Jay: Thanks for your kind words. I've spoken with a couple clients of AM 760 and I've heard great things. It's good to see someone doing a PT format that works, especially on a nice signal.
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Is there a new trend around the corner in 'talk radio' or is this it?
- Thread starter brian65
- Start date
J
jaymarvin
Guest
Thanks KJCB. I hope Phil, Holland, and you can answer my question on how you think left of center or non right-wing radio should and can be done. To me the picture is clear it is not being done right. Is it the talent? Is it the signal of most of the stations? Is it lack of promotion? Is it the fact NPR already has the left of center market locked up? Love to see what people here think.
jaymarvin said:Thanks KJCB. I hope Phil, Holland, and you can answer my question on how you think left of center or non right-wing radio should and can be done. To me the picture is clear it is not being done right. Is it the talent? Is it the signal of most of the stations? Is it lack of promotion? Is it the fact NPR already has the left of center market locked up? Love to see what people here think.
Seems to me that the so-called 'left of center' could easily be handled by having right wing hosts actually take on calls from opposing points of view and actually have a real discussion with them.
But that's not likely to happen. That would only expose the blue-red dichotomy as the product of right wing talk radio.....for ratings and votes.
Seems to me that the so-called 'left of center' could easily be handled by having right wing hosts actually take on calls from opposing points of view and actually have a real discussion with them.
The left today is unable to explain who they are. If you pretend that having a right-winger having discussion with callers who are NOT right wing will do anything to explain who the left is, and help the left learn to explain who they are, you end up with the left being defined as what the right PRETENDS the left is/are.
AND, this thread seems to assume EVERYONE is either Right-wing or they are Left-wing. Could someone actually be middle-of-the-road or moderate or centrist. What is talk radio going to do for this middle crowd?
S
SeanMGilbow
Guest
willcail said:Well "Jay Marvin" Ed Schultz is syndicated and you still stuck doing local AM drive time on a major market MW station. One more thing how may stations are you on?
Time out, Will. Jay subbed for Big Eddie when he was in his old time slot. Much as I like Norman Goldman, I like Jay better. Jay was the one who introduced me to the author of Bush on the Couch. He is worthy of national syndication.
I realize it's still cold in Columbus now. (I'm vacationing just outside St. Louis.) But, Will, please take a chill pill. You've already had your comments on the Ohio Majority Radio board subject to intense monitoring prior to posting.
D
Don62
Guest
Will, local hosts can be as smooth and polished and have great shows. Some, in fact, are better than syndicated hosts. I've heard many that sound better and have more interesting shows than the national host who airs 3-6 PM ET.willcail said:Well "Jay Marvin" Ed Schultz is syndicated and you still stuck doing local AM drive time on a major market MW station. One more thing how may stations are you on?
BTW, what major market station are you on, Will?
willcail said:Well "Jay Marvin" Ed Schultz is syndicated and you still stuck doing local AM drive time on a major market MW station. One more thing how may stations are you on?
Since when does being syndicated make you any good?
Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:Seems to me that the so-called 'left of center' could easily be handled by having right wing hosts actually take on calls from opposing points of view and actually have a real discussion with them.
The left today is unable to explain who they are. If you pretend that having a right-winger having discussion with callers who are NOT right wing will do anything to explain who the left is, and help the left learn to explain who they are, you end up with the left being defined as what the right PRETENDS the left is/are.
AND, this thread seems to assume EVERYONE is either Right-wing or they are Left-wing. Could someone actually be middle-of-the-road or moderate or centrist. What is talk radio going to do for this middle crowd?
Thats more or less my point. I never mentioned the 'Left', just left of center. There is no Left. It is a straw man creation of Conservative hosts, which they maintain by not actually carrying on conversations with any callers who might effectively disagree with them.
If these hosts would actually hear out the callers which they conveniently label as being 'the Left' I believe the result would be that they really don't disagree on that many things.
Apparently, thats not good radio.
J
jaymarvin
Guest
Will, let me lay out some facts for you. I use to sub for Ed when he was in his old time slot. I also use to sub for Jerry Springer, and have also sat in for Alan Combs. I've worked on one of the biggest radio stations in this country twice. That's WLS in Chicago. You can hear them in 38 states and Canada. Not many talk show hosts can say they have sat in a hotel room in Havana, Cuba and heard their own station loud and clear. I have also worked in San Francisco, Tampa, Milwaukee, and twice here in Denver. I have left out a bunch of other stations. So what's your point? I have no right to disagree with you or Ed? You want to get into looking at people's resumes then let's hear where you've worked? I'll wait for your answer.
J
jaymarvin
Guest
By the way thanks for the very nice words for all here on this thread!
As to how non-political talk should be done, you need, other than just the shows themselves, a sort of vertical system upgrade, where the entire chain from production to speaker works well. That may sound odd, but what I mean is that each part of the process has to do their part. The network, the host, and everybody at each local station need to each have what it takes.
A small part of that is how to run a station. WVKO is the first new PT affiliate that I can recall in some time. Already we hear about how it's doomed to fail because of the bad signal... this complaint from progressives who already seem to want an excuse. As I've said before and told someone here just yesterday, if WVKO can get even a 1.0, it would be doing fairly decent. This complaining is, in my belief, based on some sort of angry liberal movement that is mad conservatives dominate talk radio and they want to get even. It's kind of like when your doctor tells you to quit stressing out on the job because it's harming your health in some way... you don't see the direct correlation but you know the doctor is right. Indirectly, the desire to get even with right-wing talkers has manifested it in many of the PT hosts, primarily on AAR, in the form of doing all-political borefests designed for policy wonks. What the hosts themselves need to get themselves up to snuff is some real life. Hosts need to be real. Ed Schultz is a good start; I may agree that going after Phil Boyce who no one knows is a bit silly, but in his defense, I've heard good conservative hosts do similar stuff before. It's good to set up an actual "enemy" and tear him down sometimes. Hosts should also be funny; not comedians (although none of the "comedians" on AAR were funny at all) or people who tell jokes all hour, but if someone has a sense of humor, they will not only be able to interject that when appropriate, but also aren't likely to take themselves too seriously. The problem with many of these PT shows isn't that talking about serious issues is bad but knowing when to stop. Talk about a sports game once in awhile, use a story.
It also might be worthwhile to go back and look at people who used to have some success. I can't say he is my favorite host or is a great example of my point, but Mike Malloy used to be syndicated by a bad network and has now gotten two new opportunities. Why not look at people who once were but now aren't? It's always amazed me how a lot of radio stations make stupid programming changes, and when the new host/show bombs, they often don't go back to the old one. I'm not saying go back and rehire Michael Jackson and make your station sound like 1968, but there has to be some talent who already knows the game out there that would love to get back on the saddle.
Also, we need end stations that know what they're doing and treat PT like any other talk station. You have stations like KPHX in Phoenix that embarrass the format with bake sale radio, then install more AAR-types who don't know what they're doing. To these people, it's all about getting the word out, being liberal, etc. They presently have a bunch of billboards up in bad locations with a photo of Bush and the phrase "had enough?". Alright, I get the idea, but how about promote what a wonderful station you have? I'm a fairly conservative guy who's had enough of Bush and I am not inspired to tune in, even if I didn't know how bad the station sounded outside of Stephanie Miller. Again, this station has a local afternoon show that is hosted by some former activist whose credentials include producing a once-brokered talk show on a third-string talk station hosted by another radio virgin (hence why he paid at one point). The end result is stumbling and bumbling for three hours about how we should donate to liberal charities. Also, this station doesn't know how to sell. They refuse certain types of clients and won't sell very much brokered programming (I know many disagree, but I think brokered programming is the savior of bad, high-dial AM stations). Heaven forbid we cut into "getting the message out" for an hour to hear some local mortgage guy. That really is the logic - one hour of anything but liberal politics would prevent us from electing Obama in 2008. I wonder, half-jokingly, if we should just find someone who's good at radio, educate them about all the liberal views, and tell them to go on air and pretend to be liberal. If it was a good enough radio person, it would work, and we wouldn't have to hear about a bake sale for some new cause.
The other thing is, how about we not call it "progressive talk"? At least on air. You have Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, decided conservatives, on stations called "Newsradio". You'd think you would tune into such a named station to get fair news. I'm not saying you don't, but you understand how imaging gives people connotations. While I did like "The Revolution of Talk Radio" on WCKY (which you'll note doesn't imply politics), all the cookie cutter stations like "Progressive Talk 1690" never got anywhere. I think I could write an entire thesis on the listener psychology involved, but the bottom line is imaging is everything. If you're treating your PT station like some non-entity to focus on the bigger ones, and in turn can't come up with an good or original ideas, you are already at a disadvantage. By the way, I don't just mean imaging, but the actual presentation... why not an advice show here and there? Dr. Laura, Clark Howard, etc. work on conservative talk radio. Some of them could work on liberal talk radio. You don't think some Texas democrats are devout Christians and would listen to Dave Ramsey? Maybe not all, but some. The problem is when you're "the liberal station" and put Dave Ramsey on... KSAC did this awhile back and I mentioned it here. It's all about how you're perceived.
I'll leave more intricate details on how a host should do this or that to Phil or Holland, or anyone else if they want to chime in. The key is hosts have to cut through. Most of the hosts on RW talk radio that I think cut through are lifelong radio people. I'm not saying that's a necessity, but I don't think it's a coincidence. And lighten up... when hosts talk about a fringe issue, it not only bores but, but shows arrogance. Arrogance that we're all supposed to be excited by hearing about the same thing you and your 9 policy wonk friends are. Listeners don't like that, and if a few do, it certainly won't help you expand beyond those few. After all, all the liberals who complain about how bad conservative talk shows are know for a reason... they've listened. I know a lot of people on both sides of the aisle who have listened to PT for 5 minutes, ever, but still listen to RW talk. The answer to a working progressive format is figuring out why.
A small part of that is how to run a station. WVKO is the first new PT affiliate that I can recall in some time. Already we hear about how it's doomed to fail because of the bad signal... this complaint from progressives who already seem to want an excuse. As I've said before and told someone here just yesterday, if WVKO can get even a 1.0, it would be doing fairly decent. This complaining is, in my belief, based on some sort of angry liberal movement that is mad conservatives dominate talk radio and they want to get even. It's kind of like when your doctor tells you to quit stressing out on the job because it's harming your health in some way... you don't see the direct correlation but you know the doctor is right. Indirectly, the desire to get even with right-wing talkers has manifested it in many of the PT hosts, primarily on AAR, in the form of doing all-political borefests designed for policy wonks. What the hosts themselves need to get themselves up to snuff is some real life. Hosts need to be real. Ed Schultz is a good start; I may agree that going after Phil Boyce who no one knows is a bit silly, but in his defense, I've heard good conservative hosts do similar stuff before. It's good to set up an actual "enemy" and tear him down sometimes. Hosts should also be funny; not comedians (although none of the "comedians" on AAR were funny at all) or people who tell jokes all hour, but if someone has a sense of humor, they will not only be able to interject that when appropriate, but also aren't likely to take themselves too seriously. The problem with many of these PT shows isn't that talking about serious issues is bad but knowing when to stop. Talk about a sports game once in awhile, use a story.
It also might be worthwhile to go back and look at people who used to have some success. I can't say he is my favorite host or is a great example of my point, but Mike Malloy used to be syndicated by a bad network and has now gotten two new opportunities. Why not look at people who once were but now aren't? It's always amazed me how a lot of radio stations make stupid programming changes, and when the new host/show bombs, they often don't go back to the old one. I'm not saying go back and rehire Michael Jackson and make your station sound like 1968, but there has to be some talent who already knows the game out there that would love to get back on the saddle.
Also, we need end stations that know what they're doing and treat PT like any other talk station. You have stations like KPHX in Phoenix that embarrass the format with bake sale radio, then install more AAR-types who don't know what they're doing. To these people, it's all about getting the word out, being liberal, etc. They presently have a bunch of billboards up in bad locations with a photo of Bush and the phrase "had enough?". Alright, I get the idea, but how about promote what a wonderful station you have? I'm a fairly conservative guy who's had enough of Bush and I am not inspired to tune in, even if I didn't know how bad the station sounded outside of Stephanie Miller. Again, this station has a local afternoon show that is hosted by some former activist whose credentials include producing a once-brokered talk show on a third-string talk station hosted by another radio virgin (hence why he paid at one point). The end result is stumbling and bumbling for three hours about how we should donate to liberal charities. Also, this station doesn't know how to sell. They refuse certain types of clients and won't sell very much brokered programming (I know many disagree, but I think brokered programming is the savior of bad, high-dial AM stations). Heaven forbid we cut into "getting the message out" for an hour to hear some local mortgage guy. That really is the logic - one hour of anything but liberal politics would prevent us from electing Obama in 2008. I wonder, half-jokingly, if we should just find someone who's good at radio, educate them about all the liberal views, and tell them to go on air and pretend to be liberal. If it was a good enough radio person, it would work, and we wouldn't have to hear about a bake sale for some new cause.
The other thing is, how about we not call it "progressive talk"? At least on air. You have Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, decided conservatives, on stations called "Newsradio". You'd think you would tune into such a named station to get fair news. I'm not saying you don't, but you understand how imaging gives people connotations. While I did like "The Revolution of Talk Radio" on WCKY (which you'll note doesn't imply politics), all the cookie cutter stations like "Progressive Talk 1690" never got anywhere. I think I could write an entire thesis on the listener psychology involved, but the bottom line is imaging is everything. If you're treating your PT station like some non-entity to focus on the bigger ones, and in turn can't come up with an good or original ideas, you are already at a disadvantage. By the way, I don't just mean imaging, but the actual presentation... why not an advice show here and there? Dr. Laura, Clark Howard, etc. work on conservative talk radio. Some of them could work on liberal talk radio. You don't think some Texas democrats are devout Christians and would listen to Dave Ramsey? Maybe not all, but some. The problem is when you're "the liberal station" and put Dave Ramsey on... KSAC did this awhile back and I mentioned it here. It's all about how you're perceived.
I'll leave more intricate details on how a host should do this or that to Phil or Holland, or anyone else if they want to chime in. The key is hosts have to cut through. Most of the hosts on RW talk radio that I think cut through are lifelong radio people. I'm not saying that's a necessity, but I don't think it's a coincidence. And lighten up... when hosts talk about a fringe issue, it not only bores but, but shows arrogance. Arrogance that we're all supposed to be excited by hearing about the same thing you and your 9 policy wonk friends are. Listeners don't like that, and if a few do, it certainly won't help you expand beyond those few. After all, all the liberals who complain about how bad conservative talk shows are know for a reason... they've listened. I know a lot of people on both sides of the aisle who have listened to PT for 5 minutes, ever, but still listen to RW talk. The answer to a working progressive format is figuring out why.
Oh, and one other thing that might apply more to local stations... how about counter programming? Yes, I know PT is itself a counterprogram to RW talk, but perhaps (particularly in markets that don't have 8 talk stations) putting Miller up against Beck and Schultz against Rush makes less sense than switching them. If I'm a conservative, I'll choose the RW host that's funny over the LW host that is, but if given a choice between Rush (who some people don't care for) or a funny LW host, I might just try her out.
J
jaymarvin
Guest
KJCB! Great points. Thanks for a good read!
Also, this station doesn't know how to sell. They refuse certain types of clients and won't sell very much brokered programming (I know many disagree, but I think brokered programming is the savior of bad, high-dial AM stations). Heaven forbid we cut into "getting the message out" for an hour to hear some local mortgage guy.
After the housing bubble collapse are you kidding? Heaven forbid we should hear another mortgage guy on the radio!
KPHX should market itself as the "no-infomercial station". If I were them, I'd put a live non-brokered show on Saturdays and take calls from conservatives only, in all-out crossfire mode, to attract all the listeners right-wing radio abandons for the easy money on the weekends.
The problem is when you're "the liberal station" and put Dave Ramsey on... KSAC did this awhile back and I mentioned it here.
The problem is Dave Ramsey is NOT a liberal. He supports regressive taxation (no state income tax and lotsa grocery taxes) of the type that has kept his home state of Tennessee in 45th place by most measures of social progress. He beats people up for being in debt but never brings up that our government is teaching young people to go into debt by forcing them to finance so much of their college education or go without one.
smedge2006 said:Also, this station doesn't know how to sell. They refuse certain types of clients and won't sell very much brokered programming (I know many disagree, but I think brokered programming is the savior of bad, high-dial AM stations). Heaven forbid we cut into "getting the message out" for an hour to hear some local mortgage guy.
After the housing bubble collapse are you kidding? Heaven forbid we should hear another mortgage guy on the radio!
KPHX should market itself as the "no-infomercial station". If I were them, I'd put a live non-brokered show on Saturdays and take calls from conservatives only, in all-out crossfire mode, to attract all the listeners right-wing radio abandons for the easy money on the weekends.
The problem is when you're "the liberal station" and put Dave Ramsey on... KSAC did this awhile back and I mentioned it here.
The problem is Dave Ramsey is NOT a liberal. He supports regressive taxation (no state income tax and lotsa grocery taxes) of the type that has kept his home state of Tennessee in 45th place by most measures of social progress. He beats people up for being in debt but never brings up that our government is teaching young people to go into debt by forcing them to finance so much of their college education or go without one.
I'm not here to discuss politics, and don't really think Ramsey is the answer for PT. What I do know is the station needs money. I, too, realize that some of the mortgage people out there are sheisters. Whether it's mortgage, chiropractors, or whoever else wants to pay to play radio, I say open the floodgates. I understand you feel the folks at KPHX should solve their financial issues by going to the money tree in the back parking lot of their Washington St. digs.
The reality is KPHX is the only home for PT, so listeners have nowhere else to go. Adding more shows promoting liberalism will do nothing to reflect their performance. I realize that people who are unrealistic about how marginal, bad-signaled AM stations operate think I'm a nut. But as a proponent of diverse opinions on the radio, I'd rather keep a thriving liberal talk station on in Phoenix in exchange for whoring out the weekends.
KJCB said:What I do know is the station needs money. I, too, realize that some of the mortgage people out there are sheisters. Whether it's mortgage, chiropractors, or whoever else wants to pay to play radio, I say open the floodgates. I understand you feel the folks at KPHX should solve their financial issues by going to the money tree in the back parking lot of their Washington St. digs.
The reality is KPHX is the only home for PT, so listeners have nowhere else to go. Adding more shows promoting liberalism will do nothing to reflect their performance. But as a proponent of diverse opinions on the radio, I'd rather keep a thriving liberal talk station on in Phoenix in exchange for whoring out the weekends.
If KPHX were the only station in Phoenix whoring out the weekends, you might have a point. As it is, they have to compete with higher-rated stations that are doing the same thing. Show rates can get beaten down just like spot rates. EVERYBODY'S whoring out on the weekends -- so how special is your particular act of formatic self-destruction? The novelty of being on the radio for advertisers is going to wear off, too, as the generation that never had a reason to care about radio moves into business. Brokered radio lives on the fumes of the transistor radio generation.
The PT fans do have other places to go -- satradio and the internet. Good local talk on a Saturday afternoon might keep some of them around, and make a play for all the disfranchised conservatives who hear "Home Repair Talk' and "I can get you into a home without a job or a paycheck" radio on their favorite stations.
KTAR and their around the house shows actually do pretty well. As for KTAR and KFYI combined, there really isn't much whoring out. Compare this market to Dallas, a similarly overtalked market where KRLD, WBAP, KLIF, and KSKY sell much of their weekend time. I can't find much brokered on 550 or 92.3, and what is (on 550) isn't that much and is rather difficult for the average listener to discern as pay-for-play.
If KKNT isn't your thing (and they're usually sold out, and, as usual with Salem, a bit expensive), KPHX would be the next best option for a station with some documented following. Your point that brokered shows is all about vanity may hold some weight, but there's a reason people on the aforementioned WBAP pay $5,000 a week month after month after year to do a show - a quarter of a million dollars is some price to pay for vanity. People that did shows on 1190 may have been flushing their money away, but if you were on 1480 you could probably do well enough to keep doing it. It may be hard to believe, but brokered programmers typically want to make money. Whether someone cares about radio or not, if you can show them how to make a return on their investment, they'll do it.
If KKNT isn't your thing (and they're usually sold out, and, as usual with Salem, a bit expensive), KPHX would be the next best option for a station with some documented following. Your point that brokered shows is all about vanity may hold some weight, but there's a reason people on the aforementioned WBAP pay $5,000 a week month after month after year to do a show - a quarter of a million dollars is some price to pay for vanity. People that did shows on 1190 may have been flushing their money away, but if you were on 1480 you could probably do well enough to keep doing it. It may be hard to believe, but brokered programmers typically want to make money. Whether someone cares about radio or not, if you can show them how to make a return on their investment, they'll do it.
D
DaleGriffin
Guest
smedge2006 said:KJCB said:What I do know is the station needs money. I, too, realize that some of the mortgage people out there are sheisters. Whether it's mortgage, chiropractors, or whoever else wants to pay to play radio, I say open the floodgates. I understand you feel the folks at KPHX should solve their financial issues by going to the money tree in the back parking lot of their Washington St. digs.
The reality is KPHX is the only home for PT, so listeners have nowhere else to go. Adding more shows promoting liberalism will do nothing to reflect their performance. But as a proponent of diverse opinions on the radio, I'd rather keep a thriving liberal talk station on in Phoenix in exchange for whoring out the weekends.
If KPHX were the only station in Phoenix whoring out the weekends, you might have a point. As it is, they have to compete with higher-rated stations that are doing the same thing. Show rates can get beaten down just like spot rates. EVERYBODY'S whoring out on the weekends -- so how special is your particular act of formatic self-destruction? The novelty of being on the radio for advertisers is going to wear off, too, as the generation that never had a reason to care about radio moves into business. Brokered radio lives on the fumes of the transistor radio generation.
The PT fans do have other places to go -- satradio and the internet. Good local talk on a Saturday afternoon might keep some of them around, and make a play for all the disfranchised conservatives who hear "Home Repair Talk' and "I can get you into a home without a job or a paycheck" radio on their favorite stations.
Weekends do not matter on talk and never will.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.