The first part of that so-called CW is wrong. Rush already had ratings *before* there was a Bill Clinton. He took off during the first Bush Administration (when Rush was providing an outlet for a lot of conservative frustration over Bush 41's missteps) and his TV show which was also successful debuted before there was a Clinton (during the 92 campaign).
-
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.
Limbaugh, on WOR, lost half of his WABC audience share
- Thread starter jeff23
- Start date
The first part of that so-called CW is wrong. Rush already had ratings *before* there was a Bill Clinton. He took off during the first Bush Administration (when Rush was providing an outlet for a lot of conservative frustration over Bush 41's missteps) and his TV show which was also successful debuted before there was a Clinton (during the 92 campaign).
The first part of that so-called CW is wrong. Rush already had ratings *before* there was a Bill Clinton. He took off during the first Bush Administration (when Rush was providing an outlet for a lot of conservative frustration over Bush 41's missteps) and his TV show which was also successful debuted before there was a Clinton (during the 92 campaign).
The TV show was not successful. Opinions differ as to why. But it did not last. Roger Ailes moved on but it's interesting he has not included Rush in his later endeavor. And except for his "15 minutes" as an ESPN sports commentator, Rush has stayed away from TV (unlike other leading hosts).
Rush did start by providing an outlet for frustrated conservatives, especially for Buchanan supporters. After Daddy Bush almost lost the New Hampshire primary, Rush was invited to the White House and got to spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom. Whatever was said, Rush sold out, became the voice of the party establishment and an RNC shill.
The TV show was not successful. Opinions differ as to why. But it did not last. Roger Ailes moved on but it's interesting he has not included Rush in his later endeavor. And except for his "15 minutes" as an ESPN sports commentator, Rush has stayed away from TV (unlike other leading hosts).
Rush did start by providing an outlet for frustrated conservatives, especially for Buchanan supporters. After Daddy Bush almost lost the New Hampshire primary, Rush was invited to the White House and got to spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom. Whatever was said, Rush sold out, became the voice of the party establishment and an RNC shill.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=uxQEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4628,2240805&hl=en
The newspapers of the time when his show aired contradict your assertion. His TV show ran in first run syndication for four years and would've continued, but HE made the choice to pull the plug.
Newspapers (plural)? One article. Typical puff piece. And the show was on two seasons, not four. In most markets it ran opposite local news, not late night talk shows. False comparison. And no mention of revenue.
It ran four years not two (1992-1996) and it was successful. During the first year of the run it was in fact competing well in many markets with Nightline, Leno and Letterman because it did NOT air opposite local news. And Ailes acknowledged that it was Rush's decision to pull it because he was bored with the medium.
Your analysis of Rush's appeal in the Bush I period is also way off-base as well (you keep forgetting that the show broke out and was a national phenom in 1990 and 1991 before there was such a thing as "Buchanan" conservatives) but I think getting into an argument about history would take things too far afield. What this is coming back to is that your sweeping "CW" simply does not jibe with how things actually happened.
Your analysis of Rush's appeal in the Bush I period is also way off-base as well (you keep forgetting that the show broke out and was a national phenom in 1990 and 1991 before there was such a thing as "Buchanan" conservatives) but I think getting into an argument about history would take things too far afield. What this is coming back to is that your sweeping "CW" simply does not jibe with how things actually happened.
Last edited:
And even the ones that are in or close to the top 10 are nowhere near there in 25-54.
While KFI and KNX are 5th and 6th in billing in LA, they are slipping badly in 25-54. KFI was 23rd in Jan-Feb-Mar average and KNX was 26th.
Like many such AMs, they are helped by a format which tolerates lots more spots. So they can sell at a lower rate commensurate with delivery and make up for it on bulk.
Would they (KFI, KNX) do well to have FM's. I would be interested to know how KCBS is doing compared to KNX with the 25-54
I think KABC would do well on FM. Not that cumulus has one to switch.
Last edited:
I think KABC would do well on FM. Not that cumulus has one.
Definitely not going to blow up their only FM for talk. I don't have any reason to believe what KABC is doing would work better on FM.
Talk on FM has to be programmed more like a music station, less like a talk or news station.
Howard Stern worked because it was talk with a rock edge. There's nothing on KABC with that rock edge.
Last edited:
Well that would be the question. Are these AM/FM newstalkers doing much better than their AM only counterparts?
And by KCBS I mean KCBS-AM/KFRC-FM totally forgot about LA's KCBS-FM.
And by KCBS I mean KCBS-AM/KFRC-FM totally forgot about LA's KCBS-FM.
Well that would be the question. Are these AM/FM newstalkers doing much better than their AM only counterparts?
Depends on the market and the programming. Cumulus is doing better with WMAL-AM/FM in DC, but that's a news-oriented market. I wouldn't say LA is similar. Greater Media isn't doing better in Charlotte with WBT-AM/FM. Cox is #1 in Atlanta with WSB AM-FM.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.