Ed Schultz Blasts Phil Boyce and Poor Management at WABC

[Phil Boyce]

After i posted my comments about TSL and WABC I happened to notice Mike Kinosians excellent column in Inside Radio today that lists the stations with the largest TSL in america off the last book. Notice who is #1...and this is all formats....not just news/talk:

Time Spent Listening
Some outrageously high TSL figures dot our list of individual market pacesetters.
Three separate WABC first-place showings are included. The Citadel Talk outlet leads in its New York
City home market; on Long Island (Nassau-Suffolk); and in Middlesex-Somerset-Union, NJ.
Data appearing after a station’s calls/city are its format; Spring 2007 weekly time spent listening
total (in hours: minutes); and 12+ market rank.
Please note stations needed to notch at least a 1.0-share 12+ to qualify for this list.
Format TSL 12+ Rank
1 WABC/New York Talk 11:45 #5
2 KTLK-AM/Los Angeles Talk 10:30 #29
3 WPPN/Chicago Spanish Oldies 11:45 #10
4 KSOL/San Francisco Regional Mexican 10:00 #4
5 KHVN/Dallas Gospel 12:45 #28
[EDIT]

[EDIT-post truncated because original material is copyrighted.]

 

[Phil Boyce]

Kinosian also lists the top TSL getters by format. Notice the #1 station...and the fact that out of the top 10 TSL getters in America, WABC holds down 3 of those positions. I share this not to brag but try to explain how all this works. There is a reason why the TSL for WABC is so high. All the pieces fit together. Here is the list of the top TSL stations in the Talk Format. There is something alike with the top 2. KTLK in LA has no conservatives.

Talk 23%
1 WABC/New York 11:45
2 KTLK-AM/Los Angeles 10:30
10 WJR/Detroit 9:15
14 KPTK/Seattle 10:15
18 WABC/Long Island** 10:00
20 KFTK/St. Louis 11:00
27 KTKZ AM & FM/Sacramento 9:45
29 KAHL/San Antonio 11:15
38 WPRO-AM/Providence 10:00
39 WABC/Middlesex** 12:00

 

[Don62]

Your post defeats narrow-minded blowhards like Hannity who claim "no one listens to liberal or progressive radiio."

KTLK has very high TSL.

Is Hannity going to retract his erroneous statements?

 

[NewsNow]

Mr. Boyce, can you tell me if those are PPM or diary figures?

At first I thought that a disruption to the argument that a talk station has to have a consistent political ideology would be the success of WGN, but then WGN has a very consistent presentation, just not a political one.

Speaking of sumo wrestling, one of my first job interviews was at a station in South Bend, IN. After the interview, I drove by a grungy strip mall that had a bar in it. They had a pointy arrow sign out frone that said on it, "TONIGHT: SUMO WRESTLING.... TOMORROW: QUIET RIOT".

And that's the rest of the story.

 

[DaleGriffin]

Couldn't that just mean a few listen for long periods of time... but you already thought about that. Are you going to retract your idiotic question?

 

[SeanMGilbow]

Sorry..I was away for awhile and came back to find this little tidbit of complete lunacy from Sean Gilbow:

If we take Hannity's 12.5 million listeners and divide them by 500 stations, that's average listenership per station of 25,000.

However, take Big Eddie's 3.25 million listeners and divide them by 80 stations, and you get an average listenership per station of 40,625.

Hannity may have more than triple the number of listeners compared with Big Eddie, but Schultz is getting in excess of 60 percent more listeners per station. Not bad considering many of Big Eddie's stations have lousy signals.

The problem with this argument is that EACH station is not equal. There are only about 300 Arbitron rated metros. Sean has 520 radio stations, so about 220 of them do not even rate in Arbitron...they have a zero, according to Arbitron. "Ohhhhhhhhhh" says Sean Gilbow. "I did not KNOW that!" Trying to divide total national audience figures by the number of stations will NEVER give you an accurate count of how many listeners you have per station, because of this simple fact above. It will not compute.

This is what happens when somebody with a tiny bit of knowledge tries to debate the issue with somebody who actually DOES this for a living.

The second problem with the Gilbow argument is that in the markets where Sean and Big Ed actually DO compete head-on...(and these are the 4 markets mentioned above where ABQ Tom claimed Big Ed was beating Sean)....these markets actually have REAL numbers attached to them. You do not have to do any fuzzy math, and try to calculate who has more listeners in these markets.

I already pointed out Sean's lead over Big Ed when you add up the shares in these four markets. So the issue is MOOT. If you want me to, I will go back and convert the shares to actual listeners, but it will not change the final calculation because a share represents a percentage of the radios turned on to any given show in each market. The percentage lead for Hannity over Big Ed would be the same.

It was a nice creative try to use air-headed calculations to justify somebody's pre-conceived notion about how well Big Ed is doing. Gilbow should go to the mirror...give a look of horror and grab his cheeks like the kid in Home Alone, because the light bulb surely is going off in his tiny little head that his little calculation is worth about as much as my tiny suma wrestling towel.

pb

Phil, I would be more than happy to display my lunacy at any time in a debate with you. At least it's more than Sean Hannity was willing to do against Ed Schultz in Cincinnati. The only thing I ask is that Stephanie Miller moderate it.

Feel free to contact me at any time at the Ohio Department of Public Safety.

By the way...the station managers who carry Hannity's show in non-Arbitron markets will be happy to know they have a zero audience according to you.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Don 62 further shows his ignorance with this ill-informed comment:

Your post defeats narrow-minded blowhards like Hannity who claim "no one listens to liberal or progressive radiio."

KTLK has very high TSL.

Is Hannity going to retract his erroneous statements?

Don...KTLK ranks 27th in Los Angeles. They have a tiny number of listeners...but they do listen a LONG time. They score high in TSL but have so few listeners that they are near the bottom of the stack. Hannity is right...not many are listening. Those that do listen a long time. You can't JUST look at TSL. My point about TSL is that the stations that do well with TSL have similar hosts across all dayparts, and keep their listeners all day.

Please....I beg you to pay attention here. I am doing all I can to teach you about how radio works, and you JUST REFUSE TO LISTEN.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Sean Gilbow continues to flail like a fish on the bank, who does not know he has been caught.

By the way...the station managers who carry Hannity's show in non-Arbitron markets will be happy to know they have a zero audience according to you.

I did not say they have a zero audience...I said Arbitron shows them as a zero. Of course somebody is listening...but Arbitron does not know it, and does not show it. And do you think those stations managers in small town America are aware of the fact that Arbitron does not rate them? Of course they are. They are not paying Arbitron...are they?

I will try to speak slower this time so the slow ones like Don and Sean Gilbow can figure this out. There are about 300 Arbitron rated markets. If Sean is heard in 520 markets, that means 220 of Sean's markets are too small to be counted in the national Arbitron figures. So when Talkers Magazine releases it's semi-annual list of the cume figures for talk show hosts, there is no way for them to know how many listeners are in those markets. The figures they come up with are estimates...for both Hannity and for somebody like Big Ed.

You can't do what Gilbow tried to do, and some up with an average audience for each station. There is no statistical model that would allow for that. But...as I pointed out you CAN look at how Sean Hannity and Big Ed do....head to head in the markets where they compete. According to ABC Tom...those four markets that I listed were Big Ed's best markets...where a lot of liberals give him a lot of listening. Even so...in Big Ed's 4 BEST markets....Hannity beat him easily in those same 4 markets. Head to head...even steven...when you add up the shares for each show.

Look...of course Hannity is going to beat Big Ed. That is not a shock to me. But it apparently is EARTH SHATTERING to a few kool-aide drinkers who came here to this board with preconcieved notions about how well he is doing...and how well liberal talk is doing. I want Air America to succeed. Frankly, I want Big Ed to make it too. We are not really competing for listeners with him. Hannity listeners are not going to listen to them. But the more the merrier in this format.

I am just not going to sit by and watch some morons post things here that are patently false about the shows I manage, without correcting the record. That is why I keep doing this.

pb

 

[Phil Boyce]

NewsNow says:

Mr. Boyce, can you tell me if those are PPM or diary figures?

Those are diary figures. Once the PPM starts to roll out I expect the TSL to be lower...for everybody...but the cume will be higher.

 

[SeanMGilbow]

Sean Gilbow continues to flail like a fish on the bank, who does not know he has been caught.

By the way...the station managers who carry Hannity's show in non-Arbitron markets will be happy to know they have a zero audience according to you.

I did not say they have a zero audience...I said Arbitron shows them as a zero. Of course somebody is listening...but Arbitron does not know it, and does not show it. And do you think those stations managers in small town America are aware of the fact that Arbitron does not rate them? Of course they are. They are not paying Arbitron...are they?

I will try to speak slower this time so the slow ones like Don and Sean Gilbow can figure this out. There are about 300 Arbitron rated markets. If Sean is heard in 520 markets, that means 220 of Sean's markets are too small to be counted in the national Arbitron figures. So when Talkers Magazine releases it's semi-annual list of the cume figures for talk show hosts, there is no way for them to know how many listeners are in those markets. The figures they come up with are estimates...for both Hannity and for somebody like Big Ed.

You can't do what Gilbow tried to do, and some up with an average audience for each station. There is no statistical model that would allow for that. But...as I pointed out you CAN look at how Sean Hannity and Big Ed do....head to head in the markets where they compete. According to ABC Tom...those four markets that I listed were Big Ed's best markets...where a lot of liberals give him a lot of listening. Even so...in Big Ed's 4 BEST markets....Hannity beat him easily in those same 4 markets. Head to head...even steven...when you add up the shares for each show.

Look...of course Hannity is going to beat Big Ed. That is not a shock to me. But it apparently is EARTH SHATTERING to a few kool-aide drinkers who came here to this board with preconcieved notions about how well he is doing...and how well liberal talk is doing. I want Air America to succeed. Frankly, I want Big Ed to make it too. We are not really competing for listeners with him. Hannity listeners are not going to listen to them. But the more the merrier in this format.

I am just not going to sit by and watch some morons post things here that are patently false about the shows I manage, without correcting the record. That is why I keep doing this.

pb

Phil...Your arguments, regardless of how valid some of your points might be, are being drowned out by your pomposity.

Talkers Magazine's latest survey of the top talk radio audiences showed only 39 hosts as having audiences of at least a million listeners. This is compared to the publication's list of the Talkers 250, including the Heavy Hundred.

http://www.talkers.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=34

Of the 39 hosts cited by the magazine as having audiences in excess of one million, six of them would be labeled as progressive. In addition to Big Eddie with 3.25 million, five hosts were at 1.5 million: Alan Colmes, Thom Hartmann, Lionel, Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes.

For six progressive hosts to be listed among just 39 talkers to generate an audience in excess of one million, especially with a number of liberal talk stations flipping formats in early 2007, is noteworthy.

Since you say average listenership per station has no bearing, I would counter by taking Hannity out of the picture.

Ed Schultz and Bill O'Reilly, according to Talkers, each have 3.25 million listeners.

Ed's website indicates he is on roughly 80 stations. Westwood One's website indicates The Radio Factor is on 390 stations, including all of the top 100 markets.

The two of them, when aired live, would compete head to head between noon and 2 p.m. Eastern.

Now, unless you are willing to dispute how a leading publication on talk radio came up with numbers that unquestionably put Rush and Hannity at 1 and 2 with only a difference of a million listeners between them (and Savage a distant third)...explain to this moronic Kool-Aid drinking fish flailing on the bank how average listenership does not come into play when comparing Schultz with O'Reilly, and how Big Eddie could not possibly be beating O'Reilly in many of the markets where both those shows air.

And I will not bring up the sumo outfit again if you will avoid being so condescending, though I won't hold my breath on that since I am currently flailing.

 

[DaleGriffin]

Phil...Your arguments, regardless of how valid some of your points might be, are being drowned out by your pomposity.

You make it easy for him to be pompous when you are so constantly and ridiculously wrong.

 

[DaleGriffin]

Now, unless you are willing to dispute how a leading publication on talk radio came up with numbers that unquestionably put Rush and Hannity at 1 and 2 with only a difference of a million listeners between them (and Savage a distant third)...explain to this moronic Kool-Aid drinking fish flailing on the bank how average listenership does not come into play when comparing Schultz with O'Reilly, and how Big Eddie could not possibly be beating O'Reilly in many of the markets where both those shows air.

Ok now you are moving the goalposts here. First it was Hannity and you were smacked down, now it is O'Reilly. A few things to remember Bill O. on many second and third tier radio stations competes directly against Rush on most markets top dogs, so take 10 million audience members away and put them with Rush. Now Big Ed's 80 stations are the only game in town with his format and he still isnt blowing anyone away, that is not setting the world on fire and making me want to carry his program, when I have Hannity and Rush getting all the ears.

Is it really impressive that a format with no-competition has one person from each daypart on a list with a 32 other talkshow host all competing against each other in the same dayparts?

Now remove the Talker's Magazine numbers and ask yourself this, who is more profitable Big Ed or Hannity, or in your new argument Big Ed or Bill O., even in head to head markets? When the answer to either of those is Big Ed then you will see the format be successful.

 

[Phil Boyce]

OK...Sean Gilbow asks a legitimate question, and I will stop harassing him and try to answer it:

Now, unless you are willing to dispute how a leading publication on talk radio came up with numbers that unquestionably put Rush and Hannity at 1 and 2 with only a difference of a million listeners between them (and Savage a distant third)...explain to this moronic Kool-Aid drinking fish flailing on the bank how average listenership does not come into play when comparing Schultz with O'Reilly, and how Big Eddie could not possibly be beating O'Reilly in many of the markets where both those shows air.

And I will not bring up the sumo outfit again if you will avoid being so condescending, though I won't hold my breath on that since I am currently flailing.

I was the one who challenged Big Ed to a sumo wrestling match, so I have no problem with the analogy.

The Talkers Magazine semi-annual survey of the most listened to hosts in America...is an estimate. I know this, because I am close friends with Michael Harrison who created this magazine began this survey over 12 years ago. I have worked with Michael to make this list as accurate as possible. The reason this survey is an estimate, is that Arbitron does not release it's national radio ratings. In order to get them, you have to be a subscriber to Arbitron, on a national basis. It is expensive, and no trade publication could afford that. Only the major networks can afford it. I have access to those numbers, because I do subscrive. Talkers Magazine does not.

Also...keep in mind what I pointed out about the 300 Arbitron rated markets. Estimating how many listeners Hannity and Rush have is not an exact science, because you have to guess on the additional markets that are not Arbitron rated. And frankly with the PPM rollout we will find higher cume figures for all stations and all shows. So the numbers you are seeing today will eventually start to go up as the PPM is rolled out.

Now to answer your question about Bill O'Reilly vs. Big Ed. You may be right. I would have to look at the numbers for Big Ed in his markets, and compare them with O'Reilly in the same markets...and see who wins. I really don't know, and I don't like to guess on these things.

However, when ABQ Tom claimed that Bid Ed was beating Hannity in those four specific markets...I checked it out. He was wrong. There may have been a book when this occurred, but in the last book available, Spring of 07, Hannity had a comfortable lead. But keep in mind these were supposedly Big Ed's best four markets. I did not run O'Reilly in those same markets...but if Big Ed is beating him...big deal. I am not a Bill fan...at least not on the radio. His TV show is awesome.

Bill O'Reilly may have 330 affiliates...I am not sure. Stations guard their affiliate lists so there is no way for me to verify. I do remember one time seeing a list of Bill O'Reilly stations in which they listed 4 affiliates in Albuquerque. I thought that was odd, so I checked it out and learned that NONE of the four stations had ever been rated by Arbitron in Albuquerque, because they were in other cities, and could not be heard there. So there is always a little fudging going on by the networks.

You made a big deal of the fact that of the 39 hosts listed in Talkers....6 are progressive. That is a fine showing, considering that progressive radio is relatively new. But in order to know how Big Ed is doing against other hosts, you really have to look at his ratings in each of his markets. You can't take the number of radio stations the syndicator claims....divide it by how many listeners TALKERS Magazine claims...and come up with a number. It just won't compute.

Hope this helps...and I tried to take as much condescension out as possible.

pb

ps...Dale...thanks for the tactical air support. This board seems filled with kool-aide drinkers...so it is nice to see a few normal, sane, rational posters here who do seem to get it.

 

[ajhenderson]

O'Reilly is not on in all 100 markets, and hasn't been for sometime. He's not in Chicago, for example, unless you count 2-4am - and that will go away soon. He's on low-rated stations like KLIF/Dallas or KNEW/SF, where he just returned. Then again, Ed's 3.25 million seems a bit high, seeing that his biggest affiliates are LA at night and Chicago on a daytimer. He does have the support of so many other great stations like Hannity to make up for these initial impediments.

 

[Don62]

Don 62 further shows his ignorance with this ill-informed comment:

Your post defeats narrow-minded blowhards like Hannity who claim "no one listens to liberal or progressive radiio."

KTLK has very high TSL.

Is Hannity going to retract his erroneous statements?

Don...KTLK ranks 27th in Los Angeles. They have a tiny number of listeners...but they do listen a LONG time. They score high in TSL but have so few listeners that they are near the bottom of the stack. Hannity is right...not many are listening. Those that do listen a long time. You can't JUST look at TSL. My point about TSL is that the stations that do well with TSL have similar hosts across all dayparts, and keep their listeners all day.

I wasn't looking at only TSL. But in your argument of how great your station is, you inadvertantly brought up a good point about a competitor. I think you regret posting that information, because, as the myth goes, "no one listens to liberal radio."

Hannity's logic is riddled with errors. He displays his arrogance and unwillingness to listen to others every single show.

Did you not see Hannity's TV show where he interviewed a leading conservative and a leading liberal, Bob Beckel and Cal Thomas, who have co-authored a book on stopping the arguing and coming together on the middle.

All that mental midget Hannity could do is grumble about how Pelosi or someone else said something stupid or compared Bush to some dictator.

Hannity's the kind of person that won't let facts get in his way of his constant argument.

Hannity doesn't listen. He's one of the most ignorant hosts on the air.

He's taken many great local hosts of the air. And this is what we get in its place? Dribble.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Don....I absolutely do NOT regret what I said about KTLK. I never said they had NO listeners, nor did Hannity. There is no host on the air today that is more aware of how the ratings system works than Sean Hannity. I should know...I hired him and I talk to him almost everyday about ratings. He did not say nor does he believe that Air America gets NO ratings. But their ratings are poor, and there is NO denying that.

What I said about KTLK was that they had high TSL and I told you why. This apparently zoomed right over your head. I explained that there was NO conservative in their lineup. This is typical of Air America stations, and it makes me wonder why people demand WABC place liberals on my station, when nobody demands the air america stations place conservatives on theirs.

As I pointed out...KTLK ranks 27th in total listeners in LA. You are trying to use their TSL to prove Hannity's statement that they get few listeners wrong. He never said NO listeners, he said few. And he is right..they rank 27th. They have a very low cume...but that cume listens to them all day giving them high TSL. Even so it is not enough to drag them off the ratings floor. My point is, there is a consistency to the lineup that drives listeners from one show to the next. Same as WABC.

But the difference is that WABC also has 1.2 million cume. So when you have decent cume...and enormous TSL you place 5th in NYC.....as opposed to 27th in LA. Please listen to me...and stop claiming KTLK has a lot of listeners. They don't. They have high TSL...as I stated. They have few listeners, which is what Hannity said.

KJCB, I agree with you. In fact both O'Reilly and Big Ed seem a bit high to me in the Talkers estimate. Keep in mind that it is an estimate. I think Harrison actually did some of the lib talkers a favor to help them get out of the gate, because he wants to support this form of talk. Nothing wrong with that.

As KJCB states, these shows are not very well represented in some really big markets. For that reason, neither will cross the 4-5 million threshold anytime soon unless they are able to pick up more major stations and get some great ratings. 3.25 is not that big of a deal. Mark Levin is already at 4 million and after about 18 months in syndication.

This is the frustration expressed by Big Ed (the start of this thread) when he criticized WABC. It is not that we have a bad station...but that he is not on it, that makes him mad. He thinks if he WAS he would do a lot better than he is.

pb

 

[Phil Boyce]

One more thing from our friend Don 62...

Hannity doesn't listen. He's one of the most ignorant hosts on the air.

He's taken many great local hosts of the air. And this is what we get in its place? Dribble.

Think about what you are saying here. If he really is as bad as you say...how in the world did he get to 520 stations and 13.5 million listeners? This board is a discussion of radio....not politics. If you do not like his politics, then go to the move-on.org board. There are tons of Hannity haters over there who feel like you do. But the fact is, Hannity is one of the best hosts on the radio....based on his track record of success. If you don't like him....TOO BAD. You can't stop him...you can't silence him...and you can't get him off stations because guess what....you are WRONG. He gets ratings for stations. That is why they carry him. If he did not get ratings, they would dump him for the next guy.

I am constantly amazed Don...that people like you simply drink the liberal kool-aide and refuse to listen to facts. Here I am explaining to you how radio works...and you cover your ears like some kid singing la-la-la-la, and will not accept the fact that Hannity got here, because he is good.

You hate him...I get that. But millions love him. I know that. It is a fact. I went to all 5 Freedom Concerts. I witnessed this for myself. He is a rock star to these people. So take your Hannity hating comments to the liberal blogs where you will find lot's of company. I am not going to sit here and let you slander the guy...with silly untrue statements. But keep trying...it is fun for me to play wack-a-mole.

pb

 

[SeanMGilbow]

Phil...Your arguments, regardless of how valid some of your points might be, are being drowned out by your pomposity.

You make it easy for him to be pompous when you are so constantly and ridiculously wrong.

Because of your comment posted after this one, in which you then state how wrong you feel I am, I will let that one slide.

As compared with a poster on another topic in this area recently, I do respect opposing viewpoints from those who identify themselves and give reasoning to say when I am wrong, unlike those who post anonymously and say I am wrong without giving a counter argument.

Keep in mind I never heard of you before I started posting here.

 

[SeanMGilbow]

OK...Sean Gilbow asks a legitimate question, and I will stop harassing him and try to answer it:

Now, unless you are willing to dispute how a leading publication on talk radio came up with numbers that unquestionably put Rush and Hannity at 1 and 2 with only a difference of a million listeners between them (and Savage a distant third)...explain to this moronic Kool-Aid drinking fish flailing on the bank how average listenership does not come into play when comparing Schultz with O'Reilly, and how Big Eddie could not possibly be beating O'Reilly in many of the markets where both those shows air.

And I will not bring up the sumo outfit again if you will avoid being so condescending, though I won't hold my breath on that since I am currently flailing.

I was the one who challenged Big Ed to a sumo wrestling match, so I have no problem with the analogy.

The Talkers Magazine semi-annual survey of the most listened to hosts in America...is an estimate. I know this, because I am close friends with Michael Harrison who created this magazine began this survey over 12 years ago. I have worked with Michael to make this list as accurate as possible. The reason this survey is an estimate, is that Arbitron does not release it's national radio ratings. In order to get them, you have to be a subscriber to Arbitron, on a national basis. It is expensive, and no trade publication could afford that. Only the major networks can afford it. I have access to those numbers, because I do subscrive. Talkers Magazine does not.

Also...keep in mind what I pointed out about the 300 Arbitron rated markets. Estimating how many listeners Hannity and Rush have is not an exact science, because you have to guess on the additional markets that are not Arbitron rated. And frankly with the PPM rollout we will find higher cume figures for all stations and all shows. So the numbers you are seeing today will eventually start to go up as the PPM is rolled out.

Now to answer your question about Bill O'Reilly vs. Big Ed. You may be right. I would have to look at the numbers for Big Ed in his markets, and compare them with O'Reilly in the same markets...and see who wins. I really don't know, and I don't like to guess on these things.

However, when ABQ Tom claimed that Bid Ed was beating Hannity in those four specific markets...I checked it out. He was wrong. There may have been a book when this occurred, but in the last book available, Spring of 07, Hannity had a comfortable lead. But keep in mind these were supposedly Big Ed's best four markets. I did not run O'Reilly in those same markets...but if Big Ed is beating him...big deal. I am not a Bill fan...at least not on the radio. His TV show is awesome.

Bill O'Reilly may have 330 affiliates...I am not sure. Stations guard their affiliate lists so there is no way for me to verify. I do remember one time seeing a list of Bill O'Reilly stations in which they listed 4 affiliates in Albuquerque. I thought that was odd, so I checked it out and learned that NONE of the four stations had ever been rated by Arbitron in Albuquerque, because they were in other cities, and could not be heard there. So there is always a little fudging going on by the networks.

You made a big deal of the fact that of the 39 hosts listed in Talkers....6 are progressive. That is a fine showing, considering that progressive radio is relatively new. But in order to know how Big Ed is doing against other hosts, you really have to look at his ratings in each of his markets. You can't take the number of radio stations the syndicator claims....divide it by how many listeners TALKERS Magazine claims...and come up with a number. It just won't compute.

Hope this helps...and I tried to take as much condescension out as possible.

pb

Phil, I commend you for your effort at bringing a sense of civility back to the discussion.

There are posters like myself who have no problem with a good counter argument, as long as 1) you have one (which you did) and 2) you avoid using certain terminology which only serves to get your opponents riled up.

Even lunatic, Kool-Aid-drinking, flailing fish will respond to a rational opposing viewpoint in kind.

 

[Don62]

Think about what you are saying here. If he really is as bad as you say...how in the world did he get to 520 stations and 13.5 million listeners? This board is a discussion of radio....not politics. If you do not like his politics, then go to the move-on.org board. There are tons of Hannity haters over there who feel like you do. But the fact is, Hannity is one of the best hosts on the radio....based on his track record of success. If you don't like him....TOO BAD. You can't stop him...you can't silence him...and you can't get him off stations because guess what....you are WRONG. He gets ratings for stations. That is why they carry him. If he did not get ratings, they would dump him for the next guy.

I am constantly amazed Don...that people like you simply drink the liberal kool-aide and refuse to listen to facts. Here I am explaining to you how radio works...and you cover your ears like some kid singing la-la-la-la, and will not accept the fact that Hannity got here, because he is good.

You hate him...I get that. But millions love him. I know that. It is a fact. I went to all 5 Freedom Concerts. I witnessed this for myself. He is a rock star to these people. So take your Hannity hating comments to the liberal blogs where you will find lot's of company. I am not going to sit here and let you slander the guy...with silly untrue statements. But keep trying...it is fun for me to play wack-a-mole.

pb

You callin' me a LIBERAL, Boyce?
I'm the furthest thing from that.

I actually like and listen to Billl O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, David Gold and Michael Savage. I also like Big Ed and listened to Jay Marvin (KOA) and Bob Lassiter. I detest Stephanie Miller and Rhandi Rhodes gets on my nerves sometimes.

I like talk radio. Good talk radio.

I will listen to a host despite his politics.

I don't like the way Hannity handles his show. He shows his ignorance every day.

Think about it. When was the last time he ever said to a guest or caller, "You may be right about that."

NEVER.

In Hannity's world, he's always right, like El Rushbo, whom I helped get on the air in a major market- through writing the two major talk stations, asking them to carry Rush. Believe me, I regret that action.

I'm far from a liberal. Yet I'm not some Kook-Aid drinking right winger who can't stand hearing other viewpoints and other hosts.

Hannity doesn't behave like a professional broadcaster. His show is far from "the best news you'll find anywhere." Surely he says that with a crooked face?

The shows ignorant stations threw off the air in favorof this clown were in many cases much better than the monotonous "Republicans are always right" and "Liberals are always wrong" dribble he spouts every day.

Beck, Savage, Gold, Bob Grant and others didn't spout that nonsense every single day.

You chumps running talk radio have big brains if you think your listeners will be scared away from the dial if someone who isn't a talking-points reading Republican comes on the air after your sacred cow Rush's show is over. What a bunch of idiots you are.

You're the ones that drove great hosts like Bruce Williams, Ken Hamblin and others off the air in favor of right-wing, all-the-time jibberish.