• 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

Limbaugh and Poli-talk

S

Shadow

I read a ton of posts on here and sometimes laugh at some of the misinformation. One problem is we cannot quote Arbitron numbers here and people try to make assumptions based off of 12+ numbers. Predicting the health, or lack thereof, of a radio station looking at a 12+ number is like predicting the 5 day forecast with a barometer.

I have the luxury of being able to look at numerous rated markets. Without quoting any numbers, I can safely say that Rush Limbaugh has some serious issues in the top ten markets. He was down in all top ten markets in the agency demos with the exception of one market and flat in another. Four top tens he is down significantly and four he was down some. By the way, this is year to year. He's down in many markets from Winter to Spring, but that is not as fair of a comparison.

This isn't a beat up Rush post. My question is this. Is his troubling decline over the past year due to a fatigue from a long political season and people are taking a break or is he just simply not entertaining the masses anymore? Maybe it is both. All I can say is that a GM or GSM really doesn't care what the answer is. Lower numbers = lower revenues. That does not make managers, owners or stockholders happy.

I keep seeing the 600 station mark for Limbaugh posts below. Bottom line is most radio companies of decent size doesn't care about much out of top ten markets. Why? The top ten markets bill about $5 BILLION dollars out of a $20 billion dollar industry. These markets are so much money that you HAVE to win here or it doesn't matter what happens in smaller (11+) markets. Clear Channel could exceed every budget in every market out of the top ten and still miss their numbers if they don't hit the top ten markets. So Limbaugh dropping in 8 of ten top ten markets while flat in one is not a good thing.

Thank you for your time.
 
> I have the luxury of being able to look at numerous rated
> markets. Without quoting any numbers, I can safely say that
> Rush Limbaugh has some serious issues in the top ten
> markets. He was down in all top ten markets in the agency
> demos with the exception of one market and flat in another.
> Four top tens he is down significantly and four he was down
> some. By the way, this is year to year. He's down in many
> markets from Winter to Spring, but that is not as fair of a
> comparison.

As a progressive and a realist, I acknowledge Rush Limbaugh remains #1 and a mega powerhouse. A lot of us have almost grown up with the guy. I remember him imitating Perot more than a decade ago. He's comfort food for his listeners and I think he'll be around for a very long time. There is room for Rush on the radio dial in every market out there, and I am perfectly fine with that.

I think the ratings ebbing and flowing have to do with the political season and whether you are considered "me-too" or "the opposition." With the GOP in charge of everything, Rush's complaints don't work as well when they are already running everything.

Further, his audience is aging. Most young people think AM refers to time alone, and they don't even realize there is AM radio. Many others are confronted with hundreds of new choices and are leaving traditional radio altogether, or they are sampling the new liberal talk.

Bottom line, Rush Limbaugh is going to be a major force in talk radio until he's dead, retired, jailed, or gets embroiled in some mega scandal beyond the drug issue.

His liberal audience who listens because they had little else to listen to are leaving for liberal talk, which will also now have a place at the table. It will be years before the hosts and shows are refined and solid enough to be on 300+ stations. But there will be some second rate conservative talkshows that will fail in part because there will be liberal shows that can deliver a larger audience for a station.

That's the marketplace of ideas, with room for everyone.
 
Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

Rush Limbaugh closed one generation gap by making political conservative talk (previously the realm of John Birchers who hated rock n roll) palatable, even enjoyable, to the baby boom generation.

Limbaugh and other conservatives have opened up another generation gap by criticizing hip-hop, now the favorite music of the white teens and young adults of today, who will presumably be the rock-ribbed Republicans of tomorrow.

As for AM, it is interesting to note that few dominant news-talkers have been launched on that band since 1990. Most of the successful conservative talkers are the Top-40 or Full Service giants of old -- the WABCs, the WLSs, the WJRs, the WTAMs, the KFIs, the KMOXs. They displaced an earlier generation of AM stations that had specialized in talk when most of the band was still music -- the KABCs, the WMCAs, the WORs, the WERE's, etc.

I have a feeling that FM will become the home of talk -- not just so-called FM talk, but talk in general.

During the 1970s, AM stations responded initially to the rise of FM music stations by doing some of the same things FM is doing now to respond to IPods and other technologies: Cutting back the personality, adding "more music" and telling everyone you played more music was that era's equivalent of "Jack."
The initial response of AMers to FM was ironically to try to beat FM music stations and their de-emphasis of personality by becoming mushy, 48 RPM, monaural clones of what FM was doing in stereo. It took five to ten years
for AM programmers to admit that their medium was dead for music, and that talk was the way to go. Some stations never got it, they swapped musical chairs on the deck of the Titanic, from Top-40 to AC to Country to Nostalgia, as one generation of AM listeners moved to FM and the other died off. By the time they realized music was over on AM, circa 1990, the window of opportunity to launch a successful talk station had already closed. All the listeners had fled to FM, or declared their allegiance to an AM talker.

I think something similar is going to happen to FM in the next few years. Smart programmers will realize that the time to launch a talker on that band is now, before the audience all flees to IPod, XM/Sirius, cellphones, in-brain teleportation of music, or whatever other technologies lie ahead. Others will keep trying music format after music format, with as little personality as possible, until the cash cow has been milked dry and gets sold to End of the Road Ministries as a dollar-a-holler "Preaching Teaching" station.
 
Even assuming that's the case, who could anyone put in that spot that would do as well or better?<P ID="signature">______________
Soon to set the world record for recieving Nigerian scam and phising e-mails!</P>
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

> Limbaugh and other conservatives have opened up another
> generation gap by criticizing hip-hop, now the favorite
> music of the white teens and young adults of today, who will
> presumably be the rock-ribbed Republicans of tomorrow.

Agreed, although I think those of us in that generation aren't so rebellious as to reject Rush and the others over this. I love hip-hop for the sound of it, not the lyrics, and as cliche as that thinking is, it's true. Most people in my age range aren't listening to hip-hop because they enjoy hearing about thugs getting shot up or smacking hoes around, we listen because the overall sound is appealing to us. I personally agree with Rush on the fact that hip-hop doesn't need to have these lyrics in them, and while I still listen to the music, I can laugh along with Rush at the crap that goes into a lot of these songs.

> I think something similar is going to happen to FM in the
> next few years. Smart programmers will realize that the time
> to launch a talker on that band is now, before the audience
> all flees to IPod, XM/Sirius, cellphones, in-brain
> teleportation of music, or whatever other technologies lie
> ahead. Others will keep trying music format after music
> format, with as little personality as possible, until the
> cash cow has been milked dry and gets sold to End of the
> Road Ministries as a dollar-a-holler "Preaching Teaching"
> station.

Amen, brother! Seriously though, I have to disagree with you on one point, and that's the implied notion that local broadcasting of music will die out due to new technology. I've said many times on these boards that localism is a key to any station's success, and there will always be broadcasters that acknowledge that fact and will be successful because of it.

I think the major change that lies ahead for local music broadcasters is a mass exodus to the Internet. With the growth of WiFi over cellular networks will come (as I see it) the addition of WiFi receivers in cars and on portable media players. With the ability to listen to any webcast from anywhere in the world, the Internet will be on our radios... or should I put that in reverse? Either way, more and more stations are adding or relaunching webcasts, and I think that's where music radio is headed. Think about it: if you live in Somewhereville and you're on a business trip in Anotherburgh, you'll still be able to listen to your favorite Somewhereville stations. Localism will still thrive, and it will thrive no matter where you are.

As far as news/talkers go... this exodus might be for them as well. The same want for localism applies to them too. While FM may be the new band for them now, I wouldn't be surprised to see more and more news/talkers pop up online in the years to come either. We could even see more Internet-only stations appear to target the audience that wants local news from their hometown wherever they go. For example, look at Curtis Media's online all-news station out of Raleigh, triangleradionews.com. More and more companies could do something like this with the technology getting cheaper and the licensing issues being worked out. I see it coming... and it could be here sooner than you think. All because radio listeners crave the local feel of their hometown stations.<P ID="signature">______________
"Get educated. Read stuff on the web and believe all of it."
-- Phil Hendrie
http://theradioblog.blogspot.com</P>
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

>
> As far as news/talkers go... this exodus might be for them
> as well. The same want for localism applies to them too.
> While FM may be the new band for them now, I wouldn't be
> surprised to see more and more news/talkers pop up online in
> the years to come either. We could even see more
> Internet-only stations appear to target the audience that
> wants local news from their hometown wherever they go. For
> example, look at Curtis Media's online all-news station out
> of Raleigh, triangleradionews.com. More and more companies
> could do something like this with the technology getting
> cheaper and the licensing issues being worked out. I see it
> coming... and it could be here sooner than you think. All
> because radio listeners crave the local feel of their
> hometown stations.
>

One profound point. The masses could care less about localism, and with the exception of the KGO's and WLS's, nobody does it anyway. "Traffic and Weather Together on the Eight's" may be compelling radio to some, but not to most.

Perfect example from the non-radio world: Macy's is changing the nameplates of several regional chains the the Macy's brand, why, BECAUSE LOCALISM DOESN'T MATTTER ANYMORE. Get it????
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

That's true, and unless you can give a "local" format 10-20 years to catch on, it ain't happening. WLW's staff has been in place for the most part since the 80s. You don't duplicate that overnight, and you don't beat the established syndicated talkers. <P ID="signature">______________
Soon to set the world record for recieving Nigerian scam and phising e-mails!</P>
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

>
>
> One profound point. The masses could care less about
> localism, and with the exception of the KGO's and WLS's,
> nobody does it anyway. "Traffic and Weather Together on the
> Eight's" may be compelling radio to some, but not to most.
>
>
> Perfect example from the non-radio world: Macy's is
> changing the nameplates of several regional chains the the
> Macy's brand, why, BECAUSE LOCALISM DOESN'T MATTTER ANYMORE.
> Get it????
>
I think your argument is ridiculous. Just because there are chain stores and food establishments doesn't mean that there is no more localism.

Some in the Macy's brand is highly underperfomring and the name Macy's is pretty well respected. Your slippery slope argument over one mediocre analogy doesn;t mean localism is dead. Go tell a New Yorker that his city blows and Boston is the bomb. You might be found in the Hudson River face down.

Many cities have radio stations with syndication programming that does well because THERE IS NO OTHER choice. There are too many examples to share, but I do want to look at WLW. Who cares that they have been on the air for a long time, those hosts are local and they always beat WKRC's syndicated programming. CLeveland's Mike Trivisanno ALWAYS beats the 9-12 syndicated host and Limbaugh middays. John Corby in PM drive and the AM Show on WTVN in COlumbus always well outperform the syndicated stuff.

Of course the big cities like NYC, LA and Chicago all have very successful all news stations (NYC and LA have two each.) Plus WOR, WADO, WFAN etc, in NYC and KLSX, KFI, etc, in LA. What about WJFK and WMAL in Washington, DC.? Local and proud. WRKO in Boston does very well overall as does WQAM in Miami.

Give people the choice of listening to local programming and syndicated programming and current ratings show usually the local programming comes out on top. Plus the selling of local programming is usually much easier than syndicated. That makes it more attractive for the bottom lines.
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

>
> Give people the choice of listening to local programming and
> syndicated programming and current ratings show usually the
> local programming comes out on top. Plus the selling of
> local programming is usually much easier than syndicated.
> That makes it more attractive for the bottom lines.
>

Granted, there are a handful of heritage big signal, big city, big budget stations with excellent local talent. But these are the exceptions, not the rule. While Boston, Chicago, and New York, and even Cincinnati may support localism, the lesser markets have out of necessity thrown in the towel. I live in a top 50 market with one major league sports franchise, and relatively short commute times. Half the population is non-native and just doesn't really have that sense of community which say a fourth generation Irish Catholic Bostonian has. It's just a big suburb with no core. And that's what's happening outside the East Coast. There just isn't enough to talk about for localism to work here. Nobody really seems to care. So our 50,000 watt AM is all syndicated out of necessity.
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

That's not always the case...WLW has had about a 20-year lead time. It would take several years to rebuild it from scratch, audience-wise.<P ID="signature">______________
Did the Corinthians ever write back?</P>
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

> I think something similar is going to happen to FM in the
> next few years. Smart programmers will realize that the time
> to launch a talker on that band is now, before the audience
> all flees to IPod, XM/Sirius, cellphones, in-brain
> teleportation of music, or whatever other technologies lie
> ahead. Others will keep trying music format after music
> format, with as little personality as possible, until the
> cash cow has been milked dry and gets sold to End of the
> Road Ministries as a dollar-a-holler "Preaching Teaching"
> station.
>
Just gotta say I agree with this, completely.
Time for smart radio companies to launch some talk formats on FM now.
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

There needs to be the equivalent of Randy Michaels in 1982 to launch a brand new talk format on FM...preferably with a powerful signal.<P ID="signature">______________
Did the Corinthians ever write back?</P>
 
Re: Limbaugh's (and AM's) demo issues

> There just isn't enough to talk about for localism to work
> here. Nobody really seems to care. So our 50,000 watt AM
> is all syndicated out of necessity.

But see, that, to me, would reveal an opportunity for even more localism than what your traditional big-city blowtorch would provide. More locally-focused programs relating to the smaller communities. The station could get right down to the nitty-gritty in terms of local political news for all of the cities in the area, cover each school board in their own little segment of a program, etc. I seriously doubt that there isn't enough to talk about... it's probably more of the case that there's plenty to talk about, but the station doesn't want to take the time and money to cover it all. However, I'm sure local advertisers would be more than happy to advertise on programs that focus more on the community around them, so while money might be an issue at first, the problem would likely solve itself as listenership grows and the programs start paying for themselves. Stations in my area (and I live in Ruralsburgh, USA) do this pretty well. The possibility and viability of it is there... I'd say it's just sheer laziness and acceptance of the (sad) status quo that keeps your local 50kW AM syndicated 24/7.<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