• 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

"The Maddening Allure Of KIRO Radio"

Rob Piotrowski said:
That's the title of a new piece in The Stranger. A good read IMO.
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/the-maddening-allure-of-kiro-radio/
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that, Rob. Whoever is programming KIRO-FM is doing it absolutely correctly. Understand the market, challenge the market, then approve of most who disapprove. That sounds crazy, but it is a formula that works. KIRO-FM is doing good stuff right now. Meantime, KTTH, in the same building can bring up a more politically positioned opinion, and that is OK as there is room for that. Good on KIRO!
 
Sorry, I mistyped the source - it's Seattle Weekly, not The Stranger. In any event, seatownmedia is right. KIRO is firing on all cylinders. Hard to believe that less than a decade ago they were nearly conceding their news leadership role to KOMO. It's a good thing for KIRO that KOMO was so inept that they couldn't capitalize on that big opportunity.
 
No worries on the source. It was a spot-on article.

As for KOMO, as I mentioned in another thread last year, they are so under-performing IMO. They come across as "newsradio-lite". Too conversational. Need to be more authoritative IMO. Give me a KNX L.A. presentation and I would take them seriously. And their traffic reports are weak, only offering minimal info in each report.
 
KIRO-FM does well in this market, simply because the product is excellent, and the ratings prove it. KOMO on the other hand is slow and dull, just like is was in the Larry Nelson era. I really liked KOMO’s all-news approach when they started out in 2002. Fisher let the product slide, and when Sinclair bought them, the product quality is about zero, and the rating prove it. Sinclair should sell the radio side…they don’t care about radio anyway, and anyone with half a brain can tell from 15 minutes of listening to KOMO.
The only way KOMO can get back up on its feet, in my opinion is for someone to buy the station from Sinclair, put a compelling news-talk format on, and get a full market FM signal. FM is the future for talk, because AM is dying overall and because the younger generation listens to their MP3’s, and doesn’t really give a darn about radio (and as a Gen-X’r, I only listen to talk on the radio…I have my MP3’s too).

OK…the experts on this board can now shoot at me for having an opinion.
 
Are you sure? More and more stations on both bands are dropping talk for music. We're seeing a lot of AM stations, mainly those with translators, drop talk for music.
 
KXA said:
KIRO-FM does well in this market, simply because the product is excellent, and the ratings prove it. KOMO on the other hand is slow and dull, just like is was in the Larry Nelson era. I really liked KOMO’s all-news approach when they started out in 2002. Fisher let the product slide, and when Sinclair bought them, the product quality is about zero, and the rating prove it. Sinclair should sell the radio side…they don’t care about radio anyway, and anyone with half a brain can tell from 15 minutes of listening to KOMO.
The only way KOMO can get back up on its feet, in my opinion is for someone to buy the station from Sinclair, put a compelling news-talk format on, and get a full market FM signal. FM is the future for talk, because AM is dying overall and because the younger generation listens to their MP3’s, and doesn’t really give a darn about radio (and as a Gen-X’r, I only listen to talk on the radio…I have my MP3’s too).

OK…the experts on this board can now shoot at me for having an opinion.
Click to expand...

I'll shoot, because I totally agree with your opinion. All-news is an expensive format to do correctly mainly because of the human capital needed. In '02 Fisher under Bill Krippaehne was a free-spending animal, blowing $145M on Fisher Plaza and $60M on Mariners rights. So money was no object back then. Fast forward 15 years and you have a station running with 40% of the staff from those salad days and most everyone just mails it in now (there are exceptions like Herb Weisbaum but for the most part it's like how KXA describes it).

David Eduardo will be along soon to school all of us.
 
Last edited:
I'm not particularly a fan of KIRO-FM. They're just too conservative for my taste (I used to listen to 1090 for progressive talk and I've had to find refuge via WCPT's online stream.) But what the writer indirectly acknowledged is that like most Seattle stations, KIRO-FM doesn't program for Seattle proper, but more for the outlying suburbs like Lynnwood and Bellevue, which are more conservative leaning than Seattle proper. And also where the big box store advertisers are.

But I still give them props for being live and local most of the time when most talk stations aren't.

And now, back to Nor-MAN Gold-MAN on 'CPT.....
 
Bongwater hit the nail on the head...KIRO-FM is programmed for the suburban listener. Your average Seattle listener will be listening to KUOW (while complaining voraciously about how it's not nearly as good of a NPR station as it should be for its size population) or podcasts.

That being said, I've always felt like KOMO sounds like one of those stations that goes news in market #75 or so...they can't afford the big staff of a WTOP, KCBS, or WINS, so they do what they can by using syndicated stuff, automation at night, running TV reports on the radio, and basically finding whatever excuse to avoid the costly "two anchors and an editor" format most news stations have.

Granted, I rarely listen outside the 2-5 am hour, so my opinion may be skewed.

Radio-X
 
Radio-X said:
Granted, I rarely listen outside the 2-5 am hour, so my opinion may be skewed.
Click to expand...

Here's something you may not know: Even all news stations like the ones you mentioned don't typically staff with "two anchors and an editor" between the hours you listen. And it'll be interesting to see how staffing of the heritage AM all-news stations will change under new ownership.

That being said, there are compromises people have to make in radio listening today. I often wonder how many people used to listen to Ichabod Caine and didn't like country music? At one time, there were "full service" stations that had full local news staffs, likable personalities, and they played music everyone in the family could enjoy. That style of radio went away as there became more stations doing more focused programming.

BTW, I thought one of the reasons Seattle listeners supported the friends of KPLU was exactly the comment you made about KUOW.
 
It is really an "attitude" more than staffing. An all-news station needs to be clear, direct, and authoritative. Doesn't matter how many anchors there are. But what does matter is the station sounds like it really knows what is going on. Yes, that takes support staff, but not necessarily a lot of voices on air. Traffic is important, and KOMO tends to keep it very light. They should follow KNX's example of pointing out ALL problems, not just a quick summary. This is where all-news stations can shine, that, and with weather. KOMO repeats the weather over and over, and don't update it when needed. I would like to see KOMO continue with the format, but IMO they need to blow it up and bring in someone who can direct it to greatness. BTW, KOMO-AM has perhaps the strongest signal in Washington State, easily picked up from Longview to Bellingham, and over into Eastern Washington into Ellensburg and beyond. Heck, I can hear it in the Tri-Cities for gawd sakes! What a waste of a great signal, IMO.
 
Last edited:
I know this is probably a drop in the bucket, but KOMO really needs to improve some of their imaging if they want to be taken with the same authority as KIRO. The current imaging is really milquetoast, and doesn't command any real authority (compared to KIRO, which is much more authoritative).
 
Radio-X said:
Your average Seattle listener will be listening to KUOW (while complaining voraciously about how it's not nearly as good of a NPR station as it should be for its size population) or podcasts.
Click to expand...

Huh... I thought it was just me...
 
fordranger797 said:
I know this is probably a drop in the bucket, but KOMO really needs to improve some of their imaging if they want to be taken with the same authority as KIRO. The current imaging is really milquetoast, and doesn't command any real authority (compared to KIRO, which is much more authoritative).
Click to expand...

Disagree KIRO's imaging is authoritative, but I do agree how better it is than KOMO's. KOMO's problems are bigger than the imaging anyway.
 
seatownmedia said:
It is really an "attitude" more than staffing. An all-news station needs to be clear, direct, and authoritative. Doesn't matter how many anchors there are. But what does matter is the station sounds like it really knows what is going on. Yes, that takes support staff, but not necessarily a lot of voices on air. Traffic is important, and KOMO tends to keep it very light. They should follow KNX's example of pointing out ALL problems, not just a quick summary. This is where all-news stations can shine, that, and with weather. KOMO repeats the weather over and over, and don't update it when needed. I would like to see KOMO continue with the format, but IMO they need to blow it up and bring in someone who can direct it to greatness. BTW, KOMO-AM has perhaps the strongest signal in Washington State, easily picked up from Longview to Bellingham, and over into Eastern Washington into Ellensburg and beyond. Heck, I can hear it in the Tri-Cities for gawd sakes! What a waste of a great signal, IMO.
Click to expand...

Above all, stations like KOMO need consistency and credibility. They inherit some credibility by virtue of sharing the name with television. Consistency not so much, as everything but mornings seems to change regularly for whatever reason. But even the morning show hasn't been immune to change with Paul Tosch being let go after 25 years last year.

It seems like quite awhile since KIRO made a change in mornings, middays or afternoons.
 
AQH said:
Above all, stations like KOMO need consistency and credibility. They inherit some credibility by virtue of sharing the name with television. Consistency not so much, as everything but mornings seems to change regularly for whatever reason. But even the morning show hasn't been immune to change with Paul Tosch being let go after 25 years last year.

It seems like quite awhile since KIRO made a change in mornings, middays or afternoons.
Click to expand...

I agree, consistency is important. KOMO doesn't seem to be trying too hard to make their station standout, IMO. I would blame Sinclair for not putting an effort at KOMO-AM in place. But they have made it clear that radio is secondary in their business plan. So either sell it off, or make it work. Those are the two options. Please choose one.
 
seatownmedia said:
I would blame Sinclair for not putting an effort at KOMO-AM in place. But they have made it clear that radio is secondary in their business plan. So either sell it off, or make it work. Those are the two options. Please choose one.
Click to expand...

Obviously if the station is profitable, why would they sell it? Or is it purely because you don't care for their imaging or promotion?

To me, none of the arguments here seem to be worthy of Sinclair doing something as drastic as divesting itself of a station.
 
seatownmedia said:
I agree, consistency is important. KOMO doesn't seem to be trying too hard to make their station standout, IMO. I would blame Sinclair for not putting an effort at KOMO-AM in place. But they have made it clear that radio is secondary in their business plan. So either sell it off, or make it work. Those are the two options. Please choose one.
Click to expand...

I'd agree, although I think it goes back farther than Synclaire, I think it goes back to the last couple years under Fisher. How many times did they cancel then put Newsline back on? Also, how many afternoon teams did they go through before settling on the current one? I'd give Synclaire some credit, because as far as I can tell, Paul Tosh retired, and the death of Jane Shannon is the only other change they've had to make in two years or so. I'm liking the 11:00 TV simulcast, it's become nightly listening for me. The only issue is that sometimes they'll tease something after sports, which the radio will not air.
 
Kelly A said:
Obviously if the station is profitable, why would they sell it? Or is it purely because you don't care for their imaging or promotion?

To me, none of the arguments here seem to be worthy of Sinclair doing something as drastic as divesting itself of a station.
Click to expand...

It's only profitable because they run it on a shoestring budget...even someone who's half asleep can tell when listening to KOMO.
 
Bongwater said:
I'm not particularly a fan of KIRO-FM. They're just too conservative for my taste (I used to listen to 1090 for progressive talk and I've had to find refuge via WCPT's online stream.) But what the writer indirectly acknowledged is that like most Seattle stations, KIRO-FM doesn't program for Seattle proper, but more for the outlying suburbs like Lynnwood and Bellevue, which are more conservative leaning than Seattle proper. And also where the big box store advertisers are.

But I still give them props for being live and local most of the time when most talk stations aren't.

And now, back to Nor-MAN Gold-MAN on 'CPT.....
Click to expand...

I find KIRO-FM to be in the middle politically, and find that refreshing. To me, conservative talk is KTTH, KVI, KLFE etc.

As to progressive talk, the only shows that ran on the now defunked KPTK that I thought were worth my time was Ed Shultz and Ron Reagan Jr. After they dumped Ron, I turned them off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom