REAL dangerous thinking: “Listeners tune-in to hear compelling hosts.”

[gr8oldies]

Catherine Jons used to do a mix of current events and relationship topics on WLS, and I really likemd the show. She also had a lot of male callers. Mike McConnell's "lighter topic" on the last hour of Friday's show, with topics such as "Flushes with Greatness", "worst pain you've ever been in", etc. is heavily driven by the callers' stories. However, hsn't a lot of the general interest talk that you found on talk radio maybe 15 years ago moved to FM music shows? The couple of efforts to create female oriented talk or talk/music hybrids (I'm thinking of one in New York) have bombed (maybe they weren't given enough time).

I do believe NPR is where the audience you might develop for "liberal talk" is. We had quite a controversy locally with the NPR station owned by Antioch University in Yellow Springs (Dayton) OH after they dropped a lot of their local programming (a bunch of DJs who had 10 very vocal listeners apiece) to become the area's NPR station, with Morning Edition and ATC (WYSO used to dump out of ATC for Pacifica at 4:30, sending the ATC audience to another NPR station). Pacifica fans had a cow, or a soybean or something. The "community" ran a couple of PDs out of town on a rail, however the University system was no longer able to subsidize the local programming no one listened to. They have more listeners and contributors being the major NPR station.

 

[smedge2006]

The couple of efforts to create female oriented talk or talk/music hybrids (I'm thinking of one in New York) have bombed (maybe they weren't given enough time).

The handling of "female talk" is perhaps the best example of the good-old-boyishness and pack-dog mentality of radio management.

Greenstone Media was shut out of all but a handful of small AM's in extremely small markets, and lo and behold, it really went belly up (not "bankrupt" as in Air America which is still very much with us today).

Of the other efforts at "female talk", one in Baltimore (programming a marginal AM with right-wing hosts who just happened to be women but who drew mostly men) was a joke. The only effort I'd consider serious is that of WFMP in Minneapolis -- one wonders about its future given recent cutbacks at Hubbard.

Love how corporate radio sets up formats to fail -- stick them on the worst AM in town, sell the station to preachers who immediately change the format, then declare said format a failure because it didn't draw double-digit shares.

 

[DaleGriffin]

The couple of efforts to create female oriented talk or talk/music hybrids (I'm thinking of one in New York) have bombed (maybe they weren't given enough time).

The handling of "female talk" is perhaps the best example of the good-old-boyishness and pack-dog mentality of radio management.

Greenstone Media was shut out of all but a handful of small AM's in extremely small markets, and lo and behold, it really went belly up (not "bankrupt" as in Air America which is still very much with us today).

Of the other efforts at "female talk", one in Baltimore (programming a marginal AM with right-wing hosts who just happened to be women but who drew mostly men) was a joke. The only effort I'd consider serious is that of WFMP in Minneapolis -- one wonders about its future given recent cutbacks at Hubbard.

Love how corporate radio sets up formats to fail -- stick them on the worst AM in town, sell the station to preachers who immediately change the format, then declare said format a failure because it didn't draw double-digit shares.

Really the corporate suits, who every other post on this site (except the talk board) declares are only after the bucks, are now intentionally failing.

I'm so confused.

 

[gr8oldies]

OK, let's think with a little logic. Music royalty fees are about to skyrocket to the point that they make take a station's entire profit. Why wouldn't the ee-vil, money hungry corporations want several viable non-music formats? Are some of you saying they are so ideologically driven that wouldn't even think of that?

 

[smedge2006]

OK, let's think with a little logic. Music royalty fees are about to skyrocket to the point that they make take a station's entire profit. Why wouldn't the ee-vil, money hungry corporations want several viable non-music formats? Are some of you saying they are so ideologically driven that wouldn't even think of that?

Ideology may not drive every programming decision blatantly, but it does lead to a lot of in-the-box thinking.

"Liberal talk! It failed miserably on that six-tower directional AM at 1540 that doesn't cover the center of the metro!"

"Talk for women! Everybody knows the only two successful forms of talk are A) sports, aimed at 30-year-old guys and B) conservative talk, aimed at their fathers."

After 12 years of consolidation and centralization, plus the economy, radio management is not only thinking in-the-box, it's pulling over the lid, duct-taping the flaps and assuming a fetal position...

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Re: Yo from Balto'

Boy, you are good at ducking a question, and repeating ad naseum the same re-tread talking points.

1.) HC's "Push" - You still can't face the fact that you are "push"ing the "caller-centered" focus on us - no different than how most talk show hosts do on their shows today.

You still haven't addressed my "Level #1" assertion above - that this thread wouldn't have started, and been continued on each day, without you - a well-known and unabashed industry opinion-leader - starting the thread and keeping it going with your "push"ing this train of thought.

Without HC's "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread.

HC is doing on here, exactly what he says, people don't want anymore. Yet he cites this thread somehow as an example that he is right - when is doing the exact opposite of what he proposes.

Therefore, HC this thread is an example that talk radio's current format works just fine. The entertainer or opinion-leader gives his/her opinion first, and then gets feedback from listeners.

2.) There's a difference between smart phones and talk radio.

Just because people are increasingly using smart phones - doesn't mean that the talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but I don't see a change in the talk radio format because of it.

3.) Lack of concrete examples of where this is already working.

WBEN

Any others?

As a statistics professor will tell you that just one example - is not a trend of anything.

HC,

I have yet to see your reply - to the 3 points listed in my last post (quoted above)?

Don't tell me I stumped a radio consultant.

Nor have we seen from you:

* A List of Current Examples - A listing of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" format is currently drawing higher ratings.

* My Reply - Anecdotal stories about one show on one day aren't nearly good enough - we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

And please don't duck (avoid) the question again by resorting to these lame excuses yet again:

1.) That I Don't Understand the "Caller-Centered" Concept - That I just don't get it, that I'm stuck in an outdated mindset of the current industry, etc.

* My Reply - Because I understand the concept extremely well. We just disagree that it is as effective as you contend that it is.

2.) That this thread is "Poster-Centered" - That this thread somehow (mistakenly) demonstrates your point.

* My Reply - As I noted in Point #1 of my quote above, this thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader. Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio.

3.) Smart Phones increasing usage

* My Reply - Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Your thoughts?

HC, I have yet to see your reply - to the 3 points listed in my last post (quoted above)?

I could swear I addressed this several pages back.
Search for the word "respectfully," which I recall using, because I was trying to respond as-specifically-as-I-was.
I'd go back and find the specific post, but Southwest is about to herd us on-board...

If you STILL feel (a) insufficiently-responded-to, and/or (b) that I'm "ducking" you, CALL ME: 401-330-6868. Best time: Saturday midday.

You have my advance permission to record and/or transcribe our conversation and post it here if you feel the need to bring-this-to-closure.

Why-this-is-worth one-on-one time: to avoid boring #2 and #3 below.

There seem to be three categories of responses-to-what-I-suggested on the first post pages ago:
1. responses like yours, which suggest I'm UNDER-explaining what-I'm-explaining;
2. responses which suggest I'm OVER-explaining, by repetition, what-I'm-explaining;
3. concurring observations, such as...

I have posted these questions to you 3 times now - and you have ducked my questions each time!

What are you afraid to answer my questions?

How many times are you going to duck my 3 direct questions to you?

Here's a short summary of my questions:

1.) List of Current Examples - A listing of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" format is currently drawing higher ratings. Anecdotal stories about one show on one day aren't nearly good enough - we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

2.) This thread is "Host Centered" and demonstrates that talk radio's current "host push" format IS working just fine. This thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader. Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio. You mistakenly consider this thread support for your hypothesis - when in fact - it supports the "host centered push" model that you are railing against, for without you an industry opinion-leader, this thread wouldn't have gone anywhere.

3.) Smart phones are a different medium, talk radio will capitalize on them, but it doesn't invalidate the current "host centered push" model - Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Again, don't resort to these lame excuse of saying that I don't understand the smart phones and the "caller-centered" concept - because I'm very connected to social networking and new media - so I understand the concept extremely well.

 

[Holland Cooke]

As Woody Allen said in the movie lobby scene in "Annie Hall..."

"What I wouldn't give for a large sock with horse manure in it..."
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpIYz8tfGjY)

I have posted these questions to you 3 times now - and you have ducked my questions each time!

I've bought real estate quicker than this.

Clearly, my repetitive efforts lo these many pages demonstrate my utter failure to sate you via written response.
Accordingly...

CALL ME: 401-330-6868. Best time: Saturday midday.

OFFER EXTENDED: For-the-sake-of EVERYONE here, call me ANY time.

You won't have to come-out-of-hiding.
You can call from a pay phone using a calling card, to avoid Caller ID on this end.
Wear Groucho glasses, speak through a handkerchief, in an eastern European accent.

And I reiterate my advance permission for you to record and/or transcribe our conversation, should you feel the need to then deconstruct it ad nauseam here.

we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

Who's "we?"

Others here have disagreed more agreeably.
Measured-in-inches, your responses are conspicuous (if anonymous).

And you sure do remain engaged, what Arbitron calls "Time Spent Listening."

 

[Dan Gaffney]

I just did this "caller vs. host" discussion as an actual on air topic on my show! I’m conducting high dollar radio research for free. Ha!. The segment is 17 1/2 minutes and features Holland Cooke prominently. (Hat to Holland for his "12 seconds of greatness" approach, actually used to generate high call volume in this clip)

Here is the link:

http://www.wgmd.com/images/stories/audio/holland121008.mp3


Dan Gaffney
http://thetalkradioreport.com

 

[Holland Cooke]

Now THAT'S "meta!"

Dan: You're a pistol!

You've actually got 'em talking-ABOUT-talking!

Applause for high call count, and offering listeners the feeling that they have some control over their media.

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Re: As Woody Allen said in the movie lobby scene in "Annie Hall..."

Boy, you are good at ducking a question, and repeating ad naseum the same re-tread talking points.

1.) HC's "Push" - You still can't face the fact that you are "push"ing the "caller-centered" focus on us - no different than how most talk show hosts do on their shows today.

You still haven't addressed my "Level #1" assertion above - that this thread wouldn't have started, and been continued on each day, without you - a well-known and unabashed industry opinion-leader - starting the thread and keeping it going with your "push"ing this train of thought.

Without HC's "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread.

HC is doing on here, exactly what he says, people don't want anymore. Yet he cites this thread somehow as an example that he is right - when is doing the exact opposite of what he proposes.

Therefore, HC this thread is an example that talk radio's current format works just fine. The entertainer or opinion-leader gives his/her opinion first, and then gets feedback from listeners.

2.) There's a difference between smart phones and talk radio.

Just because people are increasingly using smart phones - doesn't mean that the talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but I don't see a change in the talk radio format because of it.

3.) Lack of concrete examples of where this is already working.

WBEN

Any others?

As a statistics professor will tell you that just one example - is not a trend of anything.

HC,

I have yet to see your reply - to the 3 points listed in my last post (quoted above)?

Don't tell me I stumped a radio consultant.

Nor have we seen from you:

* A List of Current Examples - A listing of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" format is currently drawing higher ratings.

* My Reply - Anecdotal stories about one show on one day aren't nearly good enough - we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

And please don't duck (avoid) the question again by resorting to these lame excuses yet again:

1.) That I Don't Understand the "Caller-Centered" Concept - That I just don't get it, that I'm stuck in an outdated mindset of the current industry, etc.

* My Reply - Because I understand the concept extremely well. We just disagree that it is as effective as you contend that it is.

2.) That this thread is "Poster-Centered" - That this thread somehow (mistakenly) demonstrates your point.

* My Reply - As I noted in Point #1 of my quote above, this thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader. Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio.

3.) Smart Phones increasing usage

* My Reply - Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Your thoughts?

I have posted these questions to you 3 times now - and you have ducked my questions each time!

What are you afraid to answer my questions?

How many times are you going to duck my 3 direct questions to you?

Here's a short summary of my questions:

1.) List of Current Examples - A listing of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" format is currently drawing higher ratings. Anecdotal stories about one show on one day aren't nearly good enough - we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

2.) This thread is "Host Centered" and demonstrates that talk radio's current "host push" format IS working just fine. This thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader. Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio. You mistakenly consider this thread support for your hypothesis - when in fact - it supports the "host centered push" model that you are railing against, for without you an industry opinion-leader, this thread wouldn't have gone anywhere.

3.) Smart phones are a different medium, talk radio will capitalize on them, but it doesn't invalidate the current "host centered push" model - Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Again, don't resort to these lame excuse of saying that I don't understand the smart phones and the "caller-centered" concept - because I'm very connected to social networking and new media - so I understand the concept extremely well.

"What I wouldn't give for a large sock with horse manure in it..."
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpIYz8tfGjY)

I have posted these questions to you 3 times now - and you have ducked my questions each time!

I've bought real estate quicker than this.

Clearly, my repetitive efforts lo these many pages demonstrate my utter failure to sate you via written response.
Accordingly...

CALL ME: 401-330-6868. Best time: Saturday midday.

OFFER EXTENDED: For-the-sake-of EVERYONE here, call me ANY time.

You won't have to come-out-of-hiding.
You can call from a pay phone using a calling card, to avoid Caller ID on this end.
Wear Groucho glasses, speak through a handkerchief, in an eastern European accent.

And I reiterate my advance permission for you to record and/or transcribe our conversation, should you feel the need to then deconstruct it ad nauseam here.

we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

Who's "we?"

Others here have disagreed more agreeably.
Measured-in-inches, your responses are conspicuous (if anonymous).

And you sure do remain engaged, what Arbitron calls "Time Spent Listening."

Ducked my question now a 4th time!

Why are you so afraid to answer my 3 simple questions to you? What are you scared of?

This would be 100 times easier than a real estate deal - if you would just answer 3 simple questions that I posed to you now 4 times.

Your inability to write answers to 3 questions directly asked to you - is what is slowing down this process. If you want this process to go faster - THAN ANSWER THE 3 QUESTIONS POSED TO YOU!

If there is so much substance behind what you are saying on this thread - THAN ANSWER THESE 3 SIMPLE QUESTIONS I HAVE ASKED YOU NOW 4 TIMES! QUIT DUCKING THE QUESTIONS!

At least, a quality "host-push-centered" radio talk show host knows how to answer a tough question when posed one (assuming the questioner can get past the call screener).

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS! QUIT DUCKING!

 

[Holland Cooke]

As Joni Mitchell sang...

"If there's no good reception for me, then tune me out..."
(http://www.lyricsfreak.com/j/joni+mitchell/you+turn+me+on+im+a+radio_20075399.html)

That last tantrum came-close-to what-may-be a radio-info.com first: a full-page-length post!

And what we're witnessing here also demonstrates the value of call screening.
Imagine one repetitive whiner who had unfettered access to listeners' dwindling attention?

Ducked my question now a 4th time! What are you scared of?

I just checked.
'DO have dial tone.
So -- other than identifying yourself -- what are YOU scared of?

"What a sorry face you get to wear. I'm going to tell you again now if you're still listening there. If you're driving into town with a dark cloud above you, dial-in the number who's bound to love you..."

401-330-6868

"Call me at the station. The lines are open..."

And note-the-tote: MINUS your host, and one particular nuisance caller, "call count" on this thread now tops 1100 + 1 aircheck.

"You turn me on, I'm a radio."

But not JUST radio.
Even if you're too shy to speak, you may also flame-me-in-print, after my piece on this topic in the next issue of Talkers magazine.
If Letters-to-the-Editor there are half-as-lively as the conversation here, I'll owe Michael a barrel of ink.

HC
www.HollandCooke.com

 

[Holland Cooke]

Here, as it should be in Talk radio, CALLERS decide when the topic's done.

"I have no guests. It's really caller-driven."
Kim Komando, interviewed on affiliate WDAY

"When you hear folks on radio arguing opinions and positions, it is real people expressing their personal truths -- brilliant or misguided, cogent or inartiulate, informed or naive, whatever."
Dr. Laura, in R&R

When asked “How much of an impact on your life has ___ had?”
"Radio" (21%) is number 2 to "cell" phone (33%).
Research data from the recent Arbitron Consultant Fly-In conference

THANK YOU...EVERYONE (and I really mean that)...for weighing-in,
HC
www.HollandCooke.com

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Re: As Joni Mitchell sang...

Boy, you are good at ducking a question, and repeating ad naseum the same re-tread talking points.

1.) HC's "Push" - You still can't face the fact that you are "push"ing the "caller-centered" focus on us - no different than how most talk show hosts do on their shows today.

You still haven't addressed my "Level #1" assertion above - that this thread wouldn't have started, and been continued on each day, without you - a well-known and unabashed industry opinion-leader - starting the thread and keeping it going with your "push"ing this train of thought.

Without HC's "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread.

HC is doing on here, exactly what he says, people don't want anymore. Yet he cites this thread somehow as an example that he is right - when is doing the exact opposite of what he proposes.

Therefore, HC this thread is an example that talk radio's current format works just fine. The entertainer or opinion-leader gives his/her opinion first, and then gets feedback from listeners.

2.) There's a difference between smart phones and talk radio.

Just because people are increasingly using smart phones - doesn't mean that the talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but I don't see a change in the talk radio format because of it.

3.) Lack of concrete examples of where this is already working.

WBEN

Any others?

As a statistics professor will tell you that just one example - is not a trend of anything.

HC,

I have yet to see your reply - to the 3 points listed in my last post (quoted above)?

Don't tell me I stumped a radio consultant.

Nor have we seen from you:

* A List of Current Examples - A listing of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" format is currently drawing higher ratings.

* My Reply - Anecdotal stories about one show on one day aren't nearly good enough - we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

And please don't duck (avoid) the question again by resorting to these lame excuses yet again:

1.) That I Don't Understand the "Caller-Centered" Concept - That I just don't get it, that I'm stuck in an outdated mindset of the current industry, etc.

* My Reply - Because I understand the concept extremely well. We just disagree that it is as effective as you contend that it is.

2.) That this thread is "Poster-Centered" - That this thread somehow (mistakenly) demonstrates your point.

* My Reply - As I noted in Point #1 of my quote above, this thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader. Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio.

3.) Smart Phones increasing usage

* My Reply - Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Your thoughts?

I have posted these questions to you 3 times now - and you have ducked my questions each time!

What are you afraid to answer my questions?

How many times are you going to duck my 3 direct questions to you?

Here's a short summary of my questions:

1.) List of Current Examples - A listing of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" format is currently drawing higher ratings. Anecdotal stories about one show on one day aren't nearly good enough - we want to see a concrete list of current examples where this "caller-centered" model is working.

2.) This thread is "Host Centered" and demonstrates that talk radio's current "host push" format IS working just fine. This thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader. Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio. You mistakenly consider this thread support for your hypothesis - when in fact - it supports the "host centered push" model that you are railing against, for without you an industry opinion-leader, this thread wouldn't have gone anywhere.

3.) Smart phones are a different medium, talk radio will capitalize on them, but it doesn't invalidate the current "host centered push" model - Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones - but doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Again, don't resort to these lame excuse of saying that I don't understand the smart phones and the "caller-centered" concept - because I'm very connected to social networking and new media - so I understand the concept extremely well.

Ducked my question now a 4th time!

Why are you so afraid to answer my 3 simple questions to you? What are you scared of?

This would be 100 times easier than a real estate deal - if you would just answer 3 simple questions that I posed to you now 4 times.

Your inability to write answers to 3 questions directly asked to you - is what is slowing down this process. If you want this process to go faster - THAN ANSWER THE 3 QUESTIONS POSED TO YOU!

If there is so much substance behind what you are saying on this thread - THAN ANSWER THESE 3 SIMPLE QUESTIONS I HAVE ASKED YOU NOW 4 TIMES! QUIT DUCKING THE QUESTIONS!

At least, a quality "host-push-centered" radio talk show host knows how to answer a tough question when posed one (assuming the questioner can get past the call screener).

ANSWER THE QUESTIONS! QUIT DUCKING!

"If there's no good reception for me, then tune me out..."
(http://www.lyricsfreak.com/j/joni+mitchell/you+turn+me+on+im+a+radio_20075399.html)

That last tantrum came-close-to what-may-be a radio-info.com first: a full-page-length post!

And what we're witnessing here also demonstrates the value of call screening.
Imagine one repetitive whiner who had unfettered access to listeners' dwindling attention?

Ducked my question now a 4th time! What are you scared of?

I just checked.
'DO have dial tone.
So -- other than identifying yourself -- what are YOU scared of?

"What a sorry face you get to wear. I'm going to tell you again now if you're still listening there. If you're driving into town with a dark cloud above you, dial-in the number who's bound to love you..."

401-330-6868

"Call me at the station. The lines are open..."

And note-the-tote: MINUS your host, and one particular nuisance caller, "call count" on this thread now tops 1100 + 1 aircheck.

"You turn me on, I'm a radio."

But not JUST radio.
Even if you're too shy to speak, you may also flame-me-in-print, after my piece on this topic in the next issue of Talkers magazine.
If Letters-to-the-Editor there are half-as-lively as the conversation here, I'll owe Michael a barrel of ink.

HC
www.HollandCooke.com

Rather than pose my 3 simple questions to yet a 5th time - to watch you duck them yet again.

I think it is painfully obvious for everyone on here to see what is going on here.

You won't answer the 3 simple questions.

Because you can't answer the 3 simple questions.

Why can't you answer 3 simple questions?

Because you would have to admit - there is absolutely no evidence for your hypothesis:

1.) There is no list of current shows or stations that are successfully utilizing your "caller-centered" model of talk radio.

If such a list exists, I request for the 5th time - please provide a concrete list of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" model of talk radio is currently getting successful ratings.

2.) Smart phones are a different medium, talk radio will capitalize on them, but it doesn't invalidate the current "host centered push" model.

For example:

* DVR's are increasing in popularity too - does that mean the "host-push-centered" model of talk radio is wrong? Answer - No.

* Twitter is increasing in popularity too - does that mean the "host-push-centered" model of talk radio is wrong? Answer - No.

Smart talk radio hosts/shows have capitalized on: websites, podcasts, blogs, myspace, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones as well. But that doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc.

3.) This thread is "Host Centered" and demonstrates that talk radio's current "host push" format IS working just fine.

This thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader.

Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio.

You mistakenly consider this thread support for your hypothesis - when in fact - it supports the "host centered push" model that you are railing against, for without you an industry opinion-leader, this thread wouldn't have gone anywhere.

When you have actual evidence to back up your hypothesis...come back and talk to me...otherwise all you are doing is blowing "hot air."

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Re: Here, as it should be in Talk radio, CALLERS decide when the topic's done.

I find it unbelievably ironic that you contend that people don't take the time to listen to talk radio "hosts" anymore...

Yet you cite examples from two very successful talk radio "hosts."

Why didn't you cite examples from two very successful "callers?"

If the future of talk radio is "caller-centered" as you predict, then you should be able to find two very successful "callers" that you can cite as examples.

As I wrote on page 2 of this thread:

Listeners still tune in to hear what entertainers and opinion-leaders have to say on a topic.

I don't believe “Listeners tune-in to hear compelling callers.”

When it is called the "Callers to the Rush Limbaugh" show or the "Callers to the Sean Hannity/Dave Ramsey/Dr. Laura/Colin Cowherd/Jim Rome" show - then I'll believe HC.

"I have no guests. It's really caller-driven."
Kim Komando, interviewed on affiliate WDAY

This example is no support for your hypothesis.

Kim Komando does "advice" talk radio - she is an example of "host-centered" talk radio.

Both her callers and listeners want to hear what tech advice Komando is going to give, i.e. "host-push."

They aren't listening to hear what the other callers have to say.

They are listening to hear what Kim Komando has to say - which is the definition of "host-centered" talk radio.

"When you hear folks on radio arguing opinions and positions, it is real people expressing their personal truths -- brilliant or misguided, cogent or inartiulate, informed or naive, whatever."
Dr. Laura, in R&R

With all due respect to Mother Laura...

Dr. Laura is another example of "host-centered" advice talk radio.

Dr. Laura's callers and listeners tune in each day to hear what moral advice Dr. Laura is going to give - which is exactly what "host-centered" talk radio is.

Regarding Dr. Laura's quote:

Callers are real people? Answer - True.

Does that make good talk radio?

Answer - Callers may be "brilliant or misguided, cogent or inartiulate, informed or naive, whatever."

Which is why station managers don't give callers their own radio shows.

This is why the show is called "Kim Komando" or "Dr. Laura" - and not "Callers to Kim Komando/Dr. Laura."

 

[Holland Cooke]

Not only are callers here talking-to-each-other. They're talking to themselves!

Why didn't you cite examples from two very successful "callers?"

Some hosts, such as Dr. Laura, BEGAN as callers.

When you have actual evidence to back up your hypothesis...come back and talk to me...

Talk to me ANYTIME, at 401-330-6868.

And I won't even require that, TODAY, your call begins with "Happy Birthday, HC."

But don't say I didn't warn ya!
My "If today is your birthday" horoscope says:

Your birthday falls shortly after a Full Moon this year, suggesting a period of communication and teaching. You may be turned to for advice more frequently, and you are very willing to offer your help. This is a strong year for publicity and any other endeavors that involve spreading the word. As well, your ability to be objective--or to see the "big picture"--can be especially rewarding this year.

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Re: Not only are callers here talking-to-each-other. They're talking to themselves!

Some hosts, such as Dr. Laura, BEGAN as callers.

True, but she is the "exception which proves the rule."

Very few regular radio show callers have a Ph.D. (in Physiology) from an Ivy League school (Columbia University, 1974).

Beyond the exceptional Dr. Laura, I can only think of one other example, "Dan in D.C." who started as a caller on Jim Rome and went on to host a local DC sports show.

Two callers, one with a Ph.D. from an Ivy League school, is not a trend.

When you have actual evidence to back up your hypothesis...come back and talk to me...

Talk to me ANYTIME, at 401-330-6868.

Type ANYTIME what you would tell me in a phone call.

No one is stopping you from answering my 3 simple questions - except yourself.

Which is ironic, given that a few days ago - you had all the time in the world to type replies:

* You took the time to start the "caller-centered" thread.

* When some posters on here challenged your hypothesis - you took the time to write:
* "How they didn't get it and were stuck in the industry-mindset."
* "They didn't see the caller-centered future of talk radio."
* "That they didn't understand that callers don't want to listen to hosts-push anymore."
* "That because smart phones are increasing, the host-centered model of talk radio has changed."
* Etc, etc, etc.

* Yet when I and other posters ask for a concrete list of shows and stations where this is successfully producing ratings; & actually challenge the assumptions of your hypothesis.

* Suddenly, you can't seem to write a response on here anymore. Now if we want a response we have to call you - how utterly ridiculous is that.

* Next time you start a thread - if you plan to criticize other posters - at least have the stones to provide evidence to backup your hypothesis, and reply to the simple and direct questions posed from other posters.

And I won't even require that, TODAY, your call begins with "Happy Birthday, HC."

Happy Birthday HC!

Don't get me wrong, I do think highly of you, and (believe it or not) I have even recommended you to others (despite your mistaken belief in "caller-centered" talk radio).

 

[Holland Cooke]

"We now begin another broadcast day..."

If Talk radio simply remains business-as-usual, and, in, for instance, 6 months, or a year, everything...just...suddenly....gets better, I'll REALLY look like a dope, eh?

Meanwhile, as TSL erodes (WHILE cume actually grows slightly), firings continue.
At radio stations I mean, not The Apple Store.

Here's a whole 'nother thread: YOUR PREDICTIONS:
Which will happen first:
1. Some licensees will shut-off transmitters, as stations go-bust?
2. On-air outbursts by frustrated talent?
"One, eight hundred..."

there is absolutely no evidence for your hypothesis

Technically, that's an oxymoron.
Something hypothetical is inherently without-evidence in-the-status-quo.

Turning to the camera...
Thus the premise which began this thread, and apparently continues to elude SOMEONE here:

Type ANYTIME what you would tell me in a phone call.

Grab the arm rest.

Citing easily-observable societal trends, I am recommending a change in course from Talk radio business-as-usual.
Repeat: I am urging CHANGE from same-old-same-old, the "concrete list."
Change.

Admittedly, change will be threatening to anyone-SO-embracing-the-status-quo that he/she choses the nickname "bigtalkradiofan."
For all I know, I'm matching-wits-with a high school kid, here in anonymous-land.
(And because he/she is too shy to call, I'M ducking, right?)

Were I also as-prone-to the stimulus-response loop, I'd simply reply, in a thick New England accent, "4Q2."
Which, predictably, would trigger yet-another copy-and-paste-fest.

Instead, here's some leftover birthday party entertainment you can stare at.
"Joan dawlin,' do the rope trick:" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPcE1JbAN_4

And to all the FABULOUS babes who blew kisses on Facebook yesterday: right-back-atcha.

Aloha from Block Island,
HC

PS: Y'alls' words-O-wit-N-wisdom -- on ANY topic -- are also welcome when you click to "Comment" on any pertinent page, at www.AndYouCanQuoteMe.com

PPS: For comments you would like sent to the President-Elect, hit www.ListenToAmerica.com

 

[bigtalkradiofan]

Re: "We now begin another broadcast day..."

there is absolutely no evidence for your hypothesis

Technically, that's an oxymoron.
Something hypothetical is inherently without-evidence in-the-status-quo.

Absolutely wrong! Nothing I wrote was an oxymoron.

I wrote "hypothesis" (not "hypothetical" as you contend) - words have meaning, and those words have different meanings.

"Hypothesis" (the word I used) has a clear demonstrable relationship to evidence - hypotheses are constructed based upon evidence and tested via evidence:

http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm

Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.

The only (oxy-)moron here is someone who can't tell the difference between "hypothesis" and "hypothetical."

Turning to the camera...
Thus the premise which began this thread, and apparently continues to elude SOMEONE here:

Type ANYTIME what you would tell me in a phone call.

Grab the arm rest.

Citing easily-observable societal trends, I am recommending a change in course from Talk radio business-as-usual.
Repeat: I am urging CHANGE from same-old-same-old, the "concrete list."
Change.

Turning to the camera...apparently this continues to elude SOMEONE here...

Grab the arm rest.

Everyone on here completely gets the "easily-observable societal trends" & "change of course" advocated by HC.

But anyone can make an argument (i.e. hypothesis) recommending anything, the sky being purple, the seas being yellow, the ground being blue, etc.

Obviously, some arguments have merit, others don't.

How then do we separate the wheat from the chaff?

An argument gains credence when:
* The assumptions it is based upon stand up to scrutiny (i.e. peer review by those in the industry).
* There is evidence that backups/supports the argument.

Therefore, posters on here like myself do our due diligence - and begin to ask questions like:

* If HC's "caller-centered" hypothesis is true - why is he unable to provide any concrete examples of it occurring in the real world?

You would think if his hypothesis is as strong as he says it is - there would be concrete examples of it occurring somewhere.

* If HC's hypothesis that listeners won't take the time to listen to "host-centered" shows is true - why does the current industry data fail to show this, and rather instead demonstrate that listeners tune in to hear what entertainers/opinion-leaders have to say on a topic.

* If HC's hypothesis about the increasing use of smart phones leading to a change in the model of talk radio is true - why haven't we seen other "new media" (including radio on cell phones) leading to a change in the model of talk radio.

* HC cites this thread as evidence of support for his hypothesis - but in actuality it demonstrates the opposite is true - that the "host-centered-push" model of talk radio is working quite well. This thread wouldn't have started, and been continued on each day, without HC - a well-known and unabashed industry opinion-leader - starting the thread and keeping it going with his "push"ing this train of thought. Without HC's "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. HC is doing on here, exactly what he says, people don't want anymore.

* Etc, etc, etc.

Therefore, in order for your hypothesis to gain credence - you have to:
* Answer questions that challenge the assumptions of the hypothesis, and
* Provide evidence to support your hypothesis.

Someone on here has been asking you for just this sort of information since the beginning of Dec - feel free to start by answering these questions first:

Rather than pose my 3 simple questions to yet a 5th time - to watch you duck them yet again.

I think it is painfully obvious for everyone on here to see what is going on here.

You won't answer the 3 simple questions.

Because you can't answer the 3 simple questions.

Why can't you answer 3 simple questions?

Because you would have to admit - there is absolutely no evidence for your hypothesis:

1.) There is no list of current shows or stations that are successfully utilizing your "caller-centered" model of talk radio.

If such a list exists, I request for the 5th time - please provide a concrete list of shows and stations where this "caller-centered" model of talk radio is currently getting successful ratings.

2.) Smart phones are a different medium, talk radio will capitalize on them, but it doesn't invalidate the current "host centered push" model.

For example:

* DVR's are increasing in popularity too - does that mean the "host-push-centered" model of talk radio is wrong? Answer - No.

* Twitter is increasing in popularity too - does that mean the "host-push-centered" model of talk radio is wrong? Answer - No.

Smart talk radio hosts/shows have capitalized on: websites, podcasts, blogs, myspace, etc. Talk radio will learn to utilize and capitalize on the increasing use of smart phones as well. But that doesn't mean that the current talk radio format is wrong - it is a different medium.

Smart phones are a different medium. What works for TV, is different than what works for newspapers, which is different than what works for radio, which is different for what works for the internet, websites, blogs, etc.

3.) This thread is "Host Centered" and demonstrates that talk radio's current "host push" format IS working just fine.

This thread demonstrates the current "host-centered" and "host-push" format is working quite well; because it was started and continues to be stoked by you, a well-known industry opinion-leader.

Without your "push" of "caller-centered" talk radio - there's little to no debate in this thread. You are doing on here, exactly what you say, people don't want anymore in talk radio.

You mistakenly consider this thread support for your hypothesis - when in fact - it supports the "host centered push" model that you are railing against, for without you an industry opinion-leader, this thread wouldn't have gone anywhere.

When you have actual evidence to back up your hypothesis...come back and talk to me...otherwise all you are doing is blowing "hot air."

 

[Holland Cooke]

4Q2

http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm

Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but not proven to be true.

Chemistry, eh?
I suspected there'd been a mix-up at someone's pharmacy...

If Talk radio simply remains business-as-usual, and, in, for instance, 6 months, or a year, everything...just...suddenly....gets better, I'll REALLY look like a dope, eh?

"If you don’t like change, you’re going to like irrelevance even less."
General Eric Shinseki

 

[Holland Cooke]

Honest: I'm not TRYING to rope-a-dope.

1960s reference: Anyone remember "Pard?"

If I'm remembering this right, it was the biggest product launch flop in the history of dog food.
Despite consensus among humans that it should've been a hit.
The humans did focus groups, asking dog owners EVERYTHING.
Meal or meaty-stuff-in-a-can?
What SIZE can? Tall soup-can size, or short tuna-can size?
What color label?
What-breed-of-pooch on the label?
They tested EVERYTHING.
Then made a massive media buy, biggest in dog food marketing history.
You'd have to have been BLIND to miss the TV spots and newspaper coupons.
It was all you could do not-to-trip-over-it in supermarkets.
And, immediately upon launch, it flew off the shelves...once.
Then flopped.
Humans loved it.
Dogs didn't.

An argument gains credence when: The assumptions it is based upon stand up to scrutiny (i.e. peer review by those in the industry).

You're right about arguments, but that's not my goal here, and misses my point.
I'm talking about the business model.

What we-INSIDE-the-box find comfortable/familiar is inconsequential to the business model.
"Those-in-the-industry" are the only ones INELIGIBLE to be Arbitron diarykeepers or PPM panelists.

Which-is-not-to-say that self-amused broadcast content won't continue. Just don't be surprised by diminishing returns already measurable, WHILE time-pressed, tech-enabled, uber-consumers demonstrate, in-every-way-they-can, a preference to interact-with-each-other, rather-than sitting-still-while-WE-vent.

Happy with the status quo?
DON'T change.
Maybe we'll see YOUR name in the trades soon.