Michigan News Network

[umfan]

I never said public radio didn't have an audience, Fred, only that talk stations that are 'right wing' in your view cume higher than 'public' talk stations.

WGN carries Limbaugh. Does he not qualify as 'right wing talk' in your view? I said 3.2 in NYC, Fred. Put on your glasses. 1.6 for WOR and 1.6 for WABC. You acknowledge above that RWT outcumes 'public' talk in your response above.

Your contention was that public talk had a higher cume than right wing talk. I take it you're no longer willing to defend that assertion.

One more time, I could care less about a format, I just don't want it subsidized.

 

[FredLeonard]

One more time, I could care less about a format, I just don't want it subsidized.

Neither do I. I've said so here several times.

I don't see you complaining about all the huge corporate - too big to fail - bail-outs, tax breaks and other forms of corporate welfare. Those are many times greater than CPB hand-outs. When Clear Channel or Cumulus face bankruptcy, their lobbyists will break speed records running to DC to get money from the tax-payers. It's hypocrisy to rant about the speck in the eye of public broadcasting and ignore the beam in the eye of major corporations.

In many markets (not all) right-wing talk does get greater cume than public radio news and information stations. I notice you keep focusing on that because often, in those same markets, right-wing talk gets lower AQH shares. Talk about selective use of statistics. The reason for this is public radio news and information stations have greater TSLs. Even ditto-heads can only stand so much.

And by the way, Rush is NOT - repeat NOT - carried on WGN. He's on WLS. Do you just make stuff up and hope nobody will notice or check?

My "glasses" are fine. You did not label the numbers you posted; I did.

Still waiting for that "analysis" you claim to have seen.

 

[umfan]

You're right, I meant WLS. I included WLS and it shows in my analysis.

I never claimed to have seen an analysis, I made it myself of the Top 50 markets using the information at Radio Online, and I'm correct, 'right wing' talk has a higher cume than 'public' talk.

Why did you even bring WGN into the discussion, I clearly didn't include it in my Chicago number.

You apparently have conceded the point.

 

[FredLeonard]

I have not conceded anything but thank you for demonstrating how you twist, fabricate and miss the point.

I based it on an analysis of stations that carry such programming in the Top 50 Markets as published on Radio Online.

That states there was an "analysis" at RadioOnline. Thank you for now acknowledging there was not, even as you try to wiggle out of admitting that you said there was.

Your unlabeled numbers made no sense. I mentioned WGN so you could not try to claim its numbers as right-wing talk numbers.

Now you are harping about cume. Yes, right-wing talk does get higher cume in some markets but you clearly have shifted gears to get away from your claims that public radio news and information is a niche market. Maybe you should do a little homework and think twice before mindlessly repeating what you heard some right-wing host say.

 

[umfan]

No Fred, it states that I based the analysis using information published on Radio Online.

Why do my 'unlabeled' numbers make no sense, Fred? Do they not reflect the correct data? If not, point it out. I obviously didn't include WGN in Chicago when I called it a 1.6 cume.

"Yes, right-wing talk does get higher cume in some markets but you clearly have shifted gears to get away from your claims that public radio news and information is a niche market. "

Uh, no, I said that brand of talk cumed higher than so called 'public' talk. Public radio is a niche, and a shriking one at that. The same issues you hammer about RWT are impacting public radio, except, RWT seems to manage to attract and retain a larger audience.

 

[davideduardo]

When Clear Channel or Cumulus face bankruptcy, their lobbyists will break speed records running to DC to get money from the tax-payers. It's hypocrisy to rant about the speck in the eye of public broadcasting and ignore the beam in the eye of major corporations.

The only government bail-outs have been in cases where a company or industry was too big an employer and economic generator to be allowed to fail. Basically, banks and auto companies.

If Clear or Cumulus should "fail" the same thing will happen as did with Citadel. They will be sold at a discount, with the lenders and investment bankers taking a haircut. New owners, unburdened by unsustainable debt, will be very profitable as the underlying assets have huge cash flows.

 

[davideduardo]

F
LA 2.0 2.0 ('Right Wing Talker' KTLK doesn't subscribe)

KTLK is now KEIB, and is subscribed as part of the CC cluster. It ceased to be KTLK in January of this year.

 

[davideduardo]

What analysis? Provide a link please.

I think any reasonable person would understand that umfan was trying to say that he made an analysis based on the data reported in the radio-online PPM summaries. Yes, the sentence was a bit misleading but that's an error in writing style. We all do that at times when responding to emails and board posts and text messages and the like. But you twisted poor sentence structure into an "assault on the castle" of umfan's contentions about listenership.

 

[umfan]

I didn't know the calls had changed thanks for pointing that out.

I knew Hannity had moved to the, former, KTLK, but not that of the new call sign.

 

[davideduardo]

I didn't know the calls had changed thanks for pointing that out.

I knew Hannity had moved to the, former, KTLK, but not that of the new call sign.

It's a very bad signal. Better than KABC, but not by much.

 

[FredLeonard]

The only government bail-outs have been in cases where a company or industry was too big an employer and economic generator to be allowed to fail. Basically, banks and auto companies.

If Clear or Cumulus should "fail" the same thing will happen as did with Citadel. They will be sold at a discount, with the lenders and investment bankers taking a haircut. New owners, unburdened by unsustainable debt, will be very profitable as the underlying assets have huge cash flows.

Maybe. Maybe not. But for all the ranting about "big government" and "keeping government off our backs" spewed by broadcast owners on their talk outlets, broadcasters, as much as anyone and maybe more than some, are very willing to use government to rig things in their favor, thwart competition and even take hand-outs in one form or another. GE, then owner of NBC, managed to not pay any taxes and still get tax refunds. Major broadcasters maintain a revolving door between the commission and their executive and legal offices - just like defense contractors and the Pentagon.