Does anyone know the precise listening audience of the Michael Savage radio show?

[Avid Listener]

Back to Savage:

I caught some of his show today and heard him say he was devoting the bulk of it to talking about child sex abuse and how it affects victims throughout their adult lives. It's not a subject I'm especially interested in but he made it interesting -- at least the part I heard.

The impetus for the discussion was the Pope's meeting with sex abuse victims today so it fit the definition of news/talk and was certainly more enlightening than the three hours of political "got'cha" taking place elsewhere on the dial.

It's too bad there wasn't any advance publicity to let people who otherwise don't listen to Savage know about that topic. Had I known in advance, I might have tuned in.

 

[wadio]

OTOH, if people begin to realize his show is about more than just politics they may be more likely to tune in more often. Some topics are in response to breaking news and can't be promo'd in advance. That's the beauty of news/talk radio -- if done right.

 

[FredLeonard]

Any half-way intelligent person who wants serious discussion of real issues is not going to listen to Dr. Weiner. NPR has given this issue a great deal of coverage while Weiner was doing his usual mindless rants for the dummy demo.

 

[wadio]

NPR was no doubt doing its usual scripted bla, bla, bla. They talk to the audience as though they are 6 year olds.

 

[Lester_the_NightFly]

Not when I listen.

 

[Avid Listener]

OTOH, if people begin to realize his show is about more than just politics they may be more likely to tune in more often. Some topics are in response to breaking news and can't be promo'd in advance. That's the beauty of news/talk radio -- if done right.

How would anyone possibly find out what his show is about if there is no advertising or promotion beyond the stations he's on? How does anyone find about about anything that's on the radio on stations that they don't usually listen to?

 

[TheBigA]

How would anyone possibly find out what his show is about if there is no advertising or promotion beyond the stations he's on? How does anyone find about about anything that's on the radio on stations that they don't usually listen to?

They have this new fangled thing called the internet with something called google

 

[davideduardo]

It does indicate a serious cut in OTA radio listening. But when it comes to being confronted with the truth about OTA radio's loss of listeners, the suits have only one response. They deny.

A substantial part of Pandora listening is in replacement for music purchases. Yes, some is a replacement of one kind of radio with another (strictly a platform issue) but if you look at recent reports about further declines in both hard and soft music purchases, you will see, as one trade phrased it, "people want to rent their music, not own it".

In any event, you seem to be obsessed with the platform and not the medium. "Radio" is AM, FM, satellite, streams, iHeart, Pandora, Uforia and all the others. While there may be shifts from one "station" to another, it's all audio without pictures and the consumer calls all of them "radio".

 

[davideduardo]

You don't think streaming represents a problem for radio also?

Streaming is just another form of radio on a different platform.

When I read stats that say there are up to 76 million Pandora listeners nationwide, for example, that seems to be a figure that would indicate a cut in radio listening.

That's a figure that measures the folks who have registered, not the ones who are listening at any given time. As such, it's meaningless unless we know the number of average concurrent sessions... the equivalent of AQH persons in OTA radio measurement.

 

[boombox4]

Streaming is just another form of radio on a different platform.

I understood that part... I meant over the air radio.

 

[boombox4]

They have this new fangled thing called the internet with something called google

The problem is you have to already know about something to search for it. As opposed to an advertisement, which often tells you about the existence of something you didn't already know.

Radio doesn't advertise anymore. I used to see ads on billboards, bus placards, even on TV and in newspapers. Not any more.

 

[FredLeonard]

Warning, Will Robinson. Off topic. OP will spank.

 

[wadio]

Discovery is a problem.

When "radio" (meaning in this context the terrestrial broadcast bands) had a diversity of programming with live, local, non-infomercial 24/7 content, people would scan the dial to find programming they liked and stayed with. (Analog dials also made that easier.)

Radio is no longer a complete destination with a range of programming to choose from -- the Internet is. That's the problem. Today's terrestrial owners have decided that there's no room for any programming that doesn't strive to target the most lucrative demo or bring in a fast buck. In the process they've killed the golden goose.

 

[FredLeonard]

NPR was no doubt doing its usual scripted bla, bla, bla. They talk to the audience as though they are 6 year olds.

Do you ever listen to public radio? Or do you just believe what some right-wing blow-hard like Dr. Weiner tells you? Ditto-heads have the intellectual ability of six year olds. That's why they will believe anything.

 

[wadio]

Do you ever listen to public radio? Or do you just believe what some right-wing blow-hard like Dr. Weiner tells you? Ditto-heads have the intellectual ability of six year olds. That's why they will believe anything.

My comment about NPR was completely about style -- not political leaning, something about which you seem to be obsessed.

Yes, I listen to NPR from time to time but I usually turn it off because I can't stand the scripted sound of the readers, the old men with clenched jaws who speak through their lower teeth, the obligatory sound-design (are NPR listeners so stupid that they need to hear the sound of a tractor -- can't they just be told it's a tractor?) and the music interludes that are a waste time. I don't like any of it.

Yes, I listen to varying political opinions. I listen to Alan Colmes regularly because he's fun to listen to -- he talks, he doesn't "lecture."

I also listen to Bloomberg Radio -- something you should try, BTW, if you want to hear what politically neutral really sounds like. The programming on Bloomberg is in depth and informative but it's delivered without the smarmy, professorial tone of NPR. In other words, they don't "talk down" to their listeners.

 

[TheBigA]

The problem is you have to already know about something to search for it. As opposed to an advertisement, which often tells you about the existence of something you didn't already know.

The problem with advertising is you have to put it everywhere in order to reach people. That gets very expensive. And you still end up with potential consumers not seeing it. One of the big things now is ad blockers or skippers. So a radio station buys ads in a popular TV show, and half of the potential audience skips the ad. How effective was that?

Radio companies like Clear Channel and CBS own outdoor advertising companies, and often use them to advertise radio stations. But it's hard to advertise specific shows, topics, or guests or topics. Typically the kind of advertising radio does is image advertising. Newspapers don't do radio listings any more. But radio station and radio shows usually have web sites that give all the specifics that you need. Plus there are way too many radio stations. Too much information. That's the real problem.

One of our local radio stations changed formats. They hired a bunch of popular DJs who had heritage in the market. They did a massive media blitz, with bus cards, outdoor advertising, newspaper, and anything else you can think of. They also did lots of local appearances and TV interviews. Constantly hammering the new format and the popular DJs who were back again. After two years or doing this, they had a 1 share and ultimately gave up the format. So even when you do lots of advertising, it's likely that the people you want to reach won't see it.

When "radio" (meaning in this context the terrestrial broadcast bands) had a diversity of programming with live, local, non-infomercial 24/7 content, people would scan the dial to find programming they liked and stayed with. (Analog dials also made that easier.)

The fact is there are more stations and formats now than there were 40 years ago. The problem isn't lack of diversity. The problem is too many stations and too many choices. It takes way to long to scan. It's not a radio problem. It's a user problem. Users don't scan. They go to what they like, and stay with it.

The other thing a listener can do (that they couldn't do 40 years ago) is listen to an archive of a show they missed. If someone missed a Savage show that they want to hear, go to his web site. All listening doesn't have to be don e in real time.

 

[FredLeonard]

My comment about NPR was completely about style -- not political leaning, something about which you seem to be obsessed.

Yes, I listen to NPR from time to time but I usually turn it off because I can't stand the scripted sound of the readers, the old men with clenched jaws who speak through their lower teeth, the obligatory sound-design (are NPR listeners so stupid that they need to hear the sound of a tractor -- can't they just be told it's a tractor?) and the music interludes that are a waste time. I don't like any of it.

Yes, I listen to varying political opinions. I listen to Alan Colmes regularly because he's fun to listen to -- he talks, he doesn't "lecture."

I also listen to Bloomberg Radio -- something you should try, BTW, if you want to hear what politically neutral really sounds like. The programming on Bloomberg is in depth and informative but it's delivered without the smarmy, professorial tone of NPR. In other words, they don't "talk down" to their listeners.

Fair enough. But in that case, it sounds like you are comparing apples and oranges. NPR airs newscasts and news magazines, which are almost always scripted - even on Fox. If you prefer talk shows to news broadcasts, that's one thing. But you can't really compare the two. And stylistically, public radio's "talk shows" are primarily interview shows, not call-in shows, so no direct comparisons there, either. Right-wing talk radio has avoided interviews since Rush.

NPR is not alone in "obligatory" sound design. And I agree with you about that but I have heard it on the CBS radio network and on their various all news stations. NPR does "music interludes" to fill out segments because they have to meet an exact clock. I notice commercial talk show hosts use bumpers, too, for the same reason. In NPR's case, the interludes are a cover for poor planning and sloppy production on their pieces.

I don't know about clenched jaws but, yes, they do talk slowly. But I don't listen to live radio. I listen to their podcasts (including customized podcasts of All Things Considered and Morning Edition) on a smartphone app with variable speech compression that lets me listen at up to twice actual speed with no chipmunk effect. I normally listen at 1.7 (1.4 if I'm driving) and they sound pretty normal.

I have listened to Bloomberg. I wouldn't call them exactly neutral but it's a much more classy presentation in my view than CBS network or all news radio.

 

[wadio]

... it sounds like you are comparing apples and oranges.

Actually I'm not the one who originally made the comparison! ;-) But that said I agree with your analysis of the differences.

I guess it's a matter of taste. I'm a fan of live radio where things are said and reacted to in the moment without the luxury of scripting and editing. Sometimes what's said is ridiculous, sometimes thought provoking, sometimes inane, sometimes brilliant ... but generally it's spontaneous and honest. At least it strikes me that way.

I too have noticed the sound-design on CBS radio news. I suspect they're trying to copy NPR, and that's a form of flattery!

 

[FredLeonard]

I too have noticed the sound-design on CBS radio news. I suspect they're trying to copy NPR, and that's a form of flattery!

I always thought sound-design, as we have come to know it, started with ABC Radio, "live at 55." The other networks were more straight-forward, with full reports from correspondents (not staged - even scripted - faux Q&A) and also without extraneous music and sound bites. This is what happens when radio news departments are staffed with would-be DJs for whom news was Plan B (not real journalists).

Talk radio, live and unscripted, certainly has its place but newscasts, where accuracy is important and words must be chosen carefully, will still need scripts. Talk radio is entertainment and the rules there are different.

Unfortunately, today's political talk radio is more often inane than thought-provoking or brilliant. Not really entertaining much either.

Just curious: Do your criticisms of scripted news apply to Paul Harvey (who always worked from a script)?

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I guess it's a matter of taste. I'm a fan of live radio where things are said and reacted to in the moment without the luxury of scripting and editing. Sometimes what's said is ridiculous, sometimes thought provoking, sometimes inane, sometimes brilliant ... but generally it's spontaneous and honest. At least it strikes me that way.

I guess I had never sat still and pondered that question as a formal issue before. I have always enjoyed reporters who had a speech delivery that sounded "spontaneous" but I never had doubts that they had carefully scripted what they were going to say.

If I spend 37 minutes writing a script and revising the script, and "test driving" the script before actual delivery I'm giving you the best product my brain has to offer. If I just walk into a room, wait for the light to come on, and start talking to the mic without "pre-write" and without practice, you may be getting a pretty shabby product, depending on how well the cylinders in my brain are firing on a given day.

Now, back to your observations... and my reaction: When I turn on the radio and tune around to find news and talk, I'm not interested in shabby product. It's like Sunday dinner at grandma's house: I assume it is going to be the best of everything.... or I would leave the radio off and just read a book.