FM Talk: The Comin' Thing?

[cm454]

I understand both San Antonio and Louisville have FMs about to flip. Details, anyone?

Yeah, San Antonio is calling their new FM talk station "THE NEW FM TALK 106.7, SAN ANTONIO'S NEXT GENERATION OF TALK RADIO"

Yet their lineup is a bunch of predictable, right wing, 2nd tier agenda pounders.

Next generation!

LOLOL!

 

[jimwalsh2001]

Interesting to note a) how many FMs are now switching to the talk format, and b) how there ain't a dime's worth of difference in any of them... ;D

 

[DToTheJ]

Sports Talk will work but only if you have major franchises on your air... you MUST have a solid morning show with talent the audience knows and respects..and you must give them latitude to discuss things OTHER than sports..

Tom Bigby, is that you? :

 

[amfmxm]

Am I the only one who cringes when the subject is "FM programming" versus "AM programming?"

The differences between AM & FM are technical--methods of modulation. Two different bands, or vehicles, carrying programming content. There is absolutely nothing inherent in either band that requires a particular style of programming.

Sorry, but 30+ years ago when the movie "FM" came out, it bugged the shit out of me that--as beloved as the movie was for capturing a cultural moment--there was this basic confusion between the carrier and the programming that went on it. And now we're doing the same thing with talk programming.

Here's my take on this thread. If you slap uninteresting talk programming on a small FM (Class A) stick versus compelling talk programming on a big/strong AM stick, the FM will have very little impact. On the other hand, if you put compelling talk programming on a big FM (Class B/C) stick versus uninteresting talk programming on a small/weak AM, you'll kill the AM.

Where it gets interesting is when talk programming of roughly equal quality shows up on roughly equal FM & AM sticks...

 

[Signal_Faded]

Here's my take on this thread. If you slap uninteresting talk programming on a small FM (Class A) stick versus compelling talk programming on a big/strong AM stick, the FM will have very little impact. On the other hand, if you put compelling talk programming on a big FM (Class B/C) stick versus uninteresting talk programming on a small/weak AM, you'll kill the AM.

Where it gets interesting is when talk programming of roughly equal quality shows up on roughly equal FM & AM sticks...

Well said.

 

[DocWashburn]

Re: How about Lectures from Universities/Colleges

Just record lectures, guest speakers from the Universities and Colleges on stuff like history, science, art...etc Then broadcast them on FM. That way people can get smarter listening to the radio.

Let me make sure I understand how this all works. Companies pay a lot of money for radio stations. Their shareholders expect a good return on their investment. So the stations sell advertising - somewhat easier to do when the economy was better. But still, stations are duty bound to try to attract the biggest possible audience so they can charge more for advertising. So, how is it that broadcasting college lectures on commercial radio would attract a large enough audience to turn a profit? Perhaps I am missing something.

 

[DocWashburn]

FM talk needs to be issue-oriented talk with a less predictable, more energetic approach.

What does that mean? Ninety percent of what's on talk radio is issued oriented, albeit through the prism of a partisan lean (or more likely, extreme). Do you mean that kind of issue-oriented, people who actually have dialogue with listeners, or something else? What operation will pay to stock the talent, and if they can simulcast their AMs and increase ratings, why should they?

Actually, most people are not interested in what is going on in the world. Most people can not tell you who the Secretary of State is or who their state's US Senators are. They are interested in their own personal peace and happiness and do not want to be bothered. So they certainly are not interested in an in-depth discussion of the day's issues (which is what Limbaugh does). So Talk radio has to do what other formats do - actually program to its core audience. Look at the successful Talk stations (FM or AM). What are they doing? Why did Rush recently sign and eight-year extension for $400 million. To quote Levin, people don't throw that kind of money at you if you're not worth it.

I wrote two short paragraphs. You highlighted the second, but apparently ignored the first, which partially addressed your question.

Yes, I am talking about issue-oriented talk that isn't based on some transparent partisan double standard. People talking to people about what's going on in the world---all for the purpose of entertainment.

Get your head out of radio for 2 seconds. THINK: Most people you know talk periodically about the hot issues of the day. My guess is MOST of them don't approach every situation with a Limbaughesque mentality. Most people I know aren't trying to pander to a niche---they just speak from the heart, and those opinions rarely all fit neatly into one specific political ideology.

That's life, and it's about time talkradio reflects it.

 

[DocWashburn]

FM talk needs to be issue-oriented talk with a less predictable, more energetic approach.

What does that mean? Ninety percent of what's on talk radio is issued oriented, albeit through the prism of a partisan lean (or more likely, extreme). Do you mean that kind of issue-oriented, people who actually have dialogue with listeners, or something else? What operation will pay to stock the talent, and if they can simulcast their AMs and increase ratings, why should they?

I wrote two short paragraphs. You highlighted the second, but apparently ignored the first, which partially addressed your question.

Yes, I am talking about issue-oriented talk that isn't based on some transparent partisan double standard. People talking to people about what's going on in the world---all for the purpose of entertainment.

Get your head out of radio for 2 seconds. THINK: Most people you know talk periodically about the hot issues of the day. My guess is MOST of them don't approach every situation with a Limbaughesque mentality. Most people I know aren't trying to pander to a niche---they just speak from the heart, and those opinions rarely all fit neatly into one specific political ideology.

That's life, and it's about time talkradio reflects it.

Actually, most people are not interested in what is going on in the world. Most people can not tell you who the Secretary of State is or who their state's US Senators are. They are interested in their own personal peace and happiness and do not want to be bothered. So they certainly are not interested in an in-depth discussion of the day's issues (which is what Limbaugh does). So Talk radio has to do what other formats do - actually program to its core audience. Look at the successful Talk stations (FM or AM). What are they doing? Why did Rush recently sign and eight-year extension for $400 million. To quote Levin, people don't throw that kind of money at you if you're not worth it.

 

[listener-in]

Why did Rush recently sign and eight-year extension for $400 million. To quote Levin, people don't throw that kind of money at you if you're not worth it.

Come now, people get suckered into doing it all the time. Companies in general do it (have you looked at executive pay relative to performance lately?), broadcasters do it, sports teams do it, individuals do it. Sports team owners got away with it so far by ripping off the broadcasters and by crying the blues and getting bailed out by the public when they wanted a new stadium, though it's debatable how much longer the public will stand for that. Broadcasters - well, has anyone noticed how the industry is doing? It's quite obvious why Limbaugh signed; what's less obvious is why an industry in such desperate financial straits would willingly go along.

When perceived value diverges increasingly from real value, the bubble gets bigger but eventually bursts. I would have thought that would be obvious from our recent history. When the bubble does burst, it leaves some people very wealthy and many more impoverished. You can't blame Limbaugh for cashing in while he can at the expense of people on the other side of his contract who are too irresponsible to know any better.

 

[gr8oldies]

if Premiere hadnt paid him the 400 million, someone else would have..then Premiere would have had to compete with him and not made the money he brings in.

 

[listener-in]

if Premiere hadnt paid him the 400 million, someone else would have..then Premiere would have had to compete with him and not made the money he brings in.

Precisely.....the classic ingredients of a bubble.

 

[Leebo65]

Re: How about Lectures from Universities/Colleges

Just record lectures, guest speakers from the Universities and Colleges on stuff like history, science, art...etc Then broadcast them on FM. That way people can get smarter listening to the radio.

Let me make sure I understand how this all works. Companies pay a lot of money for radio stations. Their shareholders expect a good return on their investment. So the stations sell advertising - somewhat easier to do when the economy was better. But still, stations are duty bound to try to attract the biggest possible audience so they can charge more for advertising. So, how is it that broadcasting college lectures on commercial radio would attract a large enough audience to turn a profit? Perhaps I am missing something.

Don't rely on investors. Look for philanthropists... OK

 

[DocWashburn]

Re: How about Lectures from Universities/Colleges

Just record lectures, guest speakers from the Universities and Colleges on stuff like history, science, art...etc Then broadcast them on FM. That way people can get smarter listening to the radio.

Let me make sure I understand how this all works. Companies pay a lot of money for radio stations. Their shareholders expect a good return on their investment. So the stations sell advertising - somewhat easier to do when the economy was better. But still, stations are duty bound to try to attract the biggest possible audience so they can charge more for advertising. So, how is it that broadcasting college lectures on commercial radio would attract a large enough audience to turn a profit? Perhaps I am missing something.

Don't rely on investors. Look for philanthropists... OK

Oh, OK. But how would you propose to coerce folks into listening to programming that dull? Soliciting philanthropists to underwrite programming that does not attract an audience sounds more like non-commercial radio. And even they go for programming that tends to attract a broader interest than lectures would. You know, Prairie Home Companion, Car Talk, World Cafe, All Things (Half) Considered, etc. But I have been (amazingly) wrong before. If you can talk a commercial (or non-commercial) station into considering your plan, go for it. Let us know how it works out.

 

[Leebo65]

Re: How about Lectures from Universities/Colleges

Just record lectures, guest speakers from the Universities and Colleges on stuff like history, science, art...etc Then broadcast them on FM. That way people can get smarter listening to the radio.

Let me make sure I understand how this all works. Companies pay a lot of money for radio stations. Their shareholders expect a good return on their investment. So the stations sell advertising - somewhat easier to do when the economy was better. But still, stations are duty bound to try to attract the biggest possible audience so they can charge more for advertising. So, how is it that broadcasting college lectures on commercial radio would attract a large enough audience to turn a profit? Perhaps I am missing something.

What is dull about a college lecture...? Are you crazy....? What is your idea of entertainment, The Jerry Springer Show...?

Don't rely on investors. Look for philanthropists... OK

Oh, OK. But how would you propose to coerce folks into listening to programming that dull? Soliciting philanthropists to underwrite programming that does not attract an audience sounds more like non-commercial radio. And even they go for programming that tends to attract a broader interest than lectures would. You know, Prairie Home Companion, Car Talk, World Cafe, All Things (Half) Considered, etc. But I have been (amazingly) wrong before. If you can talk a commercial (or non-commercial) station into considering your plan, go for it. Let us know how it works out.

 

[DocWashburn]

Re: How about Lectures from Universities/Colleges

Just record lectures, guest speakers from the Universities and Colleges on stuff like history, science, art...etc Then broadcast them on FM. That way people can get smarter listening to the radio.

Let me make sure I understand how this all works. Companies pay a lot of money for radio stations. Their shareholders expect a good return on their investment. So the stations sell advertising - somewhat easier to do when the economy was better. But still, stations are duty bound to try to attract the biggest possible audience so they can charge more for advertising. So, how is it that broadcasting college lectures on commercial radio would attract a large enough audience to turn a profit? Perhaps I am missing something.

What is dull about a college lecture...? Are you crazy....? What is your idea of entertainment, The Jerry Springer Show...?

Don't rely on investors. Look for philanthropists... OK

Oh, OK. But how would you propose to coerce folks into listening to programming that dull? Soliciting philanthropists to underwrite programming that does not attract an audience sounds more like non-commercial radio. And even they go for programming that tends to attract a broader interest than lectures would. You know, Prairie Home Companion, Car Talk, World Cafe, All Things (Half) Considered, etc. But I have been (amazingly) wrong before. If you can talk a commercial (or non-commercial) station into considering your plan, go for it. Let us know how it works out.

No, I have never given Jerry Springer much attention. From what I gather, he was rather successful on television. But I thought we were discussing radio - an audio medium, as opposed to television, a video medium. The market tends to support what works. As an example, Clear Channel poured a lot of money and energy into a liberal talk radio format (Air America) and it bombed. There was no demand for it. While some college lectures may be interesting (in the context of a college classroom), there is certainly no evidence to suggest that even a small audience would be interested in listening to them over an actual radio receiver...and even philanthropists tend to look for a return on their investment.

 

[quadraphonic]

Didn't the radio industry get away from lectures and packaged courses back in the 20s when it was mostly experimental and the playground of colleges of engineers and interested parties like that?
They never seem to have gone back to it, and probably for good reason.

 

[DocWashburn]

Didn't the radio industry get away from lectures and packaged courses back in the 20s when it was mostly experimental and the playground of colleges of engineers and interested parties like that?
They never seem to have gone back to it, and probably for good reason.

Yes, I think you have summed it up nicely - what has actually happened (and is happening) in the real world; brevity being the sole of wit, and all...

 

[Leebo65]

Didn't the radio industry get away from lectures and packaged courses back in the 20s when it was mostly experimental and the playground of colleges of engineers and interested parties like that?
They never seem to have gone back to it, and probably for good reason.

Yes, I think you have summed it up nicely - what has actually happened (and is happening) in the real world; brevity being the sole of wit, and all...

So we are stuck with programming geared for morons....?

 

[gr8oldies]

Your "all college lectures, all the time" format would have less than zero listeners and no revenue. It's much easier to take a course on line than rearrange your schedule to listen to the Biology 301 hour.

 

[KeithE4]

Your "all college lectures, all the time" format would have less than zero listeners and no revenue. It's much easier to take a course on line than rearrange your schedule to listen to the Biology 301 hour.

Even most pre-PBS educational-TV stations gave up on that type of programming in the '60s, or maybe the early '70s. Such programming - in fact, any form of specialized programming that doesn't need a large audience - is better suited for on-line viewing than mass-market broadcasting, commercial or non-commerical.