M
mwebster
Guest
From what I read, O'Reilly is the last person who should be talking about numbers - or stations dropping shows.
In a lot of markets, NO TALK STATIONS are in the top five. Even by Arbitron's more flexible defintion (Top seven in markets 1-10, top five in markets 11-50, and top three in markets outside the top 50), many markets - maybe most markets (I have not counted) - do not have top performing talk stations of any variety (conservative or progressive). In a lot of markets, the dominant stations are country or urban formats. Talk, at best, ends up in the middle of the pack.
>
> The bar for success keeps getting changed by conservative
> critics of the formula. Since the "nobody listens" argument
> failed, now anything less than a top 5 in the market rating
> is a "failure." A station dropping AAR means libtalk is a
> "failure" while three stations adding it is ... silence.
>
> That and libtalk is made up of America hater traitors... at
> least according to O'Reilly.
>
In a lot of markets, NO TALK STATIONS are in the top five. Even by Arbitron's more flexible defintion (Top seven in markets 1-10, top five in markets 11-50, and top three in markets outside the top 50), many markets - maybe most markets (I have not counted) - do not have top performing talk stations of any variety (conservative or progressive). In a lot of markets, the dominant stations are country or urban formats. Talk, at best, ends up in the middle of the pack.
>
> The bar for success keeps getting changed by conservative
> critics of the formula. Since the "nobody listens" argument
> failed, now anything less than a top 5 in the market rating
> is a "failure." A station dropping AAR means libtalk is a
> "failure" while three stations adding it is ... silence.
>
> That and libtalk is made up of America hater traitors... at
> least according to O'Reilly.
>