You're right about talk. A lot of the current boomer hosts don't want to retire. In many markets, they remain on the air past the traditional retirement age. If they GET retired, lots of people complain about the big bad corporations firing great high priced talent, and replacing it with cheaper, younger, dumber kids. My problem with that view is I was one of those dumb kids once. At some point, we ALL have to let it go. When that happens, someone newer and younger will take over, and all the old folks will complain again.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Wabc..1.3
- Thread starter benale
- Start date
You're right about talk. A lot of the current boomer hosts don't want to retire. In many markets, they remain on the air past the traditional retirement age. If they GET retired, lots of people complain about the big bad corporations firing great high priced talent, and replacing it with cheaper, younger, dumber kids. My problem with that view is I was one of those dumb kids once. At some point, we ALL have to let it go. When that happens, someone newer and younger will take over, and all the old folks will complain again.
I was actually seriously asking. I only know about 10 people who do what I do, and aside from a couple they're all in their 50s or older. It's interesting to see your experience with it though.
Thanks with all the problems kids have today who do they listen to? Andy Dean was just plain goofy.....and most other show hosts want strippers on their shows. But serious open minded political intelligent talk for under 30 they dont even want to try...that's whats so sad.
Couple of thoughts. 1. Talk radio will never get an under 35 crowd unless it's sports or Howard Stern-type talk. Never happened, never will. Talk radio's current problem is that it's no longer getting 35-54 year olds as it once did.
2. Regarding Baby Boomers who "won't" retire: Not sure what size market or if we're talking about nationally syndicated hosts. If it's local hosts, maybe it's because they CAN'T retire, i.e., they don't have sufficient retirement savings.
I worked in radio from post-college until I was 35. Left the industry and for the first time had a 401K. If I hadn't done that, I think I'd still be living paycheck to paycheck.
A little story: In my hometown, a long-time morning DJ died at the age of 75. He was still hosting morning drive on a small AM station up until his death. My mom assumed he kept working in radio all that time because he loved the job. That may be, but I also mentioned this possibility to her: Maybe he kept working in radio because he had to. Station was never bought by a large national conglomerate. DJ probably didn't have a pension or 401K. I saw my share of this in small and medium market radio ... people staying employed beyond age 65 because financially they had to.
Now, if you're a nationally syndicated host, you've got the money to retire at 65. Or even if you've worked many years in a major market.
2. Regarding Baby Boomers who "won't" retire: Not sure what size market or if we're talking about nationally syndicated hosts. If it's local hosts, maybe it's because they CAN'T retire, i.e., they don't have sufficient retirement savings.
I worked in radio from post-college until I was 35. Left the industry and for the first time had a 401K. If I hadn't done that, I think I'd still be living paycheck to paycheck.
A little story: In my hometown, a long-time morning DJ died at the age of 75. He was still hosting morning drive on a small AM station up until his death. My mom assumed he kept working in radio all that time because he loved the job. That may be, but I also mentioned this possibility to her: Maybe he kept working in radio because he had to. Station was never bought by a large national conglomerate. DJ probably didn't have a pension or 401K. I saw my share of this in small and medium market radio ... people staying employed beyond age 65 because financially they had to.
Now, if you're a nationally syndicated host, you've got the money to retire at 65. Or even if you've worked many years in a major market.
If they work for any of the major companies, they offer retirement packages. But like so many things, some choose not to participate. Who's problem is that? And why should the next generation (and the generation after that) have to suffer because grandpa won't retire?
Which majors have their own pension plans? Those I am familiar with have 401k plans with some degree of employer match, but nothing else.
None offer pension plans. Unions may still do. I had one in AFTRA. Not many profit companies still offer pensions...maybe AT&T. But not for long. Even government workers are in danger of losing them.
F
FredLeonard
Guest
Never say "never."
NJ 101.5 has done very well in the money demos. Not New York; not Philadelphia. Also not Howard Stern; not sports talk.
Add to that, "Not in PPM"
Trenton is a diary market and the way talk listeners "remember" listening and enter it into the diary differs greatly from the way the PPM actually detects talk listening.
Even AFTRA has considerable limitations on its plan, such as hours per week worked and length of qualifying employment over a period of years.
I think that the SAG / AFTRA rules are different, but have not talked with anyone about it since the merger.
The IBEW and other technical worker unions do seem to still have pension plans. But they cover a constantly shrinking number of radio employees.
This all suggests a thread about lifetime radio people and how many have saved anything for retirement.
S
stevensonair
Guest
Conservative hosts are accused of things like "climate change deniers" - well, it appears you can add "ratings reality denial" to the list of things conservative radio hosts practice. Hannity and Boyce (who really should know better!) are on the attack against Arbitron and "political motives" rather than addressing the decline in appeal of their product.
From Talkers:
"Hannity told the hundreds of broadcasters in attendance, “Clear Channel pays Nielsen $100 million a year for bad information; Cumulus pays them $50 million a year for crappy information. If we don’t confront the ratings failure that exists today and has not kept up with new technology, we are literally paying for our own demise. It’s madness!” Hannity was joined onstage during his speech by renowned talk radio programmers Phil Boyce, VP of spoken word programming, Salem Communications and Greg Moceri, CEO, Moceri Media. Both men concurred with Hannity’s premise adding their views that today’s distorted ratings picture falls into the hands of people and organizations who use it for political motives to create the false impression that news/talk radio is losing its audience and influence, when the exact opposite is true. "
From Talkers:
"Hannity told the hundreds of broadcasters in attendance, “Clear Channel pays Nielsen $100 million a year for bad information; Cumulus pays them $50 million a year for crappy information. If we don’t confront the ratings failure that exists today and has not kept up with new technology, we are literally paying for our own demise. It’s madness!” Hannity was joined onstage during his speech by renowned talk radio programmers Phil Boyce, VP of spoken word programming, Salem Communications and Greg Moceri, CEO, Moceri Media. Both men concurred with Hannity’s premise adding their views that today’s distorted ratings picture falls into the hands of people and organizations who use it for political motives to create the false impression that news/talk radio is losing its audience and influence, when the exact opposite is true. "
Does all this come as a big surprise? As I said, most of the big radio companies offer retirement plans in the form of 401K. From what I hear, quite a few employees choose not to participate. That's the employee's responsibility. Once again, no job is for life. At some point, you're expected to retire, and make way for the next generation.
If they've got better numbers, we'd all love to see them. Until then, they're just guessing along with everyone else.
Funny that they think radio companies and advertisers have political motivations. Have they learned nothing in their time on the air? There is only ONE motivation: Money.
No surprise here. I've looked at 401k participation at several companies in radio, and the majority do not participate.
I know or know of quite a few radio people who are at retirement age who have lost their jobs in the recession who have no income other than Social Security at this point.
So much for the "wealthy over-55 consumer" that so many threads here are about.
""Hannity told the hundreds of broadcasters in attendance, “Clear Channel pays Nielsen $100 million a year for bad information; Cumulus pays them $50 million a year for crappy information. If we don’t confront the ratings failure that exists today and has not kept up with new technology, we are literally paying for our own demise. It’s madness!"
IOW: Doctor-up the numbers or we won't give you any more money.
OK. One problem "solved".
Now, the big problem; nature is killing your audience. Try to fix that with lies.
Chanon.
IOW: Doctor-up the numbers or we won't give you any more money.
OK. One problem "solved".
Now, the big problem; nature is killing your audience. Try to fix that with lies.
Chanon.
Were you born this hateful, or did you have to work at it?
It is amazing what partisanship does to people. Hannity is guilty of doing what every radio personality has always done, complain about the ratings not being accurate. While I support a lot of their platform(socially at least), the big reason I can't support Hannity's haters on that side of the isle is that they have double standards based on identical words and phrases, be it Iraq has WMDs, this president is not following the constitution, and this here with the ratings not being accurate.
I believe that what Hannity and others like him present on their shows is a true service to our nation, getting out information and facts that otherwise are covered up, under reported and most ignored by other media outlets, the problem is that am radio does not a have monopoly anymore on getting out the other side of the story or information and facts that go against the mainstream media's beloved Democrat party, with fox news along with drudge and other websites.
Also, it just gets tiring to hear the constant unfortunate facts and truth of this president, his party, its supporters, and the direction that this country is going. I don't want to be depressed all the time, in fact I want my radio to be an escape, to be blissfully ignorant of it all at least for my ride to and from work.
I also do think that the fun of these shows are gone and it comes off as being angry, certainly not as angry as the guys on that comedy channel who have to play their fake enemy because no real life Conservative as they describe and hate on them actually exists, but still it is just not that all entertaining.
I know that the slightest little parody against Obama would have a mainstream media chorus of screaming racism as foam spews from their mouths, and that these media companies are forced to confirm to their wishes of censorship when giving anything the mainstream media can distort and manipulate, but it was the parodies that Rush would do and others that were so much fun and a nice switch up of debating the truth and facts.
As for the ratings, we need to have smartphones equipped with ppm technology so that we get a very strong sample that is consistent, how that goes about is to be debated but that is the only way I see to make the ratings more viable. It may help a little but it wont be the holy grail that the Hannitys of the world think it would be, it is obviously true that am radio in general is not getting the listening it once had, not even close.
I believe that what Hannity and others like him present on their shows is a true service to our nation, getting out information and facts that otherwise are covered up, under reported and most ignored by other media outlets, the problem is that am radio does not a have monopoly anymore on getting out the other side of the story or information and facts that go against the mainstream media's beloved Democrat party, with fox news along with drudge and other websites.
Also, it just gets tiring to hear the constant unfortunate facts and truth of this president, his party, its supporters, and the direction that this country is going. I don't want to be depressed all the time, in fact I want my radio to be an escape, to be blissfully ignorant of it all at least for my ride to and from work.
I also do think that the fun of these shows are gone and it comes off as being angry, certainly not as angry as the guys on that comedy channel who have to play their fake enemy because no real life Conservative as they describe and hate on them actually exists, but still it is just not that all entertaining.
I know that the slightest little parody against Obama would have a mainstream media chorus of screaming racism as foam spews from their mouths, and that these media companies are forced to confirm to their wishes of censorship when giving anything the mainstream media can distort and manipulate, but it was the parodies that Rush would do and others that were so much fun and a nice switch up of debating the truth and facts.
As for the ratings, we need to have smartphones equipped with ppm technology so that we get a very strong sample that is consistent, how that goes about is to be debated but that is the only way I see to make the ratings more viable. It may help a little but it wont be the holy grail that the Hannitys of the world think it would be, it is obviously true that am radio in general is not getting the listening it once had, not even close.
They're probably about as accurate as they were in diary days. Back then talk was over-rated, now it's probably under-rated. It all evens out in the end.
But it's the best system we have, and ratings are just a tool anyway. As long as they can sell spots, I wouldn't worry about it a whole lot if I were Hannity.
S
stevensonair
Guest
What's more shocking is Boyce buys into it. He's supposed to be the informed, forward thinking management in a successful company (Salem) - and he throws out a conspiracy theory. I think these people live in denial of what's happening to programming they believe is "the REAL" America/truth/answer. It's not possible in their minds that they're wrong, or that people are rejecting their viewpoint.
- Status