-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Does anyone know the precise listening audience of the Michael Savage radio show?
- Thread starter fordranger797
- Start date
It's call conversation. Conversations have tangents. If this topic were as limited as you apparently want to make it, it would have been less than half a dozen posts long. Except that I had the suspicion all along that you had some agenda with your original question but you did not want to be out in the open with.
Don't start tangents if you don't want to see them through.
???
That doesn't have anything to do with the original topic. The question was about listening audience and what creates an engaging host.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
???
That doesn't have anything to do with the original topic. The question was about listening audience and what creates an engaging host.
The single most important thing that makes any radio talk show host "engaging" is the topics that he talks about. The three most important things, in the long run, for any radio host are content, content, and content. To discuss content is to discuss what creates an engaging host.
The single most important thing that makes any radio talk show host "engaging" is the topics that he talks about. The three most important things, in the long run, for any radio host are content, content, and content. To discuss content is to discuss what creates an engaging host.
I disagree. If we were talking about a television talk show host, such as Ellen Degeneres in this scenario, I could just as easily argue that she is an engaging host without dipping into the content on her show. Her humorous personality is what makes her an engaging host.
It's both content and the host's ability to make it interesting. If the host doesn't seem interested in the content and doesn't bring his or her own perspective to it you might just as well listen to news radio.
I personally listen to talk radio to try to learn something. If a host just rambles on about nothing (Imus) or about the same thing hour after hour (Hannity) I'll look elsewhere.
Timing is also important. For years Dr. Dean Edell hosted a talk show on health -- a topic I generally avoid like the plague on talk radio. But Elell would find stories in the news that had health components and would discuss them. He also had very strong views on quack medicine and was outspoken against the miracle-cure pitchmen that populate today's weekend talk radio.
I personally listen to talk radio to try to learn something. If a host just rambles on about nothing (Imus) or about the same thing hour after hour (Hannity) I'll look elsewhere.
Timing is also important. For years Dr. Dean Edell hosted a talk show on health -- a topic I generally avoid like the plague on talk radio. But Elell would find stories in the news that had health components and would discuss them. He also had very strong views on quack medicine and was outspoken against the miracle-cure pitchmen that populate today's weekend talk radio.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
I disagree. If we were talking about a television talk show host, such as Ellen Degeneres in this scenario, I could just as easily argue that she is an engaging host without dipping into the content on her show. Her humorous personality is what makes her an engaging host.
Ellen DeGeneres isn't working in news/talk radio. She's in a totally different genre in a totally different broadcast medium. Since this is the "News/talk" forum, and therefore about the specific news/talk format, other talk formats aren't really grist for this mill.
It's both content and the host's ability to make it interesting. If the host doesn't seem interested in the content and doesn't bring his or her own perspective to it you might just as well listen to news radio.
OK, I'll give you that. After the three most important things, content, content, and content, then personality & perspective are fourth and fifth.
OK, I'll give you that. After the three most important things, content, content, and content, then personality & perspective are fourth and fifth.
Yes, but there are hundreds of talk show hosts out there talking about the same content, content, content. Only a very few achieve any real level of success, and that is due to their personality. Content is the baseline. Personality is what sets a talk show apart.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
Yes, but there are hundreds of talk show hosts out there talking about the same content, content, content. Only a very few achieve any real level of success, and that is due to their personality. Content is the baseline. Personality is what sets a talk show apart.
Content is to news/talk what the songs are to music radio. Personality is to news/talk what personality is to a music DJ. First and foremost, content determines if you even get on the air or not.
And, given how few news/talk hosts there really are, since most news/talk stations simply plug into satellite feeds, I doubt if there are "hundreds" of news/talk hosts out there. When there are local talk hosts, as often as not, they're doing sports talk, hot talk, or generic chit-chat.
I don't know if I agree. In my world, content is a generic term like "stuff." People throw that word around as though all content is equal, and it's not. What often changes the character of content from generic to something worth listening to is the personality of the person presenting it. In talk radio, it's the personality that engages the audience. Otherwise, it's just more stuff.
In Savage's case, he's a very distinct personality. Very different from Rush & Hannity, but also different from Dennis Miller.
I think that's a very narrow view of news/talk. Just about every market in the Top 100 has at least one station that has at least one local talk show. Most Top 25 markets have multiple local news talk hosts. So I'd say there are "hundreds" of local news talk hosts. I think the Talkers magazine would agree.
In Savage's case, he's a very distinct personality. Very different from Rush & Hannity, but also different from Dennis Miller.
And, given how few news/talk hosts there really are, since most news/talk stations simply plug into satellite feeds, I doubt if there are "hundreds" of news/talk hosts out there.
I think that's a very narrow view of news/talk. Just about every market in the Top 100 has at least one station that has at least one local talk show. Most Top 25 markets have multiple local news talk hosts. So I'd say there are "hundreds" of local news talk hosts. I think the Talkers magazine would agree.
Last edited:
Personality is to news/talk what personality is to a music DJ.
Apples and oranges. There are music listeners who would rather not have the DJ talk at all. Not true for talk show hosts.
Last edited:
F
FredLeonard
Guest
They are personalities - no more, no less. Listen to some old "Jeff Christie" airchecks. Rush is doing the same act, the same schtick as a talk show host, he did as a top 40 DJ. Only difference is - as AL said - content. He used to play the hits; now he spouts RNC talking points. But it's personality that makes him listenable. It's personality that draws (or repels) listeners.
Yes, there are some bad DJs who talk too much. Mostly, management would just as soon replace personality with content; showmanship with format and air talent with satellite dishes. Very tellingly, chief content officers are replacing program directors.
Yes, there are some bad DJs who talk too much. Mostly, management would just as soon replace personality with content; showmanship with format and air talent with satellite dishes. Very tellingly, chief content officers are replacing program directors.
F
FredLeonard
Guest
Maybe the importance of personalities in musicradio has declined because the role of, presence of and quality of personalities has declined. The few personalities left are doing Oldies or talk radio. Few musicradio stations have local-live air talent outside morning drive and most can not be considered real "personalities."
No personalities mean musicradio has nothing unique and compelling to offer and that's why the musicradio audience has gone/is going to new media.
Oh no, we are talking about something other than Dr. Weiner's audience, the original topic. Bad! Bad! Bad!
No personalities mean musicradio has nothing unique and compelling to offer and that's why the musicradio audience has gone/is going to new media.
Oh no, we are talking about something other than Dr. Weiner's audience, the original topic. Bad! Bad! Bad!
No personalities mean musicradio has nothing unique and compelling to offer and that's why the musicradio audience has gone/is going to new media.
Both halves of that statement are false. There are lots of personalities in music radio, and the music radio audience as a whole is very stable. Some formats, like country, urban, and CHR, are very strong right now. There are entire companies, like CBS, Entercom, Cox, and Townsquare, that run their stations with a full roster of live and local personalities.
OTA musicradio provides a free CURATED music collection on devices that are omnipresent and easy to operate. In this world, that makes it unique and compelling. Some DJ reading liner notes or blabbering with his co-host about his vacation isn't a unique or compelling.
People mainly use new media because they prefer streaming music to owning music. That's more of a problem for record labels, who continue to see music sales fall.
Last edited:
Both halves of that statement are false. There are lots of personalities in music radio, and the music radio audience as a whole is very stable. Some formats, like country, urban, and CHR, are very strong right now. There are entire companies, like CBS, Entercom, Cox, and Townsquare, that run their stations with a full roster of live and local personalities.
OTA musicradio provides a free CURATED music collection on devices that are omnipresent and easy to operate. In this world, that makes it unique and compelling. Some DJ reading liner notes or blabbering with his co-host about his vacation isn't a unique or compelling.
People mainly use new media because they prefer streaming music to owning music. That's more of a problem for record labels, who continue to see music sales fall.
You don't think streaming represents a problem for radio also?
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.
You don't think streaming represents a problem for radio also?
Sure, but we're never going to have the monopoly we had in the 60s. Those days are over. Which is why radio companies are getting into the streaming business.
We know that there IS value in curated music presentation. There is no value in DJs yammering about nothing. So we have to understand exactly what the consumer wants.
Returning to the days of boss jocks spinning stax of wax is not going to cause people to throw away their cell phones or ipads. That's just a very simple reality. So all we're asking for is parity...to be available on the same platform. Right now, that's an uphill battle. But it's one worth fighting for.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
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.
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.
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.
Funny how you don't accept the numbers or methodology presented by Nielsen, but you're willing to accept whatever Pandora prints in its press releases.
A little consistency would be appreciated.
Funny how you don't accept the numbers or methodology presented by Nielsen, but you're willing to accept whatever Pandora prints in its press releases.
A little consistency would be appreciated.
Careful, or he'll drag out the chicken guts again...
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.
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.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.