The rising irrelevance of talk radio

[Mr. Jones]

Steve Elman and Alan Tolz, Boston Globe:

ONE MORE note on the significance of the presidential election of 2008: It's the first one in more than 30 years on which talk radio had no major impact.
Perhaps the Carter-Ford contest in 1976 was the last in which talk radio was so irrelevant to public opinion on candidates and issues. In retrospect, 1979 (the year the Iranian hostage crisis began) and 2004 (the year of George W. Bush's reelection) may well be regarded as bookends of talk radio's greatest influence on American politics.

Consider some of the major stumbles this year by the medium's 800-pound gorilla. Rush Limbaugh vigorously promoted three separate political objectives over the past year, all of which failed: derailing John McCain's quest for the Republican nomination, sabotaging Barack Obama's drive for the Democratic nomination by fomenting Republican crossover votes for Hillary Clinton, and ultimately stopping Obama's march to victory in the general election. Contrast this with the impact talk radio once had on local taxes, the impeachment of Bill Clinton, congressional pay raises, a mandatory seat belt law, etc.

What happened?

Most radio people hate to discuss the primary factor: overall use of their medium is in decline. Although the trend is affecting news and talk (including public radio) less than music programming, it is inexorable.

Alternatives to broadcast radio have proliferated - satellite, netcasts, downloads, blogalogue, iPod entertainment, cellphone updates. As a result, younger listeners largely ignore talk radio, and its existing audience is calcifying.

New ears - even middle-aged or senior ears - are vital to talk radio's influence because they are attached to brains that are available for persuasion, rather than brains that have already made a choice. In other words, if Limbaugh and Michael Savage (not to mention Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz, and other more recent adventurers in talk) fail to attract many new listeners, they end up talking only to those who agree with their opinions, and thus have a smaller chance to affect the ideas of the electorate in general.

Beyond the shift in media usage are three factors of content and style.

First, news-and-comment television has gradually usurped talk radio's position as the destination of choice for freewheeling opinion. Keith Olbermann and Bill O'Reilly are the major faces of the form, but news with an edge now defines the programming on Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN. Talk radio, even when its sounds stimulate imaginary pictures in the minds of listeners, is low-def.

Second, American listeners no longer expect talk-radio hosts to be reasonable - or even rational. Most listeners now assume that when they strike a talk show as they cruise across the dial, the talker will be a (sometimes rabid) promoter of a particular point of view.

Third, talk radio no longer even pretends to be a "town meeting of the air." The telephone call itself, which was a primary reason for the form's wide acceptance, has become an inconvenient appendage to most programs. Hosts, along with the usually inaudible producers, programmers, managers, and owners, ordinarily do not perceive callers' contributions as valuable use of airtime.

Phone calls from listeners once occupied 40 to 50 percent of a typical program. A host would often spend five to 10 minutes, and sometimes much more, with an individual caller, if the caller's ideas warranted it. Past paragons of talk familiar to many Bostonians - hosts like Jerry Williams, Paul Benzaquin, and David Brudnoy - actually argued with their callers. They asked them questions like, "What makes you say that?" or "Why do you feel that way?" This led the majority of listeners, the people who never made calls themselves, to value the medium as a place they could sample the ideas of others - even if they didn't agree with them.

But there's no going back, even if a modern host wanted to try. The American mass audience is dispersing, and talk radio, if it is to survive, will have to adapt to a nichified world.

Steve Elman worked for WBUR for 30 years. Alan Tolz is executive vice president and chief operating officer for Marlin Broadcasting. They are the authors of "Burning Up the Air: Jerry Williams, Talk Radio and the Life in Between."
© Copyright 2008 Globe Newspaper Company.

[Lester]

Didn't they say the same thing when Clinton won in '92 and '96?

[Big Media]

I believe there to be even more of a market for conservative talk NOW than while Bush is in office. Now, they have a liberal President, a liberal House, and a liberal Congress. In essence, conservatives will need to start building their case and rallying, recruiting, whatever you want to call it, their base to overthrow the current government and attempt to regain those seats.

Talk radio is still relevant. And more importantly, it is still very profitable.

[AC Carter]

If Limbaugh is so irrelevant, why did he just net a gozillion dollar deal? And it's not like Hannity or any of the other conservative talkers will be headed to the poor house anytime soon.
Keith Olbermann???? Are these guys serious? Does anybody watch MSNBC?

[Arp2]

The authors, supposedly broadcasters, make the mistake of believing the purpose of talk radio is to create some particular outcome. Does this mean they also believe the purpose of sports talk is to get a particular team to win...?

They also are just wrong in some of their facts.

[AC Carter]

The purpose of talk radio, like any other genre of radio, is to produce high ratings and make money. Do Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and the rest have a political agenda they want to advance? Sure. But if they couldn't make a boatload of money while advancing said agenda, they would do something else. The Globe columnists have totally missed the point.

Just checked the spring book numbers and it looks like talkers did pretty well ... WVHU-AM was seventh in Huntington-Ashland, while WCHS-AM was number five in Charleston. WTVN-AM was No. 1 in Columbus. WLW-AM was No. 1 in Cincinnati. WTAM-AM was No. 1 in Cleveland. WJR-AM was No. 2 in Detroit. KDKA-AM was No. 2 in Pittsburgh. KFI-AM was fourth in L.A. (that's Los Angeles, not Lower Alabama). WINS-AM was sixth in New York City. WFLA-AM was number two in Tampa.

[Bob Campbell]

The point, I believe, is not whether people are listening, they are. I think what they're getting at is the power of that talk. And whether it's ever really had any power. Rush, Hannity, all of them, foamed at the mouth trying to get McCain elected. We saw how that worked out. Listeners realize it's a "SHOW". If Rush and the rest got ratings from flogging the liberal point of view they'd be doing that. To think they're "true believers" in anything other than their own wallets is ridiculous. Look in the mirror, what's most important to you as a broadcaster? Your ratings and paycheck. The major talkers aren't any different from anybody on here.

[AmpedNow]

The authors, supposedly broadcasters, make the mistake of believing the purpose of talk radio is to create some particular outcome.

Very good point...

The purpose of talk radio is to engage and entertain. Take from it what you will.

I'm still waiting for FM talk stations to pop up in WV...

Rush Radio 99.5 in New Orleans should be a good model. And, they broadcast in HD. Talk in HD.

[Lester]

If Rush and the rest got ratings from flogging the liberal point of view they'd be doing that. To think they're "true believers" in anything other than their own wallets is ridiculous. Look in the mirror, what's most important to you as a broadcaster? Your ratings and paycheck. The major talkers aren't any different from anybody on here.

Didn't the President-Elect get a little bent over the "ineffective" Limbaugh and his antics regarding Indiana?

[AC Carter]

What's funny to me is when you turn on FoxNews, CNN, MSNBC, etc. around 5 p.m. and find that one of their top stories is based on what Limbaugh said during his three hours that day. Limbaugh was nearly a regular news feature on TV during the primaries.

[Arp2]

I think what they're getting at is the power of that talk. And whether it's ever really had any power.

They're Boston guys...you've been a Boston guy....let's look at it in that context and remember some of those talk guys there. I mean, WBZ has pretty much literally swung that big stick at times, and a guy like Brudnoy has been the rockstar rabble-rouser of the Bach and Beethoven set if there ever was one....the dullest-sounding talk host you've ever heard had something like a 24 share in the evening, and local politicians feared him like the nationals feared Russert but knew they simply had to get by him.....

[cgarison]

What's funny to me is when you turn on FoxNews, CNN, MSNBC, etc. around 5 p.m. and find that one of their top stories is based on what Limbaugh said during his three hours that day. Limbaugh was nearly a regular news feature on TV during the primaries.

Limbaugh was at his best during the Clinton Era.

Although people that I know that listen to conservative talk radio and Faux News have the most peculiar outlook on the new Obama presidency. Most of them are pulling piles of cash out from under the beds to purchase all the firearms they can at a time.

Dummies.

My more liberal friends and myself are just setting back on our (now twice the size of) Clinton Era stash of powder, lead, brass, primers and related paraphernalia waiting for the ban on ammunition. Of course I have a private stash for me while my most "liberal" friends are looking to sell for a profit.