-=jd=- wrote:
On Tue 06 Apr 2004 02:34:51a, Peter Maus
wrote in message news:fcscc.44302$He5.853242@bgtnsc04-
news.ops.worldnet.att.net:


{snippage}

Franken was interviewed on NPR this past weekend concerning Air
America, and was surprisingly open about the fact that he's not even
sure he likes Radio enough to consider it a full time venue. His
contract only runs one year. These are admissions that are
generally not hte sort of thing that a radio station wants to hear
of it's flag hosts. Radio, if it's to garner loyalty, and long term
impact, want's commitment and public commitment at that for it's
talent. Something that no one at Air America Radio has done.



It would not surprise me if whoever is producing the format picked the
current hosts thinking thay would "jump-start" it - get it going long
enough to ease longer-term talent into place.



It's not like that hasn't been tried before. But with generallly
poor results. Radio, like most anything in the entertainment field,
finds success in consistency. In major markets it often takes a
talent two years just to establish. Bait and Switch, usually doesn't
work. Radio stations are publicly expected to hit the ground with
their fields in place, so that the establishment can begin. Easing
in the REAL talent after an initial bang, usuall means that the new
talent remains unestablished for that much longer. In today's
broadcast environment, that's a stupendous waste of resources.

Still, based on what I've heard so far, waste of resource
doesn't seem to bother these people.


From what's being reported, these big names aren't yet having much of a
WOW! effect. I would have expected an "All-Star Blitz" in the first few
weeks, just to grab some positive attention and snag as many listeners as
possible. Heck, Limbaugh can compete with what they have so far just using
guest hosts.


Bear in mind how long it took Limbaugh to become established. And
his story in notable for his rapid growth. Still, it was far from
overnight. And the same can be said of his guest hosts.

So far, with the exception of Randi Rhodes, there's not a lot of
established radio talent in that stable. Time is something, if
they're going to have the impact they wish, that they do not have in
abundance. And as scattered as Franken, so far, has been, that WOW
effect may have already been missed.



Still, the new format is brand-new - it's barely got it's feet wet. I'd
give it a year or so before anyone starts doing a post-mortem. It may yet
take off like a rocket.


And that's the point. What they're attempting may, in fact
succeed. It will not be taking off like a rocket. Nothing with a
strictly political motive ever does. What the point of much of this
thread has been about is the seemingly lack of focus, or lack of
long term viability for the network.

Long term viability doesn't appear what this network is about.
And success in broadcasting is found in focussing on the listeners,
not the broadcasters. Franken has already abrogated that position
with the very name of his program.

By calling the program the "O'Franken" factor, he's clearly
calling out Bill O'Reilly. Nothing wrong with that. And it's a
pretty brassy way of doing it. But in doing so, Franken has
surrendered a crucial indentity issue for his program. Rush,
Hannity, even O'Reilly have all staked their identity in their name
and personality without compromise. Even Art Bell created a clear
and distinct identity for Coast To Coast. But by coopting
O'Reilly's "Factor" Franken has surrendered a key element of his
show's identity, stating in the very title, that he's there to be a
PITA to O'Reilly, and that alone should endear him to listeners.

As clever as that is, it's also an enormous waste of opportunity.
Radio listeners wish to identify with their favorite personalities.
They wish to establish relationships with them. One way, to be sure,
but relationships none the less. Franken has tipped his hand, that
rather than keeping both eyes and his microphone on his audience, a
key factor, so to speak, in building loyalty and establishing
credibility among his listeners, he's instead keeping his eyes on
O'Reilly. And by his patter, his attention is diverted to Rush as
well.

Precisely not the way to build a base. Poking fun at the big guys
is one thing. But making them a part of your identity, is quite
another.

What Franken has done is the equivalent of Letterman calling his
show 'The Late Show Starring David Lenoman.' He's surrendered a
portion of is identity to Leno. Which is a tacit acknowledgement
that Leno is bigger than he, and he accepts that without ambition.
Franken has acknowleged that O'Reilly is bigger than he is and has
accepted it. That's no way to build an audience. And audiences have
a way of getting very tired of tuning in to hear Franken, and
hearing talk about Rush or O'Reilly.

Again, this is not to autopsy this new network. It's barely a
week old, for heaven's sake. But they've made some questionable
choices in strategy. Choices that radiate the soul of an also-ran.


p




-=jd=-