• 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

Can 1360 WPTT AM take down the big guys?

Radio_Realist said:
"your exact words were

"passed their sell-by date years ago""

That was in reference to Hoerth and Cullen, but I thought you were commenting on what I said about Pintek and Romine. In the case of Hoerth and Cullen, it's not so much that they are old people, it's that their schtick is old. Other talk hosts the same age as those two, with the same amount of time on the air have managed to keep their acts fresh. Those two haven't.

As for Pintek and Romine, I stand by what I said about them sounding like they were getting bored. Maybe they weren't, I don't know them personally. But they came across as getting bored.

"If the existing hosts are getting a bit stale, then were do you turn for fresh ones?"

That's a major conundrum for the entire industry. The stations in small markets where one would think rookies could develop their skills, and some of them could display the abilities needed to move up to larger markets insist on filling their time with syndicated programming. I can understand small companies forced to go all syndication out of economic necessity. I cannot understand why no one at large companies like Clear Channel or Viacom sees the advantages of grooming new talent.

It strikes me as similar to how organized baseball maintains the minor leagues to develop talent for the major leagues. Without the minor leagues, where will the new major leaguers come from?
Click to expand...

Having listened to some talk shows in small markets...and having listened to hosts sweat bullets while stammering to fill long intervals between calls, I'd say you have an excellent point. It's hard to get a farm system going.
 
Absolutely Freddy. There is no 'minor league' for radio anymore. And a lot of these Pittsburgh talk show hosts are getting old, grumpy, and stale. There is a great need for fresh talk show talent in Pittsburgh besides moronic disc jockeys like the ones on Kiss FM. Stations feel more safe with Hannity,Savage, Beck than allowing hosts who want to get their feet wet and bring some new talent. Not that I blame the stations from a financial standpoint, but after awhile all the hosts who hve been listening to for ages sound the same and boring (except for Savage when he missed a dose of Prozac.) One might say internet radio is a minor league for talk radio, but broadcasting out of your mom's attic on your E Machine while wearing your "What Would Captain Kirk Do" T-Shirt to your audience of negative 12 people sounds kind of corny to me. Not that I am familiar with this.........

Star Trek is back on...gotta go.
ha ha.

-Dukat
 
Dukat says it's a great station (and in some ways, I agree) then people reply with ways to change it. ???

With their current numbers they are doing better than most Air America Radio stations.

IMHO:
They need a real morning show - not TV audio and not yesterday's Laura Ingraham.
They need a consistent format. Progressive talk, conservative talk or advice talk. Pick one.
A better signal would also help.

Their schedule suggests pay2play may be a factor in their programming decisions.
 
They need a real morning show - not TV audio and not yesterday's Laura Ingraham.
They need a consistent format. Progressive talk, conservative talk or advice talk. Pick one.
A better signal would also help.
Click to expand...

#1 can be helped very easily by programming decisions--the other two stations in the cluster have local morning shows; why not 1360?

#2 can be helped, if they want to, but it's not necessary to pick one constant ideology or general topic and make that the format; KDKA proved for over 30 years that you could have conservative and liberal talk on the same station (Wheeler, Levine, Marshall, Cigna, Pintek, Romigh, Honsberger)

#3 is out of everyone's hands except the Commission; they just have to make do with what they have, as bad as it may be (though here's a question--anyone know how their facility is? Transmitter dated? Ground system dated?)
 
Question- might a morning show targeted to McKeesport and the Mon Valley be something to work with?

The signal is, of course, based there and it's the only place that can get the station at night.

The Mon Valley is not without people.

This is not to say that a morning show without mentioning Bob O'Connor's recent spat with cancer would be what we want.

What it is to say is that if one was doing a sportscast- why not a special mention to some of the local high school teams in the Mon Valley? Why not feature NASCAR- which is so popular in that area? Why not also take a special look at the news there in the Mon Valley and be sure to have a focus there?
 
"might a morning show targeted to McKeesport and the Mon Valley be something to work with?"

Sounds like you're describing WMCK.
 
I agree with Fred. While I like old 1360, they need to pick a general format within the talk radio layout and stick to it. I like Cullen and Hoerth and think they are valuable and define Pittsburgh radio, but maybe revamp the other shows with newer younger hosts that are within the area and also tap into the fast paced energy that WPGB has. I hate to say it, but when Lynn or Hoerth aren't on, I switch to WPGB because WPTT's other program is too old, stale, and booooring. I think WPTT should of grabbed McIntyre because he has some energy (even though I don't always politically agree with him) and a local appeal like Honsberger.

I don't know, its hard to say. For a AM Talk Station succeed, does it have to be all political talk? Any ideas?
 
I don't think so. I think you could succeed in pop culture talk.

One thing about Hoerth is that in his day he succeeded in doing pop culture talk.

Now, his pop culture is by this time waaaaaay behind the times. Don't give me "Well, Pittsburgh's population is so old that it will fit in."

It would be waaaaaay behind the times in Tampa and Miami- where the population is just as old. It would be waaaaay behind the times in New York or Philadelphia- where they also have older people and more of them than we do.

However, I have always felt that you could have a talk show based on pop culture and its effects on society and do great things.

To a certain extent- Matt Drudge tries to do this- though 90% of his show is political. But you'll often hear him commenting on how movies affect the culture- though it's mostly surrounded by "This is how Hollywood is corrupting society" or whatever.

I mean a "Jessica vs. Britney vs. Christina" could be an interesting talk show debate and would get a new audience to the genre. It may be puff- it may not be your cup of tea- but there is obviously potential.

Now, I don't know. Maybe if WPTT went to such a format it might find an audience. You could keep Hoerth in such a format- Lynn would probably be out the window- but he might actually sound fresh or regain an audience if surrounded by talk shows catering to a younger crowd.

Son listens before, then dad listens later.

Could Alan Cox suddenly have found a role?

Maybe I should bite my tounge . . . . ::)
 
"I think you could succeed in pop culture talk."

Can you imagine the ratings a radio talk show about the soap operas (sorry, daytime dramas) would pull among 30 to 60 years old housewives?!?! Or how well a radio version of a TV show like Oprah Winfrey would draw among that audience?

I'll wager most radio pros will say it won't work. The same people who said a nationally syndicated woman DJ playing sappy love songs and sob-sister dedications wouldn't work will tell you that your idea won't work either.
 
Ironically, the one place locally where they seem to be trying to develop fresh talent is in the sports-talk arena, with guys like Tim Benz, Ken Laird and Greg Linelli. Unfortunately, programmers seem to be grooming them to serve a warmed-over imitation of the pro-wrestler-in-your-face program on 1250. These young guys seem to have potential, but are going to learn a hard lesson if the market suddenly tires of that blowhard act (and it will!)
 
Sports Talk has always had some "in-your-face."

I'm listening to Laird right now- I'm not sure he's trying to do the "Madden-Schtick" like Tim Benz was. Very straight sports talk- not so much in your face- though I think he's giving Ed Rendell too much credit for "Saving the Pens."
 
Perhaps not. And neither was Ken Beatrice in Washington, for that matter.

But the traditional image of a sports talk host is something of a "Bulldog Briscoe" type, probably established by the late Pete "You bore me, meathead. What'd you do, take Tylenol for dinner?" Franklin.
 
"Cope did the most successful sports talk show ever in Pittsburgh and wasn't in anyone's face."

I beg to differ. One of Cope's many skills was the ability to get in the face of the opposing team and its fans on behalf of the local fans. On his talk show, there were times when Myron was the official fan spokesman for the entire city, giving voice to our feelings towards the Steelers' opponents.
 
1. Cope always maintained a degree of civility in rivalries and 2. That isn't what's meant by a talk show host being "in your face."
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom