KABC-AM Cuts Most Of Local Lineup/ Sacramento's Armstrong and Getty to Join in 2020

[davideduardo]

Thank you for confirming my long-held suspicion. You haven't sufficiently listened to the show to comment.

I have listened regularly since I first put Rush on one of our stations in Florida when EIB Network first started; we were a very early affiliate and we were credited with creating the "Rush Lunch" where a restaurant had one of its private rooms with Rush on speakers and listeners could come for lunch and a long listen to the show.

While not a professional Dittohead, I've always been a frequent listener as the show is really well assembled, even though it sounds spontaneous. I've used some of Rush's practices while training talk hosts in places like Puerto Rico, Chile, Argentina and the Dominican Republic.

Rush listeners know that comedy is a constant theme and Rush goes out of his way to make it fun. He even has at least one professional comic that makes material for him to run on the showand of course he is quite funny himself. Liberals just don't like being the butt of his jokes.

From my perspective, that's only a small part of the show for the most part. I would not say that comedy is a strong point of the program.

"Fun" does not mean "funny". That's my point in countering the idea that politicized talk shows are not entertaining.

Rush: currently approximately 600 stations, 30+ years on air
Air America: currently 0 stations, < 6 years on air

As I said at the beginning of this discussion, Air America was not entertaining; it was too intense and not personable enough. Somehow, every show sounded like a union meeting called to put forward a strike vote.

 

[davideduardo]

I would disagree with that.
While Limbaugh has a reputation for being an "angry old white guy," I personally found him more funny than several professional comedians (Jay Leno, Garrison Keillor, Bob & Tom), especially back in the 90s when they were all basing their material on Bill Clinton's indiscretions.

I agree here. Particularly, I found Keillor about as amusing as my proctologist.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

[SIZE="3

As I said at the beginning of this discussion, Air America was not entertaining; it was too intense and not personable enough. Somehow, every show sounded like a union meeting called to put forward a strike vote.[/SIZE]

On that we agree. The only liberal air talent I have heard that was consistently listenable is Stephanie Miller. While she skewered and bashed conservatives just as rough as anyone else, she did it with a fun and whimsical approach that was probably much more effective than, for example, the grating Randi Rhodes.

 

[SuperRadioFan]

On that we agree. The only liberal air talent I have heard that was consistently listenable is Stephanie Miller. While she skewered and bashed conservatives just as rough as anyone else, she did it with a fun and whimsical approach that was probably much more effective than, for example, the grating Randi Rhodes.

Hey ChannelFlipper I know (or I think) you were a fan of the old KSCA FM101.9, right? Have you ever checked out what Nicole Sandler is doing these days?

 

[ChannelFlipper]

Hey ChannelFlipper I know (or I think) you were a fan of the old KSCA FM101.9, right? Have you ever checked out what Nicole Sandler is doing these days?

Not really. I know she was good buddies with the aforementioned Ms. Rhodes during the Air America days and perhaps since, this information coming from Don's laradio.com website years ago.

 

[SuperRadioFan]

Not really. I know she was good buddies with the aforementioned Ms. Rhodes during the Air America days and perhaps since, this information coming from Don's laradio.com website years ago.

She has a daily (I think) podcast and is a talk show host, extremely liberal. I only "tuned in" one time for a few minutes maybe 6 months ago. She lives in south Florida.

 

[Theater of My Mind]

The well worn talking point about how conservative hosts are entertaining while liberal hosts are not is really quite a load of B.S. from the conservatives who keep posting that tripe. I can assure you that there are millions of people in this country who consider Rush, Hannity et al highly abrasive, destructive to the country and not the least bit entertaining.


The reasons for Air America's demise are not as black-and-white as conservatives like to make it out to be. David Eduardo, for such a proponent of radio research as yourself I don't see any factual data to back up your opinions for a change. But I'll point out that Air America tried to replicate the formula used by conservative talkers, substituting liberal idoeology, and it didn't work. It could take a psychology master to explain why but it likely comes down to the fact that the format didn't work well for liberal listeners who are drawn to the more balanced, intellectual and non-commercial nature of programming heard on NPR, which by the way is very successful.


Combine that with the fact that Air America aired on poor signals in few markets, that the AM band had already earned a reputation for being a low-fidelity, conservative talk wasteland, and that the potential audience already had other well-established outlets for their information and entertainment, and it's easy to see how challenging it was for AA to attract an audience.

 

[TheBigA]

It could take a psychology master to explain why but it likely comes down to the fact that the format didn't work well for liberal listeners who are drawn to the more balanced, intellectual and non-commercial nature of programming heard on NPR, which by the way is very successful.

I sort of agree with that, drawing on the famous quote from JFK, who said, "I'm not a member of an organized party, I am instead a Democrat." Radio stations are built around consensus formats, such as Top 40, country, AC, urban, and others. The only consensus talk format is conservative talk. There are too many unrelated elements in what makes someone liberal. Certainly the abrasive approach chosen by conservative talk doesn't work for non-conservatives. It probably doesn't work for a lot of conservatives too. Not all who agree with Rush or Hannity choose to listen to them. They might agree with their POV but not necessarily all that they say or how they say it. But there are enough of them who are attracted to the presentation to make it work as a radio format. All it takes in any given place is 2% of the population. In LA, the figure is probably closer to 5%. They agree with Rush, but they don't actually listen. Then there are a few more percentage points who agree, but aren't radio listeners.

So to your point, there are more consensus listeners for conservative talk than any other type of talk except sports talk. And yes, the approach used by Air America was ill-advised. But the other factor that led to their demise, in addition to presentation and weak facilities, was just bad management and poor funding. Had they been owned by CBS or some better-funded organization, such as Amazon or Google, they'd have lasted longer. But chances of that are non-existent. It would be interesting if Michael Bloomberg chose to fund a talk radio network, rather than a financial services network. But the chances of making money with financial services are likely greater than with any form of talk.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

The reasons for Air America's demise are not as black-and-white as conservatives like to make it out to be. David Eduardo, for such a proponent of radio research as yourself I don't see any factual data to back up your opinions for a change. But I'll point out that Air America tried to replicate the formula used by conservative talkers, substituting liberal ideology, and it didn't work. It could take a psychology master to explain why but it likely comes down to the fact that the format didn't work well for liberal listeners who are drawn to the more balanced, intellectual and non-commercial nature of programming heard on NPR, which by the way is very successful.

No advanced degree necessary, really. I listened the entire first day (I will never get it back!) and pronounced it dead on arrival for many of the same reasons as have been pointed out already on this thread. The only thing I was wrong about was the end date. I gave it 24 months, but it lasted over 60. If I remember right, I think they were teetering on failure for at least the last three years and were only being propped up by some quiet sugar daddies who were intent on keeping it aloft and a very patient iheart (think they were still CC then) who liked the idea of having both a conservative and liberal network for sales purposes.

 

[hotpatrick2004]

I remember when Air America debuted on 1150 AM in los angeles then within a few days it was off the air in los angeles for not payin there bill. I remember hearing foreign language. And i remember randi rhodes complainin how she wont stay blah blah blah... Leasing the station i believe. Clear channel dont play.

 

[Yabadabado1]

Air America aired where I live for like a minute and a half on one of the weaker AM signals. I listened to it now and again but didn't find any really compelling reason to stick around, same goes with the conservative yakkers. In the end, most station groups are owned by conservative-leaning owners so I'd expect to hear conservative blathering on their stations.

 

[TheBigA]

In the end, most station groups are owned by conservative-leaning owners so I'd expect to hear conservative blathering on their stations.

I've read people say that, and I don't find it to be true. Neither David Field nor Mary Berner are what I'd call conservatives. They want to make money.

 

[davideduardo]

In the end, most station groups are owned by conservative-leaning owners so I'd expect to hear conservative blathering on their stations.

Were there a formula for liberal talk, believe me that Pittman and Fields and Berner and the rest would jump on it instantly; most of the big groups have AMs that they don't know what to do with and that would be manna from heaven for those operators.

 

[michael hagerty]

I've read people say that, and I don't find it to be true. Neither David Field nor Mary Berner are what I'd call conservatives. They want to make money.

This (man, we need a "Like" button on this forum).

If conservative talk was a loser, it would be gone. If progressive talk, classical and jazz made money, they'd be on.

 

[davideduardo]

The well worn talking point about how conservative hosts are entertaining while liberal hosts are not is really quite a load of B.S. from the conservatives who keep posting that tripe. I can assure you that there are millions of people in this country who consider Rush, Hannity et al highly abrasive, destructive to the country and not the least bit entertaining.

It's not our personal opinion that, with exceptions in places like Portland and Seattle and... well, actually, except for only Portland and Seattle, Air America did not get listener support. It had a minor initial peak, but listeners left after short periods of sampling.

The reasons for Air America's demise are not as black-and-white as conservatives like to make it out to be.

Sure they are. Low ratings, no growth, and no national and agency buys due to poor ratings.

We can analyze the different aspects of the ratings long into the night, but listeners did not buy in.

David Eduardo, for such a proponent of radio research as yourself I don't see any factual data to back up your opinions for a change.

There is no better research than the ratings. The stations did poorly; even those that started well (like KGW) faded soon.

But I'll point out that Air America tried to replicate the formula used by conservative talkers, substituting liberal idoeology, and it didn't work. It could take a psychology master to explain why but it likely comes down to the fact that the format didn't work well for liberal listeners who are drawn to the more balanced, intellectual and non-commercial nature of programming heard on NPR, which by the way is very successful.

Better than a psychologist are the opinions of experienced talk programmers. In my case, I've done talk in 5 of the top 10 markets, set up the #1 station in the Dominican Republic which is all talk and done the format very successfully in Puerto Rico, Argentina and other places.

In many cases, I did not agree with the political focus of the station (the Argentine station was solidly Peronist... ughh) but I worked to make the stations "good listens". Air America was not a good listen.

One of the last R&R New Talk Conventions had an entire session about why progressive talk was not working. Some of the best talk programmers in the USA said the same thing: the format and the hosts were not entertaining; they were crusaders and not entertainers.

Combine that with the fact that Air America aired on poor signals in few markets, that the AM band had already earned a reputation for being a low-fidelity, conservative talk wasteland, and that the potential audience already had other well-established outlets for their information and entertainment, and it's easy to see how challenging it was for AA to attract an audience.

That is exaggerated and simplistic. Monster talkers from WJR and WTAM to KMOX and KFYI and KFI were getting huge ratings. Companies were still investing in AM because, in those pre-PPM days, the TSL and AQH was terrific. But by 2008, the PPM had seriously wounded talkers... and now, a decade later, the listeners to talk on AM or FM are fewer and the PPM shows much lower TSL and, thus, lower shares.

For most people under 45 or 50, talk is boring. It does not matter what the political focus. It's just not an appealing format whether on AM or FM. And the younger demos are preferring podcasts and on-demand sources, so the issue goes back to nearly two decades ago when AM still had opportunities... and Air America could not attract and retain listeners.

 

[hotpatrick2004]

Theatre of the mind whats ur deal. You approach this like ur butt hurt that liberal talk doesnt work. You are part of the problem. You take yourself way to seriously like most liberals. David is taking it from a business point of view and all you want to do is argue about your feelings it seems.

You dont like conservatives we get it but from a business standpoint with very few exception liberal talk fails. David keeps giving u reasons why but you dont want to listen.

Air america did nothing right and everything wrong and thats a fact!!!

 

[Delete My Account]

No, it's not a fact.

Some of its hosts (Sam Seder, Rachel Maddow, Al Franken) used their time there as a platform to even bigger things. The fact the management was inept and some of the programming was terrible doesn't mean there weren't some talented people involved in the on air side.

As to liberal talk, we've been over this a million times, but Rhodes actually beat Limbaugh in several Florida markets, and the FM version of liberal talk was successful enough in Madison to stave off a format change at least once. They held on until the syndicated programming simply wasn't there to fill a day. But the station itself performed well with Bill Press, Stephanie Miller, and a local show in afternoons or nights.

The fact is, you want to pretend liberal talk can't and NEVER worked. Which is equally not true.

 

[davideduardo]

No, it's not a fact.

As to liberal talk, we've been over this a million times, but Rhodes actually beat Limbaugh in several Florida markets, and the FM version of liberal talk was successful enough in Madison to stave off a format change at least once.

Just Fort Lauderdale, from where they recruited her and where she was well liked. She tanked when she drank the Air America Kool-Aid.

Madison had a half-life of one book and then faded.

The fact is, you want to pretend liberal talk can't and NEVER worked. Which is equally not true.

The fact is that some of the Air America talent that was not ready yet when they went on the network grew and matured and learned from what brought down Air America. But they had been part of it, and at the time did not seem to understand the need to be entertaining as well as provocative.

 

[TheBigA]

The fact is that some of the Air America talent that was not ready yet when they went on the network grew and matured and learned from what brought down Air America. But they had been part of it, and at the time did not seem to understand the need to be entertaining as well as provocative.

The best example is Rachel Maddow, who has since found her audience and is the main attraction at MSNBC, with a bigger audience than she ever had on the radio.

There were other similar networks around the same time. Chuck Harder was part of a network owned by the UAW. There was an all-female radio network. The hard part of running a network isn't the programming, but finding enough advertisers who'll support a service that isn't in every market and doesn't deliver bulk audience. There are too many other ways to reach that audience. So while most of the focus of the discussion has to do with the programming, the real reason these networks fail is financial.

 

[Delete My Account]

If Madison was a one book fluke, how did their audience successfully protest a pending format change and keep it on the air longer than iHeart planned?

The station performed decently. Not top 5, admittedly, but as long as there was a supply of syndicated shows that fit the format, they held their ground longer than most.

I don't deny that most liberal talk stations didn't succeed with the Air America lineup. That's a separate issue from the format. It's also separate from Patrick's assertion that Air America did "everything wrong." Maybe their management did. But not all of the hosts did.