• 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

"News/Talk" is a misnomer. It's really "Political Talk".

R

Radio_Realist

Guest
Why does the radio industry insist on hiding behind euphemisms? Can anyone honestly say that any of the talk hosts in the so-called "news/talk" format actually talk about anything other than politics and/or political news? So why isn't the format accurately called "Political Talk"? Why hide behind a euphemism like "news/talk"?
 
Disagree. For example, WGN, Chcago is news/talk encompassing a thousand topics plus political stuff. I believe WLS, Chicago is much more "political", but I seldom listen there.

Anyway, the NEWS has been basically "political" for the last few weeks (election/Rumsfeld, etc.) so discussions about your diet or the latest Hollywood divorce were alot less relevant.
 
Radio_Realist said:
Why does the radio industry insist on hiding behind euphemisms? Can anyone honestly say that any of the talk hosts in the so-called "news/talk" format actually talk about anything other than politics and/or political news? So why isn't the format accurately called "Political Talk"? Why hide behind a euphemism like "news/talk"?

The format and the moniker go back to the beginnings of what generally is called "talk radio".

"Talk", whether political or about cars or about home maintenance, was the filler that kept stations from playing music (and paying ASCAP and BMI) when their real bread & butter, news, had gotten tired for the day. Lots of real news in the morning hours; talk about anything to stay on the air without music until about noon; more news; more filler talk; a heavy late afternoon-early evening news block. Then more filler talk at night. Best part of that stuff was the classic Long John Knebel and Gene Shepard stuff out of NYC.

The format was a combination of news and talk and the name stuck. Some stations still do it in that way though the "talk" part has become political and may well be more profitable than the news part.

You're fighting history!
 
I can't speak for all News-Talk stations, but ours doesn't talk politics all day long.

We do a 4 hour all news block in the morning (without "fluff" interviews with anybody who's promoting a
book)...We have a full news staff producing this show. We do live interviews weekly with a military spokesperson live from Baghdad. (In fact, one such interview happened just minutes after an insurgent attack!) We do special features on topics of local interest, too.

Our "news" programming continues top and bottom of the hour around the clock. Our newsroom is staffed essentially 24/7.

Our talk shows are considered the "entertainment" product of our station, much like a song is the entertainment product of a music station. And, we do three hours of "consumer" oriented talk in the early evening. Weekends are specialty "ask the experts" shows, many of which are locally produced and consumer talk is on most of the daytime hours on the weekend. We also air local college football and basketball.

Overnights is "Coast To Coast AM"...hardly a political show, to be sure. At least most nights.

I don't think "Political Talk" would be an appropriate name for our station, even though we do air Boortz, Rush, Hannity and Savage.
 
KevinFodor said:
I don't think "Political Talk" would be an appropriate name for our station, even though we do air Boortz, Rush, Hannity and Savage.

I agree. A more appropriate name would be "right wing political talk." You've gotta be kidding. Your station programs 12 hours per day of right wing talk and you don't think your station should be classified as a "poltical talk station?"
 
What "news" should hosts be talking about? Science news? Entertainment news? Business news? "News/talk" means they have news segments (unlike a "talk station" like FreeFM that runs spots from :00-:06 and :30-:34) and talks about the news as well.
 
I would say that News/Talk is actually more than one format.

Format A in Chicago would be WGN. This is a format that has talk shows surrounding extensive news coverage. At the biggest stations this means 24/7 local news, in medium markets this might mean 6am-mid local news, in a small it could mean 6a-6pm, or drive times only. Unless they're O-and-O's, and sometimes even if they are, they won't carry network news as the top of the hour. These stations most often carry Rush Limbaugh, or a local talk show. They generally won't carry O'Reilly. They'll generally be amongst the highest-rated in a market. (If they weren't, the station wouldn't pay for a news staff.) It's rare to have more than one such station to a market, but you might find it that in very large markets. They often carry sports, particularly and especially especially major league baseball if it is a factor in that market. Format A stations are likely to have lots of conservative talk, though some have none, but the vast majority have other kinds of talk shows as well... either libertarian, liberal, hot-talk or social issues shows, advice type shows, Coast-To-Coast AM. A lot of these staitons 20 years ago were full service AC or even Country stations that had music with lots of interruptions for good local news coverages, good disk jockeys, and lots of commercials.

Format B is a format with little or no local news. They might have local news in the morning, possibly even tons of it, but the rest of the day very little local news. These stations almost invariably carry network news at the top of the hour. In the biggest markets they might have local news updates quite a few hours a day, perhaps a minute or two at the end of a shortened network news. Or they might have brief local news updates produced by a local TV station. Or they might have no local news at all, even in the largest markets. These stations typically would get lower ratings than in format B, and there often would be several to a market, in some markets a whole bunch of them. WLS is could be described as format B, or perhaps because of its local elements it deserves to be classified as Format A. Sports radio stations really fit into this format, but in radio terms, they are already recognized as a separate format. Format B has some pretty clear variants.
B1- Mainstream right-dominated talk using whoever's available after the local Format A station gets what it wants. Often O'Reilly, but Limbaugh if he's available. Hannity if the local format A station doesn't have Hannity, Glen Beck maybe. Likely to have a modest local news presence running much of the day. Might have financial or social advice. Fairly rare to ave more than one station like this in a market. Often a local morning show.
B2- Hard right wing talk. Michael Savage, Liddy if he's still out there. The third-rated right wing talk station in a market, or the second rated if the local Format A station is really right wing. Rarely a local morning show. Rarely local news. Always national news on the hour.
B3- Socially oriented right wing talk. Think some Salem stations.. Bill Bennett, Medved. NAtional news on fhte hour. Could be from USA Network.
B4- Progressive talk. Little local presence outside morning drive or weekends. National news on the hour, from any mainstream network. (Is there still an Air America News. Does anyone carry it now?). Could be local news updates from a sister newsroom.
B5- Variety political talk-- could be O"'Reilly at Noon, then Ed Schultz, little local presence except morning drive. Natl news.
B6- Service talk-- Financial advice, psychological advice, computer advice. Rare for this to get it's own station, common to have a chunk of a station in a format described above, especially on weekends. Big emphasis on selling to targeted advertisers rather than onm overall ratrings. Might be brokering airtime. (IMHO, this kind of programming is what helps some Format A or Format B1 stations to reduce their ratings on weekends in exchange for some quick cash.) WOR in New York is what I call a Format A station, but it has big elements of this format. Probably natl news on the hour.
B7- Sports. As said above, industry recognizes this as separate format, as well it should, but clearly it fits the patttern described here, minus the top of the hour news. Probably a sports news update on the hour, maybe several times an hour.
 
A number of "Format A" WEREN'T music formats 20 years ago. And a number don't clear Rush, preferring local. As to the "B" formats, there's really no such thing as B2 or B3. They're the same as B1. Other than some totally schlock operation, most syndicated RW talkers have a local morning show, save the B5s owned by Salem or their look-alikes. These stations also often use Metro news (if the market's large enough), or many are owned by CC which pipes in some local news from some bigger city. I realize there are many stations with no local news, but it seems wherever I travel that I have to drive two hours out into some hick town to hear such a station.

B6 stations are religious stations... Dave Ramsey or Dr. Laura on a N/T doesn't make it a service talk format.
 
I here local and national hosts trying to go to life style talk...relationships..food...dogs...etc....after banging the drums for the Iraq war..it's popularity has wained with the public...so it is a sore subject
 
When a station uses one particular format for all of its core hours of the day, regardless of what that format is, does what they use to fill in the off-hours when hardly anyone is listening really matter? Does putting something a little different on for the graveyard shift, or weekends really change a station's core identity?

Does a station that play any music format lose the right to call themselves a classic rock station, for example, if they also carry football play-by-play on the weekends?

Aren't a lot of you really nitpicking when you bring up exception-to-the-rule programming in off-peak times that's really just dead-air filler as proof that a station isn't really a political talk station?
 
Realist, not sure I agree w your terminology; "off-hours when hardly anyone is listening."

I'd say "fewer people" or "different people." Hardly anyone is quit an generalization. Ask WGN (with nearly ALL "fresh programming") or WLW about "hardly anyone."

In this day and age, there are many people who work/drive/listen overnight. WGN has nearly the same number of ads in the 4am hour as they do in the 4pm hour. Neither of them is "political talk."
 
I'd say "fewer people" or "different people." Hardly anyone is quit an generalization.

They're just different ways of referring to a reduction in listenership.

In this day and age, there are many people who work/drive/listen overnight.

And "many" who don't. in terms of exact numbers, the drop in listeners for the graveyard shift can be significant. Of course, what few listeners are out in the wee hours of the morning are usually tuned to the few 50,000 watt AM blowtorches who are taking advantage of skip to cover really large areas.
 
what few listeners are out in the wee hours of the morning are usually tuned to the few 50,000 watt AM blowtorches who are taking advantage of skip to cover really large areas.

I bet lots of local 24 hour music fm's would disagree.

I live 150 miles from WGN (I'm stil in their grade A signal) and hardly EVER listen to any local stations, as THEY are on the bird all day and have the repeat broadcasts at night.
 
I bet lots of local 24 hour music fm's would disagree.

Fine, but we're talking about talk radio listeners. I'm sure that people who buy infomercial time on cable TV networks at 4:00 AM have their perspective on the matter, but that also doesn't have anything to do with talk radio.

I live 150 miles from WGN (I'm stil in their grade A signal) and hardly EVER listen to any local stations, as THEY are on the bird all day and have the repeat broadcasts at night.

So, a "universe of one" is proof of the habits of the vast majority of listeners?
 
YES! That's it. A universe of one IS the perception of the listener. They have chosen to identify with and use the service available.

We cannot imagine all the ways radio serves the millions of universes.

To choose the local outlet would require local relevance, as tj points out.

I doubt any unbiased surveys of radio use have ever been done, at least for many years.
Arbitron and others with commercial concerns disqualify themselves by having a different question to addess.

WGN is a good example of news/talk avoiding political confrontation. They are old school, and behave almost as if
they still respected the old fairness doctrine, and code of good broadcasting, which they used to air on WGN TV way back.
Anyone who lives in the midwest knows if they want to know what the heck is going on in Chicago, directly, they just tune in,
as have several generations. This kind of widespread longstanding service knows well enough to avoid the edges of the road,
where potholes and sharp dropoffs lurk. Satisfying brokers and farmers is a fine line to walk.

WLS-AM on the other hand, seems like a 50kw brokered station, with local drop ins at drive time.

This is Political talk, when we expect confrontation and strong opinion.
And they (WLS) rule, still for this huge market, and share many listeners with WGN.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom