The real story of talkradio

[DaleGriffin]

In prime dayparts? None... In syndication, quite a few.

Most prime dayparts, on most stations, these days ARE syndication. And it's clear by listening that the quality of local advertisers is way down too, and plenty of stations are using the snake oil to fill inventory. []/quote]That's just not true... syndication in AM drive is very rare and syndication in PM drive outside Hannity is rare as well, neither of those have snake oil salesmen. I do hear the "snake oil" this and that on the syndicated shows in off hours (non M-F 6a-7p) quite often.

Clearly you don't understand this business... if the deals are profitable and we know they will be, they will cost NO one a job. How many stations have they each picked up since them? Zero. They are insanely profitable NOW and will continue to be.

Is it so hard a concept to understand? Revenue is not increasing in radio, fixed expenses are, thus there is a finite (and shrinking) pool of money available for personnel. If somebody gets a bigger piece, the rest of the pie has to get a lot smaller. It's zero-sum, not win-win.

The pie is shrinking, I did not deny that. What I said and what you did not respond to is that the talk radio format is profitable. Is it as local as we all want? No. Is it a money maker? Yes.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

Justareporter said: Here is the so-far unmentioned point. There was a time when talk show hosts migrated to the genre from news....yes....from being journalists. they brought with them their bias for fairness and a desire to see that more than one side got a fair airing.

Yes....those of us who are journalists got into the business to make a difference. I can only speak for the ones I know. Having said that we believed (and mostly still do) that our job is to report what we see and (when appropriate) provide perspective. Simply the facts without the benefit of perspective is almost always useless and often misleading.

If you report on a fire that is reporting the story. When you report this is the thrid fire at the same place in a week and each time you could smell gasoline...that is perspective.

Interestingly, good reporters often become good talk show hosts because they know how to tell a story, provide balance and perspective. That is unless all you want is a one note samba. Then call for Rush, Sean or any of their ilk.


Justareporter makes a good point.
In Market # 75 (Wilmington Delaware) a medium sized market (approx 580,000) one AM news/talker (WDEL) has gone to all live and local during it's dayparts. They offer a morning drive newsblock made up of local news/weather/sports/traffic/even some local commentary/ with CBS news/features/commentary. Then at 9am - noon live and local talk with a former reporter from the Wilmington News Journal papers, Al Messetti. Al admits to being a liberal, but as a former reporter, his approach to the discussions shows the reporters depth and willingness to have an honest discussion from both sides. I'd agree with Justareporter that reporters can make good talk show hosts as Al does know how to tell a story, and offers intelligent perspective and will give conservatives and Republicans credit when he thinks it's due (unlike the national right or left wings talkers who'd never say the opposition had a good idea or was anything less than being evil and the cause of the ruination of America). When Al is discussing national issues, he generally has an interesting show, but he definitely favors the liberal Democrats, but isn't an a mouthpiece for right or left wing like Limbaugh, Hannity, Bill Press, Rhodes, etc.

The afternoon local talk show 1pm-4pm is hosted by the PD (Rick Jensen) and he is as conservative as Al is liberal. Rick, I believe has worked in radio news prior to coming to WDEL, so he has a reporters experience as well. He, like Al will discuss both sides of the issue, but he definitely favors conservative Republicans.

The 12+ numbers show that WDEL's live and local format is doing just slightly better than the crosstown CC owned AM station (WILM) that airs Limbaugh/Hannity, but also does air a live and local liberal talker John Watson opposite of Al Messetti in the morning. Watson has been in radio for many years, even as PD, has worked as a reporter too. Watson is as opinionated as Messetti, but is less willing to hear from callers who disagree with his point of view, as he'll interrupt them a lot and not let them finish what they are saying, etc. I have no data available to me as to the real numbers as to whether Messetti or Watson pull in the bigger audience or how Jensen's numbers compare to Limbaugh/Hannity's.

Now that the election is done, it will be interesting to see if the live and local talk will gain a larger audience or if the gain will go to the syndicated satellite talkers across town, or stay as it is, or will both lose audience to Philly's NPR news/talker WHYY-FM which has a solid signal in Wilmington with a very good lineup of news/info/talk programming from NPR.

 

[justareporter]

Mike makes good points and while I have not heard most of the talent he refers to I will take him at his word. As for Dale...he is too busy making money today to plan on how is going to make money next year.

He probably doesn't know (or decides to forget) that while his license is a license to print money his primary responsibility to serve the public interest, convenience and necessity.

If it takes a local content rule or the fairness doctrine to make him do his job then so be it.

He will only have himself to blame for re-regulating the industry.

 

[gr8oldies]

You can have all the "fairness" or "local content" rules you want, but you can't keep anyone from turning your fairf, high-minded programming off. This isn't 1964 with only a few media options.

 

[Heater]

Most of the so-called liberals have gotten bored enough with talk radio to go listen to all news...or just pipe in music.

Me? If all I can find is Rush, Beck or the local flavor of themonth right wing conservative...I just turn it off.

That is what radio should be most concerned about for the near and distant term..."off."

I have been an AM-radio fan since I was was in grade school. Bruce Williams turned me on to radio. My interest continued with various talkers who offered valid discussion of the daily issues. Now talk radio is a Republican party propaganda echo chamber of what is the Drudge headline of the day. I subscribed to XM radio to listen to music and only listen to the straight news only station WTOP here in Washington DC. Talk radio is dead. It is just the same old hateful Republican propoganda day after day.

You really can not tell if the show is live for that day or not. It is the same thing every day of every week of every year.

 

[gr8oldies]

Why is it automatically assumed that smaller government and individual liberty+hate while a larger goverment and top-down solutions to every problem is "love"?

 

[justareporter]

Gr8 misses he pnt...or doesn't want to see it. You get a license to broadcast. It isn't high minded...it is reality. Stations have a license to perform certain functions and if they fail then they should lose the license.

And it will be their OWN fault.

 

[Don62]

N/T sticks have a ton of inventory to sell and it makes the stations profitable.

Judging how much of that ton of inventory -- in prime dayparts -- goes to PI's, quack remedies and gold hawkers, not so much.

In prime dayparts? None... In syndication, quite a few.

Many news-talkers, especially in markets below 30 or so, are nothing but computers in a closet, running syndication all the time and double audio half the time. Something tells me that's not a profit magnet.

Does that happen yes, is it most of the time? No and you know that. Stop being dishonest.

I think those Rush and Hannity deals are going to be problems in the future -- both hosts' audiences appear to be aging and I see no sign that they're bringing in younger demos. Hannity had to bring in two companies and threaten to bail out to get his deal done. I wonder how much damage he did to Citadel -- and how many jobs he might have cost in the process of getting that deal.

Clearly you don't understand this business... if the deals are profitable and we know they will be, they will cost NO one a job. How many stations have they each picked up since them? Zero. They are insanely profitable NOW and will continue to be.

This isn't true.
Hannity and possibly another big conservative host just laid off some of his producers.

Mike Gallagher the other day, in arguing against the big bailouts, said, "My industry, broadcasting, is hurting. Sean Hannity, whom I respect, just laid off some producers. Should my industry get a bailout?

 

[justareporter]

In answer to the larger question of Sean firing producers...why not just fire Sean?

Not a good idea? How about a pay cut?

I love these fellows who claim to represent "Joe bag-o-donuts" while they pull down multi-million dollar salaries and their syndi-deals displace other broadcasters.

Call them what they are, "the death of broadcasting."

But I don't have opinions.

 

[KFodor]

Gr8 misses he pnt...or doesn't want to see it. You get a license to broadcast. It isn't high minded...it is reality. Stations have a license to perform certain functions and if they fail then they should lose the license.

And it will be their OWN fault.

No...I'm afraid it's you that doesn't get it.

Radio is a business. Yes, the federal government gives us the license and, in return, we must follow its' policies and practices. But that having been said...

Radio is a "for profit" business. You put programming on the air to make a buck. No argument, if they want, the government can regulate a Fairness Doctrine back into business. My question: will they give broadcasters a subsidy to replace the revenue lost by the lower ratings a station will get if it is forced to put "not-as-popular", but, in the minds of the democrats in congress, more "fair" programming on to "balance" the views of Rush, Sean, etc?

And, since the FCC is also interested in regulating the internet, should it not pass a "Fairness Doctrine" to balance the lefty bloggers who literally try and "take over" sites like Digg, Yahoo News, etc. voting up ridiculous stories like "Sarah Palin's Alien Love Child"?

 

[SeanMGilbow]

Radio is a "for profit" business. You put programming on the air to make a buck.

But at what cost, Jason?

Let's use WHIO-AM as an example. Aside from the morning news, and a few minutes of news each hour thereafter, there is nothing amidst the babble of Rush, Sean, Savage, etc., that gives any indication that WHIO is a Dayton station other than commercials.

If what is happening in Columbus is an indicator, WHIO is about to take a serious hit from loss of ad sales from local car dealerships, perhaps the biggest advertiser on the radio (at least it has been in newspapers and on TV). Six dealerships in Columbus have closed this year so far.

Dayton is taking a huge hit with the job losses at GM's Moraine plant. It was recently ranked by Forbes as one of the nation's top ten dying cities.

Cox Radio's stock closed at $5.87 today after announcement of its consolidation plans. The stock price is less than half its 52-week high.

And WHIO airs nationally syndicated hosts with a reputation for being anti-union--not necessarily the way to cheer on the auto industry. If it hasn't happened already, the dealerships will pull their advertising from any program that chastises the manufacturing of the products they are trying to sell.

If the automakers don't achieve a turnaround (with or without help from Congress), the layoffs we've seen in the radio industry will be nothing compared to the bloodbath that will follow a massive drop in ad revenue from the automakers nationally and the auto dealers locally.

The domino effect on a city like Dayton with its ties to the auto industry would be enormous. Businesses advertising on WHIO would become fewer and fewer, as would the local news staff. A station like WHIO could end up being a shell of its former self, and what identity it has as a Dayton station would be pretty much gone.

Now, I will admit there is something I don't get, Jason.

There are three hosts WVKO airs (Bill Press, Stephanie Miller and Ed Schultz) who champion General Motors cars. I have yet to figure out why the local GM dealerships haven't beaten a path to Gary Richards' door to buy commercials at some very affordable rates.

Fred Ricart would be amazed at what he could get for an informercial to sell Chevys and Fords.

 

[gr8oldies]

Even at a dollar a holler there arent enough bodies listening to WVKO to be bothered

 

[SeanMGilbow]

Even at a dollar a holler there arent enough bodies listening to WVKO to be bothered

Yet another example of the mentality that is killing this industry ever so slowly.

 

[SeanMGilbow]

If it hasn't happened already, the dealerships will pull their advertising from any program that chastises the manufacturing of the products they are trying to sell.

If the automakers don't achieve a turnaround (with or without help from Congress), the layoffs we've seen in the radio industry will be nothing compared to the bloodbath that will follow a massive drop in ad revenue from the automakers nationally and the auto dealers locally.

Although it appears the point has been made, I realize the need to back my comments up further anyway.

From Advertising Age on Tuesday:

General Motors Corp. outlined a program to slash $600 million in spending by 2012 and support only half of its eight brands.

GM said it would concentrate its marketing and product development in the U.S. on four brands: Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC.

http://adage.com/article?article_id=132961

Pontiac is not being phased out completely. But Columbus is one market where stations may be getting nervous about the loss of a major advertiser: Saturn of Columbus. Saturn is on the chopping block.

And the dealerships are listening. A caller to Ed Schultz earlier today works for a GM dealership in Oklahoma (not known for being liberal territory). He was steamed at how conservative Congressmen were deriding his industry on Capitol Hill today. Meanwhile, Ed Schultz had a representative from J.D. Power & Associates explain how the quality of American cars has improved according to customer satisfaction surveys.

And the news is even worse, according to Reuters:

James Boyle, a senior broadcast analyst at research firm C.L. King & Associates in New York...said..."If the recession lasts for all of 2009 and the weakness persists in many of the major radio ad categories, such as auto, to the point where spending severely plunges, then it may be 2010 or beyond before radio revives."

http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSTRE4B287U20081203?feedType=RSS&feedName=entertainmentNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Adding to the lack of spending by auto dealerships is that the banks are still not lending to the point dealerships can start selling cars. And guess what? The banks aren't advertising, either. Another major radio advertiser.

Just how bad is the situation?

Today's Columbus Dispatch had no auto dealership display ads in the classified section.

And who are the top advertisers on the radio? Two examples locally:

WVKO--Meat Packer's Outlet, Carfagna's (meat and poultry), Sanfillipo Produce
Sunny 95 (wall-to-wall Christmas music)--Giant Eagle (grocery chain), Meijer (supercenter chain), Kroger

Specialty retailers are making up the majority of the advertising on both stations right now. The only auto dealership advertising on Sunny 95 is Carmax, the leading nationwide used-car sales chain.

Bottom line: Radio's race to the bottom is catching up to the news/talk format in a big way. And the number of layoffs in this industry continues to climb with each passing day. (Both Viacom and NBC announced major job cuts just today.)

And when one major source of radio revenue, auto dealerships, finds itself threatened by hosts critical of the people behind the manufacture of their products, is it any wonder those dealerships will advertise elsewhere with their increasingly limited budgets?

The question PDs now have to ask themselves, and answer to their co-workers is this: Which is less likely to cost you your job, replacing hosts critical of a major advertising base or losing ratings by replacing those hosts with ones who support your biggest advertisers and their products?

 

[gr8oldies]

I don't get that line of thinking that WHIO shouldl trash their successful lineup and go all-liberal, all the time because supposedly car dealers are going to pull their advertising from any station whose hosts have ever said that the Big 3 have made boneheaded moves.

Most of the car dealers I'm familiar with carry multiple lines, foreign and domestic. It's often Joe Blow Chrysler Plymouth Dodge Hyundai, or they have a Ford dealership here and an Honda dealership there. There are also plenty of people who work at the Honda plant in Marysville, and countless businesses that all the non-domestic owned car companies (my ex girlfriend works for one). I don't see advertising drying up because of talk show hosts. And by the way, I saw plenty of Obama stickers on Hondas, Toyotas, Hyundais and Kias. And McCain stickers on Big 3 products.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

I find it interesting that during the past few months, at least since September, I heard almost daily, national spots for General Motors on Rush, Hannity, and Beck's radio shows (all conservative talkers). Even when those hosts have said that the Big 3 has made boneheaded mistakes (generally about being soft on the unions, etc,) these same hosts also have been in favor of the SUV gas guzzlers and have bashed the small environmentally friendly cars that get better gas mileage. Whereas liberal talk hosts would have been the one's to bash the American Auto industry for not being more pro-environmental and making cars that get better gas mileage. So I believe you have it backwards.

 

[gr8oldies]

A family cannot haul the whole softball team in a Yugo. And if the answer is to buy a 2nd small vehicle and only use the big one when you have to the cost of paying for and insuring a 2nd car outweigh the fuel savings