Ideology vs. personality: why do people listen?

[cm454]

I have NEVER listened to a talk host because of their ideology. I have found some conservatves and some liberals, not to mention moderates, VERY entertaining and engaging. I am at a loss to try and understand those who like a show just because it reinforces their already-held beliefs. That, to me, is dreadfully boring.

Great programmers like John Mainelli always understood that personality trumps ideology from one end of the week to the other.

Of course you REALLY have to be a good judge of talent, as without ideology as a guide, you really have to navigate through tricky waters. Not a problem for the true programming talent.

 

[WTUX]

Personality wins with me every time. I liked Alan Colmes back when he was on Talknet. Don't agree with him on very much, but I like him. Rush I agree with often, but I listen because of his humor. Even if I disagree with a host, if he/she is funny, engaging, and can talk about other topics besides politics, they'll have me hooked.

 

[ponderosaAZ]

Personality wins with me every time. I liked Alan Colmes back when he was on Talknet. Don't agree with him on very much, but I like him. Rush I agree with often, but I listen because of his humor. Even if I disagree with a host, if he/she is funny, engaging, and can talk about other topics besides politics, they'll have me hooked.

I'll post hosts I don't agree with but still listen to in order to prove CM454's fantastic point:

Mark Larson on San Diego 1700, 5A-9A Pacific, conservative, but also entertaining and funny. Station balances Mark Larson with liberal Stacy Taylor afternoons, who has a great personality.

James Villanucci on 770 KKOB 2P-6P Pacific, conservative, funny, and a very unique wry sense of humor.

Dori Monson, KIRO 710 Seattle, 12P-3P Pacific, conservative, but also entertaining and has a great personality.

Heidi Harris, KDWN 720, 830A-NOON Pacific, conservative, entertaining, engaging interviewer.

Oh, and of course, the classic Dr. Bill Wattenburg KGO weekends (Citadel), independent, but fiscally conservative and sides with the Republicans on environmental matters. Just hilarious when he argues and makes fun of radical Sierra Club environmentalists when they call in :

 

[Bob_Hudson]

I think much of Air America's programming has proven that ideology is not enough: bitter ideologues preach to a rather small choir that is just as angry as they are, but they - and those who put them on the air - forget that at the end of the say, radio is show biz (well actually it's a place to sell ads, but the show biz part brings in the audience for the ads).

 

[Biz Listener]

I've always had a hard time separating content from the personality. When I hear someone saying things that make me boiling mad, I'm afraid it's really difficult to regard the person talking in a positive way. I don't much care how nice a person any given talk host is, or how engaging their personality seems to the dispassionate "experts". If the words they say make me so angry I want to bite the heads off of nails, I'm not going to listen to that person. And if a talk host's opinions are so wishy-washy and middle-on-the-road that they don't offend anyone, I'd rather tune in music.

 

[jimwalsh2001]

All true enough. So how long before the suits in charge of the format get the message...

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting...8)

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Easy to answer...

People listen for entertainment.

For example, how often have you heard someone say:

* "I don't agree with host XYZ all-the-time, but I can't stop listening to him/her."

* "I usually agree with 99% of what host XYZ says, but today he/she said ... and I don't think that's right because ..."

Even in non-commercial radio, people come for the ideology - but hope to be entertained along the way.

If it is ideology you want - you'd probably be better off enrolling in a college political science class, or volunteering in a political campaign - because radio is not the best place to get it.

 

[Biz Listener]

Easy to answer...

People listen for entertainment.

For example, how often have you heard someone say:

* "I don't agree with host XYZ all-the-time, but I can't stop listening to him/her."

* "I usually agree with 99% of what host XYZ says, but today he/she said ... and I don't think that's right because ..."

Even in non-commercial radio, people come for the ideology - but hope to be entertained along the way.

If it is ideology you want - you'd probably be better off enrolling in a college political science class, or volunteering in a political campaign - because radio is not the best place to get it.

I hear paraphrases of those quotes every now and then, usually as throwaway disclaimers before a statement that is the exact opposite. A talk host must be entertaining, that cannot be disputed. But for those listeners who are passionate about their own points of view, the host can only be entertaining if they support the passionate listeners' personal political positions.

We're talking really small percentages here, so looking at our own "universe of one" opinions can be very misleading. People active in the broadcast industry have chosen a career path based on their own personal tastes and interests, which are often quite different from the tastes and interests of those who choose other career paths.

Most people don't find any talk about politics entertaining. That's why all the music format radio stations combined have far better ratings than all talk radio stations combined. The tiny percentage of people who want to listen to political talk radio at all tend to be passionate about their positions, so they want to listen to someone they agree with. It seems that all of the highest rated political talk show hosts preach to the choir, so being successful at picking a talk show host for any given radio station means determining which choir in the range of your tower is the biggest.

I won't dispute that most radio listeners, if asked, would respond that given a choice between an entertaining talk host they disagreed with and a boring host they did agree with would say that they'd pick the former. But, if those listeners are passionate about their own personal perspectives, they wouldn't find someone who challenged their beliefs to be "entertainting". And, if they weren't passionate about their politica beliefs, then they'd more often than not tune in a music station.