Hmmm! Hearing rumors that Santos and Progressive Talk may be in Jeopardy!!!

[Onyourmark]

can anyone fill in the blanks?

 

[raccoonradio]

Not sure where the rumors you saw came from but let's look at it:
--in April of last year Jeff Santos announced that he was buying time for not just his own show on
WWZN but adding shows like Stephanie Miller and Ed Schulz (began May 10, I think)

http://bostonradio.blogspot.com April 09 "Progressive Talk Back 6am to 7 pm on WWZN" by raccoonradio

I have heard the lease is up for renewal. Is he doing so, or is the price too steep? Does Blackstrap
have a better offer?

As was noted here, Red Sox Spanish radio network will have 162 regular season games plus playoffs
if needed on WWZN though Santos says it mostly won't interfere with prog talk (and if it does, the shows will
be aired later and/or streamcast). I noted Dan S said on the Boston prog talk yahoo group that perhaps
WWZN could be heading into a Spanish format--note that the market lost 1200 last month, and perhaps
there's a need

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Boston_Progressive_Talk/message/311

Dan wrote: "My take is that Blackstrap took the Sox en Espanol for a couple of
reasons: Decent money and as a hedge against Santos's backers running
out of money (or being unwilling to part with any more money). Should
Santos and Blackstrap not be able to come to terms over renewing
Santos's deal, it's pretty much a forgone conclusion that WWZN will go
all Spanish."

He goes on to say that Santos is presenting slightly fewer hours of progtalk
----------------------------------------
Blackstrap is running WWZN as brokered time and it's a mixed breed pooch of progressive
talk, sports, religion, etc. I don't know if they still run Brother Stair but the "Victory Radio"
show they have on Sundays is prob. religious given the title...they do have various brokered
sports shows (Mouthpiece boxing, MMA, and wrestling shows, etc.) Depending on the time
of day you tune in, it could be Thom Hartmann, Ch 5 news, college sports play by play,
religion, brokered sports, etc. (The info on their shows comes from the 1510thezone.com
site whose schedule may not be complete or accurate.)

We haven't heard anything from Santos or Blackstrap but who knows, they may want to
go Spanish. I'm sure they make some money from Santos, the religion folks, the sports
shows, etc. but the question is would they want to keep things as they are or go with
a mostly Spanish programming format? (with some sports shows as brokered thrown in).
Is Santos' money enough to sustain what they have? Stay tuned, as the newspaper
articles about radio would say

We'll stress here that any rumors are just that, rumors, but it should be interesting if we
get some solid facts. btw I don't know if there's money in the budget for it but you
wonder if CBS, Clear Channel, or Entercom might buy WWZN (I know, far fetched)...
1510 could serve as a full time ESPN station under Entercom ownership (with WEEI
running it overnights as they now do) or could be where some sports could get bumped
to (it happened already: WEEI bumped some NCAA hoops to WWZN due to a conflict...
and last yr WEEI bumped some ESPN NL playoff action to 1510)

If Sports Hub has to bump some sports to another station, why not WWZN? B's on 98.5,
Revs on 1510...? Either through ownership or a brokered time agreement. Of course
WWZN will have lots of Red Sox mostly at nights, in Spanish...

 

[raccoonradio]

and, bostonradio tweet to me:

>> I suppose anything's possible as far as format goes. They could make a deal w/ESPN Deportes but let's see what happens w/Santos

That would be a poss.--ESPN deportes & Sox in Spanish too. Prog talk, Spanish music, Spanish religion,
Spanish sports, ESPN in English (deal with Entercom to place ESPN on 1510 for times besides overnights/
weekends? though "competing against itself"). Lots of things could happen with 1510

 

[WLYNWAZNgm]

After all of the declarations that this format is what Boston "NEEDS",
it hasn't really panned out that way...

 

[raccoonradio]

Sounds like they are now running CNN news at the top of the hour (not sure how long they've done that).
WTKK does continue its CNN affiliation; I heard WWZN run a CNN 'cast at 2 am and WTKK did the same one
about 15 sec later...they don't seem to be running the Ch 5 5 pm news anymore; instead, Jeff Santos with
"Revolution Boston News at 5" which isn't news but an interview.

Maybe linking up with CNN is a sign the prog talk is being renewed...?

 

[DToTheJ]

Sounds like they are now running CNN news at the top of the hour (not sure how long they've done that)... Maybe linking up with CNN is a sign the prog talk is being renewed...?

It wasn't an old news update from New Year's Eve, was it?

 

[DanStrassberg]

Maybe linking up with CNN is a sign the prog talk is being renewed...?

I don't think the CNN news is related to whether Santos's deal with WWZN continues or not. He HAD to do something; the format needs news at the TOH. Six minutes of PSAs at the top of each hour (many of them repeated two, three, four times) were really pissing off the listeners (however few of them or many of them there may be). His problem was finding a news service that a) was not right-wingnut propaganda (for example. Fox, IRN, Salem) and b) was available on a straight tradeout (no cash). It took him a while, but he finally came to terms with CNN.

 

[Thai]

I love these "nyah nyah" silly retorts. The market doesn't lie. You guys must just stamp your feet to see the kind of dough the Bigs are making while the libs go down in flames.
Read my second sentence.

 

[DToTheJ]

WWZN... the format needs news at the TOH. Six minutes of PSAs at the top of each hour (many of them repeated two, three, four times) were really pissing off the listeners (however few of them or many of them there may be). His problem was finding a news service that a) was not right-wingnut propaganda (for example. Fox, IRN, Salem) and b) was available on a straight tradeout (no cash). It took him a while, but he finally came to terms with CNN.

Wouldn't have surprised me if they started airing Voice Of America news at the TOH.

 

[dlhalper]

I love these "nyah nyah" silly retorts. The market doesn't lie. You guys must just stamp your feet to see the kind of dough the Bigs are making while the libs go down in flames.

You are half-right. Progressive/liberal talk has not done well ratings-wise in Boston, largely due to lack of promotion and lack of being on a station with a good signal. But the truth is progressive talk is a niche format. Whether you personally like it or not (and I gather from your comments that you are a rightie), in some cities, the format does very well, as do individual hosts. Ed Schultz has been turning a profit since 2005, Stephanie Miller since 2006, Thom Hartmann since 2006.

The fact is that the Revolution Boston situation involves the talk show hosts leasing the time from Jeff, if I understand correctly, so there is only the promotion that the individual talkers are able to do, plus a little that Jeff does. But the "libs" are not going down in flames, as you quaintly put it. In a number of cities, liberal hosts get very good numbers. In others, they don't. Ditto for rightie talkers. Some, like Limbaugh and Savage, get big numbers. Others like Hugh Hewitt or G.Gordon Liddy, only do well in a few cities, but their conservative owners have the money to keep them on the air whether they are getting numbers or not -- and it is a total myth that every rightie talker gets huge numbers everywhere. They don't.

Surveys repeatedly show that the typical political talk listener is a conservative Republican over the age of 50. Makes it difficult for the progressive talkers to find their niche, and yet some do find one. So I invite you to avoid broad generalities about "lib talk." In cities all over the country, Ed and Thom and Stephanie are making money and getting a large enough audience to remain on the air. Whether they'd do better if they had more promotion in Boston or were on a better signal or some other factor, I don't know. But I do know they are considered successful in a number of cities. And their success has also been acknowledged even by Talkers magazine-- which leans conservative yet has given awards to Ed and Thom as two of political talk radio's most influential talk show hosts. Now, are Ed and Thom (and Steph) gonna have the numbers of a Limbaugh? Probably not. But that doesn't mean they aren't successful or that they haven't found a niche.

 

[Don Juan]

Whether you personally like it or not (and I gather from your comments that you are a rightie), in some cities, the format does very well, as do individual hosts. Ed Schultz has been turning a profit since 2005, Stephanie Miller since 2006, Thom Hartmann since 2006.

Hi Donna. Yeah, well, WEZE and WROL both make a profit. Making a profit doesn't eman they are "good radio".

Surveys repeatedly show that the typical political talk listener is a conservative Republican over the age of 50. Makes it difficult for the progressive talkers to find their niche...

I would think that given what the surveys show...it would leave a LOT of room.

Target Liberals under 50.

 

[dlhalper]

Hi Donna. Yeah, well, WEZE and WROL both make a profit. Making a profit doesn't eman they are "good radio".

Actually, I find Stephanie very entertaining, and both Hartmann (who is cerebral) and Schultz (who is populist) offer very interesting perspectives on the news. Obviously, some people prefer the rightie perspective, and I can respect that. I've trained many rightie talkers, in my years as a consultant. But I also think for a democracy to flourish, both sides of the issues need to be heard. I am glad there are some articulate and interesting leftie talkers and I hope they continue to be on the air in Boston.

 

[raccoonradio]

Dear Mr Santos:
Do you want a conservative on your station for a bit of balance? I could be available
soon if my current employer sets me free. I can get you great ratings.

Sincerely,
H. Carr
Wellesley, MA

 

[Board Editor]

MOVED: TIO: Hmmm! Hearing rumors that Santos and Progressive Talk may be in Jeopardy!!!

Some posts in this thread have been moved to Take It Outside.

[iurl=http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=166532.0]http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=166532.0[/iurl]

 

[TSBench]

But I also think for a democracy to flourish, both sides of the issues need to be heard.

The rise of conservative talk radio was a reaction to the liberal bias found in what is called, for want of a better name, the main stream media. Quite frankly, nobody of a leftward tilt felt that "both sides of the issues needed to to heard for a democracy to flourish" as long as their side was holding down the monopoly of the airtime. The rise of Limbaugh and the conservative talkers changed the playing field.

Now, the old 'mainstream media' has, for the most part, staked out the liberal side of the discussion, and conservative talk radio the other, making liberal talk radio redundant.

Regards,
TSB

 

[raccoonradio]

Would have to agree, or at least it's there (libtalk) but not as successful as it's covered elsewhere. As
a capitalist and a supporter of the free market, my view is, if lib talk succeeds, fine--let it, just don't
have a government force "fairness"... the market should hopefully account for any disadvantages.

Jay Leno, 2004: " “According to the New York Times, a group of liberal venture capitalists are in the process of developing their own liberal radio network to counter conservative shows like Rush Limbaugh. They feel the liberal viewpoint is not being heard -- except on TV, in the movies, in music, by comedians, magazines and newspapers. Other than that, it’s not getting out!”

Note that while many liberal views are heard nationally, not only is conservative talk on commercial
radio dominant but the Fox opinion shows (Hannity, O'Reilly, etc.) usually get higher ratings than shows
in same slots on CNN, MSNBC, etc. Of course there are more shows that may tilt leftward while Fox
takes a right-leaning view, but if you added up the audiences for all the shows on the "other" networks...

Note of course that Olbermann and O'Reilly are opinion shows, not news. Like radio talk hosts the host has
a certain opinion and guests, hopefully representing different sides, will offer different (or the same) views.

 

[Blackroc]

was a reaction to the liberal bias

Nonsense. It was for the reasons everyone else stated previously. It works, it's been studied, we know why and we accept the reality of a successful format.

 

[aerie]

Most right-wingers would argue that NPR on radio and PBS on TV are "bastions of liberalism".

If that is the case, then the combination of WBUR (4.5 in the publicly released Feb ratings), WGBH (1.2) and whatever WWZN is getting trumps WRKO (4.1).

It may not be that people in Boston are not interested in "progressive talk" as such, it's just that with strong NPR stations on FM versus a relatively weak commercial signal on AM, they prefer the FM side.

It would be interesting to check the public ratings to see if this is true in other cities as well

 

[raccoonradio]

Stephanie Miller and Ed Schultz listeners were out in the cold today as WWZN airs Red Sox in Spanish.
Jeff Santos kept going at 10, doing baseball talk (Boston's Progressive Sports?) while he was followed
by el juego de las Media Rojas de Boston, in another language. Tampa Bay leads by ocho runs.

 

[RSKaz]

RevBos is streaming the regular prog line-up on the web site during b-ball espanol. Still, an odd way to run a radio station.