Grant: Another phony with a gimmick, right down to hiding his ethnicity behind a "true American" surname.
-
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
Michael Savage #1 on WABC 12+
- Thread starter TTalkradio1
- Start date
Grant: Another phony with a gimmick, right down to hiding his ethnicity behind a "true American" surname.
First, we know that radio artists in the past changed dull, hard to pronounce or discordant names for dramatic effect, just as Archibald Leach did in the movies.
And then we know that most of us have someone in the family who is an immigrant, or a recent generation child or grandchild of immigrants. There should be no stigma attached to one's heritage.
But this is radio. I'd rather be "Savage" than "Weiner" on the air. Just as I think John Wayne beats Marion Morrison.
It's not hiding... it is an effort to make the name memorable for talents who grew into radio in the diary era when ratings measured cume, TSL and memory!
Last edited:
Al Terzi, his son Tony, and Joe D'Ambrosio have done just fine in Connecticut TV and radio with their proud Italian surnames. Gigante wouldn't work in New York?
It did not work for him. Some of us have different airnames, others don't.
"Gigante" sounds like a Puerto Rican supermarket chain that also tried to operate in NYC for a while. Who knows if they guy just did not want to be confused with a Bodega.
Bob Grant hid his Italian heritage by speaking Italian?
He spoke Italian on air? I didn't realize that, didn't listen to him very much but I know illegal aliens (as he called them) were his big hot-button issue through much of his career.
Interesting point for analysis. The bulk of the entire Italian migration to the US occurred in the 1880 to 1924 period, with half of the group arriving between 1900 and 1910. The point in stating this is that up until the 20's, with the exception of a vile law restricting Chinese from the late 19th Century, there was no immigration policy and immigration laws were just coming into being.
So Savage's parents would have come "without papers" (supposedly the term that gave rise to the offensive term for Italians) as there was no such thing as illegal immigration.
You mean Grant/Gigante's, of course. Savage/Weiner's lineage most likely traces to Germany, Austria or Poland. I am of Ukrainian Jewish stock myself, and my grandmother was pregnant with my father when she and my grandfather arrived in New York from Ukraine (via Danzig) in 1921. Were they also "without papers"?
Al Terzi, his son Tony, and Joe D'Ambrosio have done just fine in Connecticut TV and radio with their proud Italian surnames. Gigante wouldn't work in New York?
Fair enough. I have never heard of them in Nashville. And I could list tons of TV/radio people in each major city that few people know outside of that city. But, let's face it. Savage works. Weiner doesn't. LOL. By the way, what is Trump's original family name?
Like Savage or not, and I will admit to listening to him and most of the other "nationally" syndicated personalities for logical radio-driven reasons, he has been very successful. Quack? Name me one TV or radio host that not a soul on this planet would dig up some kind of negative or mean dirt on and call him or he something. It's is what we now all do in America. IF we stick to the facts, Savage, Hannity, Rush, etc., have had some incredible rolls for much longer than most. Truth is, I prefer listening to Savage fly off the handle and calm right down much more than the boring monotone roll of Rush or Sean. They are just to predictable and offer nothing more than what people expect. You never know with Weiner/Savage. That is his game. Millions of people love it. That is THE GAME. 99% of us on this board are not in the demo that matters and few of us will like the talk show hosts in the next five to ten years anymore than we will like the new music. So, maybe we can all agree that what matters in radio is keeping stations on the air, maximizing their potential, revenues and future and keeping the necessary listeners listening or getting them to actually listen. It is really NOT about who we like or hate. All that bitching is us acting as armchair radio quarterbacks and not keeping the eye on what is happening and what needs to happen. And you call me as crazy as Savage, because I probably am, but no one is calling me to do a three hour talk show at WABC. There are a lot of reasons for that. (Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all of you, because at least you care enough to spend time on this board. You all rock!)
Fair enough. I have never heard of them in Nashville. And I could list tons of TV/radio people in each major city that few people know outside of that city. But, let's face it. Savage works. Weiner doesn't. LOL. By the way, what is Trump's original family name?
Like Savage or not, and I will admit to listening to him and most of the other "nationally" syndicated personalities for logical radio-driven reasons, he has been very successful. Quack? Name me one TV or radio host that not a soul on this planet would dig up some kind of negative or mean dirt on and call him or he something. It's is what we now all do in America. IF we stick to the facts, Savage, Hannity, Rush, etc., have had some incredible rolls for much longer than most. Truth is, I prefer listening to Savage fly off the handle and calm right down much more than the boring monotone roll of Rush or Sean. They are just to predictable and offer nothing more than what people expect. You never know with Weiner/Savage. That is his game. Millions of people love it. That is THE GAME. 99% of us on this board are not in the demo that matters and few of us will like the talk show hosts in the next five to ten years anymore than we will like the new music. So, maybe we can all agree that what matters in radio is keeping stations on the air, maximizing their potential, revenues and future and keeping the necessary listeners listening or getting them to actually listen. It is really NOT about who we like or hate. All that bitching is us acting as armchair radio quarterbacks and not keeping the eye on what is happening and what needs to happen. And you call me as crazy as Savage, because I probably am, but no one is calling me to do a three hour talk show at WABC. There are a lot of reasons for that. (Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all of you, because at least you care enough to spend time on this board. You all rock!)
Frank! You are right. I think 2019 will be a very interesting year for Nielsob and the ratings game. Time will prove one of the biggest radio disasters may very well be the near monopolistic nature of these ratings and their supreme power based upon
their "findings." What if more stations and companies stop using these numbers and figure out what really works and who is really listening? That, sir, may well be the most major issue that would take radio into the next decade. It would be interesting to
see the "real" numbers for Savage, as we have previously discussed. That being said, I would be very nervous to try to find another host from what is vying for his position and try to beat his numbers. My guess, and that is all I can offer, is the WABC move
has some corporate benefits or safety nets for those making the changes.
I think Frank's point is that people who are not on the staff of subscribed stations are are using 12+ ratings numbers as if they were actionable.
Stations don't pay much, if any, attention to 12+. Agencies don't even look at those numbers.
So 12+ is valueless and Nielsen gives the data for free because it helps to keep the Nielsen name "top of mind".
There is no out of the ordinary discontent with Nielsen rating other than the cost. Yes, there are always a few stations that talk about how bad Nielsen is but those tend to be stations that just had a bad book and are looking for someone to blame! But, outside of the smaller markets where Eastlan can measure for less money due to a more traditional methodology that includes telephone recall (that method died with The Pulse in 1978!), and far fewer stratification variables.
Unless someone comes up with a better methodology and / or better pricing, there is not going to be an change in Nielsen this year.
Over time, more and more clients will demand integrated all-media measurement that also incorporate engagement metrics and even factor in sales data. At the forefront of designing this kind of service is Nielsen.
Those of us who have looked at the numbers for Savage in depth know that the show was performing about the same as the rest of the station, give or take a few tenths of a share point; in other words, within the margin of error. In 25-54, where nearly all the money is, WABC overall is not even in the top 20 stations and most dayparts are around 25th.
Many radio stations compelled their talent to adopt "true American" names. I believe WBBM asked, nay insisted, that the late Mr. Gigante call himself Grant. Program directors have been responsible for such name changes as Dick Ulrich's to Johnny Donovan and John Landecker's to Scott Walker. An inverse name change occurred at WABC, however, when Rick Sklar hired Bob Cruz, and directed him to use his real name instead of "Bob Morgan," his on-air pseudonym.
Last edited:
You didn't even listen to him.
- Status