The Curtis Sliwa vs 77 WABC saga continued this week, with both Sliwa and station owner John Catsimatidis commenting on the situation.
For the uninitiated, Sliwa is angry with the way Catsimatidis, 77 WABC, and hosts on the station talked about and covered his unsuccessful bid in the New York mayoral election.
Curtis Sliwa has said he’d never return to the brand, while Catsimatidis has stated that he’d welcome the longtime host back, noting that it’s his belief that the host likely said things from a place of anger after losing the election.
In an event, the topic has garnered plenty of attention in the news/talk radio space. Whether that has been good or bad attention is open to interpretation.
But a question arises from that attention: how would — or perhaps, should — news/talk radio leaders advise their brands, hosts, and employees to operate when a former employee is openly criticizing those associated with the station?
Barrett Media spoke to three well-respected Program Directors to understand how those leaders believe their brands and employees should operate in a similar situation. We granted the Program Directors anonymity to speak more freely on the subject.
Program Director 1
Program Director 1 leads a station in a major market.
This Program Director said they would encourage their hosts to talk about the situation, as long as the audience was still engaged.
“If the topic is compelling, I can’t tell my hosts not to talk about it,” they argued. “Especially if it has the chance to turn into great content that the audience is engaging with.”
They argued that the reason they would find that talk acceptable is because of the trust built between Program Director and talent.
“I — intricately — trust my talent to do the right thing, to handle a delicate situation properly, and to know when to pull the plug,” Program Director 1 said. “If you don’t, you should question why you have that person in the power chair in your studio to begin with. It isn’t ideal for a former employee to be so negative to us so publicly, but if that’s what the audience is talking about, we should be talking about it.”
When asked what their message would be to the former host talking negatively about the station, Program Director 1 said they’d operate out of genuine concern for their former employee.
“I would tell them that they need to think about what they’re doing to their own reputation,” this brand leader said. “Every company and every manager is different. Some might like that you’d be willing to say anything at any time. Others who might not be as familiar with you are going to write you off as someone they would never hire because of it.
Program Director 2
Program Director 2, like Program Director 1, leads a station in a major market.
Their sentiments, however, were different.
“We’re not talking about the inner workings of the station, what goes on behind the scenes, personnel decisions, or anything like that on (our station),” Program Director 2 said. “Nothing good comes from it.
“If we had a similar situation (to that of 77 WABC vs Curtis Sliwa), I would tell our guys, ‘Your feelings will get hurt, the old host’s feelings will get hurt, and we all look bad.’ That’s not smart, no matter how you slice it.”
This brand leader noted that they understand how difficult it would be to sit by while someone publicly lambasted the hosts and the station, but said that sometimes rising above the criticism is an important skill to master.
“When we have an angry text, email, call, or — sometimes we still get them — letters, I wouldn’t expect our hosts to be concerned about them. So why would you put stock in to what a disgruntled former employee is saying? You shouldn’t. Leave it alone.”
Program Director 3
Program Director 3 leads multiple stations.
That brand leader shared that they would advise their talent to stay away from the topic altogether.
“In my opinion, no,” the PD said when asked if they would suggest their hosts discuss a former host talking negatively about them. “I would just say persona non grata. He only got 5%, 7% of vote, or whatever he got. The most important thing for Curtis is to hear people say his name. Once you stop saying his name, that’s when he becomes not as important.”
Program Director 3 also added that they would advise Sliwa to stop speaking negatively about his past employer and colleagues.
“My belief is you never take a pee in the pool you’ve been swimming in,” they shared. “No personality is bigger than the brand. That has been proven over and over again by personalities moving from one station where they are usually popular to another station, ‘I want to stick it to the previous employer.’ It very rarely works, almost never.”
They added that when an exiting host attempts to burn bridges, they might not understand the other structures they set ablaze.
“I have had employees who have left my employ over time in ways that may have not been the most comfortable way to leave a station,” Program Director 3 said. “I’ve had them leave with total class, and I’ve had them burn everything down. The person who leaves with total class is the guy or gal who will always get a good word from me.”
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.
Garrett Searight is Barrett Media’s News Editor, which includes writing daily news stories, features, and opinion columns. He joined Barrett Media in 2022 after a decade leading several radio brands in several formats, as well as a 5-year stint working in local television. In addition to his work with Barrett Media, he is a radio and TV play-by-play broadcaster. Reach out to him at Garrett@BarrettMedia.com.
