• 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

Stephanie Miller on Talk Decline

DavidEduardo said:


An "ad order" is a buy, and since AA did not get bought very often, there were no orders to look at. Unless that is not what you meant.

Many buys have specific no-controversial programming specs. That means, basically, no talk shows other than sports, That affected left, right and centrist stations and hosts. This is no different than specifying the kinds of formats to be bought based on product usage, etc. In other words, even if it seems political, it is not partisan as neither side of the aisle is discriminated against.
Click to expand...

Again, why are you bringing facts that you have first hand knowledge of, into a perfectly good Rush bashing thread? You're being a party pooper.

Anyone who actually worked in the business knows the Sandra Fluke phony scandal's effects on ad sales were gone within weeks. Rush lost a couple of high profile sponsors, gained a couple more and ended up right back where he was.

The entire industry is down on revenue because advertisers are increasingly cheap when it comes to buying ads. It's just the way things are. And large corporations are so afraid of ANY kind of controversy these days since people are so boycott happy that they don't want to be associated with anything that could cause them a headache.
 
Last edited:
Small Market Guy said:
Anyone who actually worked in the business knows the Sandra Fluke phony scandal's effects on ad sales were gone within weeks.
Click to expand...

Except they weren't. How do I know? Because as a result of that scandal, I made money shifting advertisers from talk to music stations. No controversy there. Like taking candy from a baby. Boom! The effects are still there. That's what this thread's about.
 
TheBigA said:
Except they weren't. How do I know? Because as a result of that scandal, I made money shifting advertisers from talk to music stations. No controversy there. Like taking candy from a baby. Boom! The effects are still there. That's what this thread's about.
Click to expand...

And someone else picked up the slack. That's the point. I saw the ad orders asking stations not to play certain spots during Rush. They didn't last long.

Maybe YOU capitalized on the controversy, but someone else did the exact same thing on the other side.
 
Small Market Guy said:
And someone else picked up the slack. That's the point. I saw the ad orders asking stations not to play certain spots during Rush. They didn't last long.
Click to expand...

As others in this thread have said, all Fortune 500 companies continue to demand not airing in Rush "and other controversial programming." Read the full article at LARadio.com. The point of that article is the advertising ban has continued, and has hurt the format.

“The StopRush movement has resulted in hundreds of blue-chip national advertisers basically not only to wander away from Rush Limbaugh and some of the ‘other righties,’ but they’ve abandoned the Talk radio format entirely. The conversation really picked up on February 29, 2012, Leap Year Day which was Day 1 of this three-day Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke faux pas,” said Holland Cooke. “And, if we were studying the history of Talk radio, you stick a pin in the timeline there because at that moment, a very well organized and relentless advertiser boycott effort which remains underway today rendered that business inviable.”

Cooke continued: “Hundreds of blue-chip national advertisers basically have not only wandered away from Rush Limbaugh and some of the other righties, they’ve abandoned the format entirely."
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
As others in this thread have said, all Fortune 500 companies continue to demand not airing in Rush "and other controversial programming." Read the full article at LARadio.com. The point of that article is the advertising ban has continued, and has hurt the format.

“The StopRush movement has resulted in hundreds of blue-chip national advertisers basically not only to wander away from Rush Limbaugh and some of the ‘other righties,’ but they’ve abandoned the Talk radio format entirely. The conversation really picked up on February 29, 2012, Leap Year Day which was Day 1 of this three-day Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke faux pas,” said Holland Cooke. “And, if we were studying the history of Talk radio, you stick a pin in the timeline there because at that moment, a very well organized and relentless advertiser boycott effort which remains underway today rendered that business inviable.”

Cooke continued: “Hundreds of blue-chip national advertisers basically have not only wandered away from Rush Limbaugh and some of the other righties, they’ve abandoned the format entirely."
Click to expand...

...but, but, but......Rush says it hasn't hurt him.

BENGHAZI!
 
flybynight said:
Rush says it hasn't hurt him.
Click to expand...

It probably hasn't. But Cooke's point, and the point of the original article, is that the format as a whole has been hurt. As he says, "They've abandoned the format entirely."

The key thing is his own syndicator, Clear Channel, has moved him to his own radio station in LA, shows clearly that his coat-tails aren't as big as they used to be, and sets him up for a confrontation when his current contract is up.
 
Last edited:
I like Holland Cooke, he's a good guy and a great consultant, but you have to take anything he says re: right wing radio with a HUGE grain of salt. He was a regular on Ed Schultz's MSNBC show. The guy is as partisan as they come. He's as unreliable a judge of this topic as Rush is.

Rush's coat tails aren't what they used to be because people are less likely to advertise on ANY radio, much less an older skewing talk radio audience. This is a demo problem, not a "RUSH CALLED SOME POLITICAL OPERATIVE A SLUT" problem. Rush and conservative hosts will deny this, but it's the real truth.
 
Could it be just another example of the radio industry taking the path of least resistance, as usual, and simply lumping everything with any sort of similarities into a single bucket of commodities that can be treated as if each item within were interchangeable with every other item?
 
Small Market Guy said:
I like Holland Cooke, he's a good guy and a great consultant, but you have to take anything he says re: right wing radio with a HUGE grain of salt.
Click to expand...

Holland Cooke has no reason to take sides. He has conservative clients. But dismissing what he says because you don't like the company he keeps ignores the fact that he's speaking the truth.

If you just walk down the hall and speak with your traffic department, they'll tell you they still get notices that say certain spots cannot air in or near Rush or any other controversial programming. The only reason your station might not get those notices is it's either in too small a market or it's too small a station to matter. If you station carries any syndication, the notice is in the commercial affidavit that your GM has to sign. So ask him. Do your own research before you believe the talking points.
 
Avid Listener said:
Could it be just another example of the radio industry taking the path of least resistance, as usual, and simply lumping everything with any sort of similarities into a single bucket of commodities that can be treated as if each item within were interchangeable with every other item?
Click to expand...

The industry that's doing the lumping is the advertising industry. The radio industry is trying to salvage the situation as best it can. But when the people who pay the bills reach a certain conclusion, you can't change their minds.
 
Small Market Guy said:
This is a demo problem, not a "RUSH CALLED SOME POLITICAL OPERATIVE A SLUT" problem. Rush and conservative hosts will deny this, but it's the real truth.
Click to expand...

Those of us who have adult daughters who "walk arm-in-arm" with the views of Ms. Fluke don't find your verbiage very charming. When you are on the air, do you 'diss' your listeners in a similar fashion?
 
Small Market Guy said:
I like Holland Cooke, he's a good guy and a great consultant, but you have to take anything he says re: right wing radio with a HUGE grain of salt. He was a regular on Ed Schultz's MSNBC show. The guy is as partisan as they come. He's as unreliable a judge of this topic as Rush is.
Click to expand...

After having known of Cooke for quite a while, I became acquainted with him personally a few years ago and can hoenstly say he's one of the brightest and most intuitive consultants/programming guys I've met or known---and I've known many successful large and major market OMs/PDs.

Saying he's "as partisan as they come" is absurd. He simply detests what talkradio has become, not from an ideological standpoint, but from a radio perspective.

Today's talkradio is a broken record that offers little to anyone outside of a small niche. Controversial current events talk can be attractive to a lot of different types of people. Catering to one niche has ruined the format, and it wasn't necessary.
 
flybynight said:
Today's talkradio is a broken record that offers little to anyone outside of a small niche. Controversial current events talk can be attractive to a lot of different types of people. Catering to one niche has ruined the format, and it wasn't necessary.
Click to expand...

You can make that same statement about almost every format in radio. Perhaps the niches are quite as small, but all radio formats end up attracting a small niche audience.
 
Avid Listener said:
You can make that same statement about almost every format in radio. Perhaps the niches are quite as small, but all radio formats end up attracting a small niche audience.
Click to expand...

That facile music/talk comparison rears it's ugly head again. :rolleyes:

Rock listeners can talk about current events.
AC listeners can talk about current events.
Country listeners can talk about current events.
Alternative listeners can talk about current events.
Jazz listeners can talk about current events.
Sports listeners can talk about current events.

Talkradio has the unique ability, when executed well, to attract a great cross-section of people. Why? Because a great many people DO talk about issues, particularly controversial issues. To niche THAT format to cater to a crowd that was already part of the core audience was born of laziness and was short-sighted. Talk about severely limiting your potential. Geeeez.
 
flybynight said:
Because a great many people DO talk about issues, particularly controversial issues.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you, but the easiest way to end a family gathering is for someone to bring up a controversial issue. Last Sunday was Easter, and while sitting at the Easter dinner table, someone brought up health insurance. Within a few minutes, everyone was looking for their spouses, saying it's time to go. That situation wouldn't have happened 20 years ago. That situation also wouldn't happen if everyone agreed. Or if people agreed to disagree. But that's not how people today talk about controversial issues. And it's not just around the family table. The exact same thing happens in Congress. That's why so many people seem to be retiring from Congress. That's why so little is getting done. The problem today is that controversial issues CAN'T attract a cross section of people anymore because they'll KILL each other! They're doing it in Egypt and the Ukraine! What makes us think we're any different?
 
TheBigA said:
I don't know about you, but the easiest way to end a family gathering is for someone to bring up a controversial issue. Last Sunday was Easter, and while sitting at the Easter dinner table, someone brought up health insurance. Within a few minutes, everyone was looking for their spouses, saying it's time to go. That situation wouldn't have happened 20 years ago. That situation also wouldn't happen if everyone agreed. Or if people agreed to disagree. But that's not how people today talk about controversial issues. And it's not just around the family table. The exact same thing happens in Congress. That's why so many people seem to be retiring from Congress. That's why so little is getting done. The problem today is that controversial issues CAN'T attract a cross section of people anymore because they'll KILL each other! They're doing it in Egypt and the Ukraine! What makes us think we're any different?
Click to expand...

Your "20-years" reference is dead-on, but maybe not for the reason you think.

In the past 20 years, Fox news and talkradio have turned political issues into a football game where "your" side is infallible. Mix in with that a VERY healthy dose of misinformation and outright fear-mongering, and you have successfully degraded the nation's discourse into an uncivil, uncompromising and often uninformed melee.
 
Maybe listeners to other formats "can" talk about current events but do they? Probably not. Most people, polls indicate, are either not interested or disgusted.
Is the talk radio "football game" Flybynight describes really a discussion - and is it really about current events? No, it's about the game, not real issues.
Talk radio gets about a five percent AQH share, meaning 95 per cent of listeners are not listening (most never listen). That five per cent is demographically narrow (and undesirable to advertisers).
The "geniuses" who program radio have spent recent decades trying to narrow their focus (and, hence, their appeal) - not broaden it. In music formats, that means tighter, shorter, more consistent and more predictable playlists. And in talk radio it means are narrower range of ideology and approach. Talk radio no longer has a congregation; just a choir to preach to. When talk radio had some diversity in opinion and content, hosts had to entertain (not repulse) people who didn't agree with them. Even Rush once practiced that style of talk radio. No more.
 
flybynight said:
That facile music/talk comparison rears it's ugly head again. :rolleyes:

Rock listeners can talk about current events.
AC listeners can talk about current events.
Country listeners can talk about current events.
Alternative listeners can talk about current events.
Jazz listeners can talk about current events.
Sports listeners can talk about current events.

Talkradio has the unique ability, when executed well, to attract a great cross-section of people. Why? Because a great many people DO talk about issues, particularly controversial issues. To niche THAT format to cater to a crowd that was already part of the core audience was born of laziness and was short-sighted. Talk about severely limiting your potential. Geeeez.
Click to expand...

That's sort of correct:

Rock listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
AC listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Country listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Alternative listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Jazz listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Sports listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.

Notice a certain tie that binds those I listed?

On the other hand,

Rock listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
AC listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Country listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Alternative listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Jazz listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Sports listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.

Therefore, what makes a person likely to listen to or participate in a radio talk show is not what kind of music they prefer. It is whether or not they care about current events and talking about them.
 
Avid Listener said:
That's sort of correct:

Rock listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
AC listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Country listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Alternative listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Jazz listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.
Sports listeners who actually care about current events can talk about current events if they want to.

Notice a certain tie that binds those I listed?

On the other hand,

Rock listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
AC listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Country listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Alternative listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Jazz listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.
Sports listeners who do not care about current events can talk about current events but usually won't.

Therefore, what makes a person likely to listen to or participate in a radio talk show is not what kind of music they prefer. It is whether or not they care about current events and talking about them.
Click to expand...

Congratulations. You missed the point entirely.

Many talk listeners DO have a music preference. Talk is a different kind of format in the way it is consumed. It is often not an exclusive selection, therefore it's potential to pull from all areas is greater.
 
Last edited:
flybynight said:
Rock listeners can talk about current events.
AC listeners can talk about current events.
Country listeners can talk about current events.
Alternative listeners can talk about current events.
Jazz listeners can talk about current events.
Sports listeners can talk about current events.

Talkradio has the unique ability, when executed well, to attract a great cross-section of people
Click to expand...

You've described why NPR member stations are among the top 5 rated in so many markets. Morning Edition and All Things Considered the shows people listen to if they want to find out about current events -- not Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh or Dana Loesch.

During the Clinton years, I liked talk radio -- newsy local morning show, Dr. Laura, Rush, sports/comedy centered PM show, 2 hours of sports in the evening. But that programming model doesn't exist anymore.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom