Day 246 without prog. talk...

[raccoonradio]

HHH does give a couple examples of agenda driven though those two hosts are also doing so to
talk to their target audience; however it's possible the AAR/Jones (note that Miller's via Jones
but many of us simply call the thing AAR when we she say prog talk) hosts may have been too
strident, too bang-us-over-the-head. Then again some conservative hosts could be that way
too, such as Savage. The O&O idea sounds about right.

But then again there could be other reasons why prog talk has basically failed. "So companies
like Wal-Mart exploit their workers...the big automakers are too greedy...and the oil companies
are in Bush's pocket. They're evil, evil, I say! Well, we'll be right back after these...
er...public service announcements..."

 

[DanStrassberg]

Dan the 16 K figure was P&I payment generated from an amortization program. Most banks require you to pay back the initial amount as well as the interest. I think WAZN was not paid for in cash, so we are not talking ROI, we are talking paying off the note.

You said "that's pure debt service and nothing else." Is there a new definition of "debt service?" To me, pure debt service is what you must pay to cover the interest on the borrowed money. As far as I know, amoritzation of the principal is not part of debt service. Am I wrong? I believe that if you are talking about paying the interest AND amortizing the principal, I don't think you refer to "pure debt service and nothing else;" I think you refer to "payment of principal and interest on the debt."

 

[Neggy]

10 grand, 16 grand 220, 221 whatever it takes.

The number is just to show what it costs to get on a small station in this market.

People seem to think that 15 bucks an hour is a fair offer to lease time. Cripes 15 bucks an hour doesn't pay the board op.

 

[SonicOverload]

While AAR radio programming was hit and miss (Randy Rhodes and Steph Miller were quite entertaining, Franken was informative but too dry, the rest sounded like amateur nite), that was not their fatal flaw. They would have shook out the deadwieghters eventually.

Stephanie is not an AAR host.. she is on the Jones Network. So is Ed Schultz.

 

[raccoonradio]

For some folks, the two services are kind of lumped together; maybe best to just say "progressive talk".
Saying Steph is from AAR is like saying Barry Bonds is in the American League. Right church, wrong pew.

 

[HHH]

Raccoon:

For the record, as I have said numerous times, I don't like either most right-wing or left-wing commercial talk radio because their entire shitck is to simply demonize the other side, and life is a bit more nuanced than that! But that's why WWF is a big ratings hit. Simple heroes and simple villans for the people who require simple answers.

By the way, you wrote:

----But then again there could be other reasons why prog talk has basically failed. "So companies
like Wal-Mart exploit their workers...the big automakers are too greedy...and the oil companies
are in Bush's pocket. They're evil, evil, I say! Well, we'll be right back after these...
er...public service announcements..."----


True, but this is not exclusive to the left. It is, as mentioned, stock and trade for commercial talk radio. By making a few simple edits, here is pretty much a typical Rush / Hannity rant:

......."The mass media is completely liberal controlled......the liberals want to see the destruction of America......Hollywood liberals hate this country.....drive-by media and their liberal agenda.......extreme left wing New York Times and their distorted reporting.....cut and run liberals who want the USA to lose the war!........They're evil, evil, I say! Well, we'll be right back after these...er...spots for debt consolodation and weight loss.

 

[raccoonradio]

Point well taken there; but maybe the lib-controlled media figures it can make money, toom the way Rush
and Hannity have made millions by USING that "shtick"). Heck,
even M. Moore made a bunch of $$ with F-911...

I can also be a victim of the "my side completely good, other side completely bad" view at times but I have
also tried to show that "it happens on either side"--with respect to politicians, both Rep. and Dem.
can have liars, cheats, hypocrites, etc. I have seen, on both sides, the opinion that "we NEVER have
those type but the other side is full of them"...though I, too, have been known to bring up liberal/Democratic
pols/media personalities' imperfections, but only as a response to those who bring up conservative/Republican
ones.

And I refuse to belong to either party (Unenrolled)--I am driven more by a candidate's stands on
the issues. If a Dem. ran for an office and had opinions I agree with, I'd vote for him/her (and in fact in
many local elections I have voted Dem. for local politicians. Of course, Mass. is about 99 per cent
Democratic, so what choice do I have...other than blanking them! Which I have also been known to do.)

maybe I'm more of a libertarian. but not a big L one (i.e., member of Libertarian party)

 

[WLYNWAZNgm]

Clarification: earlier in this thread I spoke of debt service. I include repayment of principal as well as interest as part of those calculations, just like in a conventional mortgage...

Again, commercial radio is a BUSINESS. There is no reason to believe that stations should be
interested in advancing a political agenda - for either side. Pressuring station owners
will ultimately accomplish nothing - they can program any format they choose. If you believe that
progressive talk is a commercially viable product - then put your money where your mouth is.
If you cannot come up with enough cash to lease time, you most certainly could not afford to buy a station - much less stay in business.

Why do people invest in the stock market? It is because they have faith that a particular company
will ulimately be more successful, and they can share in the results of that success. If you feel that progressive talk radio can succeed commercially - take a flyer, and get it on the air now. Stop talking about doing something, actually go out and DO something!

 

[dlhalper]

Actually, if you listen to progressive talk in a number of cities, you find (oh my gawd!!!) real commercials. Like for car dealers, restaurants, movies-- I just came back from one city where the progressive talk station had ads for a crafts shop (more colours of yarn than any other store), a local book store, several restaurants, a theater (the kind that has plays), and not one single hair loss or penis enlargement ad. Consider also what one of the righties who advertises on the Mic in Madison said when the station was about to change format-- he said that while he personally didn't like their format, he loved all the loyal and passionate listeners who came into his store and THANKED him for advertising and then bought stuff. So it's a myth that progressive talk can't work anywhere-- it really varies with the market, and depends on how well the sales staff understands selling a niche format.

And I find it a really weak argument to claim that progressive talk doesn't succeed because it's too negative-- ever listen to Michael Savage calling liberals commies and traitors and saying we ought to be shot? Now, that's pretty positive, wouldn't you say? :'(

There are plenty of negative righties on the air, but in an industry run by and dominated by conservatives, that's considered okay. I mean, look at who is speaking at the NAB-- keynote speaker is Sean Hannity, giving the awards is Glenn Beck, nearly everyone nominated for a syndicated talk show award is a rightie-- excuse me, but Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller happen to have lots of listeners and both of their shows are profitable; Ed, in fact, was named by Talkers Magazine (which in itself is a rightie publication) as one of the 5 most influential talkers in the USA. So if progressive talk can't work, it's not because people like Ed or Steph at Jones or Rachel Maddow and Thom Hartmann at Air America aren't providing intelligent and compelling programs that people want to hear. It's because there are a number of radio execs who wish progressive talk would go away, and they are willing to do their part to push it off the dial. That's my opinion, and I've got good reason to believe I'm at least partly correct!

 

[raccoonradio]

>>Actually, if you listen to progressive talk in a number of cities, you find (oh my gawd!!!) real commercials.

it was said somewhere real ads were airing (for local businesses) on the Western MA stations...someone
actually made an effort! See the San Diego board; apparently KLSD host Stacey Taylor is doing things like
making promos saying "Clear Channel sucks"; someone on the SD board says maybe Taylor should have
spent some time and gone to some liberal-minded businesses and got some sponsors if he wanted to keep lib talk going in SD

Clr Chnl could have made an effort to do a local daily show on WKOX/WXKS...did more promotion...
get a sales staff in there. Who knows what could have happened. btw isn't this the month WKOX
was due to go to full power, or did it do so and I missed it? the rumor was 1430 might go back to
prog talk once WKOX got full power but that was just a wild rumor I guess

and yes, hate and hyperbole come from both sides though partisans are unlikely to admit it. however
the "middle" is considered bland and the consensus seems to be that talk radio should aim for the
extremes on either side (or, are they some half decent more moderate hosts?)
I'm also not quite into Savage except perhaps in very, very small doses! Jerry Doyle--kind of bland syndie stuff but I guess it doesn't
cost 'RKO much, if anything

 

[ciao99]

about 246 days since AAR/Jones shows went off the air in Boston and no sign as far as I know that
"prog. talk" will be back, at least in a solid format (there are some hosts who do lean left). Would anyone
take a chance or is the format toast? So far I haven't heard of many stations being added to
"Air America 2.0" and apparently KLSD ("Lucy in the sky...with diamonds", man) in San Diego is due to
dump it next.

What is the future for libtalk--which still gets its clock cleaned by conservative hosts? Is it that stations
are unwilling to try it (here in town and elsewhere) because they feel they can't sell it (or certainly some
feel there's a political agenda)...could a station work with a "blend" of hosts, Left and Right?

Just curious. (And some feel stations like WTKK and WRKO are leaning left--Maloney has said so among
some others, but with what? Is Finneran
considered a lib just because he was a Democrat? or are party labels misleading--heck, the OTHER
convicted felon on the radio, my "Buddy", was a liberal Republican, I've heard...anyway, E&B may lean
a bit to the left...there may be others...but on the whole there is no libtalk station in Boston or in many
other places
though other forms of media are dominated by the Left)

btw: though prog talk on the whole hasn't returned to Burl VT/Platt NY, they did resurrect Stephanie
Miller on daytimer WTWK 1070 which had pulled the plug on prog talk in favor of women's talk;
the women's talk network went belly up but they're putting female hosts like Steph, Dr Joy Brown,
and Sally Jesse Raphael on instead...also something called Chick Chat)

There is liberal talk in Boston. It's called News Talk 1090 WILD. AL Shaprton, Tavis Smiley, just to name a few. Problem is, so-called liberal whites are too elitist to get their fix of progressive talk from a black radio station.

 

[raccoonradio]

there are some black conservative hosts on but they're rare. Larry Elder, "the sage from South Central",
is said to be a "firebrand libertarian"...but he's discontinued his national syndication

 

[SonicOverload]

there are some black conservative hosts on but they're rare. Larry Elder, "the sage from South Central",
is said to be a "firebrand libertarian"...but he's discontinued his national syndication

Larry Johnson... a black conservative host

didn't Armstrong Williams do radio?

 

[raccoonradio]

I don't know if Armstrong Williams did radio...not sure if L. Johnson is conservative but I guess he's
fairly religious.

 

[TSBench]

I don't know if Armstrong Williams did radio

Still does, and has been for a long time with a variety of minor league networks and syndicators. He used to be, and maybe still is, doing AMD with a co-host on the AAR flagship in NYC, which pre-empts AAR to carry his program.

He used to have a fairly widely read newspaper column, but you may recall he was involved in a conflict of interest scandal with the US Dept of Education and lost his newspaper syndication deal.

Regards,
TSB

 

[dlhalper]

It was actually not a rumour that WXKS/WKOX was having second thoughts about the change they made to Rhumba. The format is getting no numbers, sales are not what was expected, etc. But the current management isn't persuaded yet that they should make a change. I was friendly with the previous GM, who was very popular with the staff, and who was seriously looking at bringing back progressive talk, but then he was transferred to another cluster in the midwest and that was the end of that. I don't know what the new GM intends to do, but I am very certain that a lot of people would be delighted to hear progressive talk again.

And regarding a comment by someone else that "white liberals" are too elitist to listen to a black station-- that is utter nonsense. I used to consult WILD and listened to it all the time. I don't care if a talk host is white, red, green or purple as long as he or she is interesting and makes me think. However, I don't regard Al Sharpton as a credible talk host or a credible liberal, not because of his skin colour but because of his track record. He can be very entertaining, but like Comedian Rush Limbaugh, he likes to make outrageous statements that are totally untrue. I prefer hosts that are both entertaining and accurate.

 

[SonicOverload]

I don't know if Armstrong Williams did radio...not sure if L. Johnson is conservative but I guess he's
fairly religious.

LJ is definitely conservative.. I imagine it emanates from his religious views...

 

[Finn]

There is liberal talk in Boston. It's called News Talk 1090 WILD. AL Shaprton, Tavis Smiley, just to name a few. Problem is, so-called liberal whites are too elitist to get their fix of progressive talk from a black radio station.

Ciao, the last time you mentioned this I decided to take you up on it and tuned into the 1090 only to hear the host talk about how he thinks the man is the head of the household and women should defer to them. LOL. Not exactly a way to get a committed, dedicated liberal audience. Haven't listened since, but heck since you brought it up I will listen again.

I enjoy listening to Sharpton - he's very entertaining and raises lots of issues in an interesting way. I thought he was great when he ran for the Presidency - debates were MUCH more interesting for having him there. And, I loved how he responded to Biden's gaffe about Obama being 'clean' (I assure you, I shower every day).

However, like Donna says, he isn't credible because he's ended up on the wrong side of too many issues (Tawana Brawley, Duke lacrosse team) and has made himself an easy target. Oh, and the hairdo has got to go. (I just read this to my husband and he asked if I was being 'white' with my comment about the hair. I say no, Sharpton's hairdo is objectively bad. On the other hand, this is radio we're talking about here.) (By the way, I'm kidding.)

My experience with the black community is that there is concern if things get too popular with white folks, given the demographics, and they'd rather fly under the radar. do you really want the white community to get involved, start calling in to shows, advertisers to seek them out? What impact would that have on the programming?

 

[ciao99]

There is liberal talk in Boston. It's called News Talk 1090 WILD. AL Shaprton, Tavis Smiley, just to name a few. Problem is, so-called liberal whites are too elitist to get their fix of progressive talk from a black radio station.

Ciao, the last time you mentioned this I decided to take you up on it and tuned into the 1090 only to hear the host talk about how he thinks the man is the head of the household and women should defer to them. LOL. Not exactly a way to get a committed, dedicated liberal audience. Haven't listened since, but heck since you brought it up I will listen again.

I enjoy listening to Sharpton - he's very entertaining and raises lots of issues in an interesting way. I thought he was great when he ran for the Presidency - debates were MUCH more interesting for having him there. And, I loved how he responded to Biden's gaffe about Obama being 'clean' (I assure you, I shower every day).

However, like Donna says, he isn't credible because he's ended up on the wrong side of too many issues (Tawana Brawley, Duke lacrosse team) and has made himself an easy target. Oh, and the hairdo has got to go. (I just read this to my husband and he asked if I was being 'white' with my comment about the hair. I say no, Sharpton's hairdo is objectively bad. On the other hand, this is radio we're talking about here.) (By the way, I'm kidding.)

My experience with the black community is that there is concern if things get too popular with white folks, given the demographics, and they'd rather fly under the radar. do you really want the white community to get involved, start calling in to shows, advertisers to seek them out? What impact would that have on the programming?

Finn and DLHarper, I grew up outside NYC during the whole Tawana Brawley fiasco. I have vivid memories of how it divided people and cause rifts between friends in High School. So "I feel your pain"! Sharpton has toned it down since. Although he says others are just moving closer to him, not him toning it down to get closer to others. And he has very importantly addressed homophobia in the black community, something no other black leader will touch.

I do agree that he is a lot of entertainment and not always credible, but tell me, has that stopped conservative hosts? When have Severin, OReilly or Limbaugh ever let facts or integrity get in the way of their schtick?

 

[Finn]

And he has very importantly addressed homophobia in the black community, something no other black leader will touch.

didn't know that, good for him. it's a tough sell, which just goes to show that it doesn't matter how oppressed people are, they often turn and pile it on someone else (look how many Irish and Italian Americans treat American blacks - you'd think of all people they'd know better...). Also goes to show that if conservatives stopped saying hateful things about black folks I think a lot of them would vote Republican because the community is basically socially conservative. In fact, every time WLYNgm and Jimmy Severino say their schtick; it gives black folks a reason NOT to vote Republican. And, in an era where voting margins are thin, it's just a nail in the coffin.

I do agree that he is a lot of entertainment and not always credible, but tell me, has that stopped conservative hosts? When have Severin, OReilly or Limbaugh ever let facts or integrity get in the way of their schtick?

I totally agree, which is why I appreciate folks who are willing to take on folks on 'their side' who have lousy arguments, like TSB on this board, who, as far as I can tell, is an equal opportunity nincompoopery debunker.