First of the Philadelphia analogy is one of apples and oranges. Rush and Hannity are now on WPHT, which is essentially like going to KDKA here. I'm not sure that it isn't a good trade to go from a 38,000 Watt FM station to a 50,000 AM station that is nationally known and is the new conservative talker in town with a lineup that includes, among others, Dick Morris.
Second, I don't know what the ratings of the former WWIQ (the station that essentially served as Philadelphia's conservative talker) were, but ratings were not why the conservative shows left and the station changed format. The station was sold to a group that programs religious stations and was owned by Merlin Media.
According to this article: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/arti.../merlin-media-may-shed-assets-after-missteps#, Merlin Media was looking to sell some of their assets because of a failed news station in Chicago.
As for the studies you're quoting anonymously ("Studies show"- I feel like I'm posting with Arthur Dietrich), to believe them requires me to believe that Generation Y will be the first generation in the history of society to not grow more conservative as they grow older.
Is Generation Y any more or less liberal than the Baby Boomers of the 1960s? Yet they voted in Reagan once they hit 35.
To make the comparison of swing and big band music to conservative talk is simply not accurate- if anything I would state a comparison of modern rock becoming big band might be more accurate (something I absolutely hate to say).
And if the arguement you make is solely on numbers, one wonders how WAMO has been around for so long in a market that is eight percent black.
But just as not all of WAMO's listenership is black, not all of conservative talk's listenership is white male.
But even if it were, 72 percent of the US population was listed as white according to the 2010 Census. If there aren't going to be enough white males to keep conservative talk going- then what demographics have enough population to support ANY radio format?
Again, if Clear Channel decides to scrap 104.7, it will be a disaster.
Second, I don't know what the ratings of the former WWIQ (the station that essentially served as Philadelphia's conservative talker) were, but ratings were not why the conservative shows left and the station changed format. The station was sold to a group that programs religious stations and was owned by Merlin Media.
According to this article: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/arti.../merlin-media-may-shed-assets-after-missteps#, Merlin Media was looking to sell some of their assets because of a failed news station in Chicago.
As for the studies you're quoting anonymously ("Studies show"- I feel like I'm posting with Arthur Dietrich), to believe them requires me to believe that Generation Y will be the first generation in the history of society to not grow more conservative as they grow older.
Is Generation Y any more or less liberal than the Baby Boomers of the 1960s? Yet they voted in Reagan once they hit 35.
To make the comparison of swing and big band music to conservative talk is simply not accurate- if anything I would state a comparison of modern rock becoming big band might be more accurate (something I absolutely hate to say).
And if the arguement you make is solely on numbers, one wonders how WAMO has been around for so long in a market that is eight percent black.
But just as not all of WAMO's listenership is black, not all of conservative talk's listenership is white male.
But even if it were, 72 percent of the US population was listed as white according to the 2010 Census. If there aren't going to be enough white males to keep conservative talk going- then what demographics have enough population to support ANY radio format?
Again, if Clear Channel decides to scrap 104.7, it will be a disaster.