Why is Liberal Radio Such a Flop?

[Indeependent]

NYC has three major Conservative Talk Radio stations, 710 (WOR), 770 (ABC) and 970.
With the exception of Rush (went from 770 to 710), Hannity (went from 770 to 710), Levin (770) and Savage (went from 710 to 770), the majority of the other hosts last no longer than 1 year.
Those that last longer than one year get shuffled to the midnight to 6AM shift because their ratings are in the cellar.

Many of these hosts start off as Independent and suddenly, usually within 2 weeks, become talking heads.
One reason is the call comes in from above reminding them of their short term contracts and doing what they're told.
The other reason is the vast majority of the single dimension callers.

 

[elektra]

Liberal Radio has failed because all they do is insult and lie, its literally just a continuous political rant people see thru.

I did a quick search on, "liberal radio".

https://www.google.com/search?q=liberal+radio&oq=liberal+radio&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l3j0l2.4551j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8

The second search result is as follows

Thom Hartmann is the #1 progressive radio talk show host in the US and a New York Times bestselling author, including 4 Project Censored awards, of 21 .

So, I follow the link, click on the "radio" tab, then the "transcripts" tab, the 3rd transcript is as follows, stating Reagan began a war against voters.



Transcript: Thom Hartmann: What the Reagan Revolution has brought us... - 27 June '13 | Thom Hartmann - News & info from the #1 progressive radio show

But this war against voters didn’t begin on Tuesday or last week or last month or even last year. The war against voters started in 1980 when Ronald Reagan, or 1981, when Ronald Reagan took over the presidency. In fact it started in 1980 before he even stepped foot inside the White House. Reagan’s first speech during his campaign for the presidency took place in the Neshoba County Fair in Neshoba County Mississippi, Philadelphia Mississippi, which at that time was a white supremacist stronghold. Reagan’s campaign chose that event and that area for his first campaign speech to get racist votes. Why would you say there racist votes? Well Neshoba County was, this was where three civil rights activists were murdered in 1964. They made a movie about it. They were shot to death by racists who were enraged by the idea of African Americans having not only equal rights, but the right to vote, to vote. During his presidency Reagan opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 openly. In fact he said that the Voting Rights Act was “humiliating to the South." - See more at: Transcript: Thom Hartmann: What the Reagan Revolution has brought us... - 27 June '13 | Thom Hartmann - News & info from the #1 progressive radio show

So, we can go to wikipedia and confirm Thom Hartmann's lies against Reagan, against the Republicans. But is wiki the best source or is Reagan's speech.

Thom Hartmann and Wiki (maybe Hartmann edits the wiki page?) argument is based simply on the history of the state where Reagan made his speech and two words, "states rights". Reagan was specifically stating states should control welfare and education, yet this is taken out of context to paint all conservatives as "racist".

Transcript of Ronald Reagan's 1980 Neshoba County Fair speech - The Neshoba Democrat - Philadelphia, Mississippi

Today, and I know from our own experience in California when we reformed welfare, I know that one of the great tragedies of welfare in America today, and I don't believe stereotype after what we did, of people in need who are there simply because they prefer to be there. We found the overwhelming majority would like nothing better than to be out, with jobs for the future, and out here in the society with the rest of us. The trouble is, again, that bureaucracy has them so economically trapped that there is no way they can get away. And they're trapped because that bureaucracy needs them as a clientele to preserve the jobs of the bureaucrats themselves.

I believe that there are programs like that, programs like education and others, that should be turned back to the states and the local communities with the tax sources to fund them, and let the people [applause drowns out end of statement].

I believe in state's rights; I believe in people doing as much as they can for themselves at the community level and at the private level. And I believe that we've distorted the balance of our government today by giving powers that were never intended in the constitution to that federal establishment. And if I do get the job I'm looking for, I'm going to devote myself to trying to reorder those priorities and to restore to the states and local communities those functions which properly belong there

here I show how Liberals need to cherry pick a conservatives speech, take the quote out of context, redefine the meaning of the words, all to change how Americans think about Americans.

I see no bigger a danger to mankind when the most powerful political party in the world can simply make things up in order to make people hate their political opponents.

Liberal Radio fails because it is mostly an ugly tirade, because its a continuous political rant of hate and lies.

Its takes more than just loyalty to a political party to make up such outrageous lies, its takes the worst kind of people history has ever seen.

 

[Pogo]

Funny how you flip-flop between posting reasons (excuses) for Lib talk radios' utter failure and denying it is a failure. Nevertheless I'm willing to concede that a few exceptions to the rule exist if you have the integrity to admit that Lib talk radio is a flop.
In fact, I'll admit that a few exceptions to the rule exist even if you lack that integrity.

Exceptions to ..... WHAT? What is it about this question you're afraid to answer?

You posed no question that I haven't answered.

I've asked you to pin down exactly what it is that makes a radio station (any one) "succeed" or "fail". You don't seem to have an answer other than this mythological "station that can't pay its bills" without being able to point to any such example.

This is not "wobbling"; it's asking the same question over and over in different ways in hopes that one of them would penetrate. I have to conclude then that your entire thread is based on a strawman, i.e. an assumption you cannot (or will not) demonstrate. Perhaps you don't know of any. Indeed if the genre was a "failure", citations like the one from Thom Hartmann just posted, would not even exist to cite. Then again perhaps "flop" means the idea of ideas on the air that you don't agree with. I dunno.

Oh well. Enjoy your cat and mouse game...

 

[SAYIT]

NYC has three major Conservative Talk Radio stations, 710 (WOR), 770 (ABC) and 970.
With the exception of Rush (went from 770 to 710), Hannity (went from 770 to 710), Levin (770) and Savage (went from 710 to 770), the majority of the other hosts last no longer than 1 year.
Those that last longer than one year get shuffled to the midnight to 6AM shift because their ratings are in the cellar.

Many of these hosts start off as Independent and suddenly, usually within 2 weeks, become talking heads.
One reason is the call comes in from above reminding them of their short term contracts and doing what they're told.
The other reason is the vast majority of the single dimension callers.

And that is your explanation for the subject of this thread ... Lib talk radio's abject failure? Got it.

 

[SAYIT]

Exceptions to ..... WHAT? What is it about this question you're afraid to answer?

You posed no question that I haven't answered.

I've asked you to pin down exactly what it is that makes a radio station (any one) "succeed" or "fail". You don't seem to have an answer other than this mythological "station that can't pay its bills" without being able to point to any such example.

This is not "wobbling"; it's asking the same question over and over in different ways in hopes that one of them would penetrate. I have to conclude then that your entire thread is based on a strawman, i.e. an assumption you cannot (or will not) demonstrate. Perhaps you don't know of any. Indeed if the genre was a "failure", citations like the one from Thom Hartmann just posted, would not even exist to cite. Then again perhaps "flop" means the idea of ideas on the air that you don't agree with. I dunno.

Oh well. Enjoy your cat and mouse game...

"Mythological" Lib talk radio programs that can't pay their bills? "Mythological?" Really dude? Yeah, I'd say this conversation has gone about as far as it can go. You have twice proffered your reasons why it so often fails yet always return to your "mythological" default position. Have a good time.

 

[bedowin62]

Air America was started with a Ponzi scheme that defrauded the elderly, poor and minority children

true story

 

[Pogo]

You posed no question that I haven't answered.

I've asked you to pin down exactly what it is that makes a radio station (any one) "succeed" or "fail". You don't seem to have an answer other than this mythological "station that can't pay its bills" without being able to point to any such example.

This is not "wobbling"; it's asking the same question over and over in different ways in hopes that one of them would penetrate. I have to conclude then that your entire thread is based on a strawman, i.e. an assumption you cannot (or will not) demonstrate. Perhaps you don't know of any. Indeed if the genre was a "failure", citations like the one from Thom Hartmann just posted, would not even exist to cite. Then again perhaps "flop" means the idea of ideas on the air that you don't agree with. I dunno.

Oh well. Enjoy your cat and mouse game...

"Mythological" Lib talk radio programs that can't pay their bills? "Mythological?" Really dude? Yeah, I'd say this conversation has gone about as far as it can go. You have twice proffered your reasons why it so often fails yet always return to your "mythological" default position. Have a good time.

I. Haven't. Claimed. That. It. "Fails". YOU did. This is your point, not mine, and therefore yours to define what the hell you mean.

On the contrary I've noted that it's still on the air and has been continuously, therefore disappearance cannot be what you mean by "failure". Assuming the obvious definition doesn't work, yet you won't say what you DO mean.

And yes, when you claim something exists (including a "failure" or "flop") but can offer not a single example thereof, that's mythological. What exactly is your premise?

 

[HenryBHough]

Liberal radio can easily be a success in a big market. Out-and-out Communist front radio equally can be a success in a large enough market without requiring party support.

In a big enough urban area there are enough under-served liberals and out-and-out Communists in business, working or even sponging that they constitute a market so that a station designed to serve such a base can successfully sell advertising to clients who would actually benefit from it. It just chafes their spavined asses that they have to do business like filthy capitalists in order to further their anti-capitalist causes.

The trick is to find programming that appeals of a left-leaning base that isn't of such poor quality or even entertainment value that even the most dedicated aren't alienated.

Not always easy.

 

[Papageorgio]

Clear Channel owns MOST of the radio stations in the country.
Source: Facts On Media In America: Did You Know? - Common Cause

Clear channel is owned by Bain Capital
Source: Clear Channel Communications - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bain Capital is owned by Bill Bain & (drum roll please) MITT ROMNEY!

Yeah...the most recent REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.

Yes, it's nothing but a bunch of RWers that own practically ALL radio stations.

You THINK they want to hear Liberal Talk espoused on their airwaves whether it's popular or not?

Clear Channel carries several liberal talk shoes, the ratings suck, Tom Leykis had a good liberal show and ratings but he went to shock radio, more or less. KGO in San Francisco had lots of liberals and was successful up until 2005 or so and switch to all news because of decreased ratings.

As far as the Republican owned BS, in TV, where Republicans own many stations, liberals have owned the programming and as long as it is popular. It's the bottom line.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

Their ratings don't suck, they beat many other RW talkers that have been and continue to be on the air.

But you're married to that idea, so I imagine there's no penetrating that thick bubble you've amassed around your skull on that subject.

Name the big liberals that had great ratings and got pulled because of their ratings. Air America got pulled, because of bankruptcy, Thom Hartmann stays on the air because he is an interesting liberal. Ed Schultz is a buffoon and has lost shows because of ratings. Rusty Humphries has lost his show in some markets because of his ratings.

Funny how you attack personally when someone disagrees with you. More of the tolerant left, I take it.

 

[Iceweasel]

I listened to a liberal show here and it had trouble getting callers. When one did the radio host would milk it for all it's worth. Lib talking shows fail because libs are either interested in insulting conservatives so call into their shows or they know all they need to from the headlines, accusations and comedy shows. Details don't matter.

 

[srlip]

it's simple. libs are either poverty-stricken or tightwads that won't fund the talk shows.

 

[Pogo]

Clear Channel carries several liberal talk shoes, the ratings suck, Tom Leykis had a good liberal show and ratings but he went to shock radio, more or less. KGO in San Francisco had lots of liberals and was successful up until 2005 or so and switch to all news because of decreased ratings.

As far as the Republican owned BS, in TV, where Republicans own many stations, liberals have owned the programming and as long as it is popular. It's the bottom line.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

Their ratings don't suck, they beat many other RW talkers that have been and continue to be on the air.

But you're married to that idea, so I imagine there's no penetrating that thick bubble you've amassed around your skull on that subject.

Name the big liberals that had great ratings and got pulled because of their ratings. Air America got pulled, because of bankruptcy, Thom Hartmann stays on the air because he is an interesting liberal. Ed Schultz is a buffoon and has lost shows because of ratings. Rusty Humphries has lost his show in some markets because of his ratings.

Funny how you attack personally when someone disagrees with you. More of the tolerant left, I take it.

What the hell does a(n assumed) political philosophy have to do with somebody's personal posting style?

 

[Pogo]

I listened to a liberal show here and it had trouble getting callers. When one did the radio host would milk it for all it's worth. Lib talking shows fail because libs are either interested in insulting conservatives so call into their shows or they know all they need to from the headlines, accusations and comedy shows. Details don't matter.

Attack dog radio, copied verbatim from the Limblob playbook (which I don't think is a wise approach, but that's me).

By the same logic would you say Limblob "fails" as well, for the same reason? I would.

Depending of course on what we mean by "fail"...

 

[HenryBHough]

Bankruptcy is natures way of telling a performer to (find) (keep) a day job.
Air America is gone; may it rest in peace. It's already quiet.

 

[MarcATL]

Name the big liberals that had great ratings and got pulled because of their ratings. Air America got pulled, because of bankruptcy, Thom Hartmann stays on the air because he is an interesting liberal. Ed Schultz is a buffoon and has lost shows because of ratings. Rusty Humphries has lost his show in some markets because of his ratings.

Funny how you attack personally when someone disagrees with you. More of the tolerant left, I take it.

1. Stephanie Miller
2. Randi Rhodes
3. Norman Goldmann

All have had their shows pulled for reasons OTHER than their ratings.

All three do way better than the MAJORITY of RW talkers on the radio...who are still on the radio.

 

[Rozman]

Name the big liberals that had great ratings and got pulled because of their ratings. Air America got pulled, because of bankruptcy, Thom Hartmann stays on the air because he is an interesting liberal. Ed Schultz is a buffoon and has lost shows because of ratings. Rusty Humphries has lost his show in some markets because of his ratings.

Funny how you attack personally when someone disagrees with you. More of the tolerant left, I take it.

1. Stephanie Miller
2. Randi Rhodes
3. Norman Goldmann

All have had their shows pulled for reasons OTHER than their ratings.

All three do way better than the MAJORITY of RW talkers on the radio...who are still on the radio.

All have had their shows pulled for reasons OTHER than their ratings.

I guess you're saying they lost their shows because they are black?
That seems to be the Lib answer for everything....

 

[srlip]

years ago, there was a (west indies origin, IIRC) black right wing radio host. Ken something, maybe? the "black avenger" IIRC?

 

[Esmeralda]

There's certainly enough Libs in America to support liberal talk radio but it never seems to succeed. I'm not extolling the virtues of Con radio because it nuts but at least it's entertaining.
I'm guessing it is because once Libs hear themselves and each other speak they are embarrassed by their silliness.
Any other logical reasons?

NPR is probably the most listened to radio programing in the US. And it is liberal. It just doesn't create shock waves. It is calm, intelligent, and covers a very wide variety of topics. Something wham, bang, rude and abrasive conservative radio doesn't do. Those who make the most noise get the most attention--that is people are more aware of conservative radio because it makes so much noise, all of it loud and stupid.

 

[Esmeralda]

Liberal radio is a flop? I take it then you believe that National Public Radio isn't liberal,

because it has 2 shows in the top 4.

And were it not for taxpayer dollars it would have folded up shop years ago.

It doesn't have any advertising. Were it not for public funds, it wouldn't exit. Being publicly funded means it doesn't need to cater to any corporations in putting out its material.

 

[MarcATL]

Name the big liberals that had great ratings and got pulled because of their ratings. Air America got pulled, because of bankruptcy, Thom Hartmann stays on the air because he is an interesting liberal. Ed Schultz is a buffoon and has lost shows because of ratings. Rusty Humphries has lost his show in some markets because of his ratings.

Funny how you attack personally when someone disagrees with you. More of the tolerant left, I take it.

1. Stephanie Miller
2. Randi Rhodes
3. Norman Goldmann

All have had their shows pulled for reasons OTHER than their ratings.

All three do way better than the MAJORITY of RW talkers on the radio...who are still on the radio.

All have had their shows pulled for reasons OTHER than their ratings.

I guess you're saying they lost their shows because they are black?
That seems to be the Lib answer for everything....

WoW! You don't even have SENSE enough to Google them first.

They're all white.

*SMH*