• 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

Is Talk radio' reception getting weaker?

S

SaltyDog

Talk radio shows' reception seems to be getting weaker

Tim Rutten
Regarding Media

August 27, 2005

Talk is cheap — unless it's political talk on the radio, and then it's influential.

At least it has been.

Now some people think the talk bubble has, if not burst, begun to lose its wind.

Since these days the medium is overwhelmingly and partisanly Republican, those on the blue side of the aisle fervently want this to be true. Those in the red pews argue that talk is, in some ways, a victim of its own success and of an audience whose attention waxes and wanes with the election cycle.

As more than one person interviewed for this column pointed out, Rush Limbaugh can't really be expected to go on adding stations, because he's already everywhere.

Some will say talk radio is weaker because it is too conservative. Others, that liberal talkers are coming late to a party that is winding down. There are those that say the salvation is in non-political "lifestyle" talk. And still others that talk radio is in a normal cycle.

Full LA Times article here Registration required.

<center><a href="http://www.bugmenot.com">
bugmenot.gif

</center><P ID="signature">______________
<a href="http://saltydog.5gigs.com/cindyspeaks.html">
The Salty Dog</a>
</P>
 
> Some will say talk radio is weaker because it is too
> conservative. Others, that liberal talkers are coming late
> to a party that is winding down. There are those that say
> the salvation is in non-political "lifestyle" talk. And
> still others that talk radio is in a normal cycle.

I say three out of the four of those explanations are true.

A) Talk radio is too conservative. The problem, though, lies in the fact that liberal talk radio is both late in coming and, for the most part, totally lacking in entertainment value. Oh, there are a select few out there on the left who put on a good show, but the majority of liberal talkers are vitriolic Bush-bashers who have nothing better to do with their three-hour show than whine and complain about how they think Bush is ruining this country. I'm not saying the right doesn't have their own problems with vitriolic morons (i.e. Michael Savage and his ilk), but they aren't anywhere near as popular as the big guys like Rush, Sean and... oh, just for a third name... Laura Ingraham. Instead, fringe liberal talkers like Al Franken and Randi Rhodes are the big names on their side of the aisle, and the majority of Democrats (who I tend to believe are middle-of-the-road type people whether they think so or not) don't identify with them at all.

B) Liberal talkers are coming late to the party, but I wouldn't say the party's winding down. The problem they're facing is the already-established conservative base. More and more stations are realizing that there are many liberals out there that would love to have their own voice on the air, and I'm glad to see it happening, but it's going to take time. This isn't going to be an overnight deal. Conservative talk was so quick to catch on because of the fact that, without it, most AM stations would have failed. It was either flip from your music format or fail and let the company who bought you out do it for you. Liberal talkers don't have an advantageous situation like that to spur their growth. They're making inroads, but again, it's going to take time.

C) Talk radio does follow the election cycle. The years have shown that to be true. I find it surprising, though, that with all the progress liberal talk radio has made these past few years, liberals are quick to say that talk radio as a whole is failing because of a post-election decline in listenership. I'd think that, now that they too are in the fray, they'd be the first to agree with the industry-veteran conservatives and say, "yeah, our listenership is declining, but that's only because the election is over. Watch in 2008... we'll be right back up there again." Instead, since the most of them think they're attacking conservative talkers, they portray talk radio as a whole as a Viking death ship. I, for one, find that pretty indicative of the kind of people most liberal talk hosts are these days.

As for that fourth argument, the idea about "lifestyle talk" being the savior of talk radio? I think that's total bull. Personally, I don't want my local news/talker sounding like Canadian AM stations. If people can't voice their political opinions on talk radio, the format will die. To anyone on either side of the aisle: do you want your favorite talk station to run Garden Talk 24/7? I didn't think so.

All in all, talk radio is just facing it's normal post-election dropoff. I'm sure both liberals and conservatives will be more than happy to tune in again in the months leading up to the '08 election.

Post 887 once again dedicated to no one.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
 
As long as there are issues to talk about, talk radio will be around. It may have to re-invent itself from time to time (which doesn't neccesarily mean "more liberals" ofr een "more conservatives")> don't believe in "liberal talk" or "conservative talk" as formats..only good, entertaining talk, and if that means the more successful hosts are on one side or the other, so be it. There really hasn't been much to talk about over the summer.The news channels have been doing "all Aruba, all the time". As far as "lifestyle talk" as a format, I'm doubtful. There are some hosts who incorporate it.<P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>
 
I love the signature! Ah, Ohio... how could such a great state elect such a... well... I guess I should just leave that there :)

Post 891 dedicated to no one. Sorry, no 89.1's in my area.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
 
> C) Talk radio does follow the election cycle. The years
> have shown that to be true. I find it surprising, though,
> that with all the progress liberal talk radio has made these
> past few years, liberals are quick to say that talk radio as
> a whole is failing because of a post-election decline in
> listenership. I'd think that, now that they too are in the
> fray, they'd be the first to agree with the industry-veteran
> conservatives and say, "yeah, our listenership is declining,
> but that's only because the election is over. Watch in
> 2008... we'll be right back up there again." Instead, since
> the most of them think they're attacking conservative
> talkers, they portray talk radio as a whole as a Viking
> death ship. I, for one, find that pretty indicative of the
> kind of people most liberal talk hosts are these days.
>
I agree on most points here but the above is quite a stretch. From what I have been reading liberal radio has been increasing in many markets even in this non-election year because the stations they are on have flipped from a failed format with low ratings. They don't appear to be suffering from the post election blahs, at least not as badly as conservative talk is. Liberal talk is "nascent" at best and has not yet reached its core audience while conservative talk has. Once the core is established they will begin suffering the post election year cycle.

For now, any discussion of talk radio is de facto synonymous with discussing conservative talk, at least for MSM and its consumers. Most liberal hosts talk to people who are "true-believers" as Stan Lee would put it and do not believe talk radio is dead- in fact that are so into it they go on line and blog about it! The MSM people who are looking to fill pages in a newspaper have an interest in creating stories like this that grab a reader's attention- they certainly do not speak for liberals that listen to talk radio and are not, as you state, "indicative of the kind of people most liberal talk hosts are these days". Don't take one story from MSM and suddenly draw wild conclusions- didn't the conservatives teach us that years ago...?
 
Name recognition alone, I think.<P ID="signature">______________
Greetings from Ohio-where the governor wants everyone to know he's sorry.</P>
 
> I agree on most points here but the above is quite a
> stretch. From what I have been reading liberal radio has
> been increasing in many markets even in this non-election
> year because the stations they are on have flipped from a
> failed format with low ratings. They don't appear to be
> suffering from the post election blahs, at least not as
> badly as conservative talk is. Liberal talk is "nascent" at
> best and has not yet reached its core audience while
> conservative talk has. Once the core is established they
> will begin suffering the post election year cycle.
>
> For now, any discussion of talk radio is de facto synonymous
> with discussing conservative talk, at least for MSM and its
> consumers. Most liberal hosts talk to people who are
> "true-believers" as Stan Lee would put it and do not believe
> talk radio is dead- in fact that are so into it they go on
> line and blog about it! The MSM people who are looking to
> fill pages in a newspaper have an interest in creating
> stories like this that grab a reader's attention- they
> certainly do not speak for liberals that listen to talk
> radio and are not, as you state, "indicative of the kind of
> people most liberal talk hosts are these days". Don't take
> one story from MSM and suddenly draw wild conclusions-
> didn't the conservatives teach us that years ago...?

Problem is, it's not just one story I'm basing this on, and for the most part, I don't hear liberal talkers mentioning it. The media has been doing this for quite some time now... pushing this idea that just because conservative talk numbers are down, that means the medium is failing. I'm not saying there aren't some liberal talk hosts who are arguing the same thing I am... I know there are. But the majority of them don't talk about it while they allow the rest of the media (who also assume the position of "speaker for the people", if only in their own minds) to claim such things. If they don't agree with that assumption, why won't they speak out about it? I guess what I'm trying to ask here is that, by their apparent refusal to speak out about it, aren't they essentially agreeing with the argument?

Post 895 dedicated to 89.5 WBCY, the station that every once in a while fades away, allowing me to hear my friends on the air on 89.3 WJKN.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by J.C. on 09/01/05 03:13 PM.</FONT></P>
 
> Name recognition alone, I think.

Hmm... that's a shame.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom