Radio and our Culture of Greed

[EbolaMonkey]

No, it does not. Ingram was never a national star, and, without taking anything away from what he achieved on WABC, there were "Ingrams" at most Top 40 stations, from New York and LA to Albuquerque and Miami.

Stern did not come from TV, nor did Delilah, Paul Harvey, Rush Limbaugh, Kraddick, Kasem, Art Bell, Piolín, Dr. Laura, Pistolero, etc., etc. and the regional syndicated shows previously mentioned are legion and successful.

My spelling was wrong. It's Ingraham, as in Laura Ingraham. And she had a nationally televised MNSBC show throughout the Lewinsky saga. Talk listeners would know her from there.

Since my point was that today's biggest national shows were grandfathered in from the 90's, I'm not sure why you thought Paul Harvey, Rush, Delilah, Kasem, Stern and Dr. Laura would help your case. That's a head scratcher.

My main point is that the radio industry hasn't been growing Rush and Stern type shows on its own. The new, post-Telecommunications Act of 1996 radio economy doesn't allow for it. Since 2001 or so, established local talents, or talents with potential, aren't grown; they are cost-cut and shown the exit.

More recent shows like Seacrest's, Dennis Miller's and O'Reilly's were helped tremendously by TV.

 

[davideduardo]

More recent shows like Seacrest's, Dennis Miller's and O'Reilly's were helped tremendously by TV.

Seacrest was on Star in Atlanta and then Star in LA long before he did anything significant on TV. Radio actually helped him get into TV in LA. Once he had achieved some standing on TV, he was further boosted by that paltform but the fact remains he was doing very well on radio in LA before the TV career popped.

There is plenty of talent, like Big Boy, who have come out of local markets and become successful in a network / syndication model.

Of course there are not hundreds of such talents... any more than there were talents to compete with Johnny Carson or Jay Leno with different late night shows. Because of the paucacity of big talent, the really good and almost good often get syndicated.

 

[TheBigA]

My main point is that the radio industry hasn't been growing Rush and Stern type shows on its own. The new, post-Telecommunications Act of 1996 radio economy doesn't allow for it. Since 2001 or so, established local talents, or talents with potential, aren't grown; they are cost-cut and shown the exit.

You chose to ignore my response to your point. Perhaps because it disproves your point. I'll repost it here to refresh your memory:

You may not be familiar with a lot of them. John Boy & Billy, Big D & Bubba. These are local station teams who have syndicated their shows to other stations in the last few years. You won't be hearing them in the Top 10 markets, but they're out there. I expect to see many more of them in the coming years, as more talent concentration takes place. And they won't be limited to syndication within ownership groups. In other words, I expect to see Citadel stations airing shows originated by CC stations, and similar combinations crossing company lines.

MY point is that established local talents ARE being syndicated to other markets, but not often in the Top 10, so you don't know them. In fact far more local talents have been syndicated in the last five years than in the previous 20 combined. By the way, Stern and Imus were only on about 40 or so stations apiece.

What I don't understand is why you think syndication of local talent is a good thing, given how much you seem to dislike large companies and how they operate.

 

[videokilledtheradiostar]

Seacrest is a no talent talking head pretty boy. Who is very saleable to lower demos who are morons to begin with.
Worked his way up probably by boning some top executive.

Not quite.

In LA, from the latest numbers today, in 18-49 his show is #1 in the market. And in 25-54 it is 4th, only a couple of tenths of a share away from the #1 station. Hardly "lower demos" and with an adult cume of 980,000 hardly limited to "morons."

People like him. A lot.

RS is way over exposed in the media.

 

[EbolaMonkey]

You may not be familiar with a lot of them. John Boy & Billy, Big D & Bubba. These are local station teams who have syndicated their shows to other stations in the last few years. You won't be hearing them in the Top 10 markets, but they're out there. I expect to see many more of them in the coming years, as more talent concentration takes place. And they won't be limited to syndication within ownership groups. In other words, I expect to see Citadel stations airing shows originated by CC stations, and similar combinations crossing company lines.

MY point is that established local talents ARE being syndicated to other markets, but not often in the Top 10, so you don't know them. In fact far more local talents have been syndicated in the last five years than in the previous 20 combined. By the way, Stern and Imus were only on about 40 or so stations apiece.

If they're not in the top 10, then they're not analogous to Stern, Harvey, Dr. Laura, etc.

What I don't understand is why you think syndication of local talent is a good thing, given how much you seem to dislike large companies and how they operate.

Stern, Harvey, and Rush represent the type of talent that could come into a market and compete against proven and successful local shows. Stern, Harvey and Rush were groomed in local radio and worked their way up. I don't begrudge them for that. There has always been a place for quality syndicated programming in radio. But the market was healthier when strong syndication offerings competed against strong local shows. That competition required that both sides of that equation continue to strive to be better.

Today's syndicated offerings like Ingraham and Dennis Miller operate in a different environment. They don't make so much as a dent in Top 10 markets. They're usually on unsuccessful AM stations that would rather barter for a show than pay someone local. And, in many cases, even heritage signals with successful track records are blowing out local talents and potting up syndication. And these syndicated offerings really shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Stern, Harvey, and Rush. They're not in the same universe.

 

[davideduardo]

RS is way over exposed in the media.

That's like saying Coca Cola is overexposed and they should cut back on their advertising.

 

[videokilledtheradiostar]

RS is way over exposed in the media.

That's like saying Coca Cola is overexposed and they should cut back on their advertising.

How about giving someone else a chance to host some shows. Like RS is some phenomenal talent. If couldn't read a teleprompter he'd be lost. : He can't ad-lib his way out of paper bag.

 

[softmachine]

That may be how it looks, but it doesn't happen by design.  And when a station changes format, it doesn't ask permission.  Quite often, talent is stolen from its competitor, and it's not a very pleasent affair

I think you're being naive here.  Sure there are small and insignificant chess matches going on at the local level.  But they don't amount to much from a corporate perspective.  And over time, there are fewer cases of talents being lured to other companies. 

The change in "luring away" talent from another station is mostly due to the issues of tortuous interference in our litigious society. Today, if Hertz (to make an example outside radio) even talks with an executive from, let's say, Enterprise, there are lawyer letters, threats of lawsuits, hints about injunctions, etc. 

Also consider that most premium radio talents established themselves before the Telecommunications Acts of 1992 and 1996.  In recent years, the economics of radio have not been conducive to creating mega shows like Stern's, Limbaugh's or Imus's.  Those shows were grandfathered in, so to speak.

Gee, I personally know of some impressive talents who were doing overnights or somesuch in 1992. And I'm trying to think of where Seacrest was in '92...

Stern did not come from TV, nor did Delilah, Paul Harvey, Rush Limbaugh, Kraddick, Kasem, Art Bell, Piolín, Dr. Laura, Pistolero, etc., etc. and the regional syndicated shows previously mentioned are legion and successful.

The farm team mechanism is almost non-existent at this point in time. And what 'talent' there is that comes out of the ashes is barely capable of cutting it on a national level.

Who are these talents you knew in '92? I'd love to know these names.

 

[davideduardo]

Who are these talents you knew in '92? I'd love to know these names.

Start with Eddie "Piolín" Sotelo with a 50-station network and millions in cume... he was my overnight guy in 1992 in the LA market.

Then there is Amalia González, on mid-days on one LA AM in ´92, now on a dozen stations in major markets (4 of the top 10, too). She's 4th 18-49 in LA even though on a Class A signal, and #1 overall in same demo in Dallas with a way-ahead 9.1 share.

And so on...

 

[davideduardo]

How about giving someone else a chance to host some shows. Like RS is some phenomenal talent. If couldn't read a teleprompter he'd be lost. : He can't ad-lib his way out of paper bag.

Why would anyone displace seacrest? He's #1 in the key demos in LA. And he improvises and ad libs quite nicely, just as he did on Star before he was found by TV. This sounds like envy to me.

 

[TheBigA]

If they're not in the top 10, then they're not analogous to Stern, Harvey, Dr. Laura, etc.

I expect some will be in the Top 10 very soon. Perhaps as soon as next month.

But isn't your other point that such syndication is bad for radio?

 

[softmachine]

Who are these talents you knew in '92? I'd love to know these names.

Start with Eddie "Piolín" Sotelo with a 50-station network and millions in cume... he was my overnight guy in 1992 in the LA market.

Then there is Amalia González, on mid-days on one LA AM in ´92, now on a dozen stations in major markets (4 of the top 10, too). She's 4th 18-49 in LA even though on a Class A signal, and #1 overall in same demo in Dallas with a way-ahead 9.1 share.

And so on...

But no one on a national platform?

Sorry, but these names don't ring a bell. Gimme something common as Coke.

 

[TheBigA]

Today's syndicated offerings like Ingraham and Dennis Miller operate in a different environment. They don't make so much as a dent in Top 10 markets.

Mainly because in the Top 10 markets, the focus is on local programming.

The only reason Stern was on in other Top 10s was because they were all owned by the same company.











[/quote]

 

[leethalweapon]

Who are these talents you knew in '92? I'd love to know these names.

Start with with a 50-station network and millions in cume... he was my overnight guy in 1992 in the LA market.

Then there is Amalia González, on mid-days on one LA AM in ´92, now on a dozen stations in major markets (4 of the top 10, too). She's 4th 18-49 in LA even though on a Class A signal, and #1 overall in same demo in Dallas with a way-ahead 9.1 share.

And so on...

But no one on a national platform?

Sorry, but these names don't ring a bell. Gimme something common as Coke.

Chances are the reason you don't know who these people are, is because you are not part of the audience they are chasing. Having said that, neither am I, but I have still heard of Eddie "Piolín" Sotelo, and I don't even live in the US.

 

[davideduardo]

Start with Eddie "Piolín" Sotelo with a 50-station network and millions in cume... he was my overnight guy in 1992 in the LA market.

But no one on a national platform?

Sorry, but these names don't ring a bell. Gimme something common as Coke.

Piolín is on in NY, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix, Atlanta, Miami, San Antonio, Austin, Las Vegas, Denver, Portland, Portland, Seattle, etc. How's that for a national platform?

 

[adma]

Piolín is on in NY, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix, Atlanta, Miami, San Antonio, Austin, Las Vegas, Denver, Portland, Portland, Seattle, etc. How's that for a national platform?

But again, you're addressing someone who is "not part of the audience they are chasing". The ugly reality is, a lot of those who're bemoaning the dearth of "current" radio talent are doing so from a predominantly white/non-hispanic perspective--presumably because their own formative radio culture was predominantly white/non-hispanic. So they're looking for "their own", and can't find it--while avoiding the issue of the larger cultural shifts at play...

 

[softmachine]

Piolín is on in NY, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, LA, San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix, Atlanta, Miami, San Antonio, Austin, Las Vegas, Denver, Portland, Portland, Seattle, etc. How's that for a national platform?

But again, you're addressing someone who is "not part of the audience they are chasing". The ugly reality is, a lot of those who're bemoaning the dearth of "current" radio talent are doing so from a predominantly white/non-hispanic perspective--presumably because their own formative radio culture was predominantly white/non-hispanic. So they're looking for "their own", and can't find it--while avoiding the issue of the larger cultural shifts at play...

Why don't we say 'Spanish Speaking'? I don't speak Spanish fluently. I don't intend to listen to 'the hispanic Howard Stern' or equivalent. So while this guy will be popular with a segment of the culture that is growing in size, I'm not at all certain that this broadcaster will 'cross over' into my sphere-if only because I listen to other devices, and not just radio.

But you do have to admit there is a lack of new English-speaking talent, and not because Spanish-speaking is growing. It would grow anyway. What has perhaps killed a lot of talent pools is consolidation. People will ply their talents in other media or not in media at all. I'm not sure what the talent pool is like with Spanish-language broadcasters.

 

[TheBigA]

But you do have to admit there is a lack of new English-speaking talent, and not because Spanish-speaking is growing. It would grow anyway. What has perhaps killed a lot of talent pools is consolidation. People will ply their talents in other media or not in media at all.

I think what hurt the talent pool in English-speaking media were other, better opportunities. Someone like a Seinfeld might have had a career in radio. Or the Saturday Night Live folks. Instead, they went into movies. Just as talented people like Bob Hope, Jack Benny, and others who left radio in the 1940s for TV and other media. Those who were left in radio weren't as talented as they think they are. I had a chance to listen to as many as 25 radio DJs do interviews with a celebrity. After hearing the same questions asked over and over, hearing a lot of inane ideas, bad jokes, and simply terrible questions thrown at these celebrities, I find it hard to blame radio companies who've been letting on-air types go.

 

[adma]

I think what hurt the talent pool in English-speaking media were other, better opportunities. Someone like a Seinfeld might have had a career in radio. Or the Saturday Night Live folks. Instead, they went into movies. Just as talented people like Bob Hope, Jack Benny, and others who left radio in the 1940s for TV and other media. Those who were left in radio weren't as talented as they think they are. I had a chance to listen to as many as 25 radio DJs do interviews with a celebrity. After hearing the same questions asked over and over, hearing a lot of inane ideas, bad jokes, and simply terrible questions thrown at these celebrities, I find it hard to blame radio companies who've been letting on-air types go.

And that, probably, says it all.

 

[EbolaMonkey]

If they're not in the top 10, then they're not analogous to Stern, Harvey, Dr. Laura, etc.

I expect some will be in the Top 10 very soon. Perhaps as soon as next month.

But isn't your other point that such syndication is bad for radio?

There you have it. You have no examples to make your point.

You're pointing to a future where your syndication stars-in-waiting MIGHT break into the Top 10 markets, and then they MIGHT go to a station that's not looking for cheap filler and thus MIGHT become the next Rush, Stern or Paul Harvey. Maybe in a galaxy far, far away.