Ed Schultz Blasts Phil Boyce and Poor Management at WABC

[Phil Boyce]

Don 62 claims he is not a liberal. and I believe him. But that really makes his arguments about Sean worse. Because if he was a kool-aide drinking liberal, at least I could understand why he comes here trashing Sean. That fact that he is not makes me wonder....what personal thing happened to him...to make him hate Hannity so much.

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.

Don...us chumps running talk radio are paid to get ratings. We don't go out and find lousy hosts just for the fun of it. I have now programmed WABC in NYC for 12 straight years....which is 100 years in dog years (PD years). My job has all the security of your average NFL head football coach. Before this I programmed in Detroit at the number one station in that market for four years. I am not bragging, I am just saying the obvious. I did not get these jobs...and keep these jobs...by putting losers on the radio.

In fact...finding Sean Hannity, who you erroneously think is a no talent hack...has been rewarded by my company. You see, I found a guy and put him on the national stage and watched his show become MORE profitable for my company than the radio station itself...WABC in New York. How could that BE when he is so horrible, as you think?

This is why I compare you to a child covering his ears. You can't hear this. You can't accept this fact. Hannity today is making more money for my company....than one of our biggest radio stations. The fact that YOU do not care for the way he does his show means NOTHING. Your anger toward Sean is irrational. You are starting to lose the wheels on your caboose. Hannity is one of the biggest things my company has EVER created.

If you understand even ONE TINY THING about this business understand this. Shows that get ratings and make money are successful! This one does both. It works. You can keep whining about how bad he is all you want. So what? You are one man with one opinion...and I have proven you wrong more times than I can count.

pb

 

[Don62]

This is why I compare you to a child covering his ears. You can't hear this. You can't accept this fact. Hannity today is making more money for my company....than one of our biggest radio stations. The fact that YOU do not care for the way he does his show means NOTHING. Your anger toward Sean is irrational. You are starting to lose the wheels on your caboose. Hannity is one of the biggest things my company has EVER created.

If you understand even ONE TINY THING about this business understand this. Shows that get ratings and make money are successful! This one does both. It works. You can keep whining about how bad he is all you want. So what? You are one man with one opinion...and I have proven you wrong more times than I can count.

pb

So you in conversation with friends or colleagues act like Sean on the radio?
Close your ears. Start singing. Start talking over the caller.
Call the caller names.
Start spouting off crap "That Clinton did this too..."

Mr. Boyce, You never say "You may be right about that?"
Wow. It must be something working under Mr. Perfect.

Ratings are all that matters.


I like that caller a couple of months ago I heard, who vainly tried to point out where Sean was wrong about Iraq.
What did Sean do? Listen? Consider his points?

Nope. He just started his litany of why Iraq is a great thing and why Americans should invest their sons there.

The caller, realizing Sean is a one-trick pony with a pea-sized brain, exxasperated said, "I give up. I can't talk to a brick wall" or something like that and hung up.

Just desserts for a man who can't win an argument. Or one who doesn't have the capacity to expand and see other's viewpoints.

But then again, you could care less about that. It's all about money.

Stupid stations use the Hannity crutch when they could do so much better, as many have.


Oh, I could do without the name-calling.

I'm hardly a child. You're starting to take up Hannity's ways of :arguing."

 

[Phil Boyce]

Don 62: Please go back and read my last post. You can't. Your head will explode.

Stupid stations use the Hannity crutch when they could do so much better, as many have.

Yes...all 520 of those stupid stations. And all 13.5 million of those stupid listeners. And all those advertisers sending millions our way because of this stupid man...this stupid show..and these stupid stations.

Hmmmmmmmm. And how many stations have you programmed? How many shows have you hosted? How many listeners do you have? Or are you just one man here on a message board with an opinion that has absolutely NO connection to the facts?

pb

 

[Phil Boyce]

Don 62 says:

Mr. Boyce, You never say "You may be right about that?"
Wow. It must be something working under Mr. Perfect.

Don....you need to read these threads a little more carefully.

« Reply #37 on: October 25, 2007, 09:47:17 pm »
Reply with quoteQuote
KJCB says:
Quote
How much better do Mark and Bob Grant (or Jerry Agar before) do vs. when the Yankees were on WABC? I would think the Yankees, if you had them back, wouldn't do quite as well now as they did several years ago?

I think you are probably right about that.

So....I never say it, huh? I never say it to you because I have not seen a single thing you have written that may be right.

But you do the same thing you accuse me of. When I point out to you how many listeners or stations..or how profitable the Hannity show is, you never say....you know you may be right about that. You can't because something happened to you that made you blind to anything good Hannity does. Your hatred for him is irrational.

I don't need to come here and defend him on this message board. But I do, because I would prefer the record be corrected.

pb

 

[Don62]

Don 62 says:

Mr. Boyce, You never say "You may be right about that?"
Wow. It must be something working under Mr. Perfect.

Don....you need to read these threads a little more carefully.

Phil, you need to learn how to read punctuation.
That was a question. The ? mark is a dead giveaway. There was also some sarcasm there.


Tell me this, do you listen to his show? Listen to how he rudely treats his callers?

You would serously want to be friends with someone like that?

My argument isn't about politics or ideology, which is all Hannity ever talks about.

Despite his rating, his show is lousy radio.
Much like Stern, in a different way. Stern had high ratings. As did Madonna and Rosanne.
You want to tell me those were class shows?

Hannity isn't in the same league as a Jim Bohannon, Bruce Williams, Barry Farber, Tom Snyder, Larry King or even a Bill O'Reilly.

At least Bill O'Reilly will say he's sometimes wrong. He will cnocede that "Maybe you;re right about that."
Bill-O has said he was wrong about his strong initial support for the Iraq war.

Hannity won't even come close to conceding on anything.

Hannity's show with rare exeptions is like a broken record. It's preditably monotonous.
Everything is the Democrats' or liberal's fault.

His show isn't one I listen to and I wouldn't add him if I owned a station.
Despite what you think, his show isn't No. 1 everywhere it goes, like KCMO or WWBA.

I'm a talk radio listerner veteran. I know what makes for an interesting show.
I don't car how many awards you've won or how many stations you've programmed. Doesn't make a difference in my criticism of Sean.

This ain't a lousy Hannity show. You can't just pot me down or talk over me.
Since you identified yourself, and what you do, it's fair game online to take shots at you.
Hannity doesn't allow disagreeable callers much space.
This forum is perfect for this kind of thing.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Don, the problem with this discussion is that you have nothing new to share. You have no cheap shot you have not already fired...and you keep repeating the same lines about Hannity over and over again. And now I run the risk of doing the same thing, because if I keep responding to this, there is no way that I will not start to repeat myself also. But I will try to answer a few more of your points.

You would serously want to be friends with someone like that?

Yes I would, and I am. He is one of my best friends. And he is one of the most loyal, honest and caring friends you will ever have. I am honored to be one of them.

Despite his rating, his show is lousy radio.
Much like Stern, in a different way. Stern had high ratings. As did Madonna and Rosanne.
You want to tell me those were class shows?

This is a classic oxymoron (no Don, I am not calling YOU a moron). Don seems to be conceding the show gets ratings, but still thinks it is lousy radio....TO HIM. I get that. As I have pointed out, Don does not have to listen. But the whole idea behind creating radio shows (what I do for a living) is that you want a show that gets ratings and makes money for the company. Sean does that...so even though Don thinks it is lousy radio, it is successful radio....and that is all I care about.

Hannity isn't in the same league as a Jim Bohannon, Bruce Williams, Barry Farber, Tom Snyder, Larry King or even a Bill O'Reilly.

Finally....Don and I agree on something. There is nothing wrong with the people Don lists here. All of them are well known. But as radio hosts go..none of them are in the same league as Sean Hannity. In fact only two in America are in that league. Rush and Sean...who both reach in the range of 13-15 million listeners a week. Nobody else is even close. So, Don...I hand this one to you. You are correct, sir.

This thread was really not about how horrible Hannity is......but there is another thread open for that ongoing topic. Please Don, let's take it over there.

pb

 

[mobile-exradiodj]

If Phil is serious about the sumo wrestling match, I'm sure that something can be worked out for a match in Minnesota. I believe he was joking. ;D However, if you really are up for the challenge, you could visit the Larry Craig bathroom stall during your trip and take a look at the 35W bridge plus much more before the match. I have the sumo suits ready-to-go.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Mobile says:

If Phil is serious about the sumo wrestling match, I'm sure that something can be worked out for a match in Minnesota.

I was really thinking more like Madison Square Garden.

pb

 

[ajhenderson]

Phil:

Are you worried about Steve Dahl going up against Don Wade and Roma? And while we're talking about casualties of WCKG, what is your opinion on Glenn Beck? I realize there's no room for his show on WABC or most of the ABC talkers you oversee, but do you think his growth will continue?

 

[Phil Boyce]

I am not worried about Steve Dahl. He is a great talent but going after a different audience and demo than then one Don and Roma are after. Steve is not going to talk about issues and news of the day...not much.

I like Glenn Beck. He will continue to grow if his syndicator gets behind his show whic they seem to be doing now.

pb

 

[DaleGriffin]

Phil,

What did you think of Premiere's move to offer McConnel in syndication in the same slot and take Beck off a few stations like WGST when he launched?

 

[ajhenderson]

I'm not Phil, but McConnell's show has bombed. Presumably forced clearances on stations like WFLF/Orlando, but the big ones like WGST/Atlanta have not lasted - Beck is back there. WLW lost a great local talent and a lot of credibility for not much benefit to Premiere or Mike McConnell.

As to Steve Dahl, hopefully everyone realizes my tongue was firmly planted in my cheek on that one. Don't see Jack Chicago as a huge player with or w/o him.

 

[NewsNow]

I have to say, I'm not a Hannity fan, far from it. But ideology doesn't dictate that WABC programming is poorly managed. Far from it, they are about on target as it gets for their audience. It may come as a shock, but nobody is going to change Hannity's mind about anything. Why bother? Why even talk about it?

If you want to gas about management at WABC, how about the billing department, ie: the sales department? Why is WABC so far down the billing list of NYC radio stations? Why is sister WPLJ just absolutely kicking butt?

 

[Don62]

Hannity isn't in the same league as a Jim Bohannon, Bruce Williams, Barry Farber, Tom Snyder, Larry King or even a Bill O'Reilly.

Finally....Don and I agree on something. There is nothing wrong with the people Don lists here. All of them are well known. But as radio hosts go..none of them are in the same league as Sean Hannity. In fact only two in America are in that league. Rush and Sean...who both reach in the range of 13-15 million listeners a week. Nobody else is even close. So, Don...I hand this one to you. You are correct, sir.

To be precise, that doesn't mean Hannity's show is better, just that he has more listeners.

TV shows such as MASH, Cheers, etc., which were nearly cancelled during their first seasons because of low ratings, surely no one would have said many other shows - which had far superiior ratings but few can remember today - were "better" than the classics MASH and Cheers became.

Stern had a lot of ratings, probably more than Hannity and Limbo. You would claim his show was better?

When talk of "classy" radio hosts, people who read, listen to others, don't narrowly follow a political party's talking points, Hannity's name doesn't ever come up alongside the other real hosts.
Neither would Stephanie Miller for that matter.

For the record, I don' t have any problem with Hannity's ideology or politics, just the way he rudely handles people, claims he's always right, never listens to others, etc. It's a very monotonous show.

 

[DaleGriffin]

Hannity isn't in the same league as a Jim Bohannon, Bruce Williams, Barry Farber, Tom Snyder, Larry King or even a Bill O'Reilly.

Finally....Don and I agree on something. There is nothing wrong with the people Don lists here. All of them are well known. But as radio hosts go..none of them are in the same league as Sean Hannity. In fact only two in America are in that league. Rush and Sean...who both reach in the range of 13-15 million listeners a week. Nobody else is even close. So, Don...I hand this one to you. You are correct, sir.

To be precise, that doesn't mean Hannity's show is better, just that he has more listeners.

TV shows such as MASH, Cheers, etc., which were nearly cancelled during their first seasons because of low ratings, surely no one would have said many other shows - which had far superiior ratings but few can remember today - were "better" than the classics MASH and Cheers became.

Stern had a lot of ratings, probably more than Hannity and Limbo. You would claim his show was better?

When talk of "classy" radio hosts, people who read, listen to others, don't narrowly follow a political party's talking points, Hannity's name doesn't ever come up alongside the other real hosts.
Neither would Stephanie Miller for that matter.

For the record, I don' t have any problem with Hannity's ideology or politics, just the way he rudely handles people, claims he's always right, never listens to others, etc. It's a very monotonous show.

Don get help and turn off the radio. You are blabbering on repeatedly saying the same tired things. One-sided politics is not what you want, check. Hannity is slanted, check. Your nickmname for Rush is Limbo, check. Jerry Williams, David Gold, all better, check. Yikes.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Dale Jackson asks:

What did you think of Premiere's move to offer McConnel in syndication in the same slot and take Beck off a few stations like WGST when he launched?

Dale the problem in that 9am to noon time slot is the glut of too many national shows vying for too few stations. Not only is there Glenn Beck and Mike McConnell...but Laura Ingraham, Mike Gallagher, Neal Boortz, and now even Dennis Miller....not to mention a few lib talkers here. A few years ago, this was a wide open field in this slot, but the hole filled up quickly. If you count a number of regional and smaller shows available, there may be 17 shows in this time slot on a syndicated basis. Nobody can win here.

I like McConnell but I think sometimes hosts are just better off left local. He is a huge star in Cincy, and it is really hard to turn that into a national hit. It was worth the chance though.

I am not sure if a lot of people understand how tough it is to take a show national. MOST shows that attempt national syndication fail. I am truly blessed that I have struck gold 3 times, first with Drudge....then Hannity...and now Levin. But during that time span, probably 9-10 other shows my own company attempted to syndicate all failed. If you add up all the other shows that failed during this time you could probably come up with 50 or more that failed. It is a grueling and difficult proposition...and many do not have what it takes to make it. There are so many factors that contribute to this, I could not begin to count them. Plus I probably wouldn't want to reveal all my trade secrets here on a public message board.... ;D

pb

 

[gr8oldies]

McConnell had often said before the syndication deal that he preferred to stay local, at least during the week. He mentioned not being restricted to only national topics. I can understand the decision to go for the syndication deal as a neccesary career move, but think it might be better to take him back local. He has very few clearances at this point, and the field is very crowded.

Much the same haoppened with Gary Burbank's syndicated effort..local ratings went down and Burbank had to turn down a wealth of local material (namely the Marge Schott controversy which was ripe for satire) because the rest of the country wouldn't get it.

 

[Phil Boyce]

Gr8oldies....I think you are making a really good point here. The shows that I have taken national did NOT have to change. Hannity was already doing a national show...when he was still local on WABC. When he did talk about a New York City issue, it always had national legs anyway. When I asked him to consider syndication at first he rejected the idea. He feared it would hurt his local show on WABC and that we would try to change his show. I had to promise him that nothing would change, and convince him that the show he was doing already had national appeal...even if we left it completely "as is."

Same thing for Levin. He was basically doing national topics anyway. We never really changed a thing. I believe that most successful national shows have to develop a strong home base first...before they can be syndicated. But on the same token, if the shows are too local to have national appeal, it will never work.

pb

 

[Element9]

I gotta tell ya, it's really encouraging that a PD in Market #1 would take time to enlighten the board with multiple and continuous post, but I have to say Phil, I'm a bit curious if not concerned.

Multiple posts on Saturday, 10/27? Isn't there a lawn that has to be mowed. Is Phil's Job Jar not brimming with around the house items? Or do PDs in market #1 have somebody to take care of those mundane chores?

And posts in the 9 o'clock hour on a weekday? C'mon Phill... Farid's not gonna like this.

Don't you have a morning show meeting or a few programming memos to author? Or maybe, just mayyyyyybe, could it be you have a ghost writer to cater to us here on the R-I boards? Gasp!

-9-

 

[livingfruitvirus]

Phil,

What did you think of Premiere's move to offer McConnel in syndication in the same slot and take Beck off a few stations like WGST when he launched?

He didn't replace Beck on GST. He replaced Denny Schaffer. WGST ousted their whole local talk lineup when he came on.

McConnell had often said before the syndication deal that he preferred to stay local, at least during the week. He mentioned not being restricted to only national topics. I can understand the decision to go for the syndication deal as a neccesary career move, but think it might be better to take him back local. He has very few clearances at this point, and the field is very crowded.

Much the same haoppened with Gary Burbank's syndicated effort..local ratings went down and Burbank had to turn down a wealth of local material (namely the Marge Schott controversy which was ripe for satire) because the rest of the country wouldn't get it.

I don't know what it is with WLW, but their talent pool just bombs in syndication. It's almost as if they're unwilling to cut the local strings, or the station will only let them syndicate under their conditions. In addition, the people on the Cinci board seem to take it personally when one of their local hosts goes national. As if they've been back-stabbed or something. America's Trucking Network on WLW is only two stations away from being a local show again, and said stations are about to be sold. I said this in another post, but if any of those guys want to have a national career they won't be able to do it in the WLW studios. Station alumni like Cris Collinsworth and Al Michaels didn't become national personalities by staying at WLW. Gary Burbank can go into breaks saying "This is The Big One 700 WLW, on XM 173." all he wants, but that's not the same as syndication. It's like when Clear Channel tried to syndicate the Real Radio 104.1 (WTKS-FM) lineup out of Orlando. In the end, they all went back to being local shows.