'name calling' , or 'ad hominem attacks' , suggest that other live and local liberal talk can work, but not the drivel that AAR was providing. Then step back, and watch as you are compared to a Nazi, lumped in with other right wing blogs, and labeled a 'neo conservative'.

In Phoenix, if a christian based ministry buys the signal and put's AAR out the door, the fifth column of AAR moonbats claim " Them awful Christians! The did this just to silence AAR because they alot of the talent are Jewish!. They hate Jews! " . Then a Jewish guy in Atlanta buys the signal, and is nice enough to leave Franken on the air ( until he decides to run or not ), and the usual suspects pop up and claim ( without any proof ) that "he hates AAR becuase they aren't down with Isreal! ".

too bad AAR can't hire these guys. They are far more entertaining then what AAR schlupps out there every day ;D

 

[Scribbler]

Hey [EDIT], lets make a bet. I'll wager that the next 2 books are going to show that moving AAR off the signal and putting on his idea of music will not hurt him one bit. I bet if you take the median Arbi ratings from the last 2 AAR books and compare then to the next 2 Arbi's, you will either see that the 12+ ratings will improve or remain flat ( which means no one listened before, and no one's listening now .) Since you have seem to know what's going on, a little pride wager like that wouldn't concern you, right?

If Joe spends some serious money on promotion (unlike the previous owners) he might well get a better 12+, if only because of the curiosity/camp factor. And Franken is still there.

But as I've tried to explain to the neophytes on this board, the 12+ ratings are virtually meaningless.

That's why Arbitron charges for the meaningful 25-54 numbers and gives away 12+, free.

Joe, with good promotion, may well pick up some 55-to-120 year old seniors and they could account for most of the 12+ ratings for his opera-country-swing-Franken-chamber music-soul-soft rock-60s rock AM format.

Too bad most advertisers aren't interested in old people.

And of course the overhead is now greater.
.
BTW, didn't you used to be Fred Flintstone, mwebster, nwebster, merriam webster, skyeye, emacee, and bierkenstock?

"Fred " admitted to being all seven anti-AAR bashers -- and vanished just before you arrived on the scene.

The fervor of your hatred of this little lefty network seems all-too familiar.

 

[evnlee]

Hey [EDIT], lets make a bet. I'll wager that the next 2 books are going to show that moving AAR off the signal and putting on his idea of music will not hurt him one bit. I bet if you take the median Arbi ratings from the last 2 AAR books and compare then to the next 2 Arbi's, you will either see that the 12+ ratings will improve or remain flat ( which means no one listened before, and no one's listening now .) Since you have seem to know what's going on, a little pride wager like that wouldn't concern you, right?

If Joe spends some serious money on promotion (unlike the previous owners) he might well get a better 12+, if only because of the curiosity/camp factor. And Franken is still there.

But as I've tried to explain to the neophytes on this board, the 12+ ratings are virtually meaningless.

That's why Arbitron charges for the meaningful 25-54 numbers and gives away 12+, free.

Joe, with good promotion, may well pick up some 55-to-120 year old seniors and they could account for most of the 12+ ratings for his opera-country-swing-Franken-chamber music-soul-soft rock-60s rock AM format.

Too bad most advertisers aren't interested in old people.

And of course the overhead is now greater.
.
BTW, didn't you used to be Fred Flintstone, mwebster, nwebster, merriam webster, skyeye, emacee, and bierkenstock?

"Fred " admitted to being all seven anti-AAR bashers -- and vanished just before you arrived on the scene.

The fervor of your hatred of this little lefty network seems all-too familiar.

Class, let's review.

First, Scribbler claims Weber has a political motive. When asked to prove it, he backtracks and admits he has no proof, only conjecture.

Then Scribbler claims this guy is simulcating his 'terrible' programming, when in fact he is not.

When pressed to put his beliefs into a simple pride wager, Scribbler complicates the issue by saying 'well, if'.. and 'maybe, unless' ,rather then just say 'yes' or 'no'.

Finally the last sad arguments of the reality challenged. Claim the other person as 'hateful' when if you read the previous posts, everyone can see where the real hatred is coming from.

And for the record, my name is Evan Lee ( hence the handle, someone already owned the proper spelling ), no I am not who you claim I am, which is yet another Scribbler claim with no proof or merit. And I am not neoconservative, and not hostile to leftist programming. Just BAD leftist programming, get it?

[EDIT]




[EDIT=ad hominem attack]

 

[Scribbler]

In case anybody else is still following this thread, I'm answering "evnlee's" points with tongue firmly in cheek and finding it hard to believe that he's taking all this so seriously that he has to engage in personal attacks.

First, Scribbler claims Weber has a political motive. When asked to prove it, he backtracks and admits he has no proof, only conjecture.

I made no such "claim." I said I'd heard that Weber was a strong supporter of the current Israeli government and therefore wanted to get rid of people like Malloy and Rhodes. I also said that was perfectly understandable. It's his station and he can do anything he wants with it. If I had $12 million to spend on a radio station and didn't need to make a profit I might indulge my fantasy of being a jazz disk jockey. I wouldn't make any (more) money, but it sounds like fun.

Then Scribbler claims this guy is simulcating his 'terrible' programming, when in fact he is not.

You're putting quotes around a word I never used -- and Rodney Ho reported on the simulcasting issue in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on June 7th:

Joe Weber, who recently purchased WWAA-AM/1690, will be migrating his eclectic music format (everything from Pavoratti to Springsteen, Beethoven to Aretha) from 1160 starting Monday...1160, which Weber also owns, will simulcast until he creates a new format there....Intermart barely marketed 1690 and didn’t even hire a local sales person to sell ads....Weber said he can’t reveal what he’s going to eventually air on 1160 but will simulcast 1690 for now.

Notice that the previous owners "barely marketed" the station and "didn't hire a local sales person." You obviously can't get people to listen to an AM station at 1690 on the dial if you don't do heavy marketing and you can't sell commercials if you don't hire any sales people!

When pressed to put his beliefs into a simple pride wager, Scribbler complicates the issue by saying 'well, if'.. and 'maybe, unless' ,rather then just say 'yes' or 'no'.

I also can't say "yes" or "no" to the question, "Have you stopped beating your wife," because I haven't started to beat her (yet). Shorter answer to your question: Weber will get enough old people to improve the virtually meaningless 12+ ratings of a station that was "barely marketed" by the previous owners IF he spends some meaningful dollars on promotion. A better question would be, "Will he ever get any sort of monetary (as opposed to psychic) return on his $12 million investment if he continues with his 'Arts' format?" My answer would be a definite "NO." But if it brings him pleasure? Fine!

Finally the last sad arguments of the reality challenged. Claim the other person as 'hateful' when if you read the previous posts, everyone can see where the real hatred is coming from.

Please give one example of any "hatred" that I've expressed here.

And for the record, my name is Evan Lee ( hence the handle, someone already owned the proper spelling ), no I am not who you claim I am, which is yet another Scribbler claim with no proof or merit.

Claim? What claim? I just asked a question, since your Point of View and M.O. are so much like the missing-in-action Flintstone, mwebster, et al.

And I am not neoconservative, and not hostile to leftist programming. Just BAD leftist programming, get it?

Who said you were "neoconservative?" Not me.

Poor Scribbler. hiding behind his moniker,

I'm in the news biz, and my employer doesn't want me (or any other news people) expressing political views on a public forum.

...engaging in a futile struggle to defend an awful and underperforming group of poor talent and horrific business decisions. You just gotta feel sorry for this guy

Please cite any evidence that I've "struggled" to "defend" anybody's "business decisions." Air America is still struggling to recover from the disastrous business decisions made by Evan Cohen, who's now been gone for over two years. Some of the talent is good, some not so good, but I'm glad the effort is being made and that it's opened a lot of doors for other libtalkers on both the local and syndication levels.

 

[evnlee]

In case anybody else is still following this thread, I'm answering "evnlee's" points with tongue firmly in cheek and finding it hard to believe that he's taking all this so seriously that he has to engage in personal attacks.

so the 'newsguy' who could not understand 'sarcasm' or 'satire' now has his tongue firmly planted in cheek. I might respond that you may have your head firmly planted somewhere else, but that 'satire' would get me flagged as an 'hateful' ad-hominem attack

'First, Scribbler claims Weber has a political motive. When asked to prove it, he backtracks and admits he has no proof, only conjecture.

I made no such "claim."

Is that so? Here's exactly what you wrote:

"The guy who bought the station" has been quoted as saying that he dropped all the Air America programming EXCEPT Al Franken because all the other AAR hosts were "anti-Israel."

Hey Scribbler, again, provide the quote. If you cannot ( because you read in on some left leaning blog), then it's unverifiable. If this is the kind of fact checking you bring to your newsroom, I quite understand why your employer does not want you using your real name.


"Notice that the previous owners "barely marketed" the station and "didn't hire a local sales person." You obviously can't get people to listen to an AM station at 1690 on the dial if you don't do heavy marketing and you can't sell commercials if you don't hire any sales people!"

From AJC's R Ho on Access Atlanta on 06/09/2006:

Intermart partner Bill Brown said he and two other partners were
willing to promote Air America, but a fourth partner wanted to sell
out. In fact, Intermart was --hiring a sales person-- and implementing a
marketing plan when Weber approached them last fall, Brown said."

Oops. This already with the current marketing they were already doing ( getting the cities largest weekly on board, having Franken stop by, buying billbaords,etc. ). Here's another funny little fact : they ran an ad in Access Atlanta for a sales person , AND NO ONE ANSWERED THE AD!!!


"Please give one example of any "hatred" that I've expressed here."

Anyone that has basic reading skills can read the defenders of AAR, and see where the 'hatred' is coming from. Accusing me of being a troll hiding behind his anonymity may not be considered 'hateful', but I doubt it would be considered 'friendly'.

Scribbler, this is just too easy. It's clear you have made false statements and have to backtrack constantly. Go ahead, and get your last word, I will not respond to you anymore.

None of this will change the fact that your precious AAR 24 hr bad programming is no longer on the air in the nations # 10 market. That's enough of the 'last word' for me ;D

 

[Radio_Realist]

Air America is not the only means by which liberal talk show hosts can get on the air. It's not even the best means for getting liberal talk show hosts on the air. What will it take to convince those who advocate more liberal radio talk shows that the best process for achieving that goal is to first get local liberal talk hosts on the air, and then to get the best of those local liberal hosts syndication deals?

The simple truth is that most radio talk shows don't do very well regardless of the host's political alignment. That's why there are so few local talk shows. It's safer to simply plug in something syndicated off of a satelite.

Getting bogged down in whether one particular broadcaster does things well or not is missing the bigger picture. If a broadcaster, especially one who made his money elsewhere and is running a vanity or hobby operation, does a bad job of running his hobby station profitably, that doesn't prove anything other than the fact that one guy isn't doing things very well. It doesn't prove that a category of programming won't work. And it doesn't prove that a given market won't support a category of programming.

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

Air America is not the only means by which liberal talk show hosts can get on the air. It's not even the best means for getting liberal talk show hosts on the air. What will it take to convince those who advocate more liberal radio talk shows that the best process for achieving that goal is to first get local liberal talk hosts on the air, and then to get the best of those local liberal hosts syndication deals?

That is exactly what the Democracy Radio folks did at first.

Ed Schultz was a long-time successful local host before he was tapped to do the national show. (OK, so Fargo is a pretty small market, but it's more radio experience than most of the AAR folks had.)

Stephanie Miller is a veteran, successful local host in market #2, Los Angeles, who's been on full-signal high-profile commercial talk stations for years, like KABC/790 and then-KTZN/710.

Democracy also had initial talks with Randi Rhodes, who had been rolling up top ratings in afternoon drive on West Palm Beach's WJNO/1290 for years. She was apparently up for the slot vs. Mr. Schultz.

While it's important to point out that Democracy was basically an operation run by political operatives within the Democratic Party, their initial move was the right one. Find good, successful local hosts and syndicate them.

Democracy Radio went after RADIO people first. People who didn't have to be taught how to do the work, and who had ratings and revenue track record. You might remember that Ms. Rhodes, in the HBO documentary on AAR, held up that track record in a meeting, almost pleading for people to recognize that she had the numbers to back her up...

My guess - Democracy Radio really wasn't sure how to approach it. They probably meant to get existing hosts (unlike AAR, for the most part), and when they started talking to Jones Radio, Jones let them know that was the best path.

 

[FightingIrish]

Air America is not the only means by which liberal talk show hosts can get on the air. It's not even the best means for getting liberal talk show hosts on the air. What will it take to convince those who advocate more liberal radio talk shows that the best process for achieving that goal is to first get local liberal talk hosts on the air, and then to get the best of those local liberal hosts syndication deals?

That is exactly what the Democracy Radio folks did at first.

Ed Schultz was a long-time successful local host before he was tapped to do the national show. (OK, so Fargo is a pretty small market, but it's more radio experience than most of the AAR folks had.)

Stephanie Miller is a veteran, successful local host in market #2, Los Angeles, who's been on full-signal high-profile commercial talk stations for years, like KABC/790 and then-KTZN/710.

Democracy also had initial talks with Randi Rhodes, who had been rolling up top ratings in afternoon drive on West Palm Beach's WJNO/1290 for years. She was apparently up for the slot vs. Mr. Schultz.

While it's important to point out that Democracy was basically an operation run by political operatives within the Democratic Party, their initial move was the right one. Find good, successful local hosts and syndicate them.

Democracy Radio went after RADIO people first. People who didn't have to be taught how to do the work, and who had ratings and revenue track record. You might remember that Ms. Rhodes, in the HBO documentary on AAR, held up that track record in a meeting, almost pleading for people to recognize that she had the numbers to back her up...

My guess - Democracy Radio really wasn't sure how to approach it. They probably meant to get existing hosts (unlike AAR, for the most part), and when they started talking to Jones Radio, Jones let them know that was the best path.

Sounds about right. Democracy Radio operated as kind of an agent, or a farm league, and worked with Jones and others to develop and syndicate shows. They encouraged Schultz to break away and sign with P1. They also worked as an in-between for Nancy Skinner at WDTW in Detroit (she left the station earlier this year).

Rhodes had some discussions with DR prior to AAR, since she had long wanted to syndicate.

DR closed down their operations when they saw that their job was done, and that the format had grown some legs. Plus, they didn't have the clout or know-how to do their own syndication, so they left it to the pros (like Jones).

As for experienced versus non-experienced hosts, I agree that experienced hosts seem to do better shows. Arguably, the best shows in the format are from radio veterans like Schultz, Miller, Rhodes, Lionel, Thom Hartmann and Mike Malloy - established radio talkers. I assume AAR, as they built their network, wanted to mix it up a little, with relatively unknown radio veterans (Rhodes, Malloy), people from the journalistic side (Maddow, Flanders) and widely known personalities with little or no radio experience (Franken, Springer, etc.). Now, while I'm not as big a fan of Springer and Franken (they're a bit dry for me), I do realize that big entertainment industry names do add at least a little clout for the network to the average listener. This has been done on the conservative radio side as well, with people like Bill O'Reilly, Bill Bennett, John Gibson, and Tony Snow being thrust into syndication with no real radio track record. Hell, G. Gordon Liddy had no radio experience when he tried to go up against Limbaugh in the 90s (though I kinda like the whole 'trainwreck' quality of his show).

Giving non-radio people high-profile syndicated slots is a real crapshoot. I understand AAR wanted to break away from the typical radio talker mold, just to be different. Obviously, talk radio is not something anyone can do. On a side note, I do know that there were some people that turned down AAR when they were starting up. Most notable was Harry Shearer, who does have radio experience. I think another may have been Al Sharpton (also with some talk experience), who was running for President at the time.

Is AAR a perfect network? Of course not. Not even close. But for a two year old network that started from virtually nothing, I'll argue that they've done fairly well for themselves. I'll bet most people didn't even think they'd be around in August, 2006. But AAR alone is not the be-all, end-all for the format. The best progressive talk stations are the ones that cherry-pick the best shows (like Miller, Schultz, Rhodes, etc.) and slot in a few local hosts. Any station relying solely on AAR for programming is being lazy. Nowadays, there are a lot of good progressive talk shows to choose from out there. And alot of it isn't even being done by AAR.

Good post, OMW. Glad to see this thread move away from the feces-flinging fest it had become, with people concentrating more on the politics of it rather than the radio end (which I try to do).

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

Now, while I'm not as big a fan of Springer and Franken (they're a bit dry for me), I do realize that big entertainment industry names do add at least a little clout for the network to the average listener.

I'll give one point to AAR in this regard - they wouldn't have gotten nearly as much pre-launch publicity without Al Franken aboard. In fact, for the first few weeks, AAR was basically known outside its walls as "The Al Franken Network".

It's easier to sell your new product when someone can say, "Oh, yeah, the guy from Saturday Night Live is going after Rush!".

This has been done on the conservative radio side as well, with people like Bill O'Reilly, Bill Bennett, John Gibson, and Tony Snow being thrust into syndication with no real radio track record. Hell, G. Gordon Liddy had no radio experience when he tried to go up against Limbaugh in the 90s (though I kinda like the whole 'trainwreck' quality of his show).

G-Man started, of course, as a local host on WJFK-FM in Washington DC, the same station known today as the home base for WW1's Don and Mike. It was actually a pretty good lineup they had...Stern to G-Man to D&M. I don't remember how long it took WW1 to syndicate him out of there.

O'Reilly is a tool, but not an awful host radio-wise. Bennett is the closest thing to Sominex ever put near a radio microphone. Gibson's serviceable, but not thrilling. And Tony Snow got his radio chops filling in for Rush, but...ditto, as Rush would say.

It is somewhat weird having a radio talk show host go directly to the White House as press secretary.

Giving non-radio people high-profile syndicated slots is a real crapshoot. I understand AAR wanted to break away from the typical radio talker mold, just to be different. Obviously, talk radio is not something anyone can do. On a side note, I do know that there were some people that turned down AAR when they were starting up. Most notable was Harry Shearer, who does have radio experience. I think another may have been Al Sharpton (also with some talk experience), who was running for President at the time.

Is AAR a perfect network? Of course not. Not even close. But for a two year old network that started from virtually nothing, I'll argue that they've done fairly well for themselves. I'll bet most people didn't even think they'd be around in August, 2006. But AAR alone is not the be-all, end-all for the format. The best progressive talk stations are the ones that cherry-pick the best shows (like Miller, Schultz, Rhodes, etc.) and slot in a few local hosts. Any station relying solely on AAR for programming is being lazy. Nowadays, there are a lot of good progressive talk shows to choose from out there. And alot of it isn't even being done by AAR.

Good post, OMW. Glad to see this thread move away from the feces-flinging fest it had become, with people concentrating more on the politics of it rather than the radio end (which I try to do).


[/quote]

 

[evnlee]

Air America is not the only means by which liberal talk show hosts can get on the air. It's not even the best means for getting liberal talk show hosts on the air. What will it take to convince those who advocate more liberal radio talk shows that the best process for achieving that goal is to first get local liberal talk hosts on the air, and then to get the best of those local liberal hosts syndication deals?

Amen to that. Unlike some others, this guy realizes what I have been saying all along. Find local liberal talent. Use radio insiders, not comedians or tv stars. Forget about trying to compete on a 'national' level, or trying to use your programming for anything else then making $$ or entertaining people. Package the talent with good imaging and some modest promotion. Invite callers that dissent and use the forum for healthy debate. All of which AAR ( in some respects) has utterly failed to do.

Now lets hear it from the koolaid committee that thinks if you disprespect AAR, you must have some 'political motive' and watch as they spin on their eyebrows and stomp and cry.