Are Conservative Talk Stations Positioning for changes in FCC Guidelines?

[koolestcat]

Looks like a lot of shows like Hannity, Savage, Beck and others are being replaced by local shows as of late.

Could this be due to stations getting ready for FCC rules which would have them in conflict with the regs if they didnt have the local shows they are putting on now?

 

[UpstateNYBill]

Too bad the FCC gets involved in this area if this is true. The free market should rule. Many local talk shows are about mundane topics (like gardening) with mundane hosts. They are not qualified radio personalites.

 

[Talk_Dude]

Looks like a lot of shows like Hannity, Savage, Beck and others are being replaced by local shows as of late.

Could this be due to stations getting ready for FCC rules which would have them in conflict with the regs if they didnt have the local shows they are putting on now?

New FCC rules come from the government. There's a new Congress that was just sworn in that should be more friendly towards nationally syndicated conservative talkers, not less friendly. Besides, if stations are going to jettison some syndicated talkers in favor of local hosts to satisfy the government, wouldn't they get rid of the lowest rated ones, not the ones getting good ratings?

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

WOR/710 in NYC cited low ratings as the reason for dumping Glenn Beck.

 

[Talk_Dude]

WOR/710 in NYC cited low ratings as the reason for dumping Glenn Beck.

Is that citation of low ratings consistent with reality, or is that just the public excuse because they can't come out and say "We're dropping him because we're afraid of the FCC"?

I'm really asking that question, it's not rhetorical snark.

 

[OhioMediaWatch]

Is that citation of low ratings consistent with reality, or is that just the public excuse because they can't come out and say "We're dropping him because we're afraid of the FCC"?

WOR's ratings are all over the map, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was true.

Supposedly, from what someone said here on R-I, WOR's Steve Malzberg is beating WABC's Sean Hannity, but Steve's doing a local show for them. IIRC, Bill O'Reilly got middling-to-low ratings on WOR.

 

[MattParker]

Changes in FCC guidelines? ???
First I heard of it. Where did you get that idea?

Maybe, the audience is getting tired to the syndicated, partly line echo chamber. Rush was different and original 20 years ago. Now all these people are doing the same act and even Rush has gotten stale. The others never did it as well as he. Add to audience fatigue the fact that the audience for these shows has aged; most have been out of the money demos since the Reagan administration.

So, advertiser interest is waning, too.

And the syndicators have been wanting more money from stations. Stations went to syndication because it was cheaper than doing a local live show, as well as a product with a proven track record. Now the cost advantage of syndication is lessening and the track record no longer looks so go.

Ditto heads want to blame the government for anything they don't like. Well, this time it just might be your hallowed free market at work. The age of the Rushites is coming to a close. Sad thing is there doesn't seem to be anything new coming to take its place.

 

[koolestcat]

Changes in FCC guidelines? ???
First I heard of it. Where did you get that idea?

I heard one of the talkers a few months ago say they from what they could see there wouldnt be a blatant change to the regs but it would be done more from local boards which would measure how much local content stations had and report ones which were lacking. This of course would effectively reduce the impact of shows like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity etc etc as it would force the local station to drop some shows and add more local programming.

And the syndicators have been wanting more money from stations. Stations went to syndication because it was cheaper than doing a local live show, as well as a product with a proven track record. Now the cost advantage of syndication is lessening

Have to agree with you there.

 

[MattParker]

Talk show hosts make up stuff and lie outright. Anything to get the ditto-heads worked up. "Local boards?" I have no idea what that's supposed to be and besides nobody but the FCC has authority over broadcasting, certainly not any local agency.

All these guys were doing better shows when they were still local, not hobnobbing with politicians and party leaders and not so full of themselves and their ideas of their own "influence." Somebody who just wants to do a good radio show is more likely to do a good radio show.

 

[koolestcat]

Might have to do with renewals checkout this recent link.

http://radiomagonline.com/fcc/fcc-copps-public-value-test-license-renewal-1203/

 

[imhomerjay]

Amusingly, it's the very market the talkers cheer that is costing them a few slots in a few markets. Not some imagined FCC changes. No big conspiracy at work, though it could make for more amusing chatter to create yet another boogeyman out to do some nefarious ill to those poor, picked-upon national talkers.

 

[Talk_Dude]

Might have to do with renewals checkout this recent link.

http://radiomagonline.com/fcc/fcc-copps-public-value-test-license-renewal-1203/

That sounds like it will probably end up being little more than a revival of the Sunday morning PSA ghetto. The FCC might well heed the idea of Michael Copps "to reform the broadcast licensing method by requiring a public value test", but given the nature of the bureaucracy, it will probably be watered down to the point where the FCC will be happy if there are some public affairs programs on Sunday morning like in years gone by, and maybe a local origination program overnight. So, we might start hearing interns and minimum wage rookies working the graveyard shifts.

I think that there are genuinely two things at play here, occurring simultaneously, but not closely related. I think that the cancellation of expensive big-name hosts is strictly based on financial issues. But, I think that there will also be a movement in response to the FCC to put some token local programming on in time slots where it doesn't really matter. But as I said, I think those will be two separate things.

 

[KeyTimes950]

While the fear of changes in FCC guidelines has been with us since Mr. Obama's inauguration, the recent spike in such concern could be tied to the issue of net neutrality recently addressed by the FCC. Yes, the issue regards the Internet and not broadcasting directly, but standards applied there could be applied across the board.

As to the recent moves of such stations as WPHT in Philadelphia and WOR in New York, I'm willing to believe ratings are a factor. Rush Limbaugh still seems to approach his audience as an entertainer as well as "America's anchorman." Sean Hannity can be entertaining but it seems he doesn't try hard enough. But what do I know?

 

[TheBigA]

I think that the cancellation of expensive big-name hosts is strictly based on financial issues.

To be more specific, stations give up local inventory and some even pay cash to carry syndicated talk shows. If the ratings aren't as strong as they had been, it's makes sense to replace barter programming with local and keep the cash. Plus you have the rights to all the online content as well. It's all about money, folks. The FCC is far too busy looking at the internet to care about broadcasting.

 

[Talk_Dude]

I think that the cancellation of expensive big-name hosts is strictly based on financial issues.

To be more specific, stations give up local inventory and some even pay cash to carry syndicated talk shows. If the ratings aren't as strong as they had been, it's makes sense to replace barter programming with local and keep the cash. Plus you have the rights to all the online content as well. It's all about money, folks. The FCC is far too busy looking at the internet to care about broadcasting.

You make it sound like the FCC is just one guy. There are five commissioners and 17 bureaus and offices. As of September, 2009, they had 1,930 full-time employees. With that amount of resources available, they should be able to multi-task sufficiently to look into both over-the-air radio and the internet, with some additional resources to spare for other issues as well.

They also have a FY 2011 budget of $325,000,000. If they want to keep that size appropriation, they'll look at whatever the influential Senators and Representatives tell them to look at.

 

[TheBigA]

You make it sound like the FCC is just one guy.

If that's the impression you got, it's wrong. However, only one Comissioner has been saying anything about re-regulating radio, and he's all talk and no action.

And to get back to the topic of this thread, there is absolutely nothing that leads me to believe there is going to be any change in FCC guidelines regarding local programming. Nothing, nothing, and more nothing. Which means nothing on the Commissioner level, nothing among the staff, and nothing in Congress. If there's something I've missed, please show me a link.

 

[Talk_Dude]

You make it sound like the FCC is just one guy.

If that's the impression you got, it's wrong. However, only one Comissioner has been saying anything about re-regulating radio, and he's all talk and no action.

And to get back to the topic of this thread, there is absolutely nothing that leads me to believe there is going to be any change in FCC guidelines regarding local programming. Nothing, nothing, and more nothing. Which means nothing on the Commissioner level, nothing among the staff, and nothing in Congress. If there's something I've missed, please show me a link.

The things you missed are kind of things that aren't posted on weblinks. For someone who pretends to be such an insider, like you do, you must already know that.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I agree with the message that pointed out that maybe this talk about FCC guidelines changing comes from the "trash-talk" by talk show hosts from time to time that the opposition (liberals?) will be demanding that government shut down talk radio as we know it. Throw the ditto-heads some bloody raw meat to chew on from time to time.

Let me propose another pressure the stations may be feeling, or will soon be running into. You are a big car dealer. You have some money going into advertising... either during the talk block... or at other times on the station that carries talkers during the day. One of your customers that normally has someone in the office bring the Cadillac or the Lexus or the Jag down to the dealership for routine maintenance sticks his head in your office, and pecks on the door frame. "Got a minute, Can I come in?"

There is no other suitable answer than "Well, of course" as you get up, walk around the desk and engage in a big, warm handshake. Some small talk fills the air and you know this is NOT why Mr. Big is here in person today. Pretty soon he sneaks into what you quickly recognize is the mission of this unusual visit.

"You know I am as loyal and involved in conservative issues and politics as they come. But I am worried. Talk Radio is getting louder and harsher by the month. At some point it may or will become a burden to our political efforts. You spend a lot of money with the station. I would consider it a personal favor if you would suggest to them they need to dial it back a little."

The first dude that does that, you basically take a deep breath when he leaves and you forget it or sit on it. When the third or fourth "big player" delivers such a message to you in your office or on the golf course, it gets your attention.

Pretty soon the station manager finds YOU showing up at his office door, hears that little peck, peck, peck on the door frame and you ask: "You got a minute."

The station manager takes a deep breath as you live the office, and he forgets it or sits on it. When the third or fourth "big player" delivers such a message to the station manager... it gets his attention.

Pretty soon the Program Director hears tapping on his door frame as the station manager inquires: "You got a minute?"

If all of these conversation were to actually happen, that would be more powerful and quicker than any government action that has been feared.

 

[TheBigA]

The things you missed are kind of things that aren't posted on weblinks. For someone who pretends to be such an insider, like you do, you must already know that.

So then you got nothing? Not the first time.

 

[Talk_Dude]

The things you missed are kind of things that aren't posted on weblinks. For someone who pretends to be such an insider, like you do, you must already know that.

So then you got nothing? Not the first time.

I got as much as you got, same as the last time.