Newcomb out at 1480/Nova M

[Legend City]

If Farias had an ounce of respect, he would have stepped down.

Hell, even Goyette stepped down, and he is crazy as heck.

BTW, some video is posted of the news conference, lots of people interested in the "truth", that is, of course, until the only reporter there asks questions, then they kick him out.

At least they brought him back, but funny stuff nonetheless.

Hey Waugh, did we go to the moon?

LOL

 

[madlib]

*sigh* KMGX makes the claim that a promotions budget for 1480 would be pointless because people know that the station exists and simply choose not to listen. But he never offers any evidence and engages in some curious circular reasoning.

KMGX: Ratings for KPHX are bad because they have a bad product that no one wants to listen to.

madlib: How do you know this?

KMGX: Because they have poor ratings and no one listens to that station.

madlib: Couldn't it be that more people would listen if they knew the station existed? I meet people all the time who would listen to a liberal talk station if they knew such a thing existed.

KMGX: They know that the station exists, they just don't care.

madlib: How do you know this? Are you psychic?

KMGX: Because they have poor ratings and every station that has ever tried libtalk in this market has had bad ratings.

Time has already told us what the score is with 1480--it's a failure. A promotions budget won't really help, people know that 1480 exists, they just don't care.

I know this because, unlike some people, I am capable of reading the arbitrons—that by the way IS the “survey” I would trust on this matter. Everywhere they have tried “liberal talk” it has failed in this market—so why would it change now? There’s an old adage in gambling ‘never bet against a streak’, and that applies to Air-America-Nova-M-liberal-fanboy-radio-whatever-we’re-calling-ourselves-this-week-1480.

Has there ever been a liberal talk station in the Phoenix market that actually spent money to promote itself? If there has been one, I'm unaware of it. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

When I suggest that KMGX hates the whole idea of liberal talk radio, he replies:

Awfully presumptuous aren’t you? I don’t “hate” liberal talk. I have a great dislike for the hypocrisy behind Air America; the so called ‘liberal answer’ to the ‘conservative dominated media’ has proven to be just as polarizing and embittered than those they are opposing. Just like some of their conservative counterparts, Liberal talkers put style before content and come across as whiny, emotionally charged arguments where substance takes a back seat—in fact, I think Air America demonstrated that motif even more than any conservative programming—and yet they touted themselves as the intellectual retort to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Unfortunately, they couldn’t even sniff fractions of the ratings that smaller conservative talk hosts garner, nevermind Rush or Sean.

So… I dislike the hypocrisy of it all.

Yes, the hypocrisy. It's appalling! It's clear from the tone of KMGX's posts on this subject that he despise libtalk, which is fine. That's his perogative. But it's pretty hypocritical for him to deny this. Just sayin'.

This is a typical tactic; if you don’t like something or find it uninspiring someone always says, “oh, you obviously never even listened to it to know if it’s good or bad”, blah blah blah. I’ve listened to just about every talk show and every station that’s been in and out of this market for the last 20-25 years, and Miller’s show, while not quite as embittered as some of her liberal comrades is still sub-par when comparing it to other entities in this rather mediocre radio landscape of Phoenix.

I get it, you don't like the programming. I suspect that you would not like it unless KPHX became yet another right wing talk station. You're not part of the demographic KPHX is aiming at, but assuming the demographic doesn't exist is a mistake IMHO.

But at least we agree on one thing: the radio landscape of Phoenix is pretty pathetic these days. I miss the late great Earl Baldwin. I miss Bill Straus (come back, Bill!) and heck I even miss that David Liebowitz guy.

 

[j henry waugh]

Hey Waugh, did we go to the moon?

LOL

Again, the scrawling of ignorance… …while I don't buy into the whole "inside job" assertions, there are unanswered questions, and some very bright folks with far greater credentials (Physics PHDs, workers at the scene, engineers, etc.…) than a internet forum poster named "Legend City" or /K[A-Z]{3}/. Also, a good number of 9/11 victim families also believe that there are huge holes in the "official" story, and buy into "alternate" explanations and/or question facets of the plot…

…again, your choice to be an ostrich, but it's BATTY for you to assign labels to a subject matter you are dreadfully misinformed on… …I, OTOH, while not subscribing to the "Bush Family Evil Empire did it" conspiracy theory, have researched the matter and there are big holes in the government story. I've also read and listened to the Popular Mechanics guys and their justification of the official story set off bells when they say things like "well, we've seen some photos that you can't see…" and the Loose Change boys (though they're not credible sources IMV either, merely setting some spooky music to ponderances…) shredded them apart on Goyette's show. Later, democracynow.org (you can find the audio and transcript on democracynow.org) carried a debate with them and this time, Popular Mechanics sent a better debater, one that wouldn't mumble and stumble about at every non-softball question posed. Still, in that one, the PM guy held his own but didn't "blow apart" the Loose Change boys… …but Goyette and Goodman were the only 2 interviewers I heard that asked some critical, non-softball questions…

But, we've veered way OT here… …just to say there's more to a story than the spoon fed propaganda fed to the masses… …and I've seen this from media coverage of executive levels that I've been involved with…

 

[Legend City]

Wow, a lot of words that say nothing.

You say there is a lot more, but if there were, it would have been the lead story on the nightly news, years ago, not the domain of kooks, who, until 9/11 gave them something to do, were out postulating on who shot JFK.

If the 9/11 conspiracy theorists put as much time into legitmate education as they do chasing their tail and trying to prove the "evil gumbmint" did everything, they might actually lead a productive life.

 

[KMGX]

Madlib, it is you that's engaging in a circular argument. You: "Show me that liberal talk doesn't work", ME: "it has been tried on two frequencies and has failed to get higher than a 1.1 share" (by the way, some call that a success, I do not), YOU: "How do you know that it's a failure?" ME: "Look at the ratigns", YOU: "but but but but, they don't spend enough money to promote it" - this is not only circular but trying to justify failure.

You may recall when Newcomb first started his show on 1100 KFNX, he had multiple articles written about him in the NewTimes, Arizona Republic and East Valley Tribune--essentially free advertising because he was spending money to do his own show that was "different" than other radio shows--"progressive talk". When Air-America launched, it had countless television and newspaper articles about it's debut. Other stations were even discussing it's launch (hosts in this valley such as Barry Young, Bruce Jacobs, J Henry's beloved Charles Goyette and even the late Preston Westmoreland talked about it), again MORE FREE PROMOTION for Air-America.

Now, if you want to come at me with the notion that they could have had television advertisements and more billboards, etc, I might agree with that, but I don't think it would make a degree of difference significant enough for you to justify their failures on that aspect.

Yes, the hypocrisy. It's appalling! It's clear from the tone of KMGX's posts on this subject that he despise libtalk, which is fine. That's his perogative. But it's pretty hypocritical for him to deny this. Just sayin'.

"Tone" ? This is a TEXT BASED forum, what I say is what I mean, there are no "tones" or "inflections", unless of course I specify such; example , "(/sarcasm)", et al. Obviously there are times where sarcasm is so blatant that it should be obivous that's what I'm doing, but such was not the case in the aforementioned conversation. I don't "hate" liberal talk as in the very premise of what it stands for, I hate the execution, period. I don't necessarily agree with most liberal talk hosts, but I'm not exactly a shill for "right wing radio" as you put it either. I find the "liberal talk" hosts for the most part to be embittered folks that are even worse than their conservative counterparts because they're supposedly elevating the discourse and I have yet to hear that.

I get it, you don't like the programming. I suspect that you would not like it unless KPHX became yet another right wing talk station. You're not part of the demographic KPHX is aiming at, but assuming the demographic doesn't exist is a mistake IMHO.

Again, you use too many presuppositions in your discussion. You don't know who or what I am. I can tell you I'm in the target demographic of most talk stations in Phoenix. To say that I would only support KPHX if it were a "right wing" station is foolish. I'm not a big fan of Michael Savage, Joe Crummey or Rush Limbaugh (for various reasons on each). Your argument is extremely binary. I'm either a 1 or a 0, in favor of liberal or conservative talk, according to your argument--such is not the case. I'm a fan of GOOD RADIO, there are lots of shows I enjoy in Phoenix and a lot more that I don't and as a general rule it has little to do with politics. In a few cases it's glaring that politics drive me away, such as the argument Legend City is having about the holocaust denier kook-fest, but generally politics doesn't keep me away from a show. I am an admirer or Howard Stern, but much of his political posturing is outrageous, I enjoy Bruce Jacobs (and while I agree with him on a range of issues both sports and social/political), I find myself disagreeing with him some as well.

You are correct, we agree that the landscape of valley radio is fairly "blah". I suppose that's at least one building block we can agree upon. If Free-FM were gone, I think the landscape would improve a great deal, like getting rid of some ugly bougainvillea that's overgrown the entire side of your house.

 

[madlib]

Madlib, it is you that's engaging in a circular argument. You: "Show me that liberal talk doesn't work", ME: "it has been tried on two frequencies and has failed to get higher than a 1.1 share" (by the way, some call that a success, I do not), YOU: "How do you know that it's a failure?" ME: "Look at the ratigns", YOU: "but but but but, they don't spend enough money to promote it" - this is not only circular but trying to justify failure.

My argument that liberal talk has not be a success because of lack of promotion may or may not be mistaken, but it is not circular reasoning. This, on the other hand is a clear example of circular reasoning:

Station X has poor ratings because it has a poor quality product that people refuse to listen to.

How do you know that Station X has a poor quality product that people refuse to listen to?

Because it has poor ratings.

Why does it have poor ratings?

Because it has a poor quality product that people refuse to listen to.

How do you know Station X has a poor quality product that people refuse to listen to?

Because it has poor ratings.

See, the argument goes in a circle and the conclusion is presupposed by the premise. That's why it's called ... circular reasoning!

See also "begging the question":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_reasoning

You may recall when Newcomb first started his show on 1100 KFNX, he had multiple articles written about him in the NewTimes, Arizona Republic and East Valley Tribune--essentially free advertising because he was spending money to do his own show that was "different" than other radio shows--"progressive talk". When Air-America launched, it had countless television and newspaper articles about it's debut. Other stations were even discussing it's launch (hosts in this valley such as Barry Young, Bruce Jacobs, J Henry's beloved Charles Goyette and even the late Preston Westmoreland talked about it), again MORE FREE PROMOTION for Air-America.

Now, if you want to come at me with the notion that they could have had television advertisements and more billboards, etc, I might agree with that, but I don't think it would make a degree of difference significant enough for you to justify their failures on that aspect.

I still encounter people who used to listen to 1100 KFNX who don't realize that liberal talk radio still exists in the Phoenix area on a different station. I have to conclude that these people might know about the new station if some dollars were spent on promotion.

Yes, the hypocrisy. It's appalling! It's clear from the tone of KMGX's posts on this subject that he despise libtalk, which is fine. That's his perogative. But it's pretty hypocritical for him to deny this. Just sayin'.

"Tone" ? This is a TEXT BASED forum, what I say is what I mean, there are no "tones" or "inflections", unless of course I specify such; example , "(/sarcasm)", et al. Obviously there are times where sarcasm is so blatant that it should be obivous that's what I'm doing, but such was not the case in the aforementioned conversation.

Whaaaaaaaa? This is a TEXT BASED forum? No one told me!

Did you know that written communication can have a tone also? It can! Some schools even teach this in classes on business writing!

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/pw/p_tone.html

"Tone in writing refers to the writer’s attitude toward the reader and the subject of the message. The overall tone of a written message affects the reader just as one’s tone of voice affects the listener in everyday exchanges".

Tone can reflect an implied attitude toward the subject at hand. For example:

Liberal talkers put style before content and come across as whiny, emotionally charged arguments where substance takes a back seat—in fact, I think Air America demonstrated that motif even more than any conservative programming—and yet they touted themselves as the intellectual retort to Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Unfortunately, they couldn’t even sniff fractions of the ratings that smaller conservative talk hosts garner, nevermind Rush or Sean.

I'm sorry, but your contempt for liberal talk radio is showing.

I don't "hate" liberal talk as in the very premise of what it stands for, I hate the execution, period. I don't necessarily agree with most liberal talk hosts, but I'm not exactly a shill for "right wing radio" as you put it either. I find the "liberal talk" hosts for the most part to be embittered folks that are even worse than their conservative counterparts because they're supposedly elevating the discourse and I have yet to hear that.

Why do I presume that you are likely a shill for right wing radio? Because this is exactly the sort of rhetoric that I hear all the time from shills for right wing radio. "Whiny", "embittered", you forgot "shrill" and "unhinged". "Shrill" and "unhinged" are a couple of Michelle Malkin's favorites! "Moonbats" is a good one too!

I get it, you don't like the programming. I suspect that you would not like it unless KPHX became yet another right wing talk station. You're not part of the demographic KPHX is aiming at, but assuming the demographic doesn't exist is a mistake IMHO.

Again, you use too many presuppositions in your discussion. You don't know who or what I am. I can tell you I'm in the target demographic of most talk stations in Phoenix. To say that I would only support KPHX if it were a "right wing" station is foolish. I'm not a big fan of Michael Savage, Joe Crummey or Rush Limbaugh (for various reasons on each). Your argument is extremely binary. I'm either a 1 or a 0, in favor of liberal or conservative talk, according to your argument--such is not the case. I'm a fan of GOOD RADIO, there are lots of shows I enjoy in Phoenix and a lot more that I don't and as a general rule it has little to do with politics. ... I am an admirer or Howard Stern, but much of his political posturing is outrageous, I enjoy Bruce Jacobs (and while I agree with him on a range of issues both sports and social/political), I find myself disagreeing with him some as well. .

Bruce Jacobs! Bruce is the shallowist of the shallow. Talk about "emotionally charged arguments where substance takes a back seat"! Bruce is the epitome of what you criticize liberal talk radio for.

You're right, I don't know who you are. Are you Bruce? Wow! Talk about hypocrisy! You criticize liberal talkers for lack of substance and your idea of a great talk show host is Jacobs! Holy crap! I was almost willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't a right wing shill until you put forth Jacobs as someone you respect as a talk show host. I liked Jacobs when he did sports, but he's way out of his depth doing political talk radio. Bruce should go back to doing something he's good at. I can think of few who are less well informed and more dependent on imflammatory rhetoric than Jacobs. Jacobs is a parody of himself. Sheesh! Bruce Jacobs!

 

[ajhenderson]

Promotion is certainly important, but I rarely see a KFYI billboard, TV spot, etc. for them yet I listen much more than to KTAR, who I trip over billboards, transit ads, print ads, TV spots, etc. for. Not a perfect system, but endless exposure does not a station make. There are a couple wall-to-wall brokered stations with literally millions print and cable TV impressions a month... do you think those people listen? Or keep listening? Content is the key. Not that I'm passing judgment on 1480's content. Much better with Miller, albeit not as good w/o Schultz, who will be cleared elsewhere very soon.

 

[madlib]

Promotion is certainly important, but I rarely see a KFYI billboard, TV spot, etc. for them yet I listen much more than to KTAR, who I trip over billboards, transit ads, print ads, TV spots, etc. for. Not a perfect system, but endless exposure does not a station make. There are a couple wall-to-wall brokered stations with literally millions print and cable TV impressions a month... do you think those people listen? Or keep listening? Content is the key. Not that I'm passing judgment on 1480's content. Much better with Miller, albeit not as good w/o Schultz, who will be cleared elsewhere very soon.

I agree. Content is key, but especially for a relatively new station, lack of ANY promotion is commercial suicide. You need promotion to get people to listen in the first place, but you need the content to keep them listening. I do disagree about Big Eddie, I find him to be too much of a liberal Limbaugh clone. Big Eddie is not on KPHX because a lot of the listeners didn't like him, among other reasons (he also pissed off a lot of the management). It will be interesting to see where he pops up in the Phoenix market. I'm sure he will.

 

[KMGX]

Madlib, you represent an unfortunate sect of people on message boards; you read/quote a select portion and obfuscate the argument based upon what suits your argument, rather than reading and comprehend the ENTIRETY of what is written. Essentially, the 10 second sound-bite of message boards. There comes a point where it's almost like communicating with a brick wall, which is where I feel I'm at here, however one final attempt:

My argument that liberal talk has not be a success because of lack of promotion may or may not be mistaken, but it is not circular reasoning. This, on the other hand is a clear example of circular reasoning:

I take it back, you're not using circular reasoning, you're using the 'throw everything at the wall and see what sticks' reasoning. You (and those like you) will say, "liberal talk doesn't work because it's on a horrible signal', but KFNX wasn't a horrible signal and it failed, so then you'll say "but there isn't promotion", so then I'll counter with the fact that there was plenty of free promotion on TV, in newspapers on other radio stations in the local market and even a couple of billboards here and there. Following all of this, you will then say "well, you're using circular logic", okay, fine... in spite of the free promotion, the amount of time (4 years) and failed attempts in the market I suppose we'll just give it MORE time. A student fails the fifth grade 4 years in a row doing the same things over and over and yet it's not HIS fault, it must be the system... that's the reasoning you're using, again I must say--it's the content and the presentation that counts.

I still encounter people who used to listen to 1100 KFNX who don't realize that liberal talk radio still exists in the Phoenix area on a different station. I have to conclude that these people might know about the new station if some dollars were spent on promotion.

Two things here: 1) There has been promotion, plenty of it. 2) If listeners aren't savvy enough to adjust the dial to see what's on in the market, then that is a Hell of an indictment on the "target demographic" isn't it? Example: When the Edge was on 106.3 (and 100.3) and then Big City Radio sold the station and it flipped to spanish, do you think Edge listeners just turned off their radios or didn't look around to find their alternative rock? They searched around, went to KUPD, KDKB or what have you and then when the Edge resurfaced at 103.9, they came back and the numbers prove that. I think it's an excellent parallel because the Edge has a weak signal and (although not so much now) was a very niche format.

If a format is viable, listeners will seek it out wherever it may be in the market.

Whaaaaaaaa? This is a TEXT BASED forum? No one told me!

Did you know that written communication can have a tone also? It can! Some schools even teach this in classes on business writing!

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/pw/p_tone.html

"Tone in writing refers to the writer’s attitude toward the reader and the subject of the message. The overall tone of a written message affects the reader just as one’s tone of voice affects the listener in everyday exchanges".

Tone can reflect an implied attitude toward the subject at hand. For example:

"Tone" is a subjective criteria. Observe: "I really liked the movie Braveheart, it was a phenomenal piece of cinematography the likes of which we may never see again." What is the tone of that statement? Am I being sarcastic? Maybe, because I use such glowing terms repeatedly. Then again, I might be serious, you just don't know unless I say so. I said I don't "hate" liberal talk. I dislike the current presentation of it and the way it's being done now--even you conceded that the hypocrisy behind it is appalling. Whether you chose to believe me is your problem, however I think I have a lot better things to do with my life than lie about "liberal talk" and my views of it, especially on an industry message board.

I'm sorry, but your contempt for liberal talk radio is showing.

I don't care for Pepsi, but I like Coca-Cola -- my dislike for Pepsi doesn't mean I hate ALL Soda. I do not like Air-America's style, that doesn't mean I hate all liberal talkers or liberals, this is not a difficult concept to swallow but you seem to still be wrestling with it.

Why do I presume that you are likely a shill for right wing radio? Because this is exactly the sort of rhetoric that I hear all the time from shills for right wing radio. "Whiny", "embittered", you forgot "shrill" and "unhinged". "Shrill" and "unhinged" are a couple of Michelle Malkin's favorites! "Moonbats" is a good one too!

You say I am, I say I'm not -- again, which one of us actually knows? That would be ME. I am not a registered Republican OR Democrat as your binary argument suggests, therefore I don't 'shill' for either side. You may find this hard to believe, but there's more to life than a 1 or a 0--a Republican or Democrat, I know it's shocking and mind-bending, but yes there are other parties and belief systems out there. That's not to say that I cannot agree with a liberal or a conservative on issues, because I do... but I am something of an independent thinker.

Bruce Jacobs! Bruce is the shallowist of the shallow. Talk about "emotionally charged arguments where substance takes a back seat"! Bruce is the epitome of what you criticize liberal talk radio for.

It would be a real shame if you took the time to read what I wrote, particularly when I said I don't always agree with Bruce or his style (on politics, sports, etc), but as I've said many times before, Bruce brings an ineffable quality to talk radio that's missing on Snooze 92.3 and even other hosts on KFYI--that being passion, his arguments are emotionally charged, but it's not without any cause--he has research to back him up. He flies off the handle frequently, but I find it entertaining.

You're right, I don't know who you are. Are you Bruce? Wow! Talk about hypocrisy!

Heh. I don't think I've made nearly enough spelling and/or grammar errors to be Bruce.

I fail to see the hypocrisy when I stated that "it's about good radio, not politics" in my last several posts--which, again is rather obvious that you selective chose to read.

I was almost willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't a right wing shill until you put forth Jacobs as someone you respect as a talk show host.

So, I can only like someone whose politics I agree with? I may only admire those that I am in lockstep with? I pity you if that's how you really feel. What's not to admire about someone that is at the top (or close to the top) every ratings book, has earned a nice living not only doing news/talk but nationally syndicated on Fox Sports Radio and doing local sports talk on Xtra 910. I guess you didn't read the portion where I said I disagreed with his politics (sometimes), and I suppose you also failed to read or address the portion where I talked about my loathing for Rush and Michael Savage... but I guess I'm just a shill if I like anyone that's conservative even if I don't like many other conservatives. Perhaps you can rustle up a few bucks to buy yourself a clue.

 

[madlib]

I'll be hosting the first hour of the "Truth to Power Hour" tomorrow at 2pm on 1480 KPHX. This will likely be my last show. As always, I'll be talking about Arizona politics. Feel free to call in: (602) 258-8800 Even you conservatives are welcome to call!

It's been a blast doing this. I've always been a talk radio junkie and it was great to get a chance to try my hand at this. I've been doing a segment about AZ politics on Jeff Farias' show for a couple of months now, but with Jeff moving to weekday drivetime this must come to an end. Too bad, so sad.

Zelph Smith

 

[madlib]

The irony shines brightly. Calling me a shill when I'm not, and yet you're clearly a shill ! My God! No wonder you so vehemently defend them, you're hosting a show there! Fare-thee well credibility, I now see where you're coming from, hahaha, good night sir.

Damn! My cover of neutrality is blown!

Actually, I will only be hosting a show this one time (although I've done a segment on Jeff's show quite a few times) and, frankly, would defend KPHX whether or not I hosted a show there. You see, I actually like the idea of liberal talk radio. I want KPHX to succeed and I believe that it can. Am I objective? Probably not. I don't think I ever pretended to be. I don't think that the folks who insist that liberal talk radio is doomed to failure are being objective either (although they DO often pretend to be). Believe it or not, there are people who are none too pleased with the product that conservative talk radio has to offer. The market for conservative talk is oversaturated. I think there is a market niche for liberal talk radio done well, but you have to spend some money to promote it, which was my point.

Thank you for your support,

Zelph

 

[board_manager]

Several posts were relocated to the Take it Outside board

http://www.radio-info.com/smf/index.php/topic,65221.0.html

 

[callofthewild]

Is he out as an investor and host? Miller talks too fast and is hard to hear.

 

[ajhenderson]

Is he out as an investor and host?

Yes.

Miller talks too fast and is hard to hear.

She's the hottest commodity in libtalk, doing very well, and will (if she already hasn't) outpace Schultz, at least as far as the PT stations go.

 

[ajhenderson]

Apparently AzPlace.net loves the board, but isn't so much a fan of quoting sources.

"KPXQ AM 1480 morning host Mike Newcomb is out at 1480/Nova M to make room for the Stephanie Miller radio show.
Apparently the Drobnys wanted him in PMD to make room for Stephanie Miller, and he didn't go for it. KPHX listeners are complaining because of the time/effort/cash he/they put in the bring the station back."

KPXQ? "The Christian Station"? Hmmm...

 

[madlib]

I'm a big fan of Stephanie Miller. In an informal unscientific survey (of my friends), it seems like the guys like her better than the girls. Would love to see some real demographics.

 

[j henry waugh]

Apparently AzPlace.net loves the board, but isn't so much a fan of quoting sources.

"KPXQ AM 1480 morning host Mike Newcomb is out at 1480/Nova M to make room for the Stephanie Miller radio show.
Apparently the Drobnys wanted him in PMD to make room for Stephanie Miller, and he didn't go for it. KPHX listeners are complaining because of the time/effort/cash he/they put in the bring the station back."

KPXQ? "The Christian Station"? Hmmm...

The link worked so I supposed that makes it "sourced"…

 

[testing]

I'm a big fan of Stephanie Miller. In an informal unscientific survey (of my friends), it seems like the guys like her better than the girls. Would love to see some real demographics.

I'm a guy, and I'm not a big fan of her on-air style. what's with the cornball sound effects? She needs to relax a little... it's not standup, it's radio.

 

[j henry waugh]

I'm a big fan of Stephanie Miller. In an informal unscientific survey (of my friends), it seems like the guys like her better than the girls. Would love to see some real demographics.

I'm a guy, and I'm not a big fan of her on-air style. what's with the cornball sound effects? She needs to relax a little... it's not standup, it's radio.

She's a little too peppy for morning radio fare… …might be copasetic for FM, but annoying on AM. And those variety show bits are better done on TV, not radio… …who in Sam Hill is actually a listening fan of this?

 

[multiplex]

I thought Newcomb's style fit better in afternoons, and it would have been a good move for him to be in PM drive. I also feel it's a shame that he's out, since his efforts were instrumental in making the KPHX switch happen.
I hope all sides in this can find some common ground. As I see it, everyone's somewhat right.
Moving to PM drive may feel like a demotion to Newcomb, but may be a better programming move--something to consider when building an overall format.
On the other hand, KPHX has a strong lineup of mostly live programming, and I'm sure Newcomb deserves much of the credit for keeping that live emphasis and spurring the growth of KPHX.
By the way, Dr. A., I miss the Super X format, too, especially the few months of rock experimentation. Too bad you and I may have been the only listeners. I know I miss their demographic profile by a mile!