Rumor Mill: WROC-AM Dumping Progressive Talk?

[dampier]

I kind of liked having the delay on WYSL myself. We could catch the pregame as we left the arena or catch the post game after a bite to eat.

At least you can hear the station. After sundown, the signal is entirely useless indoors and reminds me of trying to DX the tropical bands in the car. Thanks to WBZ's digital crud, the station is extraordinarily difficult at worst, unpleasantly hashy at best, to hear in Brighton.

Digital AM radio = the AM stereo scam all over again. It would be far better to try and simply simulcast an AM station on an FM IBOC sub-channel than completely destroy AM radio, at least at night.

 

[Savage]

Thank you, Phillip. If only people had HD Radios. If only people understood what HD Radio was. If only an HD sub were available to rebroadcast WYSL with a coverage radius larger than you typically push a shopping cart. If only WBZ would have a heart and stop destroying our nighttime coverage to serve the 14 digital AM listeners in Boston (not an estimate. WBZ researched this and discovered it by asking for an actual show of hands.)

 

[dampier]

I do respect the opinions of the various people posting on this board. For the most part, you can't say someone's opinion is wrong, because it's, well, an opinion and there's no right or wrong. But I do have to call out Philip Dampier on the above statement. It reads "They won't alienate either side of the aisle because to do so threatens their funding - and -grant money." That's just plain wrong! I dare say none of you with the exception of Mark Giardina, alw and Aaronread have ever been to NPR or sat down with its news management. I have. I was with NPR's Vice President of News Ellen Weiss last week. I will say this one last time. The issue of a corporate underwriter or foundation being offended by a particular story is NEVER a factor in NPR's coverage decision. If a particular funder is underwriting a specific series or program, that funder has no say over the editorial content. If you're going to argue otherwise, cite specifics. Don't make broad generalizations based on your perception as a listener.

We are discussing talk radio here, if you read my post in context with that discussion. I agree with you that there is an effective firewall in place with NPRs news programming. However, based on the contributions of programming from member stations like (WAMU being an example I raised), it's clear that firewall doesn't exist with ALL NPR and NPR member station's programming. I have always said I trust NPR's news coverage over that of all of the other domestic radio networks, with AP a close second, either because the commercial radio networks haven't the time or interest to go into anything beyond a few short sentences about a headline story before the commercial break, or because there is a detectable slant, or because the product is a throwaway.

I can also say, from personal and direct experience, that programming is often contemplated, produced, and distributed with the contemplation of, and direct underwriting by, corporate sponsorship or grant opportunities. I was involved in a project with our local public radio station that would not have even been contemplated, much less undertaken, without a clear path to grant money. No money, no project. So there are multiple angles in play here. Can a corporation or industry lobbying group seeking influence drive a public debate through underwriting a program or series intended to bring a topic to the public arena using public broadcasting in a way that may not be entirely transparent to viewers and listeners? I'd say yes. The oil and gas industry this year is waving big money around to get shows developed that tackle the issues of energy exploration, alternative fuels, and frankly helping to do some image damage control. I have no doubt we'll see some new science and technology programming that explore these issues underwritten by this industry within a year or so. They won't be naked propaganda efforts, but the question is, should the availability of industry money have an impact on the issues and projects a public radio or television network develops tailored to obtain said funding.

As a political junkie, I find it enlightening.

Actually with the predictability of the guests and their usual talking points, I can usually surmise the entire show and the respective positions of the guests just by looking to see who is on that day. There are few surprises there.

 

[dampier]

It's just another whine from the left because AA and DN and the various Jones offerings are stiffing in the marketplace.

I really think Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller, as well as Randi Rhodes, are doing just fine in a lot of markets. There is dreck from Salem that runs on radio stations with even lower ratings, but because the owners consider it a mission, it lives on and on. I always consider it amusing when conservatives whine that radio has to be profitable when arguing about the potential of libtalk, but ignore the endless pollution of K-Love, Family Radio, and the other dollar a holler dreck that pollutes the FM educational band (and Salem's 'commercial' side as well) which will run programs that wouldn't draw flies, but keep them there as some grand missionary outreach to the unwashed masses, both politically and spiritually.

Post libtalk WROC, I'd challenge you to consider a Stephanie Miller or Ed Schultz on WYSL in place of at least one of the dreary right wing talk leftovers WYSL is running that WHAM wouldn't touch. Is there really a clamoring for Laura Ingraham and Falafel Man in Rochester? Apparently not when it ran on WROC. It would actually be compelling to hear something beyond the same shows running the same talking points day after day.

Miller's show prominently mentions Rochester because of her history in western New York, and she has a contributor doing bits for her in Pittsford almost every day. There's more localism from her show than either Laura or Bill-O. And it's well done morning radio. For comedy/politics, you've got... Dennis Miller? Please. Schultz is not a far lefty (trust me, a lot of the far left thinks he's a right-winger in disguise), but he can appeal to a more conservative listener base. And while AAR has been chided for not understanding radio, you can't say the same thing about Jones.

The problem with the leftovers second conservative talk outlets in a market run is it's a whole lot of "me too" radio. They just rehash the talking points that listeners will hear on WHAM anyway. I am hard pressed to understand exactly why someone would be drawn from Rushbo on 1180 to hear Dennis Miller, whose career sunsetted years ago and now eeks out a meager existence doing appearances on Fox News. At least you didn't go with John Gibson, thank god. WYSL is trying to battle with programming that conservatives can always hear just fine on 1180. Why listen to you when they can, and do, listen to them?

From what I've heard CC just about gave a bunch of their AMs to AA to help launch left-talk. Result? AA goes banko in short order with their management under suspicion for unethical fiscal practices.

I hardly think the AAR portfolio of stations had anything to do with CC's bad business practices (sort of a guarantee when you are running a cookie cutter corporate hegemony of cruddy radio stations).

It's ironic for Mr. Press to make this statement, from the segment of the political spectrum whch wants to shut down conservative opinion on the radio via a revived "Fairness Doctrine." (Itself a name rich in irony, like the fascist regimes which always include descriptions like "peoples' democratic republic of free something or other state" to name their terroristic repressive governments.)

You are listening to your own station too much. You've fallen for a conservative talking point meme about the Fairness Doctrine. There is absolutely no political push on Capitol Hill to revive the FD. None. Democrats are being well paid by lobbyists in the telecom industry not to even consider it. Furthermore, liberals like myself don't think the FD issue would survive a court challenge, much less work in reality. Our aim is to start breaking up corporate control of the media in general and get some local ownership and localism back into the medium. The amazing thing about most liberals like myself is that we will freely defend the right of conservatives to spew all the nonsense they wish. It's called freedom of speech. And sooner or later, most them go too far and get in trouble for it without any help from us. I wouldn't dream of throwing Rush or Michael Savage off the airwaves. However, the airwaves, until such time as new technology allows anyone to start and operate a broadcast station without having them limited by the government, is a public resource. Stations are licensed in the public interest. I am not seeing the public interest of a corporation owning 12 stations in a market and running more than half of them as on-air jukeboxes with no local programming. It was never my idea to auction the airwaves to the highest bidder, allowing a giant corporation to then suggest they bought and paid for a frequency and can run all of the junk they want on it. I want stations to serve the communities they are licensed to, or surrender their license and let someone else try, or start turning off some transmitters and reducing the interference problem.

Your station is EXACTLY the way local radio stations should be run. A local owner, local programming developed by people actually here, and a demonstrated interest in serving our community (except for Dennis Miller - stop threatening us with him). I don't agree with your programming decisions when it comes to syndicated talk, but that's fine. The rest of what you do makes you far better than what passes for local radio on the FM dial (107.3, 102.3, and others who know who they are).

 

[Element9]

I scanned this board early this morning in of all places, an airport lounge. No time to respond. Now that things are a bit less frantic, I logged onto the board and find that Henry Kissinger and Warren Christopher are masquerading under the guise of "alw" and "Savage."

You boys play so nice that you get an "A" in comportment.

This morning, I would have flipped off Bill Press with a simple retort, "your show sucks and you're boring, that's why you're being cancelled." This is a guy who went to Niagara University (I believe he's a graduate of the esteemed institution) but has repeatedly called it the "University of Niagara." Good lord! Even Buffalo State grads know the difference between Buffalo State (Buff-State, bwahaha) and the University at Buffalo.

Randi Rhodes is a sharp cookie, but her harangue often reminds me of Lois, the mother on Family Guy ("Stu-weeeeee, sweetie, you've messed in your diapers again.") Big Ed Schultz is the real deal, but there are times when he sounds like Rush's evil liberal twin.

This smack down of Bill Press (and indirectly some of the sublimely boring, soporific progressive AA talk show hosts) having been stated, let me take a gentle poke at some of their conservative counterparts.

I'm always enthralled by the high moral ground taken by some of these gas bags. Rush, twice divorced, wacked out on doctor-shopped prescription pain killers... O'Reilly, nut job ex-info-tainment TV jockey spouting off about values and ethics, all the while attempting to seduce his associate show producer who's young enough to be his daughter; or a right wing morning talk show host from Pittsburgh who once held down night slots at some of America's leading top 40 stations, yelping at the time about having his pick of nubile sweet young things... now doing mornings, preaching about goodliness, godliness and righteousness. I guess we all find religion after we turn 45, eh.

Oh yes, it's rich stuff, left and right. What a bunch of smarmy hypocrites... all in the name of God and country. This is talk radio in America, where liberals attempt to lay claim to the American flag, which any thinking American knows is the property of the Republicans.

Spout on!

-9-

 

[Mark Giardina]

I scanned this board early this morning in of all places, an airport lounge. No time to respond. Now that things are a bit less frantic, I logged onto the board and find that Henry Kissinger and Warren Christopher are masquerading under the guise of "alw" and "Savage."

I meant to ask you Bob about that foreign accent of yours and your inquiries if I am taping our conversations.

 

[listener-in]

Here’s another 2 cents worth, which I hope that Mr. Savage will take on board.

The very idea that anyone is trying to “shut down conservative opinion on the radio”, however absurd, is promoted so heavily by the political right that it cannot go unchallenged. All we want is even a modest fraction of airtime for liberal/progressive (and, I might add, even moderate) opinion.

The claim that “both sides are reasonably represented by today's radio programming” is the very point at issue; as far as the Rochester market is concerned, one might stretch the point and agree (great disparities of signal and technical quality notwithstanding) as long as progressive talk remains on WROC. If it disappears, then progressive and moderate opinion goes down to zero, as is the case in many markets around the nation. To call that reasonable representation is to sound completely out of touch with the real world.

Had radio existed in Russia before the revolution and been tilted as far to the bolsheviks as talk radio here now tilts to the right, the communists on taking over would have had no need to put it under state control; they could have just encouraged their media allies to keep up the good work. In those markets where the playing field is reasonably level, progressive radio doesn’t have a hard time holding its own. Even if it were a good idea, there would be no point in wanting to “shut down conservative opinion on the radio”. The worst of it will drown in its own bile, and the rest, hard-hitting as it will undoubtedly remain, will survive perfectly well if it ditches the attitude that it must constantly insult half of its potential audience.

One must admire Limbaugh and Hannity for being astute enough to sign their recent mega-contracts, if not at the top of the, market, then at least well before it hits bottom. Limbaugh has talked about being able to command “confiscatory” advertising rates. Did his syndicator wonder where the money will come from when its ability to charge such rates goes south? (Did Detroit have a Plan B for a post-SUV market?)

And a hearty AMEN to Philip Dampier’s sentiments, except that stations are no longer "licensed in the public interest”. That’s ancient history; I understand that station license renewal is now nearly automatic, there being no avenue for the public to challenge renewal. The next administration and Congress should take a leaf out of that flaming liberal Teddy Roosevelt’s book and make it part of their early business to break up broadcast oligopolies. Licenses should be exposed to public objection after three years, and should lapse totally and automatically after six years; holders of expiring licenses would be able to compete for a new license on the same terms as any other applicants that met ownership concentration criteria. Or is that TOO much of a free market for those who claim to believe in competition?

 

[SirRoxalot]

Welcome to the Worm Can...

Perhaps the "progressives" and "moderates" (I guess the "L" word is verbotten) should invest in either stations, or companies that own stations. Either that, or they should support those stations that represent their point of view, and the advertisers who buy time on those stations. Heck, you can even find stations that will sell you brokered time if you can raise the money.

It's about economics, not politics.

As far as the licensing issue is concerned, I agree that the FCC is lax in enforcement matters. I also agree that there is too much media concentration under the current rules. I do not agree that owners who have followed the rules, and invested a lot of money in physical plant, promotional activities, and successfully built an audience should have to "compete" for their licenses.

I do think that there should be a mechanism to force station owners who lose money for a prescribed period of time to give up a station. Others should be allowed to bid on frequencies that are retained merely to prevent competition. The proceeds of the auction - minus a pre-set administrative fee - would go to the previous owner to compensate them for loss of assets.

 

[DToTheJ]

Actually the format is working well in Phoenix, Portland, Madison, and parts of coastal Florida around West Palm.

And I'll remind everyone that the format was in danger of being canned in Madison - ironically, also in favor of a sports format - but due to an emotional showing of strong support, Clear Channel flip-flopped and "92.1 The Mic" still stands.

Not sure if the same passion will be shown for a directional AM station...

 

[DToTheJ]

It's just another whine from the left because AA and DN and the various Jones offerings are stiffing in the marketplace.

I really think Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller, as well as Randi Rhodes, are doing just fine in a lot of markets.

Post libtalk WROC, I'd challenge you to consider a Stephanie Miller or Ed Schultz on WYSL in place of at least one of the dreary right wing talk leftovers WYSL is running that WHAM wouldn't touch... Miller's show prominently mentions Rochester because of her history in western New York, and she has a contributor doing bits for her in Pittsford almost every day. There's more localism from her show than either Laura or Bill-O. And it's well done morning radio. For comedy/politics, you've got... Dennis Miller? Please. Schultz is not a far lefty (trust me, a lot of the far left thinks he's a right-winger in disguise), but he can appeal to a more conservative listener base. And while AAR has been chided for not understanding radio, you can't say the same thing about Jones.

In all fairness, I think Miller's show is a breath of fresh air on regular talk radio, regardless of political lean. So come on, Bob, how 'bout it? Think about adding her show on your lineup this fall...

(And Phil, not to split hairs, but she mentions Buffalo more often than Rochester... but as far as the aforementioned contributor, that would be a travesty if the show Shane-O "works" for is yanked from his own market!)

 

[dampier]

(And Phil, not to split hairs, but she mentions Buffalo more often than Rochester... but as far as the aforementioned contributor, that would be a travesty if the show Shane-O "works" for is yanked from his own market!)

Yes, I realize she's from Lockport up the Transit, and mentions it frequently, and I've protested her attempt to integrate Genny Cream Ale and Wegmans into the mix of what she calls back home culture despite both being from Rochester. Buffalo gave us Tops, something people are hardly going to rave about.

Her show is amazingly receptive to listener input. I remember raising the always confounding issue of people around here asking "red or white" when putting hot dogs on the grill, and how that question mystifies people not either from western NY or the Chicago area (the two hotbeds of white hots). It became an aside on her show. Also nice is the fact she doesn't make the "amen corner" callers who simply agree and regurgitate whatever the show host has been talking about for the last hour, a major factor in her show. Callers can slow shows down to a dead stop. Miller's show is one of the tightest produced "talk shows" I've ever heard with what must be an incredible amount of behind the scenes work to put it together. You always know her show is one that can never be produced by someone who suggests "let's wing it today." Listeners can detect that too when a host comes up with some odd topic to spend time on (sometimes it's tailor made for one of those 'best-of' shows designed to not sound dated).

And, hour three is largely politics free and focuses on entertainment issues and other pop culture topics, which is nice from political rhetoric for three hours. And I like the fact she never takes herself too seriously and keeps people laughing on both sides of the aisle.

Ed Schultz used to irritate me until I spent some time in the mountain west and got to know some folks there. He makes much better sense to me when I realized he's talking to moderates, independents, and the flyover states which are more conservative than the coastal urban areas. He's not talking to the intellectual pointy heads. He's talking to the guy who goes fishing or hunting every chance they get who bought into the conservative movement back during the Reagan era and who are open to shopping around after the last eight years.

Shane-O can be seen around Pittsford with the Miller gear and is actually getting quite well known and... shudder... has been a de facto promoter of WROC, something the station itself can't be bothered to do themselves.

 

[Savage]

I'm running today, and want to respond - nicely, I promise - to the various comments posted here. No time right now because Phillip et al have covered a lot of ground. Best to all....catch y'all on the flip-flop....

 

[SirRoxalot]

There MUST be a loophole...

C'mon Bob. Tear up those contracts. Get Stephanie Miller on your station. The demand here is overwhelming! Or, at least whelming...

 

[Savage]

One Miller on WYSL is enough, thanks. More to come. Right now I've got to round up a young woodchuck out there in Tower enclosure #2 before he decides to nosh on the exposed end of the directional sample line. (That's life here in show biz.)

 

[DToTheJ]

Yes, I realize she's from Lockport up the Transit, and mentions it frequently, and I've protested her attempt to integrate Genny Cream Ale and Wegmans into the mix of what she calls back home culture despite both being from Rochester. Buffalo gave us Tops, something people are hardly going to rave about.

Don't forget O/V Splits! ;D

The show is indeed as fast-paced as it gets, without going over your head. Outside of interviews, they rarely spend more than four minutes on a single story or topic.

 

[OttoM]

Yes, I realize she's from Lockport up the Transit, and mentions it frequently, and I've protested her attempt to integrate Genny Cream Ale and Wegmans into the mix of what she calls back home culture despite both being from Rochester. Buffalo gave us Tops, something people are hardly going to rave about.

I guess I can see why Miller thinks Wegmans and Genny Cream are from Buffalo. She was part of the tail end of the baby boom generation, so Genny was around before she was born and she was a teenager when Wegmans first came to Buffalo.

As for people not raving about Tops - how can one not rave about them? After all - they stopped generations from having to talk to themselves because they were the supermarket that "has people"!

 

[Radknowski]

Doesn't anybody else find it amusing that Miller, even though she's "from Buffalo" and is said to frequently talk about Buffalo, doesn't draw any ratings, along with the other K-Big lib talkers. Fifty thousand watts of nothingness. The station's run on a shoestring, so what might even the most ardent progressive expect. Still, it is 50kw.

 

[Mark Giardina]

Doesn't anybody else find it amusing that Miller, even though she's "from Buffalo" and is said to frequently talk about Buffalo, doesn't draw any ratings, along with the other K-Big lib talkers. Fifty thousand watts of nothingness. The station's run on a shoestring, so what might even the most ardent progressive expect. Still, it is 50kw.

What's the old saying:"You have to spend a dollar to make a dollar?" Apparently the owners of WWKB are not interested in spending money to make the station successful.
It's a shame someone doesn't come in and buy that 50kw monster and really make something out of it. I know the old "KB" days are history, but what has happened to that KB over the past few years is a damn shame.

 

[Savage]

Bob1370, listen to Giardina. Why don't you put together a group and buy your old alma mater? I'll help you program it.

With oldies.

 

[Mark Giardina]

Bob1370, listen to Giardina. Why don't you put together a group and buy your old alma mater? I'll help you program it.
With oldies.

Heck I would love to put a group together to buy the Corning/Elmira stations