May 2, 2024

Replacing Rush

Democrats, liberals and progressives can breathe a little easier because in the last couple of weeks the radio companies that distributed “The Rush Limbaugh Show” have announced a diverse group of replacements. 

Having a diverse group of hosts to replace Rush means that conservative talk radio will be fragmented and have many voices rather than one master bloviator.

By far the largest distributor of conservative talk radio is the Premiere Network, owned by the number-one radio company in revenue and number of stations (880), iHeart Media.  AXIOS MEDIA reports that Premiere Network announced last week “that the late Rush Limbaugh’s radio show will be taken over by sports journalist Clay Travis and radio host and political commentator Buck Sexton.”

Travis, 42, had a college football show on Fox Sports, and before that a similar show on a local Nashville radio station.  In 2010, The Nashville Scene named Travis “Best Sports Radio Host We Love To Hate.”   According to Wikipedia:

Travis has attracted harsh criticism for disputing government backed information about the COVID-19 pandemic.  Travis has repeatedly downplayed the severity of the disease, calling it “overrated,” claiming that it is less severe than the seasonal flu that fewer than several hundred would die of the disease in the US, that victims of the disease probably have been “killed a month or two earlier” than they would have been otherwise and inaccurately stated that the mortality rate for those under 80 and without pre-existing conditions is “virtually zero”.  He suggested that some advocates for mitigation measures to slow the spread were “rooting for the virus to triumph.”

From the Wall Street Journal on May 27:

Mr. Sexton, 39, is a radio host and political commentator who has served as an officer with the Central Intelligence Agency and a New York Police Department counterterrorism expert.  His three-hour weekday evening talk show, “The Buck Sexton Show”—formerly “America Now”—is syndicated to over 180 stations by Premiere, and he has served as a guest host for Mr. Limbaugh’s show.  Mr. Sexton is a regular on Fox News as a national security analyst and was previously national security editor for The Blaze.

Mr. Sexton pointed to their different backgrounds and younger ages as a boon for the show.

“The most dominant talk radio hosts have been from one generation; Clay and I represent the next phase.  We’re going to bring the perspective of two guys who see a country they’re deeply worried about, and a massive audience that needs people who will speak for them,” he said.

The name of the program will be “The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show.”  Note it’s a “show.”  In other words entertainment.

The second-largest radio company in terms of the number of stations it owns, Cumulus Media, announced that its network, Westwood One, would carry conservative radio host and popular podcaster Dan Bongino (47) to fill Rush’s time slot (12:00-3:00 pm) on its stations in markets including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C. 

Bongino is a far-right political commentator, radio show host, and author.  He served as a New York City policeman from 1995 to 1999, and as a Secret Service agent from 1999 to 2011.  He ran for Congress unsuccessfully as a Republican in 2012, 2014 and 2016.  The program is called “The Don Bongino Show.”

The third-largest radio company in terms of number of stations, but second to iHeart in revenue, Audacy (formerly Entercom, which bought the CBS Radio stations in 2017), made the most interesting decision to replace Rush.  Audacy named a woman, Dana Loesch, to take over the Rush time slot.  She will be the first woman conservative talk show host on a major, nationwide hook-up.

Dana Loesch (42) is a former spokesperson for the National Rifle Association (NRA) and a former writer and editor for Breitbart News.  She currently hosts “The Dana Show,” which is produced by the conservative radio network Radio America.  In a March press release, Radio America announced:

Today, award-winning, nationally syndicated radio talk show host Dana Loesch signed a new multi-year deal with Radio America as she continues to dominate talk radio during the 12-3 p.m. ET hours, a time slot she has successfully occupied with The Dana Show since 2014.  Dana’s radio program is currently broadcast on nearly 200 stations (and growing) and her audience is currently in the top 10 of syndicated programs nationwide, according to TALKERS Magazine.  As the most listened to female talk show host in the country, she has attracted a large and loyal following in syndication, expanding the news/talk audience to include more men and women in their 30s and 40s, something the aging format desperately needs. 

I think the key to Audcy’s decision to distribute “The Dana Show” in its markets is based to a large degree as expressed in the last sentence in the quote above – trying to appeal to younger demos and to women.

Even though Dana Loesch is the most popular female conservative radio talk show host.  She is not the only one.  More and more women are joining the conservative radio and podcast ecosystem.  AXIOS MEDIA reports:

A growing number of the digital disrupters in conservative audio are women.

“The Liz Wheeler Show,” hosted by former OANN host Liz Wheeler, and The Daily Wire’s podcast “Candace,” hosted by Candace Owens, both list in Apple’s top 100 political podcast chart.  Laura Ingraham, a longtime leader in conservative talk radio, shifted into podcasting a few years ago.

“I don’t know if ‘historic’ is the word I would use, but it’s true that the sisterhood of talk radio broadcasting is a small club,” says Loesch.

“I don’t attribute this to outdated attitudes about women in this sphere, but rather the simple reality of vocal tonality in this specific medium.  Men’s voices hit the lower registers better, so I’m grateful to be an alto.”

The AXIOS MEDIA newsletter quoted above also reported that there is a trend in local radio for talk shows to be more entertaining and appeal to a younger audience that includes more women. 

The concept that the way to make conservative talk radio (or any podcast or radio or TV program) more popular, especially with women, is to be entertaining is not news.

Rush Limbaugh was popular because we was an entertainer, not an expert in politics or government.  People who listened to Rush tell me he had a great sense of humor and was funny (to them).

Radio talk shows, local television station news broadcasts and cable news networks are entertainment.  The more visual, gossipy and outrageous, the more entertaining.

So being entertaining is not new, and the conservative talk shows that are most entertaining and fun and gossipy and celebrity oriented will succeed.

To me the more interesting concept is that more and more podcasts and talk radio is being delivered by women.  Is this because women are more informal, chatty, gossipy, soothing, less strident or are easier to listen to?  In terms of being informal, note that Dana Loesch’s show doesn’t use her last name, but Dan Bongino and Clay Travis and Buck Sexton’s shows use their full names.

In a survey done for the podcasting industry and reported in AdExchanger.com: “Selecting the right voice actors sets the tone.  For example, Nielsen research agrees with our own independent NYT Custom Study on our podcast users, which found that listeners are four times more likely to prefer a female voice.”

So be it.  Go Dana.

The Dilemma of Government-Funded News and Information

In my April 6 blog I advocated for not saving the paper part of the newspaper industry and suggested that the News Project might be a viable solution that would help entrepreneurs and smaller, non-chain owned news sites survive.

The News Project can help news and information sites create an online presence, manage content and generate revenue from advertising, subscriptions, events and ecommerce, for example.  However, the setup costs ($25,000) and minimum monthly fees ($5,000) might be too much for many small local news organizations.  Furthermore, if more than a small percentage (more than 10 percent, say) of a site’s total revenue comes from advertising, that tends to corrupt the editorial decision-making process.  If a substantial percentage of a site’s revenue comes from advertising, editors will tend to favor stories that entertain, titillate and outrage rather than publish news and information that audiences need to know.

Therefore, it is time to rethink the advertising-supported business model of small local news organizations.  Large, national news organizations such as The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox News and MSNBC have large audiences and can, thus, charge high enough rates for advertising to make a partially ad-supported business model work.  Also, the Times, the Post, the Journal, CNN, Fox News and MSNBC have millions of dollars in subscription revenue.  Smaller local news organizations cannot charge enough for advertising or subscriptions to support themselves, especially in the current quarantined households environment.  Also, who knows how far into the future the coronavirus shutdown of local retailers will last, and these local retailers are the advertising lifeblood of local news organizations.

Government is, therefore, the funder of last resort that can keep small local news organizations alive.  But what government: City, state or Federal?  City or state governments are too close to news sites for comfort.  Can mayors, governors and state legislators be trusted to keep a neutral, hands-off policy when a local site exposes incompetence or corruption?  As Mike Royko wrote years ago, the relationship between a journalist and a politician is like the relationship between a barking dog and a chicken thief.  That would change if the chicken thief was the dog’s owner who fed the dog.

The Federal government is further separated from local news organizations than city and state governments are, and, therefore is a better choice to fund local news.  The funding should not be part of the coronavirus stimulus money, but needs to be structured the way that the government partially funds PBS and NPR through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), a non-profit organization created in 1967 by the Public Broadcasting Act passed by Congress.  The CPB’s charter requires that the stations it funds operate with a “strict adherence to objectivity and balance in all programs or series of programs of a controversial nature.”

But this CPB model brings to the forefront a dilemma: Should government funding go to profit-oriented businesses whose primary focus is on increasing shareholder value rather than on serving the public interest in an objective, balanced manner?  PBS and NPR stations are educational, non-profit stations, should local new organizations become non-profit entities in order to accept Federal government funding?  The Salt Lake City Tribune adopted a non-profit corporate structure in November, 2019, so there is precedent for this switch to a non-profit business model.  A non-profit business model must be approved by the IRS, but once approved to become a 501 (c) (3) public charity, supporters‘ donations are tax deductible.

Should the Federal government also support commercial local broadcast stations?  Radio Ink publisher Eric Rhodes thinks so.  In an April 10 email Rhodes wrote “A Call for an Immediate Broadcaster Protection Act” that read in part:

I’m calling on Congress, the FCC, and other federal agencies to create a “Broadcaster Protection Act” that would make sure radio stays on the air, subsidizes stations’ power bills, ensures key personnel are employed and able to broadcast, and makes sure that landlords cannot evict radio or TV stations as a result of this crisis. I’d also call on music licensing companies and ratings services to suspend, forgive, or greatly adjust required payments for 90 days.  Though I understand that these companies are facing the same dilemma as others; they need to pay their employees, their artists, and their field reps, they too have skin in radio’s game.  Every station that goes dark is one billing client lost.

I stand firmly with the NAB, which is also urging Congress to step in, asking for immediate relief to keep local broadcasters on the air and warning that “Without relief, the local journalism and essential public services that broadcasters provide will begin to disappear.” 

Among the NAB’s proposals: modifications to the “Corona-3” Small Business Administration Paycheck Protection Program and “Distressed Sector” Lending Program to expand broadcasters’ eligibility and access; appropriating and directing federal advertising dollars to specific programs where community outreach is needed for spending on local media, including media serving minority communities; and designating a portion of the stimulus funds provided to businesses for advertising on local media.

Radio and TV are essential services during time of need, and lawmakers need to make special arrangements to keep them healthy.

The time to join forces and appeal to Congress to help local broadcasters is NOW, before stations begin to go dark, some — perhaps many — never to return.

After the 2008 Federal government bailout of banks and insurance companies that were too big to fail, some of those banks and insurance companies used their bailout bounties to pay executive huge bonuses and some used it to buy back stock.  These bonuses and buybacks caused public outrage, as well they should have.  So, will Congress and the public now approve of long-term funding for for-profit local news and information organizations (news sites and radio stations)?  Would Congress and the public want the government to fund the number-one radio conglomerate, iHeart Media, after its CEO, Bob Pittman, cut his yearly compensation to $1?  Would they want to fund number-two radio conglomerate, Entercom, after its CEO, David Field, cut his yearly salary to $850,000?

In my view, local news organizations that accept Federal funding that accounts for more than 33 percent of its total operating revenue should become non-profit corporations.  Furthermore, all news and information organizations that accept any Federal funding should limit their CEOs and top C-level executives to making a maximum yearly compensation of 150 times as much as that of the average yearly compensation of all employees.

The details of the above formula are not as important as the concepts: 1) That the Federal government should partially fund sustainable local non-profit news and information organizations and 2) have an effective oversight structure that limits stock buybacks and executive compensation to any news organizations, non-profit or for-profit, that it funds.

I’d love to learn about any other ideas you or anybody has about saving local news organizations to help keep our electorate informed and, thus, our democracy free.