Air America loses Providence RI and Charleston, SC

[Armstead]

Two stations (both Clear Channel I think) dumping Air America.


http://ltradio.blogspot.com/2005/09/whjjprovidence-phasing-out-aar.html
Ratings dipped (as they did for competition) in the past year or so. WHJJ caught a lot of flack for replacing much of their local programming with syndicated fare. Now they're going back to that. ...WHJJ decided to go with a syndicated lineup from liberal talk network Air America. Ratings immediately dropped, falling 16 percent from the fall of 2003 to the fall of 2004. Bill




http://ltradio.blogspot.com/2005/09/heres-new-one-wltqcharleston-sc-drops.html
WLTQ/Charleston, SC drops AAR for adult standards

Usually, it's been the other way around. And this is after ratings have started to improve. The Clear Channel AM has dropped the liberal Talk radio network's programming and is now simulcasting sister News/Talk WSCC-FM. Clear Channel/Charleston Director/Talk Programming Richard Bachschmidt tells R&R the simulcast is only temporary: On Tuesday WLTQ will flip to Adult Standards as "AM 730, The Music Of Your Life."

[checks-n-balances]

1. Now that shit's finally hitting the fan for GWB, NOW they pull out?

I guess they couldn't stand the heat, so they're getting out of the kitchen. Great timing, you cowards!

[KoKo]

2. I can understand many Southern Cities having problems with AAR.

I would be glad to hear which Southern Cities "AAR" is doing really well in, though. I'll bet there are some.

Charleston, SC would do very well with Ed Schultz. I'm hoping he can work his way into the markets that can't deal with AAR.

I think he got Atlanta and I can hear him with crackling in NC from liberal Chapel Hill...but he would definitely get an audience in those areas that go back to "Standards" or "Pop," in the South, I think. :shrug:

[dweller]

5. liberal Chapel Hill checking in

Too bad about Charleston, i think they just picked it up a few months ago, but that may have been Jones Radio which covers Big Eddie. Hopefully, if they've lost AAR, they've kept Big Ed.

Not sure, but is AAR covered mostly FM, or AM, b/c over here in this bit of blue Heavan, we are picking up the split programming of Jones Radio/AAR over AM. And this is from the town that hosts the PBS TVstations, FM NPR, etc. that have seemed to have gone over to the dark side, so I am hoping our local AM has grown in listenership with the addition of liberal radio.

have to have hope anyway.
dp

[Gloria]

3. Shows how vulnerable AAR is in hooking up with Clear Channel...

There were all those stations up for sale a year ago...all in small cities, across the South. I bet the freaktards snapped them up...

[Gloria]

4. A person on a Clark list recently gave a very detailed report

on AAR ratings vs. Limbaugh (from mid-July). Limbaugh continues to ream Franken. Frankly, I'm very wary about how AAR is really doing ratings-wise.

[KoKo]

6. AAR seems to be for a very hip, maybe urban audience.

Many folks live in areas where they need to be "weaned" away from Limbaugh and the other conservatives, and the Christian Shows 24/7.

I never saw AAR being able to do that. :shrug: That's why I've always defended Shultz here on DU. So many of our DU'ers are WAY HIP and SAVY and live in areas that Franken and the rest can get an audience. I just never saw that happening where I live. And, sadly I've become much less "Hip" and "Urban" than I used to be when I lived in the Northeast. It might be I've gotten older, too. :D

I find others on the Internet I like to listen better than both...but I do listen to Schultz sometimes and more than I do AAR. :shrug:

[Armstead]

7. AAR may be too "one note" for some areas

It may not necessarily be whether or not a market has enough liberals, but whether there are enough liberals who want to hear radio that is polarization 24/7.

I like AAR, but I often listen more often to stations like the BBC, Australian Broadcasting Co. and some domestic shows that are informative in a liberal sense but also broader in their focus.

[LTR]

8. Here's the situation

I'll chime in, since I run the blog that was referenced in this post.

In Charleston, ratings for WLTQ haven't been stellar, but were showing an upward trend. Still under a 1.0. The station's signal is a bit weak outside of Charleston (though it covers the coastline well during the day). Not sure why they flipped to Adult Standards, since it tends to be a very tought format to sell to advertisers.

In Providence, this was a situation where a station known for being 'live and local' went to a heavily syndicated approach. This was a questionable move businesswise, and I was surprised when they picked up AAR to begin with. Sounds like they're going back to being mostly local. Ratings took a serious hit afterward, but as far as AAR affiliates go, ratings were fairly decent.

I wouldn't read much into either of these situations. Decisions at Clear Channel stations are made at the local level, though the bigwigs in San Antonio suggested to their market clusters that 'progressive talk' was a strong up-and-coming format that has had success in other markets. Shake-ups like this are to be expected for any new enterprise (I like to use the FOX broadcast network as an example, which had an even rougher time when they first went on the air in the late '80's, with mass affiliate bailouts from skeptical station owners). In the case of Providence, I can see another station coming in and picking up liberal talk. There are a lot of stations in the area (though many of them a bit outside of the city). Still, it got decent ratings as an AAR affiliate, but it didn't do much for WHJJ. They just did it the wrong way, and expected too much out of it.

Liberal talk is not a quick fix for an established station in many cases. It is better used at this point for a station on the fringe of the market that hasn't gotten decent ratings in years. This is why so many smaller stations are picking it up, and some of them are doing fairly well with it. This is also a long-haul kind of format. Advertisers like to see some kind of ratings track history before jumping in, and that goes for any kind of format.

Again, don't read too much into any of this. These are two unique situations, and don't reflect the success of the format in other markets.

[Armstead]

9. I hope you're right

It's true that markets have different dynamics. RI seems like it would be much more hospitable to a liberal talk format than SC.

I worry about AAR relying so heavily on one or two large media monopolists though.

Anyway, my intention in posting this was more in the realm of news than broad conclusions.

There seem to be mixed signals about how well AAR (and liberal talk in general) are doing, now that it has been on the air for a while.

[LTR]

10. Well, it's pretty tough to avoid the 'large media monopolists', though

Clear Channel is one broadcaster that has been aggressive with progressive talk. They like to take chances on newer formats (though most of their 'new' formats are just rehashes of older ones). Progressive talk has allowed some of their stations to come up with exciting formats (instead of 24-7 feeds of FOX sports that get no ratings), and ones that their salesman can package with their other talk stations in particular markets. They see money in this format, and I certainly can't fault them for that. Plus, if they went batshit crazy and dumped liberal talk from all their stations, I'm sure there are struggling stations in their respective markets that would snap up the dropped shows.

There are a few other large companies that are carrying liberal talk. Entercom has flipped about three stations to the format, and the other big dog, Infinity, owns a successful liberal talker in Seattle. Saga also owns a couple. Many of AAR's affiliates are smaller operations, and these would be worth worrying about more, since the owners rely on the one station or so to bring in the bacon. Plus, they lack the promotional muscle of CC/Infinity/Entercom. With the big dogs, they usually own a cluster of stations in the market, and can package ad buys among their stablemates, allowing the little talk station to be instantly profitable. Remember, Air America and various syndicated shows on those stations are available on a 'barter' basis, meaning that it costs the station nothing to carry the shows, but they just allot commercial time to the network. Air America does have affiliates sign a contract, and are picky about what's packaged around their shows. Meaning that AAR has no problem with, say, Phil Hendrie on the same station, but has a problem with Rush, Hannity or Savage sharing the airwaves with Al Franken.

If liberal talk is to be taken seriously as a format, the larger media companies must be involved to an extent.

[Armstead]

11. It was a bad idea to allow the monopolies in the first place, but...

I guess the only advantage is that a corp can subsidize a new format like liberal talk with the i8ll gotten gains from conservative talk.

I remember the days when Talk Radio was a format that wasn't identified with any particular ideology. There were hosts who may have had a bias, but there was an overall balance among the programming.

Michael Jackson (not Jacko) was an interesting host, who was liberal but covered a lot of territory and subjects.

Ah well, I guess the goal in these times is to see liberal talk gain enough of a foothold to be an established format instead of a tentative newcomer.