What happened to Talk Radio?

[LarryTheDrunk]

I have been a talk radio fan for many years. I used to enjoy driving thru different cities and checking out the hosts and their opinions. Now, all the hosts are the same in every city and their opinions are very similar. Conservatives are good and liberals are bad. I don't know if you have read the Al Gore speech yesterday at the media conference in New York but he had some very interesting comments.
http://www.*************/news/2005/10/06/D8D2IU703.html
"I came here today because I believe that American democracy is in grave danger. It is no longer possible to ignore the strangeness of our public discourse . I know that I am not the only one who feels that something has gone basically and badly wrong in the way America's fabled "marketplace of ideas" now functions." Al Gore

"The minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses, and make its tool of them." Albert Einstein


Talk radio is no longer a marketplace of ideas and thoughts. Has it become a corporate run machine to control our vote? Scary

 

[FMDawg]

No it's merely reflecting the marketplace. The marketplace has not gone wrong just because no one is interested in a product placed out there. That is the product's fault not the public's.

Conservative talkshows tend to attract audiences and advertisers. Liberal talk shows don't seem to fare as well on a whole genre. See Air America's financial woes as an example. If this country is so starved for an alternative to conservative radio, why hasn't Air America been a soaring success? Or why doesn't NPR draw better ratings?

Just as stores don't continue to carry items that no one buys, radio stations--or any kind of media--should not have to carry a product no one is interested in listening to.

I will actually agree that many conservative talkers sound the same, and I for the most part have grown tired of them. But until someone else can prove that they can draw an audience--and Air America had it's chance---that's what stations will continue to go with.









> I have been a talk radio fan for many years. I used to enjoy
> driving thru different cities and checking out the hosts and
> their opinions. Now, all the hosts are the same in every
> city and their opinions are very similar. Conservatives are
> good and liberals are bad. I don't know if you have read the
> Al Gore speech yesterday at the media conference in New York
> but he had some very interesting comments.
> http://www.*************/news/2005/10/06/D8D2IU703.html
>
> "I came here today because I believe that American democracy
> is in grave danger. It is no longer possible to ignore the
> strangeness of our public discourse . I know that I am not
> the only one who feels that something has gone basically and
> badly wrong in the way America's fabled "marketplace of
> ideas" now functions." Al Gore
>
> "The minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools
> and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This
> enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses,
> and make its tool of them." Albert Einstein
>
>
> Talk radio is no longer a marketplace of ideas and thoughts.
> Has it become a corporate run machine to control our vote?
> Scary
>

 

[zoneguy]

>
> Conservative talkshows tend to attract audiences and
> advertisers. Liberal talk shows don't seem to fare as well
> on a whole genre. See Air America's financial woes as an
> example. If this country is so starved for an alternative
> to conservative radio, why hasn't Air America been a soaring
> success? Or why doesn't NPR draw better ratings?

I think Air America is more a failure of a business model, than the viability of liberal talk. Air America's problem is that they tried to launch a network. That is a vast financial undertaking just to get it up and running. Then you also need affiliates to clear your programming en masse. You are way behind the 8 ball before you get started. Afterall, the only stations you will sign on as affiliates for 24/7 programming have to be pretty dead signals to begin with.

If Al Franken were handled by Premiere as an individual talent, he would likely end up on some established stations. Signals where O'Reilly and the like have failed to make a dent in Rush. Thus Franken's show would be in a better position to succeed.

Ed Schultz is starting to gain affiliates and notice. But his emergence is overshadowed by Air American's problems.

I think Air America is destined to fail, but to me it is how they went about creating a network and not the subject matter they talk about. They should have tried becoming a syndicator working with a few shows as opposed to being a 24/7 program supplier.

 

[livingfruitvirus]

> Ed Schultz is starting to gain affiliates and notice. But
> his emergence is overshadowed by Air American's problems.

Schultz seems to be doing so-so, but I don't see how Air America, which isn't even his employer, is holding him back.

 

[clockdug]

From what I've heard on Air America they are failing by making the mistake that political talk radio is actually about politics. Look at Rush, originally a music jock and always more concerned with putting on a show than with hitting political points. Cigars, football and other lifestyle points are more interesting than politics and appeal to more than just conservatives, after all.

As to the ratings of NPR, here in Tallahassee FL they are phenomenal. Top rated station in town and a veritable ratings god in the morning. Do you have access to maximiser to check what the unpublished npr numbers are in Atlanta? I'd be interested if you could let me know if they are low there. Remember: don't post actual numbers, though. Let's not be naughty.

BTW, the Air America station I can pick up in Tally is 1790 out of Atlanta. At night it's a good signal and I can pull it out of the static reliably during daytime. Amazing what a 10k signal can do on a band that isn't overcrowded.

 

[BDBopper]

For the most part, popular talk radio seems to be "Conservatives good, Liberals bad"/ However ther are names that stick out. Neal Boortz is back on a Libertarian kick with the FairTax movement and now he is arguing that the REpublicans have done nothing that the promised to do and that they need to lose control of Congress.

Savage: I don't listen to him. He screams too much. I think he wants to start his own political party. He isn't a Republican, he's not Libertarian, and he sure isn't a Democrat. It's like he is an grumpyu old man, bitter about the poor choices we have made at the ballot box, screams at us as punishment, and gets paid for doing so. <P ID="signature">______________
In Harmony
From the Bop Shop,
Brian "BD Bopper"</P>

 

[BDBopper]

> I think Air America is destined to fail, but to me it is
> how they went about creating a network and not the subject
> matter they talk about. They should have tried becoming a
> syndicator working with a few shows as opposed to being a
> 24/7 program supplier.

Please excuse me if this doesn't belong here....it can be moved to "off the air" or whatever...

I have a slight inclination that Air America did this on purpose. I have a feeling that they knew that their efforts would eventually fail. However they started the network anyway knowing that when they did fail, they could claim that Conservative Talk Radio us basically a big political commercial for Conservative candidates and a violation of campaighn finance rules. In other words Air America could fail and they could try and shut down Conservative talk radio, and/or reinstate the Fairnes doctrine. Yeah...I have heard something similar come out of Boortz's mouth but he never said anything about them failing on purpose.

Just a thought.
<P ID="signature">______________
In Harmony
From the Bop Shop,
Brian "BD Bopper"</P>

 

[Scribbler]

> > I think Air America is destined to fail, but to me it is
> > how they went about creating a network and not the subject
>
> > matter they talk about. They should have tried becoming
> a
> > syndicator working with a few shows as opposed to being a
> > 24/7 program supplier.

Huh? They ARE a syndicator. Stations can take one, two, three, four, five, or six shows. They can take only Franken or they can just take the entire feed, 24/7. What's wrong with that?
>
>
> I have a slight inclination that Air America did this on
> purpose. I have a feeling that they knew that their efforts
> would eventually fail. However they started the network
> anyway knowing that when they did fail, they could claim
> that Conservative Talk Radio us basically a big political
> commercial for Conservative candidates and a violation of
> campaighn finance rules. In other words Air America could
> fail and they could try and shut down Conservative talk
> radio, and/or reinstate the Fairnes doctrine. Yeah...I have
> heard something similar come out of Boortz's mouth but he
> never said anything about them failing on purpose.

This makes absolutley no sense. In the first place, Air America isn't "failing," dspite what the right has been saying for a full year and a half. You're not "failing" if you continue to pick up affiliates and listeners every month and rank among the leaders in on-line streaming. And why would Air America have to "fail" in order to "shut down conservative talk radio and/or reinstate the Fairness doctrine?" How would that work? A Republican congress and a Republican president would reinstate the Fairness doctrine because a progressive radio network had "failed?" Huh?
>

 

[jimwalsh2001]

Talk Radio has, largely, become a joke: the hosts all sound alike, espousing the same cookie-cutter opinions and pandering to the same hard-core political wonks, certifiable paranoiacs and ninety year-old geezers in their underwear.

The reason, though, has nothing to do with political ideology. It has to do with the lack of courage and imagination of many of the people who call the programming shots. It's a lot easier to imitate what has worked before (read: Rush) than to try something different and/or new. The result is the godawful blandness and predictability of most talk radio.

Oh well...I'm sure the hard-core types will simply write me off as a "liberal," missing the point completely...


> I have been a talk radio fan for many years. I used to enjoy
> driving thru different cities and checking out the hosts and
> their opinions. Now, all the hosts are the same in every
> city and their opinions are very similar. Conservatives are
> good and liberals are bad. I don't know if you have read the
> Al Gore speech yesterday at the media conference in New York
> but he had some very interesting comments.
> http://www.*************/news/2005/10/06/D8D2IU703.html
>
> "I came here today because I believe that American democracy
> is in grave danger. It is no longer possible to ignore the
> strangeness of our public discourse . I know that I am not
> the only one who feels that something has gone basically and
> badly wrong in the way America's fabled "marketplace of
> ideas" now functions." Al Gore
>
> "The minority, the ruling class at present, has the schools
> and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb. This
> enables it to organize and sway the emotions of the masses,
> and make its tool of them." Albert Einstein
>
>
> Talk radio is no longer a marketplace of ideas and thoughts.
> Has it become a corporate run machine to control our vote?
> Scary
>

 

[FloridaBear1776]

What's missing in talk radio: Interactivity

Before Rush and the "cult of the host", talk radio was about callers. Hearing people's opinions. "Two way talk radio." It was an era derided by consultants as "caller-driven radio", but it produced many gems. Several talk show hosts in Atlanta and around the country began as callers.

Today it's "one way talk radio." That began when Rush arrogantly declared that "the purpose of the callers is to make me look good." Even the guys who made their names arguing with callers realized that they needed callers to bounce off of. Sometimes they would declare that chronic callers stunk, but that was just a way to get more of them to call. But Rush declared them all but unnecessary. Now blogs and other media are taking over, perhaps because of this lack of interactivity on talk radio.

Used to be talk radio had the FRANCHISE LOCK on interactivity in media. Maybe it's time to get back to letting the callers strut their stuff, loosen up on the screening a bit, let a caller or callers in general have more time on the air, do more things to involve callers on the radio. Back off on the host-produced bits and other affectations from FM morning shows and get back to host and callers interacting. Keep the long monologues, but only if they are designed to browbeat people into CALLING in and INTERACTING with the host!

I realize that consultants will declare, as they have since the 70s, that "you can't do a show for the callers", but I remember when stations did just that. That period was when talk radio had its greatest growth spurt. Listeners like callers. They see them as proxies for themselves. Plus, they're cheaper than hosts. Hosts go to bigger markets, or get fired, but callers are always there. Want to revive talk radio?? BRING BACK CALLERS!!!

>
> As to the ratings of NPR, here in Tallahassee FL they are
> phenomenal.

Tallahassee, according to an Inside Radio article a few years back, has the lowest AM listening of any market in the country. See the North Florida board.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by FloridaBear1776 on 10/09/05 02:37 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[thebelle]

Re: What's missing in talk radio: Interactivity

Martha Zoller at WDUN in Gainesville is not the typical conservative and being a mom and having been involved in several types of work before going into radio, makes her new and different. There is a big opportunity nationally for more women's voices on talk radio and not on typical "women's" topics. Women are 50% of med students and law school students--they make up close to 60% of college enrollment and they are traditional and unconventional. The radio programmer that sees that, whether with Martha or someone else--will be successful.

On Air America, I believe it was an all or nothing deal--you have to take the whole line up--I may be wrong about that and they had bad placement on the dial. Al Franken might have done well by himself but he's really rough around the edges and it is all about advertisers--

Rush has been successful because he's entertaining and has a sense of humor. He's still number one and you can't argue with that.



> Before Rush and the "cult of the host", talk radio was about
> callers. Hearing people's opinions. "Two way talk radio." It
> was an era derided by consultants as "caller-driven radio",
> but it produced many gems. Several talk show hosts in
> Atlanta and around the country began as callers.
>
> Today it's "one way talk radio." That began when Rush
> arrogantly declared that "the purpose of the callers is to
> make me look good." Even the guys who made their names
> arguing with callers realized that they needed callers to
> bounce off of. Sometimes they would declare that chronic
> callers stunk, but that was just a way to get more of them
> to call. But Rush declared them all but unnecessary. Now
> blogs and other media are taking over, perhaps because of
> this lack of interactivity on talk radio.
>
> Used to be talk radio had the FRANCHISE LOCK on
> interactivity in media. Maybe it's time to get back to
> letting the callers strut their stuff, loosen up on the
> screening a bit, let a caller or callers in general have
> more time on the air, do more things to involve callers on
> the radio. Back off on the host-produced bits and other
> affectations from FM morning shows and get back to host and
> callers interacting. Keep the long monologues, but only if
> they are designed to browbeat people into CALLING in and
> INTERACTING with the host!
>
> I realize that consultants will declare, as they have since
> the 70s, that "you can't do a show for the callers", but I
> remember when stations did just that. That period was when
> talk radio had its greatest growth spurt. Listeners like
> callers. They see them as proxies for themselves. Plus,
> they're cheaper than hosts. Hosts go to bigger markets, or
> get fired, but callers are always there. Want to revive talk
> radio?? BRING BACK CALLERS!!!
>
> >
> > As to the ratings of NPR, here in Tallahassee FL they are
> > phenomenal.
>
> Tallahassee, according to an Inside Radio article a few
> years back, has the lowest AM listening of any market in the
> country. See the North Florida board.
>

 

[lily10]

You should try WDUN AM 550 and listen to Martha Zoller...she is known as "The Velvet Hammer". Tune in and listen live Monday-Friday 9:00 to 11:30 am EST...

 

[zoneguy]

>
> Huh? They ARE a syndicator. Stations can take one, two,
> three, four, five, or six shows. They can take only Franken
> or they can just take the entire feed, 24/7. What's wrong
> with that?

Their strategy has focused on trying to find stations to carry the full load and not cherry pick a show here or a show there. Because they have the expense of producing a 24/7 format, it puts tremendous pressure on the affiliate reps to find signals to take as many hours as possible as opposed to placing a show or two on already established stations.


> This makes absolutley no sense. In the first place, Air
> America isn't "failing," dspite what the right has been
> saying for a full year and a half. You're not "failing" if
> you continue to pick up affiliates and listeners every month
> and rank among the leaders in on-line streaming. And why
> would Air America have to "fail" in order to "shut down
> conservative talk radio and/or reinstate the Fairness
> doctrine?" How would that work? A Republican congress and
> a Republican president would reinstate the Fairness doctrine
> because a progressive radio network had "failed?" Huh?


While Air America is gaining some affiliates and listeners, the financial picture continues to be bleak as revenue is way behind expense. If deep pockets remain committed, the project can go forward, but if at some point in the next five years, investors start demanding a return, they will be destined to shut it down.

 

[radiobuff81]

Oh, hi Martha.

> You should try WDUN AM 550 and listen to Martha Zoller...she
> is known as "The Velvet Hammer". Tune in and listen live
> Monday-Friday 9:00 to 11:30 am EST...
>

 

[radiobuff81]

Re: What's missing in talk radio: Interactivity

Hi there again, Martha!

> Martha Zoller at WDUN in Gainesville is not the typical
> conservative and being a mom and having been involved in
> several types of work before going into radio, makes her new
> and different. There is a big opportunity nationally for
> more women's voices on talk radio and not on typical
> "women's" topics. Women are 50% of med students and law
> school students--they make up close to 60% of college
> enrollment and they are traditional and unconventional. The
> radio programmer that sees that, whether with Martha or
> someone else--will be successful.
>
> On Air America, I believe it was an all or nothing deal--you
> have to take the whole line up--I may be wrong about that
> and they had bad placement on the dial. Al Franken might
> have done well by himself but he's really rough around the
> edges and it is all about advertisers--
>
> Rush has been successful because he's entertaining and has a
> sense of humor. He's still number one and you can't argue
> with that.
>
>
>
> > Before Rush and the "cult of the host", talk radio was
> about
> > callers. Hearing people's opinions. "Two way talk radio."
> It
> > was an era derided by consultants as "caller-driven
> radio",
> > but it produced many gems. Several talk show hosts in
> > Atlanta and around the country began as callers.
> >
> > Today it's "one way talk radio." That began when Rush
> > arrogantly declared that "the purpose of the callers is to
>
> > make me look good." Even the guys who made their names
> > arguing with callers realized that they needed callers to
> > bounce off of. Sometimes they would declare that chronic
> > callers stunk, but that was just a way to get more of them
>
> > to call. But Rush declared them all but unnecessary. Now
> > blogs and other media are taking over, perhaps because of
> > this lack of interactivity on talk radio.
> >
> > Used to be talk radio had the FRANCHISE LOCK on
> > interactivity in media. Maybe it's time to get back to
> > letting the callers strut their stuff, loosen up on the
> > screening a bit, let a caller or callers in general have
> > more time on the air, do more things to involve callers on
>
> > the radio. Back off on the host-produced bits and other
> > affectations from FM morning shows and get back to host
> and
> > callers interacting. Keep the long monologues, but only if
>
> > they are designed to browbeat people into CALLING in and
> > INTERACTING with the host!
> >
> > I realize that consultants will declare, as they have
> since
> > the 70s, that "you can't do a show for the callers", but I
>
> > remember when stations did just that. That period was when
>
> > talk radio had its greatest growth spurt. Listeners like
> > callers. They see them as proxies for themselves. Plus,
> > they're cheaper than hosts. Hosts go to bigger markets, or
>
> > get fired, but callers are always there. Want to revive
> talk
> > radio?? BRING BACK CALLERS!!!
> >
> > >
> > > As to the ratings of NPR, here in Tallahassee FL they
> are
> > > phenomenal.
> >
> > Tallahassee, according to an Inside Radio article a few
> > years back, has the lowest AM listening of any market in
> the
> > country. See the North Florida board.
> >
>

 

[Scribbler]

> >
> > Huh? They ARE a syndicator. Stations can take one, two,
> > three, four, five, or six shows. They can take only
> Franken
> > or they can just take the entire feed, 24/7. What's wrong
>
> > with that?
>
> Their strategy has focused on trying to find stations to
> carry the full load and not cherry pick a show here or a
> show there. Because they have the expense of producing a
> 24/7 format, it puts tremendous pressure on the affiliate
> reps to find signals to take as many hours as possible as
> opposed to placing a show or two on already established
> stations.

Obviously, Air America would like stations to "carry the full load," but it's in no position to demand that and there are only a handful of stations that do so. Air America's most successful affiliate by far, KPOJ in Portland, has carried Ed Schultz since becoming "The World's First Air America Affiliate," and later added a local morning show (Thom Hartmann).
> >
>
> While Air America is gaining some affiliates and listeners,
> the financial picture continues to be bleak as revenue is
> way behind expense. If deep pockets remain committed, the
> project can go forward, but if at some point in the next
> five years, investors start demanding a return, they will
> be destined to shut it down.

You could say the same thing about Sirius and XM, both of which lose far more than Air America and have been doing so for far longer. The Fox News Channel lost something like $130 million in its first two years. Look at it now. And you still haven't explained your theory that the people behind Air America somehow thought a Republican congress and a Republican president would reinstate the Fairness Doctrine if Air America failed.

 

[RoyGreen]

> Obviously, Air America would like stations to "carry the
> full load," but it's in no position to demand that and there
> are only a handful of stations that do so. Air America's
> most successful affiliate by far, KPOJ in Portland, has
> carried Ed Schultz since becoming "The World's First Air
> America Affiliate," and later added a local morning show
> (Thom Hartmann).
> > >


As you said, AAR *is* a syndicator, *AND* they are now handling Thom Hartmann.
See http://www.airamericaradio.com/node/922