Talkers releases Fall'05 audience list

[mr_arbitron]

> > While it's not perfect, it would be hard to believe that
> as
> > bad as Doyle is, he is on 200 stations which would create


san diego monday thru saturday live.. I was p-o'ed becuase he replaced alan colmes.. But I listen to Doyle for an hour every nite<P ID="signature">______________
We send you a $1 every other day. Please fill out your diaries.

Please help Err Amerika: http://larslarson.com/LinksNStuff/LarsSpoofs/Attachment_GetAttachment.aspx?id=1466&fd=0
</P>

 

[ajhenderson]

> san diego monday thru saturday live.. I was p-o'ed becuase
> he replaced alan colmes.. But I listen to Doyle for an hour
> every nite

You're right, and he is on in a growing number of markets. He's mostly paired with Michael Savage (except on Savage's top stations) because he is the latest show for TRN to shove on its Savage affiliates. Since Ingraham's taken in most markets, stations wanting Savage, or who already have him and are vacating spots (like Colmes on KFMB), have to take Doyle. He's on KFNX here in Phoenix, which is one of Savage's many low-rated AMs that had Doyle foisted upon them.

 

[morescrapple]

> You're right, and he is on in a growing number of markets.
> He's mostly paired with Michael Savage (except on Savage's
> top stations) because he is the latest show for TRN to shove
> on its Savage affiliates. Since Ingraham's taken in most
> markets, stations wanting Savage, or who already have him
> and are vacating spots (like Colmes on KFMB), have to take
> Doyle. He's on KFNX here in Phoenix, which is one of
> Savage's many low-rated AMs that had Doyle foisted upon
> them.
>
if TRN developed better programs, wouldn't need to force this on people

 

[kaufcom]

You are so right about Talkers Magazine. It is a "sleazy publication" that sucks up to Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the right wing talk radio choir. It is your classic "in house" trade publication, not an objective source. If you want to get a good idea just how bogus Talkers Magazine is as an objective source consider the methodology they claim to use for the "Talk Radio Research Project."

"These estimates, pertaining to characteristics of the talk radio audience across America, are excerpted from Talkers Magazine's in-house, 14 year, non-scientific study called the Talk Radio Research Project. It is drawn from interviews with listeners of general news-talk radio across the United States supplemented by input from talk radio programmers, hosts, sales personnel, and radio station in-house research in addition to occasional studies provided by academic institutions."

If this isn't a bunch of double talk, I don't know what is.


> > > talkers is advertorial crap. YOu believe Harrison?
> >
> > The magazine itself lends itself to bias, however the TRRP
>
> > is generated from cume listenership in affiliate markets
> > nationwide. There are hosts on there that have just showed
>
> > up that have been advertising for a long time.
> >
> This report has been and continues to be garbage. Just read
> the sourcing. It is a guestimate of some 12+ info, info that
> Harrison gets sent to him from some PDs in local markets,
> name recognition, etc.
>
> I have access to national Arb data and can tell you much of
> this is crap. Mike Gallagher? His cume is almost
> non-existant. Jerry Doyle? He's on weekends. Randi Rhodes on
> AAR has many more listeners then Stephanie Miller.
>
> I cannot believe people actually buy into this guys crap.
>
<P ID="signature">______________
http://talkingradio.blogspot.com/</P>

 

[Tom_]

Re: Talkers Magazine Ratings

> You are so right about Talkers Magazine. It is a "sleazy
> publication" that sucks up to Rush Limbaugh and the rest of
> the right wing talk radio choir.

That's a stretch. I try to be objective and in this case I don't understand the hard left bias of this board. Do the far left liberal Democrats on this board give Talkers *ANY* credit for naming Mike Malloy, Bernie Ward, Thom Hartmann, Randi Rhodes, and many other liberal Democratic hosts in recent years in their annual "HEAVY HUNDRED" lists? May I ask what evidence do you have to support that they are a "sleazy publication" with the rest of the right wing talk hosts?

>It is your classic "in
> house" trade publication, not an objective source.
> If you
> want to get a good idea just how bogus Talkers Magazine is
> as an objective source consider the methodology they claim
> to use for the "Talk Radio Research Project."

Talkers can't publish Arbitron ratings directly otherwise they would get in trouble. I give them credit for at least providing a list of ratings accessible to the public and those in radio w/o access to Arbitron data.

And FOUR LIBERAL DEMOCRAT HOSTS appeared for the FIRST TIME on the Spring '05 SURVEY OF LISTENERS (just released this fall): Franken, Schultz, Miller, and Alan Colmes. If they're linked with the right wing somehow, they could have made their cutoff at 2 million (these four Liberal Demcrats all got less than 2 million each).

 

[Nate Wesley]

Re: Major Progressive talkers show up for FIRST TIME

> >
> Add up the numbers for Colmes, Franken, Schulz, and Miller
> (5 million).
> Now add up the numbers conservatalkers get. It isn't even
> close. Talk
> radio is still dominated by the Right, because it's an
> alternative
> to the left-leaning media elsewhere...

Not often a very credible alternative, mind you, but an alternative, nonetheless.<P ID="signature">______________
"Not fixing [New Orleans'] levees before Katrina struck will now cost us untold billions. Not resolving the nation's issues of race and class has and will cost us so much more."
--Wynton Marsalis
</P>