• 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

Feb PPM's

I

Insideradio

Hmmm... Great month for Urban, not so much for others. WKLS continues to do well. Dave jumped some... Rock 100.5 still can't crack a 2.

Thoughts?
 
Dave jumped some? Heck they cracked a 3. When is the last time that has happened. Let the Orffanatics start posting now.
 
I think I read on Countryaircheck.com that for the third straight month Kicks went down, the big difference this time is that The Bull went up?
 
Anytime liberals are in power conservative radio ratings will spike....
So even though President Obama may be bad for the country, he's good for WGST and Rush.....
 
That actually makes sense. I listen to fairly aggressive music and can honestly say that the albums that were put out during the Clinton years weren't all that great whereas they were good during the reigns of George and George. That has me wondering how many musicians/singers allow their political views to influence their music in one way or another..not including those artists that are very outspoken about their views.

I never really put much thought into that angle.
 
Most of these artists were busy trying to get invited to Clinton's White House parties (only Monica made it to the Oval Office... that we know of anyway) It will probably be the same under Obama, to much partying to do any work......
 
Andy said:
That actually makes sense. I listen to fairly aggressive music and can honestly say that the albums that were put out during the Clinton years weren't all that great whereas they were good during the reigns of George and George....
Click to expand...

Bad economies, questionable leadership and other grand insecurities always bode well for rock music. It's a very cathartic musical style that ultimately speaks to angst and frustration better than many other genres.

Look back at the early nineties: The heyday of alternative rock was born in a recession. During the late 60s and 70s, quite possibly the high water mark of what we now call "classic rock" we were mired in an unpopular war and a series of unpopular presidents.

When times are good, the need for that release weakens. Music and art leans more to excess and ultimately foolishness. The optimism of the 1980s brought with it a lot of corporate rock and flashy hair bands. The irrational exuberance of the late 90s and early 2000s led to "bling" and bubblegum pop.

I would bet, although I'm not as familiar with the various subgenres, you would see a very similar behaviour in Urban music.
 
Most of these artists were busy trying to get invited to Clinton's White House parties (only Monica made it to the Oval Office... that we know of anyway) It will probably be the same under Obama, to much partying to do any work......
Click to expand...

I'm sure that's the case with artists that are considered very mainstream or those that are known for being politically active (Bono, Mellencamp, good ol' Wille) but that was/is probably the case with any artist with more of a right-wing mindset.

Look back at the early nineties: The heyday of alternative rock was born in a recession. During the late 60s and 70s, quite possibly the high water mark of what we now call "classic rock" we were mired in an unpopular war and a series of unpopular presidents.

When times are good, the need for that release weakens. Music and art leans more to excess and ultimately foolishness. The optimism of the 1980s brought with it a lot of corporate rock and flashy hair bands. The irrational exuberance of the late 90s and early 2000s led to "bling" and bubblegum pop.
Click to expand...

That's what I was trying to say...but I just realized I wasn't as clear about it.
 
JoshuaC said:
Andy said:
That actually makes sense. I listen to fairly aggressive music and can honestly say that the albums that were put out during the Clinton years weren't all that great whereas they were good during the reigns of George and George....
Click to expand...

Bad economies, questionable leadership and other grand insecurities always bode well for rock music. It's a very cathartic musical style that ultimately speaks to angst and frustration better than many other genres.

Look back at the early nineties: The heyday of alternative rock was born in a recession. During the late 60s and 70s, quite possibly the high water mark of what we now call "classic rock" we were mired in an unpopular war and a series of unpopular presidents.

When times are good, the need for that release weakens. Music and art leans more to excess and ultimately foolishness. The optimism of the 1980s brought with it a lot of corporate rock and flashy hair bands. The irrational exuberance of the late 90s and early 2000s led to "bling" and bubblegum pop.

I would bet, although I'm not as familiar with the various subgenres, you would see a very similar behaviour in Urban music.
Click to expand...

You have a good point. Most of the lyrics of the 80s dealt with more positive subjects; most of the political commentary dealt with the specific if not the esoteric. Keep in mind that the 1980s was probably the height of Rush's (as in YYZ, not EIB) popularity, with their libertarian-to-Objectivist lyrics, which fits your theory.

You might find this interesting: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NzZkNDU5MmViNzVjNzkzMDE3NzNlN2MyZjRjYTk4YjE= --not to support my point, but as an interesting article on (quasi-) conservative lyrics at various points in time.

However, I wouldn't call the music of the 1980s "excess" or "foolishness" and therefore not as valuable or worthy as earlier or later material. As David Lee Roth said, the music "smiled" back in the 1980s and was fun in a way that it hasn't been before or since, partly due to that excess.

As an aside, I remember reading Jeff Gordinier's comparison of two Seattle bands--Queensryche and Nirvana, with him ripping the former and genuflecting towards the latter, despite the fact that both bands received (and in Queensryche's case, still receives) critical acclaim. Disclaimer: I'm not a fan of either, but just wanted to point out how some folks overly discount the music of the 1980s. My point is, just because a song is not full of serious message or angst doesn't make it less worthy.

As a very cynical aside, I wonder how well Nirvana would be received today if Kurt Cobain hadn't offed himself before grunge had run its course. More proof that an untimely death can be a shot in the arm (pun not intended) to one's career (see Jim Croce).
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom