NBC News Radio As A 24/7 Progressive Talk Outlet On The Horizon??

[JeeperOne]

While listening the new NBC Sports Network via the nbcsportsradio.com website, I decided to do a little poking around to see if NBC had reserved a similar domain name for its news division

To do this, I typed in nbcnewsradio.com & sure enough, I see a GoDaddy placeholder page saying the name had been reserved

Now figuring it would be impossible (Not to mention ILLEGAL) for someone else to infringe upon NBC's trademark name, I figure they must be looking at launching a Talk Radio for news similar to what they now have for sports. It would also an effort to counter the offerings on Fox News Radio

If this is true, I've got the perfect Weekday/Weeknight lineup for them. Here it is (All times are EASTERN Time)

6:00 AM Bill Press (TV simulcast still on Current TV since Radio & TV gigs are considered seperate)
9:00 AM Stephanie Miller (TV simulcast still on Current TV)
12:00 NOON Ed Schultz
3:00 PM Norman Goldman
7:00 PM Randi Rhoades
10:00 PM Alan Colmes (Yes I know his where his TV gig is)
1:00 AM Rebroadcast of one of the earlier shows (the network could add rebroadcasts of additional shows for stations west of the Eastern Time Zone if need be)

Now of course this would be the lineup for stations which would not have local shows & would be satellite fed by the network 24/7

This is my guess for a prospective lineup for such a network (If of course it shouild become reality). What's yours? Let's have fun with this

Thoughts? Comments? Tar & Feathers? (*Gulp!* on that last one ;D)

Cheers & 73 ;D

 

[KeithE4]

Deja vu Air America all over again. And with the same level of "success." :

 

[FightingIrish]

Big problem is that all the people you listed are already being syndicated by Dial Global, Premiere and FOX. If they did do a talk radio format (and now is a pretty bad time to do it), they'd do like FOX did and build it around their own talent. But I really don't see NBC interested in getting back into radio on that level, they've got their hands full right now with the sports network.

Likely, NBC just reserved the domain name to keep it away from squatters, competitors and various internet cranks. That's very common practice.

 

[FredLeonard]

How did you make the leap that a (non-operating) NBC Newsradio website means Comcast is interested in starting a progressive talk network? About a year ago, NBC and Dial Global announced plans to do radio news under the NBC "brand."

http://www.dialglobal.com/index.php/programming/news/news-networks/nbc-news-radio

Dial Global is already the top distributor of progressive talk radio

 

[JeeperOne]

Just a guess based on a hunch.....

And considering all the hate being spewed forth on Right Wing Talk Radio, A new network like Air America would seem like a pretty good idea now (Unless you LIKE listening to racist hate speech on the radio, some of which borders on NOT being family-friendly (AKA Rush Limbaugh's rant against Sandra Fluke), which for years, Right Wing hosts have always prided themselves on being)

As for distributorship - Competition is always good.

Then too, Dial Global & NBC could take the network they have now & program it 24/7 if they wanted to

Cheers & 73 ;D

 

[w9wi]

I am a liberal, but I don't think a new network "like Air America" would be a good idea.

They seemed to think the route to success in liberal talk is to take the conservative talk formula & just flip the viewpoints. Instead of a conservative hurling ungrammatical insults at President Obama, have a liberal hurl ungrammatical insults at Speaker Boehner. Liberals simply think differently, they don't want to listen to anyone hurl insults at anyone.

That, and Air America ended up on a slate of affiliates with, in most cases, greatly sub-par signals. Conservatives won't listen to conservative hosts on stations they can't receive; liberals won't listen to liberal hosts on stations *they* can't receive...

 

[FredLeonard]

What you describe as a hunch sounds more like wishful thinking.

Whether or not progressive talk radio is a good idea, a network for it is not.

Democracy Radio launched two of the three most successful progressive talk shows, which never had any connection to Air America Radio: Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller. The other successful show is Thom Hartmann, which launched on i.e. America and then was self-syndicated and then syndicated by Dial Global before Air America Radio (briefly at the end) added the show to their network feed when Al Franken left.

Democracy Radio used the syndication model, which has worked well in the business - including for Rush. Air America Radio was thought up by people who knew nothing about radio and considered their lack of knowledge an advantage. Rush got his opportunity after ABC's attempt to launch a wall to wall talk network failed and satellite time became available cheap (and WABC was left with air time to fill).

Where Democracy Radio got it right is: First get a program which people will want to hear and stations will want to carry. Then worry about distribution.

Dial Global does have competition. As noted, Fox and Clear Channel both distribute progressive talk shows. Plus there are some in self-syndication. There's also the question of whether the company which distributes NBC Newsradio will want to take on a second progressive talk line-up.

The barriers to progressive talk are: (1) The overall decline of radio. (2) The hostility of radio management to the format. (3) Nobody has tried to come up with an approach to talk radio to appeal to progressive minded listeners. (4) Progressive talk demos are as undesirable as conservative talk demos.

 

[JeeperOne]

I am a liberal, but I don't think a new network "like Air America" would be a good idea.

They seemed to think the route to success in liberal talk is to take the conservative talk formula & just flip the viewpoints. Instead of a conservative hurling ungrammatical insults at President Obama, have a liberal hurl ungrammatical insults at Speaker Boehner. Liberals simply think differently, they don't want to listen to anyone hurl insults at anyone.

At least we're not saying or trying to assert that Speaker Boehner was born in another country or is somehow a "Terrorist Operative" & therefore shouldn't be speaking for our Congress though

That, and Air America ended up on a slate of affiliates with, in most cases, greatly sub-par signals. Conservatives won't listen to conservative hosts on stations they can't receive; liberals won't listen to liberal hosts on stations *they* can't receive...

Now I'll agree with you here. Air America was almost always dumped on some crappy signal (Usually on a distant AM station). I think that, above all else, is what killed Air America. Not the talk or talent

JMO.....

Cheers & 73 ;D

 

[JeeperOne]

What you describe as a hunch sounds more like wishful thinking.

Whether or not progressive talk radio is a good idea, a network for it is not.

Democracy Radio launched two of the three most successful progressive talk shows, which never had any connection to Air America Radio: Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller. The other successful show is Thom Hartmann, which launched on i.e. America and then was self-syndicated and then syndicated by Dial Global before Air America Radio (briefly at the end) added the show to their network feed when Al Franken left.

Democracy Radio used the syndication model, which has worked well in the business - including for Rush. Air America Radio was thought up by people who knew nothing about radio and considered their lack of knowledge an advantage. Rush got his opportunity after ABC's attempt to launch a wall to wall talk network failed and satellite time became available cheap (and WABC was left with air time to fill).

Where Democracy Radio got it right is: First get a program which people will want to hear and stations will want to carry. Then worry about distribution.

Dial Global does have competition. As noted, Fox and Clear Channel both distribute progressive talk shows. Plus there are some in self-syndication. There's also the question of whether the company which distributes NBC Newsradio will want to take on a second progressive talk line-up.

The barriers to progressive talk are: (1) The overall decline of radio. (2) The hostility of radio management to the format. (3) Nobody has tried to come up with an approach to talk radio to appeal to progressive minded listeners. (4) Progressive talk demos are as undesirable as conservative talk demos.

If what you say is true, then why is it we now have FIVE Sports Talk networks - NBC, CBS, ESPN, Fox & Yahoo! ?? (Remember NBC Sports will be going 24/7 in just a couple of days)

Sounds like more & more people are getting tired of all the hate being spewed forth on Right Wing Talk Radio (If not ALL of Political Talk Radio) IMO

Cheers & 73 ;D

 

[tvnut]

Fighting Irish is right. Big companies reserve domain names as a CYA move.

 

[FredLeonard]

Sounds like more & more people are getting tired of all the hate being spewed forth on Right Wing Talk Radio (If not ALL of Political Talk Radio) IMO

Cheers & 73 ;D

About 95 per cent of the audience never bought into the "hate being spewed" by talk radio. Typically, talk gets a five per cent audience share overall.

Sports talk doesn't do much better in drawing listeners, often not as well. But the listeners it does draw are younger males. Many advertisers covet them and sports talk is often the only format that can deliver them - certainly the only format on AM radio. So even with poor audience numbers, sports talk can make money.

Also, sports talk is acceptable to advertisers averse to controversy.

No market has room for all those sports talk networks. Plus larger markets have local-live sports talk which consistently out-perform turn-key network stations.

Most former progressive talk stations are now running sports talk. Often with smaller audiences.

 

[JeeperOne]

Most former progressive talk stations are now running sports talk. Often with smaller audiences.

Not in Denver. We still have Clear Channel owned KKZN 760 as a Progressive Talker. But while the station can be received well in Boulder (Which is VERY Progressive), it sounds crappy in the Denver Metro area

Now if KKZN were on FM (Even if it were on a signal like 92.5 or 102.3), it would likely get higher ratings & A BIGGER AUDIENCE

Waiting until Clear Channel decides to either merge KTCL & KBCO into one station (With KBCO 97.3 being the survivor) to make room for KKZN on 93.3 FM or sell it to Entercomm so they can put it on 99.5 & FINALLY kill the Classic Rock format they currently have on there. But I suppose that will likely be wishful thinking.....

Ohh well.....I can always wish.....

Cheers & 73 ;D

 

[davideduardo]

That, and Air America ended up on a slate of affiliates with, in most cases, greatly sub-par signals. Conservatives won't listen to conservative hosts on stations they can't receive; liberals won't listen to liberal hosts on stations *they* can't receive...

But take Miami (50 kw) LA (50 kw) and Portland (huge signal at 620... better than KEX). After an initial ratings surge, these stations leveled off way outside the buying rank levels.

LA's 50 kw station is still progressive, but with a 0.5.

It's something about the content, not the signals.

 

[FredLeonard]

But take Miami (50 kw) LA (50 kw) and Portland (huge signal at 620... better than KEX). After an initial ratings surge, these stations leveled off way outside the buying rank levels.

LA's 50 kw station is still progressive, but with a 0.5.

It's something about the content, not the signals.

Salem typically gets similar numbers. So do "we try harder" talk stations with also-ran conservative hosts. Conservatives like to say progressive talk's track record is about content. Maybe it's about blow torches doing some version of talk for decades can hold onto an audience. Stations starting from scratch with talk after flipping haven't got a chance (or in Salem's case haven't got a prayer).

 

[davideduardo]

About 95 per cent of the audience never bought into the "hate being spewed" by talk radio. Typically, talk gets a five per cent audience share overall.

But share is not the way to determine the reach of a format, since people listen to different things at different times and nearly nobody listens only to talk.

I looked at the unduplicated cume of the LA news/talk stations... from KFI to KFWB, KPCC and KRLA and all the rest. The cume reach was 18% of the market. One of every five people.

 

[benale]

Haven't we reached the saturation point with sports? Some markets have four sports talkers. How can they all be doing well. Miami, especially with WINZ? I'm sure their progressive format prior to sports had to be doing a little better,at least it gave us a little diversity.

I would welcome an all news network(like NIS..way ahead of it's time)or some kind of talk network. Enough sports!!

WFAN was probably one of the first all successful sports stations. Before that, I'm sure sports was just as popular then, but the only sports talk shows were heard at night on talk stations.

How did we ever survive?

 

[FightingIrish]

I would welcome an all news network(like NIS..way ahead of it's time)or some kind of talk network. Enough sports!!

I have often wondered the same thing. Why isn't there anyone doing a 24/7 news network? And I don't mean the old CNN Headline News feed. And not some marginal network that slaps an all-news tag on a partisan talk service. I'm talking about a national all-news network, maybe along the lines of BBC World Service, but perhaps with slots for local inserts.

CBS already has the infrastructure to do this. Clear Channel recently launched a news headline stream on their IHeart apps, customized with local traffic and weather. But with stations trying to get out of partisan talk, the sports talk market reaching its saturation point, and with all-news being rather lucrative, doesn't it make sense for some network to do this?

 

[FredLeonard]

I have often wondered the same thing. Why isn't there anyone doing a 24/7 news network? And I don't mean the old CNN Headline News feed. And not some marginal network that slaps an all-news tag on a partisan talk service. I'm talking about a national all-news network, maybe along the lines of BBC World Service, but perhaps with slots for local inserts.

CBS already has the infrastructure to do this. Clear Channel recently launched a news headline stream on their IHeart apps, customized with local traffic and weather. But with stations trying to get out of partisan talk, the sports talk market reaching its saturation point, and with all-news being rather lucrative, doesn't it make sense for some network to do this?

It's not for lack of trying...

NBC tried.
The AP tried.
CNN had an actual all news radio feed (in addition to HLN audio).
And now TRN has America's Radio News and I don't see the world beating a path to their door.

Sports gets younger demos and longer TSL. Short TSL kills a station in small markets.
And launching a new format, especially on AM, today is almost impossible (I'm being charitable with the "almost"),
The established major market all news stations that have been around 30, 40 and even coming up on 50 years can keep going like the Energizer Bunny. But not newbies and not outside major markets.

Meanwhile, NPR is adding a two hour midday news magazines to ones it has in morning and afternoon drive, so it's edging toward almost all news during weekdays, so they will be cutting into the potential news audience. In fact, outside of headlines and audio from TV news brands, NPR has a near monopoly on radio news.

 

[LKellerIII]

I have often wondered the same thing. Why isn't there anyone doing a 24/7 news network? being rather lucrative, doesn't it make sense for some network to do this?

It's not for lack of trying...

NBC tried.
The AP tried.
CNN had an actual all news radio feed (in addition to HLN audio).
And now TRN has America's Radio News and I don't see the world beating a path to their door.

Meanwhile, NPR is adding a two hour midday news magazines to ones it has in morning and afternoon drive, so it's edging toward almost all news during weekdays, so they will be cutting into the potential news audience. In fact, outside of headlines and audio from TV news brands, NPR has a near monopoly on radio news.

Yes - NPR does have a near monopoly - for a reason. The programming is excellent. I live in San Francisco, and we have a very good commercial news station -KCBS, but I rarely listen. We also have two local NPR stations with excellent programming - mostly from NPR, but with some good local programming, too. Now that Arbitron includes non-comms, one of them - KQED is usually near the top of the ratings.

After having listened to NPR for about 15 years now - I'm spoiled. There is no chance I will go back to the more superficial headline news formats ("22 minutes and we'll give you the world") chocked full of commercials. I undertand why the ad load is so high - news formats are expensive, and they need to sell a lot of advertising to make a decent profit. But that doesn't mean I'm obligated to listen.

Would I tune in to a national news network with that same commercial news format? Probably once or twice out of curiosity, but then I would go back to NPR.

IF NBC couldn't make it happen in the 80s - before the influence of NPR grew to its current level of popularity - what is the chance that a national news network would work now? Almost none, I think.

 

[JH_Radio]

and it seems that America's Radio News doesn't update there website as what i see is stuff from 2011 and mid 2012. at least as far as audio archives go, and even in the business collem.