Is News-Talk radio prepared for the future?

[DaleGriffin]

Sadly, if you listen to most talkradio, you would think we are a country that is 90% right-wing and 10% everything else.

Presidential elections where the vote is so close we have to get out magnifying glasses to inspect the chad to see who won would seem to support your claim.

We may indeed be a nation that is divided 50/50, or 55/45 or whatever.

However, one of the problems we have in understanding "audience" is that the question and answer are not quite that simple. People do come in MORE than TWO varieties. We are not simply left and right, Democrat and Republican, Conservative and liberal. There a sub-groups and sub-sub-groups of thinking and belief.

Winner-take-all ratings-driven-media do not seem to have the luxury of programming/writing to this sub-group and then switching gears to meet the interest of that sub-group over there. I think we have come to realize that making a child born to be left-handed fit our dreams and forcing that child to be right-handed sometimes bottles up a lot of emotion and talent.

What does it do to community when media says: You have to be either liberal or conservative, when a major portion of the population is neither PURE liberal or PURE conservative?

Here is where this conversation gets all out of whack. The reality is no radio station is targeting the "major portion of the population." All stations are tageting niches, rock (classic, alternative, modern), country (classic, hot), talk (progressive, conservative, sports, hot). You can not be all things to all people.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Here is where this conversation gets all out of whack. The reality is no radio station is targeting the "major portion of the population." All stations are tageting niches, rock (classic, alternative, modern), country (classic, hot), talk (progressive, conservative, sports, hot). You can not be all things to all people.

I agree with your description. What bothers me as a citizen is that people listening to talk radio of the Limbaugh-Hannity-Bortz genre come away from their experience thinking that 90% of the people (the people who Count they might say) are right-wing, conservative, Republican, whatever. These people do not "come to the table" prepared to have discussion and seriously consider any one else's point of view at the city council meeting, the school board meeting, the legislature OR EVEN THE LOCAL COFFEE SHOP. Limbaugh does not prepare his fans to go out and be logical and persuasive. He prepares his people to believe their view is THE ONLY legitimate view on the face of the earth. Their marching orders are "to take no prisoners" Limbaugh listeners come away KNOWING that everyone who disagrees with them is worthless, corrupt, and irrelevant.

The obvious response to my rant is for someone to tell me that the 'others' whoever they are should get their own show and tell the other side. To which I would say: "Amen, Brother!"

Whether we discuss it here, at the PTA meeting, at the library board, or the retired old men who gather mid-morning at McDonalds...... we could have a vigorous discussion and debate: Resolved that the current regulatory structure combined with the business structure makes it likely that conservative talk is going to thrive and non-conservative talk is not going to survive, much less flourish.

 

[cm454]

Here is where this conversation gets all out of whack. The reality is no radio station is targeting the "major portion of the population." All stations are tageting niches, rock (classic, alternative, modern), country (classic, hot), talk (progressive, conservative, sports, hot). You can not be all things to all people.

Many seem to have a problem delineating between music formats and conversation radio. This parallel is repeatedly drawn, but is quite specious.

Fact is, someone who likes country music, may not like anything else. Same is the case for rock listeners, Hip hop, etc. That much I grant you.

The talk format, on the other hand, is about entertaining conversation. Just about EVERYONE I know has a variety of opinions on many different issues. Some of those opinions go left, some go right. This can vary just in ONE person's spectrum of opinion. Why should talkradio be any different? Unfortunately, a niche of people, who do not mind having the same material spoon fed to them the same way, day in, day out, have, through a chain of events, preoccupied most of the major signals throughout the country. This gives a VERY misleading impression of what is and what could be.

So many have made absurd judgments about why the talk format needs to remain a right-wing haven. NONE of those opinion spewers have ever bothered to take enough of a step back to see the entire picture.

 

[smedge2006]

Notice how the last two comments haven't sparked a flame war yet? Two years ago they would have. A sign of a changing climate in the land, or at least on this board -- an acknowledgment that talk radio can't continue to follow its current model long term?

 

[DaleGriffin]

Here is where this conversation gets all out of whack. The reality is no radio station is targeting the "major portion of the population." All stations are tageting niches, rock (classic, alternative, modern), country (classic, hot), talk (progressive, conservative, sports, hot). You can not be all things to all people.

I agree with your description. What bothers me as a citizen is that people listening to talk radio of the Limbaugh-Hannity-Bortz genre come away from their experience thinking that 90% of the people (the people who Count they might say) are right-wing, conservative, Republican, whatever.

I think you aren't giving the listeners any credit. Do listeners to Country music think that is the only kind of music?

These people do not "come to the table" prepared to have discussion and seriously consider any one else's point of view at the city council meeting, the school board meeting, the legislature OR EVEN THE LOCAL COFFEE SHOP.

So... this is the radio stations fault or Rush's fault? I don't think anyone elses opinions have merit, I think I am right, so do you.

Limbaugh does not prepare his fans to go out and be logical and persuasive. He prepares his people to believe their view is THE ONLY legitimate view on the face of the earth. Their marching orders are "to take no prisoners" Limbaugh listeners come away KNOWING that everyone who disagrees with them is worthless, corrupt, and irrelevant.

They are listeners not clones, they aren't storming the capitol and they never will.

The obvious response to my rant is for someone to tell me that the 'others' whoever they are should get their own show and tell the other side. To which I would say: "Amen, Brother!"

Actually my gut tells me to tell you that you are out of touch and worried about 10 percent of men 25-54 or 35-64 getting marching orders from a radio. Even if they do, how many of those are gonna carry them out?

Whether we discuss it here, at the PTA meeting, at the library board, or the retired old men who gather mid-morning at McDonalds...... we could have a vigorous discussion and debate: Resolved that the current regulatory structure combined with the business structure makes it likely that conservative talk is going to thrive and non-conservative talk is not going to survive, much less flourish.

How does the regulaotry structure help conservative talk and keep down "non-conservative talk." The progressive talk product is awful so it tanks, the sports talk model is not so it works.

 

[DaleGriffin]

Here is where this conversation gets all out of whack. The reality is no radio station is targeting the "major portion of the population." All stations are tageting niches, rock (classic, alternative, modern), country (classic, hot), talk (progressive, conservative, sports, hot). You can not be all things to all people.

Many seem to have a problem delineating between music formats and conversation radio. This parallel is repeatedly drawn, but is quite specious.

Fact is, someone who likes country music, may not like anything else. Same is the case for rock listeners, Hip hop, etc. That much I grant you.

The talk format, on the other hand, is about entertaining conversation.

Wrong. It is about getting listeners.

Just about EVERYONE I know has a variety of opinions on many different issues. Some of those opinions go left, some go right. This can vary just in ONE person's spectrum of opinion. Why should talkradio be any different? Unfortunately, a niche of people, who do not mind having the same material spoon fed to them the same way, day in, day out, have, through a chain of events, preoccupied most of the major signals throughout the country. This gives a VERY misleading impression of what is and what could be.

No it shows what that niche wants to listen to.

So many have made absurd judgments about why the talk format needs to remain a right-wing haven. NONE of those opinion spewers have ever bothered to take enough of a step back to see the entire picture.

The only assumption I have made is that "right-wing" haven is profitable.

The only innacurate comparison made about talk and music formats is the one that says talk radio is to blame for radio's money issues. It is a profitable format.

 

[DaleGriffin]

Notice how the last two comments haven't sparked a flame war yet? Two years ago they would have. A sign of a changing climate in the land, or at least on this board -- an acknowledgment that talk radio can't continue to follow its current model long term?

Sorry, it is an acknowledgement of nothing, the small amount of people on this board can hardly be used to indicate a trend.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

I have family living in your market. I've got to see if I can arrange a trip to see them. We need to do some genealogy work there, too. I suspect if you and I sat down over a cup of coffee we would find a lot to agree about, and the ability to discuss those issues on which we do not agree with civility.

I think you aren't giving the listeners any credit. Do listeners to Country music think that is the only kind of music?

There are a lot of music listeners who are very parochial, very bigoted about what they will and will not listen to, and have some pretty unpleasant attitudes about people who would listen to those other "stupid" forms of music. Then there are those of us who have an affinity for multiple genres of music.

These people do not "come to the table" prepared to have discussion and seriously consider any one else's point of view at the city council meeting, the school board meeting, the legislature OR EVEN THE LOCAL COFFEE SHOP.

So... this is the radio stations fault or Rush's fault? I don't think anyone else's opinions have merit, I think I am right, so do you.

I have some things on which I have firm and confidant opinions. I have a number of things on which I am very flexible. I have no difficulty in public discussion or private discussion admitting which items I have only a preference but do not consider that to be the only "right" opinion. From listening to the various practitioners of talk radio I gather it is against the rules of engagement to ever admit that. The host is ALWAYS right. If the host can't prove rightness, then resort to insulting the person making the challenge.

Limbaugh does not prepare his fans to go out and be logical and persuasive. He prepares his people to believe their view is THE ONLY legitimate view on the face of the earth. Their marching orders are "to take no prisoners" Limbaugh listeners come away KNOWING that everyone who disagrees with them is worthless, corrupt, and irrelevant.

They are listeners not clones, they aren't storming the capitol and they never will.

They are storming our school boards. They are storming our Sunday School classes. I got up and walked out of the room at a church gathering recently because if I had stayed to hear the rest of his Rush cover version it was not going to be pretty.

Actually my gut tells me to tell you that you are out of touch and worried about 10 percent of men 25-54 or 35-64 getting marching orders from a radio. Even if they do, how many of those are gonna carry them out?

There you go... following the Talk Show Host Handbook: Insult the caller. Tell him he is out of touch. (O.K.... now we're even. ;D )

I just finished attending five weeks of an inter-faith encounter with the Muslim community in our metro area. The final week allowed us to have a spirited discussion with the facilitator who put this together. One of the questions asked was: What percentage of Muslims fit the profile of being "radical, fundamentalist, terrorist or terrorist supporting"? The answer was SIX PER CENT. The facilitator told us that an any culture the radical element tends to be about SIX PER CENT.

If you are trying to tell me the TEN PER CENT of men are getting their marching orders from right wing talk radio, that scares the living hell out of me!!!

How does the regulatory structure help conservative talk and keep down "non-conservative talk." The progressive talk product is awful so it tanks, the sports talk model is not so it works.

Two different thoughts in your comment. Regulatory structure: The overall regulatory climate of radio today as put together by congressional action implemented by the executive department via the FCC has created a business atmosphere where we are close to the point where ONLY BIG MONEY can own a license. Big money is serious about money and does not want to play around with do-gooder projects and experiments. It makes money or it is out of here. Years ago more INDIVIDUALS could own broadcast property as a hobby, a civic duty, as an experiment. That type of ownership is more likely to go out of their way to give the underdog a chance to learn their craft, to create their message.

My memory is that when Rush began all this his conservatism was not quite as blatantly expressed. As he gained experience, stature and audience, he was able to be much more pointed with his opinions. Efforts at progressive talk were flawed in that they tried to put together a show that was maturely developed and blatant from day one. They thought a well know show-business personality could surely pull it off and get away with it. IT SUCKS.

Conservatives who want to discuss this issue assume that the contra-image HAS to be full blown liberal radio. Where is the experiment in even-handed centrist talk? Who is trying that?

This is flippant: Who would know if the sports model is not awful? From what I read on some of the Radio-Info boards some of it IS awful. I am not a sports enthusiast so I don't listen, and don't know. (See, I don't always think I am right. :-\ ) But I do believe people who listen to sports talk radio are so addicted to sports that it would be hard to produce a program so bad they would turn it off.

Dale: I encourage you to pursue your talk show career with enthusiasm and gusto. But I also encourage you to not take your life of doing that too seriously. Always keep two or three friends in your circle who are self confident enough to tell you when you have dandruff, when you have bad breath, and when your political and polity opinions suck.

 

[Steven21]

Fact is, someone who likes country music, may not like anything else. Same is the case for rock listeners, Hip hop, etc. That much I grant you.
The talk format, on the other hand, is about entertaining conversation.

Wrong. It is about getting listeners.

Uh.....it's the same thing.

 

[Steven21]

By the way, while there ARE many music listeners who will not listen to other genres, there aren't that many people who won't listen to a spirited conversation/argument about an interesting topic.

Conversation can be interesting no matter what your political leanings are.

Unless we really are talking about the biggest AM signals in the biggest radio markets having cornered the closed-minded listener market, in which case it becomes more of a "we got here first" situation.

Whatever the case may be, legions of people will never even give talk a try, because the vast majority of people believe AM talk is nothing but PREDICTABLE agenda-driven blather.

 

[Don62]

By the way, while there ARE many music listeners who will not listen to other genres, there aren't that many people who won't listen to a spirited conversation/argument about an interesting topic.

Conversation can be interesting no matter what your political leanings are.

Unless we really are talking about the biggest AM signals in the biggest radio markets having cornered the closed-minded listener market, in which case it becomes more of a "we got here first" situation.

Whatever the case may be, legions of people will never even give talk a try, because the vast majority of people believe AM talk is nothing but PREDICTABLE agenda-driven blather.

Well-stated. Talk radio wasn't always this way.

Local stations during the mid- to late 80s had moderate, liberal and conservative hosts. They were great and entertaining hosts who didn't always talk about politics all the time, like that one-trick pony Hannity.

People didn't look to a certain station as being a mouthpiece of a particular political viewpoint, as they do now.

Now it's just a cacaphony of conservatism.

 

[jimwalsh2001]

The talk stations I enjoyed in my younger years generally had a real mix: WWDB circa 1979 had, among others, the ultra-conservative Bob Grant back-to-back with populist liberal Jerry Williams...and both were an absolute blast to listen to. Even guys who were associated with one particular end of the spectrum were not always predictable; Grant, to use an obvious example, was pro-choice on abortion.

The sad fact is Bob Grant and Jerry Williams couldn't get arrested in the biz if they were starting out today: neither fits the existing paradigm of what a "talk host" is supposed to sound like.