John Howell, a seasoned name in Chicago radio, recently found himself at a crossroads. After over four decades in the industry, his journey at WLS 890 AM came to a close in September. But instead of fading away silently, he decided to make his voice heard in a powerful op-ed for The Chicago Sun-Times.
In his op-ed, John Howell passionately conveys his concern about the direction in which radio has been heading. He highlights a pressing issue – the dangerous spread of falsehoods, conspiracies, and divisive content under the deceptive banner of “It’s just business.” It’s a sentiment that resonates deeply with those who share his views on responsible journalism.
John Howell knows the power of media all too well, and he draws a crucial distinction between using exaggeration and satire for commentary and intentionally misleading and misinforming an audience. The rise of extreme rhetoric from both ends of the spectrum troubles him deeply.
It’s a poignant warning that calls on radio hosts and the companies they represent to exercise restraint and discretion, especially when dealing with serious, incendiary, life-and-death topics.
His message is clear: don’t pander to the under-informed, as you’ll eventually regret it. Those who do so should be held accountable, along with their enablers and sponsors. It’s a call for ethical journalism that reminds us that with great power comes an even greater responsibility.
In a recent interview with Barrett News Media, John Howell talks about his motivation for penning the article, his greatest accomplishment in his remarkable career, and how the news/talk format can strike the balance between sharing ideas and listening to different viewpoints.
Ryan Hedrick: What has been the industry’s response to your op-ed, published by various media outlets, including The Chicago Sun-Times?
John Howell: I’ve heard from many people in the business and many people outside of the business.
RH: What prompted you to write the op-ed?
JH: The killing of the six-year-old here in Chicago. It was national news, and it still is; seeing that, I was waiting for the proper moment to put my thoughts out there on the responsibilities of radio stations, companies, and hosts, and that seemed like the event to express myself.
I didn’t just want to have it come from my firing. I thought complaining about the industry was gratuitous and self-indulgent, and I wanted to wait until it was relevant. That’s what prompted me to write the piece.
RH: You’ve been in the industry a long time. What do you think about current trends?
JH: The old adage of broadcast is no longer. People find their niche, and they exploit their niche. If it’s a narrow, deep vein, they are going to mine it for all it’s worth. I understand why music radio stations play the same records over and over again. I get that. You have to be very careful. With a microphone comes great power, meaning you have to exhibit some good responsibility. You can not trigger the stupid.
I wrote in my piece that the vast majority of talk radio listeners are very well informed; you don’t have to worry about them missing your satire or your double entendre. It is a small majority of people. As a host or station, you are not responsible for giving them a reason to run off the rails.
RH: Do you think conservative news/talk radio can strike a balance and invite people who don’t agree with them to have a conversation?
JH: Terrestrial radio has painted itself into a position now where everybody is going to have to find their small but loyal audience. I don’t see many successful stations that broadcast to the city or the state any longer. This is due in part to technology with syndicated radio programs that don’t cost the local stations anything.
I understand the business aspect of this as well. I do bemoan the day you had major radio stations in small and large markets that reflected the community. A lot of that is gone now, and I don’t think that it’s coming back.
RH: What are you most proud of in your 40-year broadcast career?
JH: I had some very successful shows in country and rock music. Those are great moments in my career. I am most proud that I’ve been accused of being too hip for the room. In other words, I’ve never really said anything on the radio I truly did not believe. I’ve gotten into topics I wanted to avoid exploring in the past based on what the station wanted to be done, and I abandoned all that pretty quickly.
As I’ve written in a couple of pieces since I’ve been on the beach, I only talk about interesting things. I refuse to peddle chicken excrement and call it chicken salad. I just won’t do it. If it costs me money, it costs me money, I won’t do it. I prefer the view from the high road.
RH: Did your firing at WLS come as a surprise?
JH: I knew I was an outlier. There’s no doubt. You just had to listen to the station. The station has been lagging in the ratings for a long time. But, budgetarily, I was one of two local shows. Local shows can be eliminated overnight, and then you have to flip a switch and bring in a syndicated host or somebody already on staff. It was not unexpected. The timing was surprising to me.
RH: Do you plan to get back into the business?
JH: I’ll see what the future holds. There have been inquiries about my availability for stations in Chicago and some other networks. I was never a big spender; I saved a lot of money, and I am in a good position where I’ll be fine if I spend the days in creative pursuits other than radio. There are plenty of opportunities, and I will explore those when the time is right.
RH: What changes would you make if you could change the news/talk format right now?
John Howell: I don’t know if there are any mechanisms available right now, either through communities or the government. I’m not for censorship, I’m not for a fairness doctrine, I’m not for any of that, but stations have demonstrated that it’s difficult for them to self-police, and I don’t have the answers. If I did have that answer, I would probably be in management.
