Older Audiences & Advertiser Appeal (For All Markets)

[michael hagerty]

GE purchased RCA back in the day for the sheer purpose of eliminating an arch competitor. They fully intended to destroy RCA and they did. Generally the only thing that remains is the RCA trademark which is wholly owned by GE. It's licensed out to manufacturers of extremely cheap electronics.

Um...no.

The only area where GE and RCA were direct competitors at the time of the deal (1985) was in defense technology. And buying RCA gave them a bigger market share and allowed them to reduce costs.

The vast majority of RCA's business was in areas where GE wasn't---including broadcasting (NBC) and home electronics.

What did RCA's home electronics brand in was that two years later, GE saw limited growth opportunity and more of an upside in medical products. GE made a deal with the French company Thomson, getting their medical products division and $800 million in cash.

Thomson licensed the RCA trademarks from GE until 2003, when it bought them outright. Thomson changed its own corporate name to Technicolor in 2010 and last year (2022), it sold the trademark and licensing rights to RCA to Talisman Brands, a company that specializes in "brand extension".

 

[michael hagerty]

I still think it was a stupid decision if it was true. I didn't listen to KMPC enough to know whether they played her tunes or not. My "info" was based on an obscure article I read somewhere, so I don't know whether or not this really happened.

I'm just gonna leave that there so people can look at it.

 

[TomásEstefan]

Um...no.

The only area where GE and RCA were direct competitors at the time of the deal (1985) was in defense technology. And buying RCA gave them a bigger market share and allowed them to reduce costs.

The vast majority of RCA's business was in areas where GE wasn't---including broadcasting (NBC) and home electronics.

What did RCA's home electronics brand in was that two years later, GE saw limited growth opportunity and more of an upside in medical products. GE made a deal with the French company Thomson, getting their medical products division and $800 million in cash.

Thomson licensed the RCA trademarks from GE until 2003, when it bought them outright. Thomson changed its own corporate name to Technicolor in 2010 and last year (2022), it sold the trademark and licensing rights to RCA to Talisman Brands, a company that specializes in "brand extension".

Thanks for the clarification...

 

[Joey1986]

Rush L. was not polite to people, he was a blowhard, he told people not to use their own brains and common sense, because "I will do your thinking for you!" I was taught not to speak ill of the dead, but I must make an exception. Limbaugh was not a nice person. He attacked a young lady who was testifying at a govt hearing involving birth control and related issues at colleges. He called her a whore and a slut. He went on to say that if the govt gets involved in this issue and has to pay for it, then this young lady should have to make porn films to show the public that the tax payers are getting their moneys worth.

At the time this young lady was about my own daughter's age, and I realized that Limbaugh has just given permission for every middle aged male listener to call any twenty something female they disagree with the above mentioned insults.

He lost a few stations over it, and supposedly he apologized, but for me it just didn't fly. If my station had carried his show, and I was running it, his program would have been history...NO money is worth this!

You are 100% correct. Rush Limbaugh didn’t have a nice bone in his body.

His “apology” to the woman you’re referring to was not an apology at all. Clearly, Limbaugh didn’t seem to grasp the fact that point of an apology is to accept responsibility for doing or saying something wrong. Instead, he defended his hateful remarks toward her. That, right there, defeats the purpose of apologizing.

In my opinion, Limbaugh’s death means that a hateful voice has been forever silenced.

 

[boombox4]

GE purchased RCA back in the day for the sheer purpose of eliminating an arch competitor. They fully intended to destroy RCA and they did. Generally the only thing that remains is the RCA trademark which is wholly owned by GE. It's licensed out to manufacturers of extremely cheap electronics. (Much the same way that KLH, who made high quality electronics back in the 50's and 60's is now licensed out to cheap electronics products manufacturers.)

Sony, fortunately for traditions sake, owns and maintains the seperate RCA labeled music library. For decades CBS/Columbia and RCA were major music and recording competitors, now they're all the same company! Who could have imagined that?

Consolidation appears to be the great American way.

 

[michael hagerty]

Consolidation appears to be the great American way.

As a basic business philosophy, it pre-dates us (England in the 1600s, I believe), but yeah. It's Econ 101---a segment's growth slows and to maintain a given company's growth, it must increase market share. Easiest way to do that is to absorb a competitor.

Of course, taken to its logical end, you get a monopoly---and we needed anti-trust laws to stop that.

For a few decades after anti-trust, it was thought that ideally, it boils down to three competitors in a space, but Jack Welch got people to buy into this "if you're not in the top two, get out" mentality, and now we're in a place where the only reason there are two companies in a game is because the law tells us it can't only be one.

And the focus on growth is a result of the stock market behaving more like a casino the past few decades. What were once seen as "Blue Chip" stocks---established, profitable businesses---now have to find and exploit niches (17 flavors of Oreo---Coke and Pepsi being in "healthy" drinks) to drive growth and keep the stock from getting "boring".

 

[vchimpanzee]

Rush L. was not polite to people,

Most callers, and I'm referring to the ones who agreed with him, so I can't say for sure how he treated callers who disagreed.

 

[vchimpanzee]

You're absolutely correct! Back in the 80's when KMPC 710 here in SoCal was still playing MOR music (the station at the time was supposedly targeting 50 plus and older). Rumor has it that requests were made to play songs from Linda Ronstadt's three incredible Standards albums which were backed up by the great Nelson Riddle and His Orchestra. The station supposedly refused, saying that "their" listeners either didn't like Ronstadt or didn't even know who she was so they couldn't take a chance, because their station was, after all, "nostalgia". If this was true, a decision like that was sheer stupidity. Their audience would have loved her tunes.

Those three albums are, in fact, magnificent. It might help to have a great producer like George Massenburg, but those records are truly works of musical art.

I agree.

 

[vchimpanzee]

Because by the time that music boiled down to the Nostaglia/Adult Standards format of the 1980s, it was very specific, extremely well-researched and they were playing carefully chosen versions of those songs. In most cases, the biggest hit version. It essentially was, by that point, an oldies format with a fairly tight list.

That explains why serenade-radio.com and WLML don't have quite the appeal for me that they could.

WERT plays a lot of songs that were unfamiliar but they play them a lot, so I like them now.

 

[landtuna]

Aren't there already sites like Consumer Reports and other Consumer Electronics product review sites and apps available to help guide people through this very kind of thing?

As a once long time follower of CR I gave it up a decade ago for the simple reason that too many reviewed products, particularly electronics, had already been discontinued by publication time.

Also, in their auto reviews they frequently forgot why people buy certain cars. For example, they used to downgrade most every sports car due to difficulty of ingress and egress and a less than comfortable ride. HELLO! They are called 'sports' cars due mainly to engine power and precise handling therefore they are built low to the ground and with a stiffer suspension than normal passenger vehicles.

 

[Kelly A]

You are 100% correct. Rush Limbaugh didn’t have a nice bone in his body.

I don't agree. I had the chance to meet him in person several years ago. Whereas I don't/didn't care for his radio persona-shtick, in person he seemed quite pleasant.

His “apology” to the woman you’re referring to was not an apology at all. Clearly, Limbaugh didn’t seem to grasp the fact that point of an apology is to accept responsibility for doing or saying something wrong. Instead, he defended his hateful remarks toward her. That, right there, defeats the purpose of apologizing.

Very few celebrities of any ilk want to apologize publicly.

In my opinion, Limbaugh’s death means that a hateful voice has been forever silenced.

That hateful voice had a huge audience, and probably single handily saved AM radio. Although, one can argue whether it was worth the effort.

 

[CTListener]

As a once long time follower of CR I gave it up a decade ago for the simple reason that too many reviewed products, particularly electronics, had already been discontinued by publication time.

Also, in their auto reviews they frequently forgot why people buy certain cars. For example, they used to downgrade most every sports car due to difficulty of ingress and egress and a less than comfortable ride. HELLO! They are called 'sports' cars due mainly to engine power and precise handling therefore they are built low to the ground and with a stiffer suspension than normal passenger vehicles.

I recall reading a Motor Trend review of a Rolls-Royce that included a list of performance-related specifications. For "0-60 acceleration," no time was given, just the words "Not something you ask about a Rolls." I'd imagine Consumer Reports went ahead and printed however many seconds (perhaps minutes) it took that car to reach cruising speed, no matter how ridiculous it looked in comparison to other high-end cars.

 

[davideduardo]

I don't agree. I had the chance to meet him in person several years ago. Whereas I don't/didn't care for his radio persona-shtick, in person he seemed quite pleasant.

My own impression. I put him on our stations in Tallahassee and Lake City in around 1990 and I actually talked to him on the phone (while he was still independently syndicated) and he cut custom promos for us. He seemed to like talking to me, as we both had Top 40 experience in our background.

Very few celebrities of any ilk want to apologize publicly.

They know that any apology will be edited or mis-quoted. Better is to say nothing.

That hateful voice had a huge audience, and probably single handily saved AM radio. Although, one can argue whether it was worth the effort.

It certainly bought a lot of AM stations a couple of extra decades. Of course, "he" would not have "happened" were it not for the changes in equal time rules that happened in the 80's and allowed him to take the positions that he espoused.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

Most entertainers are extroverts, and they have enough social skills to be charming and charismatic to executives who have the power to platform and amplify the entertainers. So it doesn't matter what the executive hears when the air talent wants to flatter the executives into picking up their show or increasing their salaries. Of course the talent is going to "polish the knob" and cater to the media executive. It matters what the listener hears and the message going out to the audience.

Alex Jones of Infowars is said to be very charming and conversational off the air, right along with Limbaugh. David Duke is well-spoken, and of course, Donald Trump is beloved by broadcasters, because he tells charming stories about his life in the world of celebrities and interviews very easily. Joe Scarborough and Mika gave him countless hours of free airtime on MSNBC to advertise his agenda. Howard Stern allowed him 20 years to brag about his conquests with women. He's still seen as a great talk show guest because of all the amusing and degrading, dehumanizing stories he can tell about women. Stern's listeners think that stories about that are hilarious.

The listener on the other side of the audio speaker, whether it's a smart phone, or Alexa, or a car speaker, etc. only hears what the polemicist says on the air. Rush's insistence that Hillary Clinton killed Vince Foster, then had his body dragged to another location was believed. His insistence that Sandra Fluke was a "slut" because she spoke out for the rights of women to obtain contraceptives, was believed and supported. Rush's labeling of women as "femi-nazis" for asking for equal pay for equal work was believed and supported. Trump's insistence that Barack Obama was a Muslim, a Kenyan citizen, and not a natural-born American, was heavily believed through the power of broadcasting. Alex Jones' conspiracies that Hillary Clinton was involved with pedofiles at Comet Pizza in Wash. D.C., who murder children and drink their blood for adenochrome, is part of the very popular Q-Anon conspirators group. His belief in "white replacement" theory -- that people of color are here to destroy white people -- or that Nancy Pelosi or Hillary Clinton are "coming for your children", is widely believed.

Tucker Carlson is charming, wealthy, and comes from an educated family. He theories that the Covid pandemic was a hoax, vaccines and masks are ineffective, or that Jan. 6 was an "inside job", a conspiracy by Antifa working in conjunction with the F.B.I., is widely applauded and appreciated. Rupert Murdoch and Fox News are clearly raking in a fortune each month from Carlson's high ratings.

Even when it was shown that Fox air talent did not believe in the myth of a stolen election, they still went on the air to push the conspiracy theory. Even though they knew the truth, they could not bring themselves to broadcast it. Why not? Because it cost them in ratings to Newsmax and CNN.

When you put people on the air, when you make the decision to platform them, amplify them, and give them full control of the narrative, simply because "he's a pleasant, congenial chap who likes smooth bourbon" , or "just a real nice guy at the country club where we play golf", etc., it makes a difference. It makes a difference in our society, in our culture, in how divided we are, in how our society is torn apart, in how people of different racial backgrounds, or different genders, or different economic classes are pitted against each other, by polemics and hate mongers, who are supported by executives because "he's really a nice guy off the air." From the listener's standpoint, the listener doesn't hear the nice guy. All he hears is the conspiracy theory pushing, the ginning up of outrage, calls to insurrection, etc. -- D.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

From 2016 - Les Moonves, the CEO of CBS, expounding enthusiastically on how platforming demogogues brings huge ratings and profits: "It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS. .........Man, who would have expected the ride we’re all having right now? … The money’s rolling in and this is fun...... I’ve never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going."

He also said, "You cannot live without CBS." That's a little tone deaf to throw down that gauntlet to listeners.

What broadcasters say when they think they're indomitable:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/leslie-moonves-donald-trump-may-871464/#!​

 

[davideduardo]

Most entertainers are extroverts, and they have enough social skills to be charming and charismatic to executives who have the power to platform and amplify the entertainers. So it doesn't matter what the executive hears when the air talent wants to flatter the executives into picking up their show or increasing their salaries. Of course the talent is going to "polish the knob" and cater to the media executive. It matters what the listener hears and the message going out to the audience.

That's not exactly true. I can't tell you how many DJs and air talents I have worked with that dreaded personal appearances, remotes (remember them?), having to emcee shows and the like. On mike, they were personable. Even on the phone. But in public they can, sometimes, be timid, shy and actually afraid of crowds.

One example: I found the personality night jock I had for several years at KHJ in Los Angeles to be afraid of going on stage. At a major 3-day 8-hour-a-day long weekend event with non-stop bands and singers, all our talent had to do rotating emcee duties.

Being that the station was owned by one Lenard Liberman, and was akin to working for King John of England ( King John: the most evil monarch in Britain's history) I felt I had to be at the event, start to finish, all three days.

When the DJ in question was to go on stage, in front of well over 2,000 persons on a main street in Huntington Park, my promotion director said that she was making excuses not to do a contest drawing and present the next band. I talked to her and instantly saw she was afraid of going in front of the crowd... literally shaking from apprehension.

I told her I would go out into the crowd and stand in the front row and that she should only look at me (you can see from where this is going I've done it before, lots of times). Talk to me, like we are in an aircheck meeting... or, even, if I were asking her how her weekend had gone. Tell ME a story. Welcome me. Share something with me, like the weather. Tell me how good the next band was.

She did that, and even managed to smile when I made big grinning gestures on my face.

Next, I told her to find a child, preferably a girl, and talk to the little girl. Then her mom. Then an older, nice looking lady that she could spot. Talk only to each of those. Don't talk to men, I said. She then did several more breaks as I suggested. I told her then to move her eyes across the crowd, and only talk directly to ladies and girls dressed in one color. "Red?" she suggested. "That works" I responded.

By the end of the day she lost her fear of crowds, had learned how to take direction, and was enjoying a new experience. In later years, she went on to be one of the highest paid voiceover talents in LA, making a nice high-six-figure income.

I have lots of stories like that.

 

[Daryl Lynn L.A.]

That's a good story. And that is definitely the way to help people get over their stage fright. The talent probably remembered your advice for the remainder of her career and felt your advice was really helpful.

But the talent did not have any difficulty talking to you, the station management. My comparison is about air talent who are very personable to station management, then they go on the air and do their shtick where they turn into polemicists or shock jocks like Limbaugh, or frothing conspiracy theorists. The listener doesn't hear the "nice guy" aspect. All the listener hears is the rage (which is the entire intent of the shock jock - to stir the pot), so then the listener becomes enraged also.

 

[Oldbones]

The only area where GE and RCA were direct competitors at the time of the deal (1985) was in defense technology. And buying RCA gave them a bigger market share and allowed them to reduce costs.

The vast majority of RCA's business was in areas where GE wasn't---including broadcasting (NBC) and home electronics.

Partial credit here. While GE didn't own any broadcast properties in 1985, they did at the very least own WGY AM-FM in Schenectady N.Y. for decades. According to Broadcasting Yearbook they sold those properties in 1983.

 

[michael hagerty]

Partial credit here. While GE didn't own any broadcast properties in 1985, they did at the very least own WGY AM-FM in Schenectady N.Y. for decades. According to Broadcasting Yearbook they sold those properties in 1983.

Which they kept when they sold KGO and KOA to NBC in the 30s.

 

[JJSPC]

RCA started losing their way after General Sarnoff retired in 1970 and His Son invested a lot of money in the RCA mainframe computer business and Consumer Videodiscs which both ended up as failures.