Carr, Severin, and D&C In TALKERS' Heavy 100

[raccoonradio]

Howie Carr #50
Jay Severin #66
Dennis and Callahan #93
in the Talkers magazine Heavy 100. RadioEqualizer blog says that the yearly survey is controversial,
because there are too many syndie hosts and also some "heavy advertisers" to the publication
get treated well.

http://www.talkers.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19&Itemid=44
The top 10 is Rush, Hannity, Savage, Dr. Laura, Ed Schulz, O&A, Laura Ingraham, Mike Gallagher,
Neal Boortz, and Glenn Beck. AAR's Randi Rhodes shows up just under Stern and Mancow and ahead
of Imus and O'Reilly. Stephanie Miller is #36, a few notches below Tom Leykis.

Hartmann is just under Howie. More than a few Salem talkers are on there but where are their
listeners? Providence's Dan Yorke shows up

"the selection process is subjective"...

#101 - #250 follow but are arranged by category. Among them:
Gene Burns--KGO
Eagan and Braude--WTKK
Todd Feinburg--WRKO (note it lists him that way, not as "syndicated")
Michael Graham--WTKK
Glenn Ordway--WEEI
JT The Yankee Lover--Fox Sports

Considering their far reaching signal at night am surprised WBZ isn't on there somehow. I think they're
ranked by importance rather than listenership, but Sullivan, Leveille, Rich, and Dyett don't show.

 

[ADC]

I've always thought that the heavy 100 is a big joke.

Who's doing the ranking and are they really familiar with all the talent in all the various markets?

What is the criteria used to determine the ranking? Is it ratings? Political influence? Something else?

Maybe you could do some sort of ranking with the big syndicated shows but beyond that it just gets ridiculous.

Like most lists, this is nothing more then a publicity stunt for the group that's putting it out. It will get talked about for a few weeks but in actuality means very little.

- Al

 

[AvenueA]

I've always thought that the heavy 100 is a big joke.

Yeah, the joke's on people who take it seriously.

 

[raccoonradio]

Of course talk hosts and their stations/syndicators use it to point out how "popular" they are. Radio Eq.:
"the rankings are often cited in trade advertising for hosts who make the list, while mainstream media outlets have a nasty habit of referencing it in news stories about talk radio."

He thinks Schultz shouldn't be up so high; that may talkers deserve to be higher (or lower) and that George
Noory/Coast to Coast should be higher than #28, " despite maintaining solid ratings and interest. " In addition
to the bias towards its advertisers, as he says, there's also a bias toward hosts in the NorthEast and he
notes that it's based in Springfield.

 

[shotgunanniexo]

Wow, I agree. That list is a joke. Rush? The coveted demographic we keep hearing about canNOT be interested in him. At least I'm not and I think I fall in there. (Though I'm never really sure since the age gap is so wide--what does a 25-year-old even have in common with a 54-year old?) There's smart rightwings I'll give you that, but Rush lost his appeal way back when he started becoming a tabloid-pill-popping freak. RKO should drop him. Boston is too smart for him. Why do they keep him around?

 

[Finn]

Wow, I agree. That list is a joke. Rush? The coveted demographic we keep hearing about canNOT be interested in him. At least I'm not and I think I fall in there. (Though I'm never really sure since the age gap is so wide--what does a 25-year-old even have in common with a 54-year old?) There's smart rightwings I'll give you that, but Rush lost his appeal way back when he started becoming a tabloid-pill-popping freak. RKO should drop him. Boston is too smart for him. Why do they keep him around?

Brian Maloney said they tried to get out of it but are locked into a contract with Limbaugh.

 

[raccoonradio]

Could well be; also could be, as I've read elsewhere, that they are obligated to carry all 3 hours of his show.
There was talk WRKO could go to the "big 3" concept of 3 hosts, 6-10 am, 10a-2 pm, and 2-6 pm (move
Howie back an hour) and they could conceivably do that, or maybe local 10-noon then Rush noon-2,
but maybe the contract prohibits them. (With the Red Sox games starting at 7 pm for the most part,
wouldn't it make sense to end Howie at 6 and start Red Sox pregame then? Have 2-3 pm be local
Howie hour...or maybe they make more $$ with 6-7 local talk instead of 2-3 pm. Drive time of course...

 

[BRNout]

Wow, I agree. That list is a joke. Rush? The coveted demographic we keep hearing about canNOT be interested in him. At least I'm not and I think I fall in there. (Though I'm never really sure since the age gap is so wide--what does a 25-year-old even have in common with a 54-year old?) There's smart rightwings I'll give you that, but Rush lost his appeal way back when he started becoming a tabloid-pill-popping freak. RKO should drop him. Boston is too smart for him. Why do they keep him around?

Brian Maloney said they tried to get out of it but are locked into a contract with Limbaugh.

Let's remember, Rush is still the most lucrative part of WRKO's lineup. People do listen - and not just old geezers. His demos remain better than most politically-oriented talk shows. Like him or hate him - the guy still brings in the listeners. Replacing him with a local host (especially given Entercom's recent track record) would be yet another disaster at 680.

But it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Entercom tried to get out of their contract with Rush - every other move they've made lately has been absolutely wrong. I've been away for less than a year and try to listen to 'RKO during my frequent visits. But, it's as if the station is less than a shadow of its former self. A real crash and burn.

Aside from Rush and Howie (and the Dana Hersey sounders), the rest of the station sounds so awful! And, the small market sound of the news (after having great talent let go like Listo Fisher) is terrible. Traffic guys who can't pronounce the cities and who clearly don't know the roads, the canned news from 18 year old interns - it's crap.

 

[Finn]

Let's remember, Rush is still the most lucrative part of WRKO's lineup. People do listen - and not just old geezers. His demos remain better than most politically-oriented talk shows. Like him or hate him - the guy still brings in the listeners.

Can anyone else confirm this with facts? That Rush is most lucrative part of WRKO's lineup? If true, is that also true for WTKK? In other words, is this the nature of the time slot, the nature of being syndicated, or the host?

Thanks.

P.S. If Rush is so darn popular, why does he have such strict rules about his show? Wouldn't everyone just want to have him on as much as they could??

 

[deadman]

O&A are #6 while Howard is 12th

 

[BRNout]

Let's remember, Rush is still the most lucrative part of WRKO's lineup. People do listen - and not just old geezers. His demos remain better than most politically-oriented talk shows. Like him or hate him - the guy still brings in the listeners.

P.S. If Rush is so darn popular, why does he have such strict rules about his show? Wouldn't everyone just want to have him on as much as they could??

That should tell you something. His syndicators are able to make local programmers jump through hoops to get his show on the air - because it does so well. It is, by far, the best selling show on AM radio. So, to answer your question: "because he can."

 

[argytunes]

I'm probably one of the few broadcasters who doesn't care for Rush.

His schtick has been the same for years. Complain about the Democrats and embrace the Republicans! But does Rush ever offer 'potential solutions' for either party to perform their jobs BETTER? [You'd think somebody would since our tax dollars are paying those HUGE salaries...along with those never-ending government perks?

What most talk show hosts still don't understand is that after so much day-to-day b**ching from liberals, conservatives, left-wingers, right-wingers, etc....without offering any concrete solutions....many of their loyal radio listeners get very BORED!

And this is probably the reason why ipods and satellite radio stations have become so popular?

 

[raccoonradio]

I tune in for a few minutes of him but that's about it..I think he still has good ratings and lots of affiliates.
Some have said WRKO tried to get rid of him (yet I thought they had said Howie and Rush were their
two highest rated shows?)...not sure. Wonder if WRKO could put on anyone from Glenn Beck to
Steph Miller in the post-Felon slot of 10-noon and then have a local talker on 12-3 (to counter
Eagan & Braude?)

But if Rush does indeed do well on 'RKO, then "don't fix what ain't broke". Other parts of their lineup might need fixing though

 

[lovetalk1]

The idea that Rush is the most lucrative daypart for wrko is silly. Howie gets double the ratings, and of course is local. Even the small share of AM drive would bring in many more dollars. Just look at the avails. If you figure rko is running 12? minutes an hour of spots in local programming, and compare that to the roughly 6 you get in a syndicated show, then compare dayparts, you can see instantly that this is another of the many declarations of the uninformed that plague this board.

IE - Howie - 10 spots an hour at 300/ea = $12,000 per day, or $60,000 a week (assuming he's undersold, which is probably wrong).

Rush - 6 spots an hour assuming he's 100% sold, not likely) at $200 (this seems way too high, but trying to be fair) = $3600/day or $18,000/week.

Even if Howie makes the rumored 800 large/year, and Rush costs $100,000 or so, you can see that there's no comparison in the money being made by Howie. The morning show would look pretty similar to Howie.

 

[radiotony]

About 10-plus years ago, I asked Michael Harrison about what was then the Heavy Hundred, and he said that list was based on listening estimates compiled by Arbitron and the smaller market hosts are based on ones they've been impressed with.

I've always thought that the heavy 100 is a big joke.

Who's doing the ranking and are they really familiar with all the talent in all the various markets?

What is the criteria used to determine the ranking? Is it ratings? Political influence? Something else?

Maybe you could do some sort of ranking with the big syndicated shows but beyond that it just gets ridiculous.

Like most lists, this is nothing more then a publicity stunt for the group that's putting it out. It will get talked about for a few weeks but in actuality means very little.

- Al

 

[raccoonradio]

Well I've heard that some of the rankings came from raw numbers they had, prob. from Arbitron as you
say: Rush was said to have about 14 million listeners, Hannity about 13 mil; the likes of Savage
and Ingraham maybe 8 million, 5 million, something like that. If this list is based on that kind of data
then Ed Schulz has a lot more listeners than one would think.

I wonder if we may see some of the prog. talkers try to get on the stations that currently run conservative
talk (for the most part); in some cities, Boston among them, the prog. talker/Air America station changed
their format--and while efforts are underway to get another station to take its place you wonder if
WRKO or WTKK could be persuaded to put on the likes of Miller, Schulz, etc. Would such a hybrid station
work, views from the right and the left?

Prog. talkers have said their format is viable. In some cases--the Jones hosts, maybe--it could be, but lately they've been taking some major hits. The Talking Radio blog noted that prog talk, in the past year,
"has gained two stations and lost 19 and gained 658,000 potential listeners while losing 13,815,100". He
says currently there are 47 prog talk stations...Again, would fans of prog talk be better off trying to get
a bigger station (like WRKO, WTKK) to carry some of their shows instead of trying to get on a much weaker signal?
(Source: http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/)_

 

[radiotony]

Thanks for this link. It's an interesting question. The blogger also has some interesting points to make on this link:

http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/2007/02/aar-snubbed-in-talkers-magazine-list.html

Look at the chart comparing the ratings at stations which carry left-wing AAR and stations which carry right-wing Salem. AAR beat the Salem numbers and yet their hosts don't make the Talkers 250 but Salem's do. Very interesting. I wonder if this isn't worth an email to Michael Harrison to get him to react to what seems to be a fix.

Also, he posts the Talkers disclaimer that the list isn't based on ratings or surveys but a reflective look by staff on the industry. That says a lot too!

Well I've heard that some of the rankings came from raw numbers they had, prob. from Arbitron as you
say: Rush was said to have about 14 million listeners, Hannity about 13 mil; the likes of Savage
and Ingraham maybe 8 million, 5 million, something like that. If this list is based on that kind of data
then Ed Schulz has a lot more listeners than one would think.

I wonder if we may see some of the prog. talkers try to get on the stations that currently run conservative
talk (for the most part); in some cities, Boston among them, the prog. talker/Air America station changed
their format--and while efforts are underway to get another station to take its place you wonder if
WRKO or WTKK could be persuaded to put on the likes of Miller, Schulz, etc. Would such a hybrid station
work, views from the right and the left?

Prog. talkers have said their format is viable. In some cases--the Jones hosts, maybe--it could be, but lately they've been taking some major hits. The Talking Radio blog noted that prog talk, in the past year,
"has gained two stations and lost 19 and gained 658,000 potential listeners while losing 13,815,100". He
says currently there are 47 prog talk stations...Again, would fans of prog talk be better off trying to get
a bigger station (like WRKO, WTKK) to carry some of their shows instead of trying to get on a much weaker signal?
(Source: http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/)_