Clear Channel New Home to Hannity & Limbaugh?

[Small Market Guy]

What percentage of these calls are fake? I'd be willing to believe it if there were actual facts attached to the claims. I've even listened a bit the past week, and the callers are as bad as ever. Again, I just want to see one example. Show us one example.

 

[Small Market Guy]

So the assumption is that because Premiere offers a caller service, and Rush is a Premiere show, that therefore Rush uses the Premiere caller service?

There's a big gap in that logic.

Since when is logic a requirement for bashing Rush on this board?

 

[joshzz]

Right wing radio is the GOP’s most important media tool. If the GOP is using hired callers and organizing scripted callers for national and local radio talk shows to push referenda, legislation, and candidates and attack others all year around should the money used be included in filings to the Federal Election Commission (FEC)?

The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) needs to know. If it’s fraudulent advertising should the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and other federal agencies investigate? Maybe the Better Business Bureau needs to know.

If staff and owners of stations know paid callers are being bumped to the top of the order are they complicit?

Here are some excerpts from Radio Daze by Liel Leibovitz:

A short while later, he received the following email: “Thank you for auditioning for Premiere On Call.” it said. “Your audition was great! We’d like to invite you to join our official roster of ‘ready-to-work’ actors.” The job, the email indicated, paid $40 an hour, with one hour guaranteed per day.



But what exactly was the work? The question popped up during the audition and was explained, the actor said, clearly and simply: If he passed the audition, he would be invited periodically to call in to various talk shows and recite various scenarios that made for interesting radio. He would never be identified as an actor, and his scenarios would never be identified as fabricated—which they always were.



Curious, the actor did some snooping and learned that Premiere On Call was a service offered by Premiere Radio Networks, the largest syndication company in the United States and a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications, the entertainment and advertising giant. Premiere syndicates some of the more sterling names in radio, including Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity. But a great radio show depends as much on great callers as it does on great hosts: Enter Premiere On Call.



Rachel Nelson, a Premiere Radio Networks spokesperson, defended the Premiere on Call service and said that responsibility for how it is employed falls ultimately to those who use it.

“Premiere provides a wide variety of audio services for radio stations across the country, one of which is connecting local stations in major markets with great voice talent to supplement their programming needs,” Nelson wrote in an email. “Voice actors know this service as Premiere On Call. Premiere, like many other content providers, facilitates casting—while character and script development, and how the talent’s contribution is integrated into programs, are handled by the varied stations."

 

[joshzz]

SmallMarketGuy, If Rush and Hannity want to make a point that their shows do not employ paid callers then why don't they demand that Congress investigates the matter?

I have a friend that is a Rush supporter and is ok with the calls being fake. His logic is that Rush is trying to get a point across and the paid callers help move his program along.

In fact I believe many ditto-heads feel the same way, but they don't see the error in such thinking. They would be ok with living under rule in China or Russia where the government's position is the only one they hear.

 

[umfan]

http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=2688365

Rush may be staying in place with Hannity looking for the new home after all.

This does undercut Dickey's prior assertions that Rush has been responsible for Cumulus' woes.

 

[FredLeonard]

http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=2688365

Rush may be staying in place with Hannity looking for the new home after all.

This does undercut Dickey's prior assertions that Rush has been responsible for Cumulus' woes.

So, what's the story with Hannity? The real story, not the spin. He's pushed aside at Fox News. Now on Cumulus stations (maybe others, as well). Not that Dr, Weiner is an improvement. This is just too much of a coincidence.

 

[TheBigA]

This does undercut Dickey's prior assertions that Rush has been responsible for Cumulus' woes.

As many of us said before, it's part of the bargaining position. If he's now able to get Rush without a fee, that's a different situation than what he had before.

 

[Small Market Guy]

SmallMarketGuy, If Rush and Hannity want to make a point that their shows do not employ paid callers then why don't they demand that Congress investigates the matter?

If I accuse you of doing such-and-such, why don't you prove me wrong?

That's not how real life works. The onus is on you to prove your accusations. Which, once again, you refuse to do.

Your little quote is interesting. Of course you or the author also fails to point out that Premiere also syndicates several major morning shows that have been known and have ADMITTED to using fake callers. But that wouldn't fit your (or the author's) agenda, so you (and the author) ignore it. Bob and Tom, Elvis Duran, John Boy and Billy, etc. are the kind of shows who use Premiere On Call Service.

THIS is what Premiere On Call does.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkdoogjic4I

 

[ajc_trw]

So the assumption is that because Premiere offers a caller service, and Rush is a Premiere show, that therefore Rush uses the Premiere caller service?

There's a big gap in that logic.

Since when is logic a requirement for bashing Rush on this board?

Logic is often a hindrance and causes those people the same pains as were felt by the HAL 9000.

 

[umfan]

I think we'll know the real story about Hannity this coming week. He had a much harder edge on Friday.

In the end I think he's going to stay a FNC and just move to 10, and he'll still have his radio show, albeit with fewer stations. I could see CC reformatting for Rush and Hannity would've come along for the ride, but don't see them doing that for Hannity.

I do think Rush will still leave WABC for WOR though, and Hannity will likely make that switch.

Something certainly happened. We may never know what it was exactly.

I doubt that he'd be moving to Glenn Beck's quasi-network setup.

 

[FredLeonard]

Conservatives like to talk about the free market. Well, it's at work in radio syndication, too. Supply and demand. When Rush went into national syndication, he was not in demand. Many stations thought syndicated talk would not work, even in the midday slot (the weakest daytime daypart). At the time, Rush's syndicator at the time, could not charge and stations even got compensation. Some stations only took Rush's weekend "best of" show. Some took the five-day show but delayed it to evenings. They were begging stations to take Rush.

It was almost a decade in syndication before a new distributor (not yet Premiere) decided they could charge stations (and not split the proceeds). Some stations did drop the show then. Over the years, Premiere has upped the rate several times. Stations didn't like it but mostly put up with it.

Now many broadcasters are not so sure Rush is the great asset they once may have thought. They cost is high and local sales are not so easy. Premiere still has not won friends. Now there is price resistance there did not used to be.

Clear Channel is no longer in a position to go on a buying binge (using borrowed money, even with lower interest rates than before). Cluster managers are not so likely to abandon music formats with better demos and better sales.

The free market at work. Demand is soft. Rush will end up with lower fees (maybe no fees at all) and weaker sticks in some, maybe many, markets.

Twenty five years is a long time in radio syndication. Longer than Godfrey. Longer than Larry King. Longer than Howard. Not as long as Paul Harvey or Don McNeil. Also longer than Imus but both shows are on the downhill run. Nothing lasts forever.

 

[umfan]

First off, who lamented this happening or suggested that anything but the free market was in play?

This is the free market at work. Cumulus thought they could do without Rush, and realized they could not. I'm very doubtful they'll be paying much less, and may be paying more for his show. That, more than anything, is likely why they're parting ways with Hannity. Savage gets a small fraction of what Hannity makes.

Hannity will be fine. He'll still be heard on hundreds of stations daily and will retain a prime time slot on FNC.

If anything, this episode demonstrates the current and continuing viability, at least in the short term, for conservative talk.

The free market is indeed at work and the fact that Cumulus isn't jumping into other formats undercuts your argument.

How can you say that Rush will end up with weaker sticks if he's staying put? There are many contradictions in your post, Fred.

 

[TheBigA]

This is the free market at work. Cumulus thought they could do without Rush, and realized they could not.

Realized they could do what? Get a 2 share? That's what Rush is getting. Negotiations are about leverage. The marketplace has changed, so Cumulus feels they should get a better deal than they did the last time. If they don't, they have a plan B that will make them just as much money. If their replacement show gets a lower rating, that's fine because they will pay less too. So it all works out.

The free market is indeed at work and the fact that Cumulus isn't jumping into other formats undercuts your argument.

What are you talking about? In his latest conference call Lew Dickey talked about their primary format initiatives, which are CBS Sports Network and country. So they ARE "jumping into other formats." Are they willing to flip WABC and other talk stations like WMAL, WLS, and WBAP to sports talk? You betcha. I don't think they will, because they have a stable of lesser talk show hosts who will work just fine for what they want to accomplish. But they're not putting all their eggs in one basket.

Hannity is the one whose star has fallen. He had been an ABC Radio host, he moved to Premiere, they bundled him with Rush, and that made him huge. But as Rush has fallen, Hannity has fallen further. Cumulus feels they can do without Hannity. So the threat was to drop them both. Now they'll just drop Hannity.

 

[FredLeonard]

There are many contradictions in your post, Fred.

No contradictions in your's. Total caca. It's the kind of illogic associated with preachers.

I'm sure the University of Michigan does not appreciate you taking their name in vain.

 

[Small Market Guy]

They cost is high and local sales are not so easy.

You keep saying this, but I'm almost positive you have no idea what you're talking about. Every station I've ever worked at that ran Rush had NO PROBLEM selling him. On my current station his rates are only a couple dollars behind my show for a 30. And they're always full.

Of course he only has about 6 mins of avails, so that helps, but the show still makes plenty of money for local affiliates. The cost CAN be high, depending on market, and that may go down, but your constant clueless speculation is completely unfounded. I can tell you this as FACT. Anyone else who works at one of his affiliates can tell you this as FACT.

It has nothing to do with whether we "like" Rush or not. I don't care for his show a bit. Too repetitive for my taste. Hannity is even more repetitive. But what we're seeing now between Clear Channel and Cumulus is business as usual. Anyone who actually has WORKED in the business knows that.

 

[RadioTalker101]

Hannity is the one whose star has fallen. He had been an ABC Radio host, he moved to Premiere, they bundled him with Rush, and that made him huge. But as Rush has fallen, Hannity has fallen further. Cumulus feels they can do without Hannity. So the threat was to drop them both. Now they'll just drop Hannity.

False, Hannity had 50 sticks before he left Citadel. This cram down stuff was used for Levin and Hannity, not Hannity and Rush.

 

[Small Market Guy]

This cram down stuff was used for Levin and Hannity, not Hannity and Rush.

I've heard stories of this as well, but have never actually seen it happen. "Bundling" is different from "cramming down". I know it's anecdotal, but my station plays Hannity and was never even ASKED to play Levin. We have had Dave Ramsey in that slot for years.

 

[umfan]

BigA,

Which stations is Cumulus flipping from conservative talk to other formats? List them here. If it's less than six, your argument is undercut and your BS is obvious.

What lack of logic are you referring to in my post, Fred? Cumulus is keeping Rush. The fact may not fit the drivel you keep pushing, but it's the fact nonetheless.

 

[TheBigA]

Which stations is Cumulus flipping from conservative talk to other formats? List them here. If it's less than six, your argument is undercut and your BS is obvious.

This is a story in motion right now. They haven't made any official announcements on Rush, Hannity, or Savage. They re-signed Imus for another year, so I don't expect anything will happen until next year.

My point is that they have been creating format options this past year. They flipped KGO to all-news. They have CBS Sports Network as a major AM initiative. There is still a possibility of an Atlanta-based national news network. Lots of things in the works. Stay tuned. Don't call something BS until official action is taken.

 

[umfan]

So, if it's a story in motion, it's not something where assertions akin to those you made above can be considered accurate.

What you suggested may well play out, but it's far, far less likely since Rush is apparently being retained on Cumulus.

Yes, they are creating other format options. Large radio companies do this all the time. Even mid size ones like Greater Media are doing this but it's been music to sports.

On that point we have no contention, but when you extrapolate this to assert that there is a shift away from conservative talk without being able to support it with examples, it's a false, or at least pre-mature assessment.