Conservative vs Progressive Audiences?

[amfmxm]

GRC, your question is rooted in the premise that liberal/progressive talk radio doesn't work. Please explain KPOJ's success first (and WXXM/Madison) then revisit the question.

What was bouncing around my brain did not come out quite the way it should have on the screen. It is not MY premise that liberal/progressive talk radio doesn't work. (I was wondering out loud if it could.) My premise was that the conventional wisdom of most of the messages posted in R-I hold that liberal talk will not and can not work. The question I was asking: Are so many of the people in radio buying this concept that there are no players with the smarts and the willingness to make it work.

Thank you for the tip on some stations that are making it work. And thanks to the people who posted that they are currently doing civilized talk radio in their markets. That doesn't make the headlines in the industry columns and blogs.

That still leaves the question: If a licensee wants to give it a try, how do they recognize the "brains" that can actually make it work. Not the on air host necessarily. The responsible management person who can write the recipe for talent, promotion, and actual positioning of the "tone". My observation about Air America is that they tried to hit the ground with full-strength, fully-extreme message. Is it essential to begin with a more bland, more centrist position and then know when to get more "hard core" as time moves on.

You comments about small market merchants not wanting to offed the other side struck me as an example of the need to fully understand the effects of introducing new material to the Talk Radio scene that must be tailored to the market.

Recognizing the "brains" to make lib-talk work kind of goes back to my Clear Channel/WCAO example (I'm betting $100 that none of the Mays boys have ever voluntarily listened to a Black Gospel song). But maybe KPOJ is an even better example.

Realize that Lowry Mays & Tom Hicks--the two Texans who turned CC into the 1250-station monster--were two of George W. Bush's biggest supporters/contributors/fund-raisers in both his Texas gubernatorial campaign and his presidential campaigns. There is NO sympathy for liberal thought in CC--never has been, never will be. Yet they own most of the truly successful progressive talkers in the U.S. (KPOJ/Portland, WXXM/Madison, KTLK/LA, KKGN/San Francisco).

The first question is "Why?" And the answer, of course, is that there is money to be made.

The second question is "How?" And the answer is... they hired people who understand how radio works.

Program something that people in the market want to hear. Put it on a station they can hear. Promote it. And sell the "ears"--the audience generated by the programming/station/promotion--to advertisers who want to reach those people.

In truth, I think it really does help if the management & sales folks "believe in" (or at least, like) what they're selling--just like it helps if the salespeople for a Country station actually like Country--but it's not absolutely necessary. They just have to be smart enough to know that it doesn't matter what THEY like... it's what the LISTENER likes.

Regarding Air America...

I don't think their mistake was that they began with an extreme message. The lib-talk listener certainly wasn't offended. I do think that the "founding fathers" made enormous financial & operational errors. Their plan was grandiose when it obviously called for a more cautious approach--they went through money at a mad clip. Their top executives were mostly from other fields ("Hey, radio can't be THAT difficult!")... and no one had much of a grasp on radio station perspectives or, for that matter, network ad sales. Perhaps most critically, they did not anticipate just how much hostility they would encounter from Big Business advertisers--the folks who "underwrite" network radio. In other words, they really didn't do their homework. A little basic research would have saved them a lot of heartache, and money.

Jones Radio (now Dial Global) had everything that Air America didn't (and, apparently, still doesn't). And at this point, they seem to be the most likely to continue progressive talk radio in the long haul.

 

[gr8oldies]

Air America started with a faulty premise...that "a bunch of rich Republicans plucked this talk show host out of the obscurity of Sacramento, got him on all the big stations and practically hypnotized people to listen to him". Thus, the thought was that Air America just had to duplicate what they thought happened, but really didn't. (The best treatment of the early years of Rush is in an unauthorized biography by Paul Colford written about 1992.)

I don't know if there is or isn't an audience for "liberal talk". Maybe there is more of an audience for a talk show host who happens to be liberal. Jay Marvin, who I know reads this board, was very in-your-face as a liberal voice on WLS. Many nights, however, he didn't do all politics all the time. My favorite show of his of all time was his tribute to Wolfman Jack right after the Wolf's death. There's probably no "formula" as much as we, and radio executives want to believe. Maybe lightning just has to strike, as it seemingly did with Limbaugh.

 

[NewsVet]

Air America started with a faulty premise...that "a bunch of rich Republicans plucked this talk show host out of the obscurity of Sacramento, got him on all the big stations and practically hypnotized people to listen to him".

One of my pet peeves: People who put quotation marks around fictional comments. You could have made your point without the phony quote marks!

 

[amfmxm]

I don't know if there is or isn't an audience for "liberal talk".

Stop right there. Yes, you do know. KPOJ, WXXM, KTLK, KKGN et al have already proven that.

Now, as with any other format, is it fair to ask that question as it relates to specific markets and/or specific stations? Yeah, that's fair--and logical & smart. That's the question we all ask every time we consider a format switch or fire up a new station or new acquisition.

But, at this point in the game, there is no question that there is an audience for "liberal talk."

 

[ctkatz]

KPOJ (portland), WXXM (madison, wi), KTLK (los angeles), KKGN (san fransisco)

all are big cities or college towns (or both). so, it makes me really wonder why progressive talk has not been tried in other college towns or why the format doesn't last longer in the big cities.

well, i take that back. i know why it doesn't last longer in the big cities. but i am still baffled why it has not been put on in college towns. i do think that this is pretty good proof that it's not that the format doesn't work, it's that the format is almost actively not given a chance in some pretty good choice markets where it could work.

here's some pretty good markets where it makes sense:
atlanta
boston
chicago (on a full-time signal)
new york
washington
philadelphia
pittsburgh
cleveland
st. louis
berkley (if KKGN doesn't reach that far)
louisville, ky
lexington, ky
charlotte
raliegh-durham
athens, ga

that's a quick list off the top of my head.

 

[agentUrge]

i do think that this is pretty good proof that it's not that the format doesn't work, it's that the format is almost actively not given a chance in some pretty good choice markets where it could work.

here's some pretty good markets where it makes sense:
atlanta
boston
chicago (on a full-time signal)
new york
washington
philadelphia
pittsburgh
cleveland
st. louis
berkley (if KKGN doesn't reach that far)
louisville, ky
lexington, ky
charlotte
raliegh-durham
athens, ga

Air America was given a shot here in Atlanta around 1995 or so. It lasted about a year...maybe a little longer. We also used to have FM talk on one station but it eventually went Hispanic. In fact, that station's feed was simulcast on it's AM counterpart till the early 2000's when CC took over. A few years later, they tried FM talk again with guys like Scott Ferrel and some syndicated hosts but it also didn't go far. It seems like most of the FM morning radio programs here are about 75% talk anyway so FM talk might do okay if given a shot...how progressive would work is up for debate.

I can't attest to Athens, GA but I know that Ashville's WPEK is progressive talk and as I understand it's done very well there considering Ashville is a southern city.

 

[amfmxm]

KPOJ (portland), WXXM (madison, wi), KTLK (los angeles), KKGN (san fransisco)

all are big cities or college towns (or both). so, it makes me really wonder why progressive talk has not been tried in other college towns or why the format doesn't last longer in the big cities.

well, i take that back. i know why it doesn't last longer in the big cities. but i am still baffled why it has not been put on in college towns. i do think that this is pretty good proof that it's not that the format doesn't work, it's that the format is almost actively not given a chance in some pretty good choice markets where it could work.

here's some pretty good markets where it makes sense:
atlanta
boston
chicago (on a full-time signal)
new york
washington
philadelphia
pittsburgh
cleveland
st. louis
berkley (if KKGN doesn't reach that far)
louisville, ky
lexington, ky
charlotte
raliegh-durham
athens, ga

that's a quick list off the top of my head.

You're on the right track. Boston & DC are no-brainers, but the sticks allocated by Clear Channel to the format in both cities were extremely marginal signals--that is, signals that nothing has worked on. For any format to be viable in major markets, major signals are required (not necessarily the best signals--see KTLK & KKGN--but good enough to be heard throughout most of the metro area).

Speaking of KKGN, yes, the tower is just outside the Berkeley city limits--licensed to Oakland.

Certainly the best markets for liberal talk are going to be markets that lean liberal. Matching radio programming with the culture of the market is nothing new--it's been done in Country, Urban, Gospel, conservative talk & other formats for decades... basically since it became apparent that radio stations could no longer function as "mass appeal" media--that they had to be matched with certain segments of the audience.

So nobody's doing Country in New York City. And nobody's doing Black Gospel in Fargo.

Where would liberal talk work best? Check back to those election maps from last November. See the "blue" states? Mostly in the northeast, the Great Lakes states & the west coast? That's the most likely turf. Where Democrats outnumber Republicans.

And would big cities and college towns be the best bets in those "blue" states? You bet!

What happens when that kind of very simple, basic, logic is ignored? See KNUV/Nova M in Phoenix (it's in Tom Taylor's column today).

 

[kinetic]

Maybe lightning just has to strike, as it seemingly did with Limbaugh.

Isn't that always the case in radio? It's not like radio is a bastion of originality; it tends to be an industry filled with copycats. Lightning strikes and then everyone copies it. In 1983 when Scott Shannon found the right hole in New York, CHR enjoyed a renaissance and we had morning zoos all over the place. There were plenty of copycats but few were the equal of Z-100. Same with Rush, I think. Lots of clones but it's like making a dupe of analogue; with each copy, you lose a generation. Radio ownership/management, whether corporate or local, rarely sticks its neck out. Put it this way: If Limbaugh had been a liberal talker, would we have been inundated with liberal syndication? It wouldn't surprise me at all.
The error in judgment is that radio owners thought it was about politics. Rush doesn't succeed because he's conservative; Rush succeeds because he's a good broadcaster.

I don't know if there is or isn't an audience for "liberal talk". Maybe there is more of an audience for a talk show host who happens to be liberal. Jay Marvin, who I know reads this board, was very in-your-face as a liberal voice on WLS. Many nights, however, he didn't do all politics all the time.

This begs a question: Why does all talk radio have to be political? I've never understood it. How many talkers actually tipped a hat to George Carlin last year (speaking of eulogies). Why couldn't you? You mean to say you couldn't have a discussion about Rush's Wall Street Journal column about the Fairness Doctrine without getting ideological? Sure you can. Easily. There are countless topics and stories that lend themselves to discussions beyond the political arena.
I agree, I don't think you have to follow a formula, but how do you convinced corporate or local management radio of that? Doing something different or new just isn't in the nature of most radio managers or corporate owner. Rarely does anyone break the group think mold of not copying a mold. Yes? No?

Wolfman Jack rocked.


Rush's op-ed: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123508978035028163.html

 

[jackandcoke]

Isn't that always the case in radio? It's not like radio is a bastion of originality; it tends to be an industry filled with copycats. Lightning strikes and then everyone copies it. In 1983 when Scott Shannon found the right hole in New York, CHR enjoyed a renaissance and we had morning zoos all over the place. There were plenty of copycats but few were the equal of Z-100.

Scott Shannon was the copier, not the copied. By the time he launched Z100, the hole in New York radio had been discussed by thousands of his peers for a number of years. He does deserve credit for putting himself in the right place at the right time, though. Way to go, Scott.

And of course "all talk radio" doesn't have to be political. No one has said that. Political talk radio just happens to be the topic of this particular thread. Duh.

 

[Oldbones]

My observation about Air America is that they tried to hit the ground with full-strength, fully-extreme message. Is it essential to begin with a more bland, more centrist position and then know when to get more "hard core" as time moves on.

I'm sure that was part of it, but could it be that Air America was just late to the party? Interest in "all politics all the time" talk radio had already peaked and other than the ideology AA really had nothing new to offer. Narrow-minded left wingers who won't stand for opposing viewpoints instead of narrow-minded right wingers doing the same. In the end what's the difference? Lotta 2nd & 3rd tier conservative talkers who don't have much audience too.

 

[kaysguy]

KPOJ (portland), WXXM (madison, wi), KTLK (los angeles), KKGN (san fransisco)

all are big cities or college towns (or both). so, it makes me really wonder why progressive talk has not been tried in other college towns or why the format doesn't last longer in the big cities.

well, i take that back. i know why it doesn't last longer in the big cities. but i am still baffled why it has not been put on in college towns. i do think that this is pretty good proof that it's not that the format doesn't work, it's that the format is almost actively not given a chance in some pretty good choice markets where it could work.

here's some pretty good markets where it makes sense:
atlanta
boston
chicago (on a full-time signal)
new york
washington
philadelphia
pittsburgh
cleveland
st. louis
berkley (if KKGN doesn't reach that far)
louisville, ky
lexington, ky
charlotte
raliegh-durham
athens, ga

that's a quick list off the top of my head.

Air America content bombed in Cleveland. Springer tanked the morning ratings at WTAM, was replaced with Glenn Beck, then local programming, but they are back to Beck. Akron's "progressive" station, which had a signal that covers the Cleveland area, also has given up the ghost and is all sports. It just didn't draw an audience, even when they moved from the amateurs like Franken and Garafolo to the Stephanie Millers and Thom Hartmans.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

This most recent reply along with some others the testify to similar "failures" brings us back to a very organic and basic question. Is this a CONTENT issue, or are people "trying out" liberal talk on their stations under circumstances that guarantee failure?

So I buy or LMA a station, line up content from five or six competent liberal talkers, put them on the air and wait for wonderful things to happen. Nothing happens. So after three or four months I get up some morning and pull the plug and chalk it up as a failure.

Did people who would have enjoyed listening ever even know that the experiment came and went? There is no blue pilot light installed in every home, every car, every office which announces: "Liberal Talk On-Air". It would helpful if some of these reports on programming that worked and programming that failed if some details were included about the efforts of the station in the areas of promotion. Newspaper ads? Billboards? Recruit organizations to include announcements in their newsletters, blogs and meetings. Democratic party? Planned Parenthood? NAACP? Labor Union publications?

Do some of the station managers who "tried" liberal talk even know who the natural constituents of this programming are?

 

[ctkatz]

if liberal talk is put on the air, promoted just as well as conservative stations and has about the same coverage area and still bombs, i'd say that the area couldn't or doesn't or wouldn't support liberal talk. the only problem i perceive is that more times than not, the liberal station isn't promoted well if at all and has a horrible coverage area. it's like taking freshwater tropical fish to the arctic, dumping them in the water and expecting your tropical fish sample to grow. the conditions are stacked so much against liberal radio more times than not that it fails to pull in ratings.

that brings me to another thought. say a conservative station had no promotion and no signal area. considering the nature of talk radio today, would that station get flipped to something else?

Air America content bombed in Cleveland. Springer tanked the morning ratings at WTAM, was replaced with Glenn Beck, then local programming, but they are back to Beck. Akron's "progressive" station, which had a signal that covers the Cleveland area, also has given up the ghost and is all sports. It just didn't draw an audience, even when they moved from the amateurs like Franken and Garafolo to the Stephanie Millers and Thom Hartmans.

two questions for you:
are you from cleveland and what by what standard other than lack of airtime can you call al franken and janene garafolo amateur? if you want to argue airtime, then explain why rush limbaugh or glen beck got started in the business. by the way, from what i hear, the ohio massacre of clear channel progressive stations was done despite showing up in the local books.

 

[SeanMGilbow]

Akron's "progressive" station, which had a signal that covers the Cleveland area, also has given up the ghost and is all sports. It just didn't draw an audience, even when they moved from the amateurs like Franken and Garafolo to the Stephanie Millers and Thom Hartmans.

The station still got ratings as a progressive talker. I have yet to see it even measured in the Arbitrons since the flip to sports nearly two years ago.

 

[listener-in]

This most recent reply along with some others the testify to similar "failures" brings us back to a very organic and basic question. Is this a CONTENT issue, or are people "trying out" liberal talk on their stations under circumstances that guarantee failure?

So I buy or LMA a station, line up content from five or six competent liberal talkers, put them on the air and wait for wonderful things to happen. Nothing happens. So after three or four months I get up some morning and pull the plug and chalk it up as a failure.

Sounds almost like a case history from Rochester except that, far from waiting for wonderful things to happen, it looked like the station was sabotaging its own product. WROC picked up progressive talk in 2004 and dropped it last Labor Day weekend, just in time to miss the climax of the election campaign.

During those 4 years, it dumped a long-time local radio personality, abandoned all distinctive local content, and made no attempt to promote itself in the form of appearances at local events (but then, it had no local broadcasters that could appear), billboards or even bumper stickers.

Its technical quality-control stunk. Prolonged silences and dueling audio streams were equally commonplace. Segments of tape-delayed programs often started 5 or more minutes after their intended time, and were cut off in mid-topic when it was time for the news at the top or bottom of the hour. Sometimes, the same hour of a “best of” program would be repeated in successive hours. Outdated CNN news bulletins were aired – sometimes they were more than a week old, I kid you not. When I tried complaining to management, phone calls were not returned and e-mails were ignored. All this was on top of a lousy signal.

With the market all to itself, WROC could have made a go of progressive talk and built a loyal audience. Instead, it flipped to ESPN, dividing an already small audience with another all-sports station. Its numbers did not improve in the slightest

I would argue that there are few areas of the country that could not support progressive talk, if managements managed as if their livelihoods depended on the format succeeding. This is often the case with independent stations like WCPT Chicago, but, as WXXM Madison shows, it can happen with corporate-owned stations when managements pay attention to their audience.

 

[ctkatz]

Akron's "progressive" station, which had a signal that covers the Cleveland area, also has given up the ghost and is all sports. It just didn't draw an audience, even when they moved from the amateurs like Franken and Garafolo to the Stephanie Millers and Thom Hartmans.

The station still got ratings as a progressive talker. I have yet to see it even measured in the Arbitrons since the flip to sports nearly two years ago.

in fact, iirc, after clear channel flipped its three ohio progtalk stations, only one has shown up in the ratings book since then, WCKY in cincy, and that station had to be flipped again less than a year later to espnradio.

funny how this poster mentions cleveland (which i will bet you did not bomb and suffered from the same problems most progtalk stations suffer: bad signal, no promotion) and doesn't mention places like san diego where that station was successful and its flip to be the fourth or fifth sports station in the market.

 

[SRGuide]

For a program or programming format to be successful on commercial radio it needs two things:

1) Ratings
2) Advertisers

Most people focus on the first, but it doesn't work without both parts.

What are the demographics of the people who do listen to progressive radio, and what is it they buy? What kinds of for-profit businesses would advertise to reach college students? Is the show content compatible with the product? (Is a car dealer going to advertise on a station where the host says people who drive cars are destroying the environment?)

I live within the listening area of WAVZ, which was the Air America affiliate in New Haven, CT, home of Yale University. The day WAVZ flipped from A/A to Sports Talk, there was not even a whimper in the local community. Listening to AM radio is not what young people do.

I think the same issue applies to many Spanish Language stations that try to target recent immigrants. If your listeners have little disposable income, and what they do have they are "remitting" back to their home country, what advertiser is going to pay for radio ads to reach them unless the FCC mandates that they do?

 

[almaniac27]

For a program or programming format to be successful on commercial radio it needs two things:

1) Ratings
2) Advertisers

Most people focus on the first, but it doesn't work without both parts.

What are the demographics of the people who do listen to progressive radio, and what is it they buy? What kinds of for-profit businesses would advertise to reach college students? Is the show content compatible with the product? (Is a car dealer going to advertise on a station where the host says people who drive cars are destroying the environment?)

I live within the listening area of WAVZ, which was the Air America affiliate in New Haven, CT, home of Yale University. The day WAVZ flipped from A/A to Sports Talk, there was not even a whimper in the local community. Listening to AM radio is not what young people do.

I think the same issue applies to many Spanish Language stations that try to target recent immigrants. If your listeners have little disposable income, and what they do have they are "remitting" back to their home country, what advertiser is going to pay for radio ads to reach them unless the FCC mandates that they do?

I think progressive stations can find advertisers, but they won't be the same as on a conservative talker. Progressive stations should try and get advertising from unique local shops and restaurants. A progressive station would be more appealing to a vegetarian/vegan restaurant than a conservative one. In most average sized cities, there are little neighborhoods within the city where those types of restaurants would be, along with an organic food store or gay bar or independent record shop, all of which would be good candidates to advertise on a progressive station. Unfortunately, I barely hear any local advertisers on any AM station anymore except for car dealerships.

 

[amfmxm]

For a program or programming format to be successful on commercial radio it needs two things:

1) Ratings
2) Advertisers

Most people focus on the first, but it doesn't work without both parts.

What are the demographics of the people who do listen to progressive radio, and what is it they buy? What kinds of for-profit businesses would advertise to reach college students? Is the show content compatible with the product? (Is a car dealer going to advertise on a station where the host says people who drive cars are destroying the environment?)

Right now you can walk into a car dealer and call his mother a hooker and he'll smile and offer you a five grand discount and zero percent financing.

True story. In 1973 I was selling in small-town Virginia for a well-established adult contemp AC station with a big Country FM that advertisers ignored (because, of course, nobody had FM receivers in their cars back then--and Country listeners were "hillbillies," anyway). So I tried to pitch the Country audience to one of our biggest advertisers, a big shoe store, and he said to me "I don't care how many listeners that station has--I don't want 'em in my store!" I even tried to bonus the FM for free and he wouldn't take the spots.

It took another ten years or so before it became apparent to him that all Country listeners weren't hillbillies, and that most of them wore shoes... that they had purchased somewhere.

Let me borrow a line from a friend who sells Christian Contemp radio: liberals buy the same things everybody else buys. Food, clothes, cars, furniture, financial services, education, medical care, concert tickets...

Comparing Clear Channel's talk duo in Portland, conservative KEX lives and dies on old guys--Men 65+ (which has always provided the edge in Persons 12+) while progressive KPOJ beats them in Adults 18-49, Adults 25-54 & Adults 35-64 and women across the board. So it may be fair to say that liberal talk skews younger and more female than conservative talk. But talk radio is still an adult format, for the most part, regardless of political persuasion. Kids just don't give a shit. Some things never change.

 

[piggy]

that brings me to another thought. say a conservative station had no promotion and no signal area. considering the nature of talk radio today, would that station get flipped to something else?

If it's a Salem conservative talker, as long as they can find a way to pay the light bill, Salem corporate will keep the needles moving with Ingraham/Bennett/Medved and company even if the ratings and local sales are a big fat zero.

Salem is a great example of a company that puts ideology ahead of profit every day. The pay for pray stations they run subsidize their conservative talk stations. Expanding from pay for pray into conservative talk has been costly for them.

The only difference between Salem and Air America is Salem hasn't run out of money... yet.