If you’re a football fan, then you’re familiar with the classic Bill Parcells quote “You are what your record says you are“. I’ve always loved that line because it means that you can make all the excuses you want, but the result is what’s attached to your brand’s name.
It comes into play so often too in radio. You have a bad ratings book, and quickly it’s the fault of Nielsen’s PPM system, talent being out sick or on vacation, a lack of marketing, or the competitor having Voltaire. It could never be your fault or the brand’s fault, because that would mean acknowledging your own shortcomings.
In the radio business, much like the world of sports, companies, stations and people have very different goals. For some brands, anything less than a championship is unacceptable. For others, being relevant, in the game, or better than mediocre is acceptable. Some groups will shake things up quickly if a plan isn’t working, others wait for dinosaurs to return to the planet before they even consider switching gears.
It’s easy to say you’re committed to winning and you’ll do whatever it takes to succeed, but if that mentality doesn’t exist throughout every department inside the organization, it becomes much harder for a brand to have collective success.
First of all, if winning was easy, everyone would do it. Secondly, while people on the programming end care about connecting with the audience and delivering ratings to justify their impact, promotions and sales people, along with station managers, often look harder at generated revenues/profits and customer satisfaction, than they do the product’s performance.
The success of your show/brand may help the business end of the operation tell a better story, and that does help them with their demands for higher ad rates, but if the station’s numbers are lower, they still have to paint a great picture, and produce dollars, despite the programming team underperforming.
While we can agree that the job of the business department is to tell a positive story and increase profits for the company, shouldn’t there be higher accountability on the product end too? If sales people are expected to increase profits, and charge higher rates per commercial on a year to year basis, then doesn’t it make sense to expect the programming team to perform better year to year too?
Now some of you may be saying “Don’t put that pressure on us, we’re fine right where we are“, but I don’t think or operate that way. There’s a big difference in the mindset of one who expects to win and consistently challenges themselves, and others who are satisfied with the status quo. You either seek total domination and being the best, or you don’t. It’s that simple.
Can you imagine Tom Brady, Derek Jeter, Michael Jordan or Wayne Gretzky saying “let’s do what we’ve done before, that should be good enough“? Each of those individuals are driven by their own desire to be great, that no owner, coach, or teammate needs to say anything to light their competitive fire.
It’s what separates a coach like Bill Belichick from Joe Philbin. It’s the difference of owners like Robert Kraft and George Steinbrenner who give their people what they need to succeed, and owners like Jimmy Haslam and Jeffrey Loria who always get in the way. It’s why an athlete like LeBron James continues to improve and excel, and others like Carmelo Anthony showcase talent but never reach a championship level.
Great teams and players rise to the top, and welcome higher expectations and challenges. They want to be tested to show what they’re made of, and nobody puts more pressure on them except themselves.
It’s an easy thing to recognize, and I wonder why more broadcasters and companies don’t notice it themselves.
If you’re a sports talk radio station, and your ratings are consistently outside the Top 10 with Men 25-54, there should be some concern and a number of questions being asked. Everything should be analyzed from the station’s name, position and lineup, to the content approach, the market’s appetite for sports radio, and nobody should be satisfied unless solutions are provided to help the brand improve.
Maybe the signal isn’t strong enough, which means you need to either make the investment to play with the big boys and drive bigger ratings and revenues, or get used to where you are.
Maybe your market isn’t a great fit for the format, and while I hate to see any station flip out of the format, if the audience isn’t going to support it, and you’re going to lose money, then maybe it’s a bad investment.
If it’s your personnel, there’s a simple solution – you change it. Teams change rosters all the time, and if that’s what it takes to lift a brand from 20th place to 5th, then be willing to make those difficult decisions. I don’t like seeing anyone lose an opportunity, but this is a results oriented business, and you can’t let personal feelings get in the way of what helps you maximize your brand’s potential.
Last but not least, if it’s the approach, brand name, or on-air positioning, once again you need to modify it to suit your talent, and the wants and needs of the audience. You can try to force your ideas and style on people, but if they’re rejecting it, you either adjust your game plan, or someone else will do it when they’re sitting in your chair in the future.
As easy as it is to put the pressure on the shoulders of the on-air talent and programmers, I think pressure equally needs to be placed on corporate managers and ownership. The people up top need to set the tone for what is and isn’t acceptable inside the company. Stock prices rise and decline based on performance, and if goals are laid out and agreed to by each department, and the resources and support are provided to help people do their best work, then they should be able to deliver. If they don’t, then they also need to be held accountable.
When I see a sports station sitting in 15th-30th place, for longer than 12-18 months, the competitor in me can’t help but question what’s going on. Remember, this is the ranking with Men 25-54, not all listeners. If you add older/younger people into the equation, along with women, the performance is even worse.
Is this in line with the company’s vision for the brand? Is it acceptable to the company, market manager, programmer, and talent? Are raises being given and contracts renewed for people who work there? If so, what’s the rationale?
I’m all for rewarding good performers, but if you haven’t improved, and the company hasn’t made more money, then why should you receive more? This isn’t a government position where you earn annual increases for time on the job.
If you’re operating this format (which is expensive), and you’re consistently performing 15th or worse with Men 25-54, it’s going to be difficult staying profitable. Maybe you have some national shows on your airwaves which helps you reduce costs, and in the short-term that helps you make a few dollars, but long-term, it’s hard to create a thriving business without a higher performance.
For me it goes back to two questions:
Are you trying to win, or stay afloat?
Are you accepting failure/mediocrity or doing whatever it takes to build a winner?
Great organizations don’t apologize for expecting greatness from their people, and they certainly don’t wait long to make adjustments if the formula isn’t working.
If your group and/or people aren’t where they need to be, what are you doing to change the outcome? Maybe you won’t beat your competitor today, but you certainly better be trying, and improving, and your goal better be to overtake them.
It comes down to this, “Are you in it to win it, or just happy to be in the game“?
But what the heck do I know, I’m just a guy who thinks winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing. Guys like Dan Snyder and James Dolan have certainly proven otherwise.
It was Monday night June 8th. I had just left San Francisco as Program Director of 95.7 The Game, and was driving cross country, when I reached the outskirts of Cleveland, and decided to put on the city’s local sports talk radio station 92.3 The Fan.
Immediately I was drawn in for two reasons. First, the voice of Ken Carman was powerful and passionate, and he carried an authoritative presence in the way he delivered his opinions.
Secondly, he teased an upcoming conversation with Joe Fortenbaugh, who works at the station I had left one week earlier (95.7 The Game), and he explained that he wasn’t happy with Joe, and was going to the clear the air with him. I turned to my girlfriend Stephanie and asked “what do you think Joe said to fire this guy up” and we were both intrigued and wanting to hear what was coming up next.
When the show returned from its commercial break, Ken did a wonderful job setting up the drama. He started off by talking about the NBA Finals between the Cavs and Warriors, and then segued to discussing how Fortenbaugh had talked trash about the city of Cleveland, and gave reasons why the Bay Area, its teams, and its fans, were better.
Hearing Joe’s take, (which I had no part in creating, but knew was done tongue-in-cheek to fire up Bay Area fans and drum up some fun banter between both cities), didn’t sit well with Ken, and he took to the airwaves with a mission to defend his city, its teams, and more importantly, his listeners. Ken brought Joe on to the air, and probed into the reasons why Joe would tear into the city of Cleveland, and wasted no time firing back, and expressing his displeasure with his assessments, and eventually hung up on him.
Ken Carman interviews Joe Fortenbaugh on 92.3 The Fan
It didn’t matter who was right or wrong. What impressed me, was how Ken understood his audience that night, and made sure they knew he had their backs. If you were a Cleveland sports fan listening to that segment, there’s no way you turned off the radio without gaining respect, and admiration for the way Ken handled an out of town personality talking negatively about your city.
Keep in mind, at this time, I didn’t know Ken Carman from the next guy walking down the street. I did know Joe Fortenbaugh, I hired him in San Francisco, and I consider him a good friend. I had every reason in the book that night to rip into Ken for taking one of my guys to task, but instead I found myself appreciating the exchange between two strong minded personalities, and their refusal to back down and stand up for each of their cities, made for an entertaining listen.
From that point on, I was connected to the show, and I listened to the next hour of it, and felt I was listening to someone who was going to continue to climb the ladder in the Cleveland market. Ken was bold with his opinions, wore his heart on his sleeve with the Cleveland teams, incorporated some funny WWE soundbites as drops into his show, engaged with callers in a fun and spirited way, and he had his finger on the pulse of what was important to local fans.
As luck would have it, the next day I went to lunch with 92.3 The Fan’s Program Director Andy Roth. I complimented him on finding Carman and putting him on the air. I felt he had a pretty good talent on his airwaves, and I could tell from the way he talked about him, that he felt the same way.
Later that day, I was fortunate to get a quick tour of The Fan’s studios, and wouldn’t you know it, but Ken was at the studio, 4-5 hours before his shift. I had a chance to make an introduction, and he seemed startled when my girlfriend introduced herself as Joe Fortenbaugh’s girlfriend. After we laughed that one off, I told him I was impressed with the way he directed last night’s show, especially the segment with Joe, which had its contentious moments, and thought he had a good sound and was doing good work.
Then in July, Andy Roth had a decision to make. He had a vacancy in morning drive, and had gone through two months of evaluations to determine the right fit opposite Kevin Kiley. Kevin is a strong talented personality, who’s worked in many top markets across the country, and if you’re going to co-host with him, you need to be on your game.
Well, Andy made the call, and summoned Ken to become Kevin’s full-time partner on the morning show. I don’t believe he would’ve put a young developing talent like Ken in that that spot if he didn’t think he could hold his own. It’s always easier choosing the guy with more experience, and a proven track record, but you can’t teach great natural talent, and Ken has it.
Since making the move into morning drive, Ken’s more than held his own. I’ve tuned in on a couple of occasions, and while the show is still finding its groove, and identity (they’ve been together for less than 2 months), I hear Ken gaining confidence, and proving he belongs. As more Cleveland fans become familiar with his style, approach, and dedication to his hometown and their teams, I think they’re going to enjoy a lot more of what he brings to the table.
I give a lot of credit to Andy Roth for seeing something in Ken. He gave him a platform (the night show) to learn and grow for the past few years, and that hard work, and willingness to accept feedback obviously paid off, because Andy felt confident enough to further invest in him by pairing him with Kiley in morning drive. Now Ken has the ability to learn from, and benefit from Kevin’s years of success, and that will help him tremendously in the future, as he furthers his own development as an on-air talent.
I had the chance to connect with Ken to learn some details about his background, and his approach to his craft, and I think you’re going to enjoy the conversation – especially the part about his official contract signing with The Fan. When Andy shared this story with me, I knew it had to be told to everyone. Also, make sure to watch the video of Ken watching a Browns game. It’s highly entertaining, and showcases what real passion for a hometown team looks like, but be advised that there’s a lot of colorful language in it.
Q: When did you first start listening to sports radio? What attracted you to it?
A: I first started listening to sports radio when I was 11 years old. I was in middle school and for some reason, I was looking through the newspaper in study hall, and they had radio schedules in it, and The old 1220 had the Kenny Roda show on. The more I listened to it, the more I liked it.
Q: What was your first sports radio job? What did you do?
A: I originally wanted to be a writer, but a high school assistant principal encouraged me to do radio. My supervisor at my college radio station also pushed me to apply for my first ever job as a board op at 640 WHLO in Akron, which was part of a Clear Channel cluster (now I-Heart). I ended up working as a board op and everything kind of took off from there.
Q: Who have been some of your influences who made you want to pursue this industry?
A: My first bosses, Keith Kennedy and Greg Ausham, were major influences on not just how to do radio, but also how to treat people, and how to get better as you grow. Every boss who has given me a chance to do something for them has helped me out, but a little confidence went a long way back then.
Q: As a sports fan, which teams/players are you most loyal to?
A: I’m most loyal to the three teams in Cleveland but over the last few years, it’s not even because I’m a fan of the teams. I get to see the teams from a different perspective now, so it’s changed how I enjoy them. That’s both good and bad. For example, there are times I really want to go nuts on the Browns for what they do and don’t do, and sometimes I do, but I also get to see how hard they work, and even though they run into their own way sometimes, there are a lot of people who have the best of intentions.
I find myself wanting the teams to do well also because the fans want them to do well. I like happy people, and happy listeners, and while it’s not the most damning flame throwing stuff so much, I think it’s easier to get ideas across than just the same old negative opinions.
Q: I’m told that your journey to sign your contract with 92.3 The Fan was rather memorable. Where were you when you signed your deal and what made it interesting?
A: I signed my contract on the steps of the church where my wife and I were married at. Andy Roth (92.3 The Fan’s Program Director) had to get it signed to get it to the legal department before I left the country on my honeymoon. At the time, I lived an hour away in Youngstown, so we were texting each other on how we were going to get the documents to one another while my wife and I were getting our pictures done! I felt bad, but if my wife and I wanted to eat I had to get that contract signed. So, Andy came to Youngstown, and I signed it on his back. My uncle came up to him and slapped Andy on the back because he thought Andy was officiating the wedding (not knowing it was going to be done by a Catholic priest). An awesome day, but a long one.
Q: Since joining The Fan, you spent a large part of your time developing your brand while hosting the night show. What was the best/toughest part of hosting evenings?
A: The best part of the evenings was that there were a lot of times where you could experiment and make mistakes. We made a lot of them, but we also did some really great things that I’ll always be proud of. Also, a lot of news breaks in the evening so you get the first crack at it. The worst part of it was that you’re up against live sports, and there were times where I was the only one in the room. If there was a big game on, and some folks were cutting sound, I’d have to fill ALL the time. I would get complaints about being a windbag, and that I wouldn’t take calls, but there were times when there was no one else there, and no one calling! I can understand where some listeners were coming from, but a peak behind the curtain sometimes is the only thing I’d want folks to understand.
Q: You’re known to be accessible to the audience on social media, including putting your real life out there for the audience’s enjoyment. There’s no better example of this than the video that circulated of you watching a Browns game (Ken’s wife Liz captured this piece of video gold). When you see this video, what’s your immediate reaction, and how did the audience respond to it?
A: There’s a lot of people who see the video and they really like it. I’m a little ashamed of it to be honest, just because I cuss so much in it. I really want the teams here to win, and I meant every word I said, but man, I could have dialed it down a bit. My favorite reaction though is when people say they do the same thing. Sometimes hubris takes over, and I’m guilty of it too, when we think our opinions are better than others. They’re not. There are smart fans all over, and many want the same things I do. It’s become a reminder to me to try to hear everyone out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=361ntOLs2Cc
Q: Why do you believe it’s important as a personality to be accessible on social media and share your life outside your show? What is the downside of it?
A: I think people want to be heard, and Twitter/Facebook is a great place for that. Everyone has an opinion to be respected, and even though I might not be able to address them all, that person deserves respect, so that’s what I try to give. The downfall of it is that Twitter especially can be like a driveby shooting. You’ll have people who didn’t hear you right, or heard you say something that you didn’t actually say, or they read a tweet wrong, or are just trolls. Or they just don’t like you. They can take a bite out of you 140 characters at a time with no repercussions. I think there’s people who see something other than a person.
Q: Growing up as a diehard Cleveland sports fan, what are some of the things that you believe make the area and its teams great and unique that the outside people may not be aware of?
A: It’s not the losing. I think it’s the hope that something will actually happen. I think it will sooner than later, but when it hasn’t, people have been able to dust it off and move on. I use the Browns leaving in ’95 as an example. The NFL can be a cold hearted, cutthroat business, and to get the NFL to give a franchise three years later (as misguided as they may be at times) shows the passion of this fanbase.
Q: As you look down the road, where do you hope to be in the next 5-10 years and in order to reach those goals what must you do?
A: I see myself in Cleveland. I grew up in NE Ohio, and I think that as long as I continue to work at this and not get lazy, I can enjoy a long career here. If a top 3-5 market came calling, I’d have to think about it, but as of right now, and for the long term future, I can’t picture myself anywhere but in Cleveland hosting shows.
Q: For someone reading this whose looking to break into the industry or is working in a smaller market and trying to reach the big city, what advice do you want to pass along to them?
A: Treat it like acting. Major in something else in college. Know that a lot of people who try it, don’t make it, and realize that the second you believe you’ve made it, you could be on your way out, BUT, try it out! It would be a shame for someone to love it, and want to do it, and look back on life regretting that they never tried it. You’ll have to pay a lot of dues, and work a lot of odd jobs at the beginning, but in the long run, giving it everything you can is worth it. There’s a lot of regular jobs out there, and someday I might even have one of them, but this is a lifestyle. It’s amazing from the second you break in, to the second it ends.
Ken Carman can be heard weekday mornings on the “Kiley & Carman” show, 6am-10am (ET) on 92.3 The Fan. Follow him on Twitter @Ken Carman.
I was reading Colin Cowherd’s interview with the Hollywood Reporter, and he said something that stuck with me. He mentioned how Pat Riley recommends changing jobs every 10 years in order to stay fresh, and remain challenged. I found that interesting. Most people prefer the safe bet led by routine and consistency over unpredictability.
Others though loathe predictability. They seek to be challenged. Reaching their maximum potential carries much higher importance. Neither way is better than the other. It’s simply a matter of each individual making a decision which best fits who they are.
During the past year I’ve had time to contemplate a number of possibilities related to my future. As crazy as it may sound, it was refreshing to have my nerves rattled a little, the fire in my belly rekindled, and question marks swimming around my brain daily, wondering if my next move would be wise or foolish. A little career anxiety can be a good thing.
When I analyzed my situation and where I wanted to go, I knew one thing would influence my path. That was the location. For the past thirteen years I’ve lived in thirteen apartments and houses in Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Missouri and California. Coming home to New York, and being near my son was critical. If you read my “Leaving California” column in February, then you know this was why I left San Francisco at the end of my contract this past June.
I’ve been very lucky to build great friendships and relationships with a number of different executives and radio operators. During the past six months, they’ve put my will to the test. While it’s flattering to know others value your work, I knew it was time to go home. No amount of power or money was going to change my mind.
By making the decision to return to New York, I knew it’d present difficulties since things at my level in the big apple don’t change much. It’s a lot easier to have your pick of the litter of high profile jobs when you do good work, and are willing to move anywhere. A fancy title, larger market, and bigger paycheck are all things many people in my position should want. I’ve been a hired gun for a long time though, and while it’s been professionally fulfilling, and led to some incredible friendships and relationships, it wasn’t going to help me be closer to my son, loved ones, friends or home state.
As I thought about what I enjoy most, I knew having my family with me was top priority. Then when it came to my professional desires, I discovered my real passion is in teaching, coaching, writing, analyzing data, discovering and recruiting talent, and brand building.
That said, there are certain parts of programming a radio station that are exciting and difficult to ignore.
You get to work with a number of people from all different backgrounds. You’re trusted to make key decisions, coach people, and deliver results. The tone of the brand, and the way people operate is a result of your direction. That is the fun part of the job, one that I’m glad I experienced during the past decade.
While those aspects of the job are enjoyable, there are also limitations. For instance, when you work inside one building, you’re restricted to helping your employer and staff. You may talk to others in different locations, but your ability to assess what’s happening in other cities and other companies, and contribute to helping them be successful isn’t possible. If you’re doing that, you’re likely not focused enough on your own brand.
You’re also limited in the information you can share, the networking you can do, and the honesty in which you provide your views beyond your employer’s walls. Sometimes you don’t make the final call, and you’re tasked with spending more time on operating budgets, promotions and sales challenges, than leading the department you were hired to provide guidance and leadership for – programming!
As I reviewed my career and thought about Pat Riley’s quote, I felt it was time for a new challenge. I love the sports media industry and see it growing more. Being a part of its future is important to me. However, I’ve put a lot of time, thought, and passion into my work. Leading a brand can be fun and provide additional perks, but I believe I can make a bigger difference for the industry, beyond one physical address.
Dan Patrick said when he left ESPN that he knew he was going to have multiple bosses. I plan to experience that same fate.
So after nearly twenty years in radio, I am officially announcing the launch of my company, Barrett Sports Media. It’s one that I have been slowly building behind the scenes, and I enter into this new venture head first with unwavering enthusiasm.
So you’re wondering “what the heck does that mean” right? Let me explain.
As I work on developing my brand and my company, I’ll be doing different things for different people. I’ll be writing more on this website and interacting with people and audio operators all across the country to give this format and the people who perform in it a higher profile, since it deserves one.
I’ll also be doing some teaching and speaking, serving as a liaison for programmers and corporate executives, providing one-on-one instruction and job assistance for select talent, and entering the consulting space, which is one part of the business that I am really excited about exploring.
It’s fitting that I’m moving into this side of the industry, because it was about twenty years ago that I began reading sportsradio.com, a website owned and operated by sports radio consultant Rick Scott. That website educated me on this industry, and opened doors to relationships that I maintain today.
Had it not been for Rick’s website, I’d probably not have gone to work for Bruce Gilbert at ESPN Radio. Had that not happened, who knows if I’m even writing this.
For the past twenty years, Rick has put more time, thought and care into working with sports operators, and talent around the country than anyone else. Because of his contributions, this industry has prospered. I was fortunate to have him as a mentor in St. Louis and San Francisco. With his help, support and friendship, we collaborated and did some pretty impressive things.
Seeing what he has done for the industry, and experiencing it myself, it’s opened my eyes to the benefits of becoming a resource to the entire sports media world. While Rick has been an incredible ally, friend and mouthpiece for the sports radio community, there haven’t been many others in the consultant space, dedicated to the growth of sports media, and the people who make a living in it. I plan to change that.
I know some of you reading this, may be thinking “Consulting? Multiple jobs? JB loves local radio too much to not be inside of a building“. I understand that initial doubt. However, when you’ve had sustained success and experienced the country as I have, it starts to feel the same. Those who know me have heard me say this before, I never want to become the guy inside of the factory who does the same job day after day. It’s not how I’m wired.
I’m also not fueled by money, power or fancy titles. If I’m going to put my name on something, I want it to be good. I want people to gain results from it. Nobody will remember how much money you made, or the different titles you held during your career, but they will remember the quality of your work, and how you helped and inspired others.
The funny thing is, I had a chat a few months ago with a good industry friend. When I told him what I was considering, he said “All media consultants are the same. They give some insight and opinion, change their minds when things don’t work, and try to stay out of the way and praise the people up above, so they can continue earning a check. You don’t fit that mold so I’m not sure if that’s good or bad“.
While I don’t know if his assessment was accurate or not, I wondered, “Why do I need to fit a description? Can’t I blaze my own trail and offer my own style“? It worked for me as a programmer. I think a new point of view and approach is needed. I’m hoping our industry does too.
One thing I take great pride in is knowing the entire sports media landscape. I invest time in developing dialogue with industry professionals all across the country. I’ll listen to and watch personalities everywhere, costing myself a lot of personal time at home. It’s a huge passion of mine, and one that I struggle to turn off.
Because I study people, markets, brands and operators, it helps me with providing fair and thorough analysis, If I’m going to share my opinion or insight, I want to be prepared and know the facts. If you’ve followed this site over the past 14 months, you’ve hopefully recognized that in some of the columns I write, and the ratings pieces I’ve published for numerous markets.
While this new venture places me in unchartered waters, I’m energized by taking the risk, and trying something new. Sometimes when people in our business do something different, others rush to judgment. They’re deemed as crazy, and headed down a road to failure. That’s a mistake in my opinion.
When Dan Patrick left ESPN, everyone thought he was nuts. Rick Reilly actually called it one of the five worst moves in sports entertainment history. Why would anyone leave the comfort, and power of ESPN, to start their own entity?
Well, Dan had a bigger plan. It took him some time, but he expanded his brand and income, entered new content arenas, grew his relationships, took more control of his own future, and had more fun.
As of last check, his brand could be found on NBC Television, Fox Sports Radio, Sports Illustrated, Dish Network, Audience One, Crackle, and in Adam Sandler films.
Doesn’t seem so crazy now does it?
Let me be clear about one thing, by no means am I comparing this move of mine to Dan’s. I’m not changing the world, or risking anything close to what he did. He’s one of the best to ever operate in this business, and the risk he took was enormous. I’m just a guy from New York who loves sports radio, has traveled the country and had a little bit of success, believes he has some knowledge and skill to offer, and is going to take on a new challenge to try and help others.
I’ve helped build three brands from scratch, discovered a number of talent who have had successful careers, and produced strong ratings for my previous employers. I’m proud of my track record as a programmer. Now though it’s time to see if I can make a larger impact for multiple brands, and people.
The calls, emails, texts and social media messages I’ve received during the past 2 months, have shown me that people out there do care about this format, and its future. They want to get better. I’m going to give my undivided attention to try and help them do that.
Who knows what tomorrow holds? I’ve said this many times, and I believe it’s coming, we will see a day when sports teams program their own audio channels, Twitter, Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and/or YouTube create sports talk brands, and Pandora, Spotify, Newspapers and other new audio brands emerge and develop talk content.
Podcasting is also becoming a stronger player. I think that will only increase as digital dashboards become a heavier focus inside automobiles.
There are so many possibilities, and they all need the same thing – smart and experienced leadership, strong content creators, and people who know how to deliver results, and grow a business. I know how to do that. So I’m going to use my abilities to help others enjoy success.
Geena Davis once said “If you risk nothing, you risk everything”. Well what can I say, I’m a risk taker. I bet on myself when I entered this crazy business, and I’m doing it again now when it’d be much easier to take a conventional path. It’s an exciting time, and exciting world. When you’re in the right space and location, the rest has a way of working itself out.
There seems to be two schools of thought when it comes to creating content, and performing as a sports talk radio personality.
On one side you have the talk show host who’s not emotionally attached to their market’s local teams, analyzes stories from a neutral point of view, and cares more about the creation of good content and interesting storylines, than the success or failure of the local franchises. At times they can be accused by the audience of being cynical or negative, and they value their credibility and integrity, and will stop at nothing to defend it.
On the other side, you have the talk show host who lives and dies with their team’s results and daily decisions. They watch every game because they genuinely love the franchise, and each day’s outcome tugs on their heartstrings. They go to the stadium as much as possible, forming as many relationships as they can, and they openly acknowledge their rooting interest with the audience. That often leads to being accused of being too positive and soft (homers), which calls into question their objectivity, whether it’s warranted or not.
While each person has their own personal preferences, both approaches work. Audiences are made up of people from many different backgrounds, with multiple views, and as long as the individual providing the content delivers their dialogue in an authentic way, and is willing to be open and honest with the audience, they’ll be accepted for who they are.
Some listeners put on the radio to hear a host who loves the local team as much as they do, because they want to feel good about their favorite players, hear interviews with members of the local organizations, and they want someone to pump them up for the next game.
Then there are listeners who are mentally stimulated by negative discussions built about what’s wrong with the local team, and who should pay for the team’s failure. The local team could win a championship, and the next day their more concerned about which members of the team will leave via free agency, rather than celebrating.
That got me to wondering, do we gain more listeners and higher ratings by being detached from our fandom, or by embracing it? It seems the older we get, the more cynical we become, and we spend less time watching games, and rooting for storylines over victories. But does that matter to the audience? Should it?
We’re in the sports talk radio business. The key word being “business“. The job is to present angles, opinions, insight, and information, and make it compelling enough to entertain an audience. The job description doesn’t say “one must passionately care about our teams and form a bond with them that becomes ever lasting“.
However, when a listener puts on a sports radio station, they expect that they will hear a conversation about sports. Many of us though don’t always provide that. Instead we venture into discussions about our favorite foods, favorite television shows, best concerts we’ve attended, and other lifestyle focused topics.
I’ve often found that those who take this approach, are usually more detached from their fandom, and the local teams. Yet they are passionate about what they’re discussing, and you can argue that the subject matter has broader appeal. In many cases the ratings go up when personalities let the audience in on their other views and personal interests. But is this content being created for the audience, or because we aren’t as interested in sports as maybe we should be?
For those who are more in touch with their fandom, they’re usually eager to dive into a sports discussion. Sure they’ll touch on other aspects of life too, but sports is the center of their universe. They dedicate the majority of their show to it, and they don’t have to manufacture enthusiasm to get into a conversation about their local teams.
I’ve been in numerous markets and seen both styles work well. I recall working in Philadelphia in 2006, and WIP morning host Angelo Cataldi was open with his audience about not attending games, and forming relationships with players, because he felt it could compromise his judgement. I don’t remember the exact quote but it was along the lines of “My job isn’t to make friends in locker rooms or break news. I’m here to share my honest opinions, and look out for my audience”.
By staying out of the room, Angelo felt he was in a better position to serve his listeners. I knew exactly where he was coming from, and because it was consistent with who he was as a personality, his audience accepted it.
On the other hand, I’ve watched in St. Louis and San Francisco, how guys like Randy Karraker, Bernie Miklasz, Chris Dimino and Brian Murphy, have utilized their time around local teams to gain added perspective, inside information, and form relationships with organizations which has given the audience a better understanding of how teams think and operate. They too have stayed true to who they are as people, and their approach has resonated with their audiences.
If there’s one thing that is vital for all talk show hosts, regardless of whether or not they’re fans, it’s to be willing to criticize and engage in difficult conversations. It’s not easy delivering an opinion, and knowing that it can damage a relationship, but if you’re focused on serving the audience (your true employer), then you’ve got to do what’s best for them. It’s ok to root for your team, and lean towards positive content, but when bad things happen, you’ve got to address them. Avoiding them compromises your credibility and integrity.
To gain further insight into this discussion, I reached out to a number of personalities across the country, who face this challenge on a daily basis. I wanted to get a sense of how they manage their fandom and objectivity, why they approach their programs the way they do, what they believe matters most to sports radio listeners, and what type of talent they’d feature on their stations if they made the final decision. I think you’ll enjoy their answers.
Special Guests:
Mo Egger– ESPN 1530 in Cincinnati
Shan Shariff-105.3 The Fan in Dallas
Chris Dimino–680 The Fan in Atlanta
John Kincade-680 The Fan in Atlanta
Randy Karraker-101 ESPN in St. Louis
Nick Wright-Sports Radio 610 in Houston
Brian Murphy-KNBR 680 in San Francisco
Chad Doing-95.7 The Game in San Francisco
What does the term “homer” mean to you?
Karraker: The general perception is of someone that won’t challenge the front office of the local teams and won’t criticize. But to me a “homer” is someone that pays intense attention to the teams in his home market, and has the same emotional investment in those teams as the people listening. Being a fan is being part of a community, of shared interest in your team. There’s no question that when I come on the air, I have an emotional investment in the Cardinals, Rams and Blues, and like most fans, I’m capable of being objective and critical. I don’t blindly agree with everything the franchise is doing, I just want them to succeed like my listeners do.
Murphy: A “homer” is a fan who is blind to reality. They refuse to see their team’s shortcomings, often to the point of irrationality.
Doing: I think of a local broadcast team that will never criticize the play of the team they work for regardless of the performance of the franchise. In relation to sports talk, I think of a local host who is a fan of the teams in the city that he/she works. I don’t think that’s necessarily a negative.
Kincade: It’s the blatant inability to talk about a team in honest fashion. It is the trademark of a host that wants to pander to the locals. They desire to be loved, not willing to earn respect for fair evaluations.
Egger: “Homer,” when applied to a host means that he/she is someone who allows their rooting interest to influence their opinions and willingness to criticize, often at the expense of the listener. Homers placate the lowest common denominator of an audience, and usually alienate their smartest, most savvy audience members. A good sports-radio host, whether they’re fans of the local teams or not, always has the backs of the fans. Homers place the teams (often times, they’re in a relationship with the teams) ahead of fans.
How does it make you feel if a listener refers to you as a homer?
Shariff: If someone calls me a Jerry Jones homer, I don’t get upset because it’s true. We all have natural bias and I don’t see anything wrong in acknowledging it. If someone calls me a Cowboys homer because we’re the flagship, I try to correct that perception. I don’t like someone thinking my opinion is formed because of other factors outside of what I see and feel.
Kincade: I can honestly say on-air in Atlanta since 1995 I have never been referred to as a homer. I far prefer to be known as the guy willing to tell you that your baby is ugly when deserved.
Dimino: The initial reaction for most hosts is defensive. It becomes credibility being questioned. I have been honest about liking some guys and teams and front offices more than others. But I’ve dealt that from the top of the deck. I also made a conscious decision years ago that I have to sleep at night, and in our job that means you better believe it before you say it, and more after you say it. Your body of work speaks more than any isolated incident.
Doing: It’s never bothered me. I want my listeners to know that I embrace my local surroundings, and that I’m going to root for the teams in the town in which I work. In my mind, I can be a “homer” while still being objective. I’m going to celebrate when they win, but when they don’t perform, I’m going to be critical.
Karraker: I have no problem with being called a homer. Jack Buck once told me that a listener had called him a Cardinal homer, and his reply was “what do you want me to do, root for the Padres?” Many times, people will hear what they want to, rather than what reality is. I’d actually rather be called a homer than a hater.
Shouldn’t the audience want to hear a host who lives & dies with the same teams as they do and is proud to admit it?
Wright: The audience should want to hear a host who is honest and transparent. If that host truly lives and dies with the local teams, then they shouldn’t hide it, but the worst thing a host can do is fake that loyalty. The audience can sniff that out.
Shariff: Depends how interested you are in the truth. I had many listeners in Kansas City who recognized their own bias and wanted to hear an objective view of their favorite teams. I do think you better cover every facet of your city’s favorite teams with as much passion as possible.
Murphy: Every show is different, and every host has a different voice and vibe. Some make their living being cynical, and that appeals to listeners. Some (me included) wear their heart on their sleeve, and allow the listeners to judge us for who we are.
Dimino: If you’re going to have your fandom, own it. This isn’t soup at a restaurant. The “Fan of the Day” shit is much worse than living and dying with your teams. Secondly, it better be genuine. Don’t bandwagon it. Listeners can smell that a mile away. You better save the rants for rant like moments. The overly negative “homer” exists and I can play the glass is empty with the best of them. But killing teams and people just to kill can get old. I want parades in my town, I want our teams talked about nationally, and I like seeing our team’s games on national television in the postseason. I’m unabashed and unapologetic about those things.
Kincade: You can do that! I’ve worked with a few guys that are huge fans of the local teams, but still will criticize when warranted. They are far more credible to me than the guys who prefer to kiss butt so they will be liked by the local teams. If the audience prefers a homer, they tend to be caller driven pep rally shows. I turn those off quickly.
How important do you believe it is for a host on a local sports station to be interested in & passionately & emotionally involved in the success & failure of the local sports teams they cover?
Dimino: It’s huge because success and failure drive conversation. From a business point of view, I root for storylines. I want ultimate successes or total disasters. Anyone who elicits no reaction is death. I don’t root for horrible but if that’s what it is or becomes, that drives conversation. “What needs to be done” talk is even more interesting and passionate than the ones about first place teams.
Wright: I think a local host absolutely must be interested and passionate about the teams in their market, but does not need–at all–to be emotionally invested in order to be successful.
Doing: Like my listeners, I am a sports fan. So, I want to be able to relate to them and feel what they feel. I accomplish that by choosing to become invested in the teams I cover. Once I get around the players, I create relationships and learn more about them, so that I eventually begin to pull for them as individuals. When I do this, I naturally become emotionally invested in them and my passion for them is genuine.
Shariff: Interested? Hell yes. Passionate? Absolutely. Emotionally involved in wins and losses? I don’t believe you have to live and die with every loss, but your audience better have zero doubt that you’re qualified and prepared to dissect their teams.
Kincade: I came from Philadelphia in 1995. I’ve been on-air here for 20 years, and I have never dropped my hometown team allegiances. I’ve also never hidden it from my audience. I’m honest with them and prefer that the local teams do well. It’s better for the station when they do. My audience knows that I watch the teams and am prepared to get into conversation about them every day. It allows me to be a different voice. As long as I have been fair, the audience respects you for your talents and insights.
When a host says “I don’t care if the local team wins or loses, my heart isn’t attached to them. My job is to talk about the story/result and what it means for the audience” – do you think that’s a good or bad thing for the audience?
Murphy: It depends how well the host conveys that. If it comes off as cold and distant and clinical, surely the host will turn off some listeners. But if it comes off as informative and enriching and instructive, the host will earn respect.
Dimino: If you don’t care about winning or losing, you’re in the wrong line of work. Your opinions, not final scores, will come from that caring. Your audience can understand 7-4, 28-21 and 104-98. That’s an update. It’s not a conversation. “How and why and what to do about it” IS our business. This idea that being a fan is a bad thing is ridiculous. It’s why you got the job. It’s what most of us have been preoccupied with since 6th grade study hall. If you can’t feel the ups and downs, why should anyone care what you think or believe?
Karraker: As a consumer, I don’t want to listen to a host who doesn’t care whether the local team wins or loses. If he says that privately, that’s fine. And if the host can talk about the story and analyze the result without caring, I don’t think that’s necessarily bad for the audience. However, sports fans care deeply about their teams. Any time we care about something, and the person we’re talking to says they don’t care about it, it’s going to affect that relationship.
Egger: As a whole, I don’t think the audience is looking for either. There are fans who clearly prefer a host who’s as attached to their teams as they are, but I think the majority of listeners are looking for content that’s entertaining, smart, curious, and relatable. If the host is a fan, he/she has a responsibility to be objective at times. If they’re not, they have to at least understand and convey an understanding that these teams and their fortunes do matter to their audience.
Kincade: That is a horrible thing to say. You have to care about the teams and their performances. Even if you care just to create great conversation, you better garner passion for yourself and your listeners!
How possible is it to be a homer in a local market if the on-air talent isn’t from the area?
Shariff: In my experience, you lose some rooting interest in your favorite teams the longer you do this job. My DFW motto has been “I root for ratings” and I’ve said that many times to our audience. The Cowboys and Rangers winning helps our ratings and my wallet. Why wouldn’t I become emotionally invested in their success? Personal relationships are also a factor. A major reason I root for the Cowboys success is Jerry Jones, Jason Garrett, Witten, Romo, Sean Lee and Tyron Smith. We’re not best friends, but I believe they do things the right way and I root for that. With all that said, I think it’s important to be genuine. People are instinctive and smart. They know if you’re being fake or feeding them what you think they want to hear.
Karraker: It’s very possible. Our morning guy, Bernie Miklasz, came to St. Louis from Baltimore in 1984. He grew up a big Colts and Orioles fan, but he’s been around St. Louis for such a long time, that he wants to see the hometown teams succeed. He developed an emotional tie to the city and the teams. He’s my version of a homer. He wants to see our teams do well, but is objective and willing to point out problems even for winning teams. Secondly, if you get to a town and do your job, you’re going to develop relationships that cause you to root for individuals. I became a huge Arizona Cardinals fan when Kurt Warner went there. He’s one of the finest people I’ve ever met. Any man who meets and gets to know Mike Matheny and understands why he’s successful is going to want him to succeed. So while it might not be the team you grew up with, it’s the team and people you’re with now, and you do develop personal relationships and rooting interests.
Doing: It’s very possible. I moved to San Francisco last year. In the 12-months I have lived in the Bay Area, I have been to the majority of games for the Giants, Warriors, Raiders, and 49ers. It was a challenge at first, but as I got familiar with the area and began to speak with fans, I started to develop a better understanding of the market I was in. Going to games and interviewing the athletes was the best part of the process for me. For example, the Warriors locker room was filled with high character guys who were easy to root for, and when I combine that with the buzz in the city coming from fans, my conversion process happened at an accelerated rate. But you have to put in the time and commit to going to a number of games.
Wright: If you happen to be in a market where you’ve always loved the team, despite not being from there (EX: A Lakers fan who is from Kansas City but now works in LA) you can obviously be a homer. Also, if you’ve lived in the area for a long time (10+ years) you can probably become a homer because it becomes your adopted team.
Egger: I can only speak for my market, because this is the only one I’ve worked in. We are a parochial town, a little wary of outsiders. Some have called Cincinnati the “biggest small town in America,” and I often joke to Cincinnatians, if something doesn’t happen inside the 275 loop (the interstate bypass that circles our city), it doesn’t happen. It’s an uphill battle if you’re a host who isn’t from here, especially since the most successful talents in this city so rich in broadcast history have been from Cincinnati. If you come to Cincinnati to talk sports for a living, you better do some work. Recite what the Reds did in the 70s. Familiarize yourself with why the Bengals haven’t won a playoff game in a quarter-century. Understand the depths of the many regional college rivalries. These things matter here. Maybe more than other markets.
If you were the program director of a radio station and trying to satisfy the desires of the local audience, would you put more people on the air who are more or less emotionally attached to the local teams?
Dimino: Hosts and radio stations are not widgets. Everything being the same serves no one. It’s what creates chemistry inside a show and weaves the fabric of the station. Emotionally attached does not for a second imply marching in step with some manifesto of rainbows and smoke blown up asses. It rides good and bad time waves and relatability with an audience. The trickier part is the “Rights Holders” aspect of this. Do you have the freedom to speak your mind? Do you get blowback from management or the teams themselves if you criticize? If I was PD I want genuine. The guy attempting to figure out which way the wind is blowing daily will be rooted out by smart listeners.
Wright: I would have locality be the only tiebreaker in selecting talent. I would try to build the best team possible and let the chips fall where they may.
Murphy: I think a balance is probably best. And I think it’s important for hosts to be themselves. I think audiences can smell a phony. I think they like hosts who are true to themselves, and care about entertaining the audience.
Shariff: I would side with more attached. While it’s important to be genuine and objective, sports are still driven by passion, excitement, anger and all the emotions that come from die-hard fans that can relate to others who think and react like they do.
Egger: Ideally, I’d like a mix of both because the best-programmed stations are focused on what’s important to their audience but have hosts with different backgrounds, perspectives, and can bring fresh and different angles that differentiate themselves from the other hosts, even if they’re all focused on the same basic subject matter. If I’ve got shows with hosts who are emotionally attached to local teams, I might look for someone who’s a little detached. More than anything, I’m just looking for people who can create compelling content, regardless of how they approach the delivery of it.
The approach of football season boosted KILT (610 AM) back to a secure lead in the August radio ratings in Houston, but the Astros continue to provide a strong nighttime push for KBME (790 AM).
This monthly rundown on the Nielsen Audio ratings for Houston sports radio covers the period July 16-Aug, 12, including the start of Texans training camp but no games.
As always, we start with 6 a.m. to midnight (Monday through Sunday) among men 25-54, which is the key demographic for sports radio. KILT once again led the weeklong numbers over KBME and KFNC (97.5 FM), but KBME continued to show good year-to-year growth.
ESPN 1000 in Chicago, has reached an agreement with award-winning Chicago sportscaster David Kaplan, who will have a new show, Kap & Co. The program will air weekdays from noon to 2 p.m. CT on ESPN1000, ESPNChicago.com and the ESPN app beginning Wednesday, Sept. 16.
“Adding Kap to ESPN1000, the number one sports station in town, shows our audience the dedication we have to serving Chicago sports fans anywhere, anytime,” said Adam Delevitt, program director, ESPN 1000. “Kap is by far one of the most recognizable voices in Chicago and few in the city have the breadth of knowledge and passion for sports and relationships with the people here that he has.”
Kaplan, an established sports authority in Chicago, is the host of CSN Chicago’s Sports Talk Live and formerly co-hosted Kap and Haugh with the Chicago Tribune’s David Haugh. He has won several awards for his work in television, radio and print, including Emmy Awards for his work on CSN Chicago and the sports memorabilia television show, A Piece of the Game. Kaplan began his radio career at local station WMVP-AM, and then joined WGN-AM’s sports staff as a reporter in 1995. He is the only person in Chicago media history to concurrently host a daily television show, a daily radio program and write a regular column in a major newspaper.
With the inclusion of Kap & Co., ESPN 1000 will add to an already strong lineup that includes some of the most experienced and notable sports personalities in the Chicago sports landscape. Carmen & Jurko, hosted by NFL veteran John “Jurko” Jurkovic and longtime broadcaster Carmen DeFalco, will move to the 9 a.m. – Noon slot, after ESPN Radio’s Mike and Mike. Kap & Co. will follow, with Waddle & Silvy – hosted by former Bear wide receiver Tom Waddle and Marc “Silvy” Silverman from 2 – 6 p.m. Gamenight with Jonathan Hood will air 6 – 10 p.m., with ESPN Radio’s The Freddie Coleman Show closing the night. Sarah Spain will continue to deliver SportsCenter updates throughout the day.
If you’ve ever listened to Josh Innes on the radio, chances are you have a strong opinion about him. He’s forceful with his opinions, not afraid to enter uncomfortable territory, and thrives on being in the middle of intense conversations.
Those traits have propelled him to be one of sports radio’s best over the past 5 years. While he’s certainly developed his legion of critics along the way, and earned a few industry enemies, he’s also delivered an impact in two top-10 markets – Philadelphia and Houston.
Consider me one of those people who appreciates what Innes does. While I may not agree with every one of his tactics, I recognize his commitment to creating great radio, and I find it refreshing when talent are willing to put their lives on display for the whole world to see. In today’s world where opinions are second guessed, criticized, and passed around social media like a hot potato the moment they’re uttered, Josh speaks with force, endures the avalanche of negativity that comes with it, and does so without wavering.
When I listen to Josh, I hear someone who understands how to entertain, and take control of the airwaves. In some ways he’s like an infection that infiltrates the brain and sinks deeper and deeper inside, until it fully owns the mind. If you’ve seen the movie “Private Parts“, then you remember the scene, where the Program Director is irate because the ratings are in, and they verify that people who hate Howard Stern listen to him longer. Josh has a very similar effect.
That’s also evident by the way people respond and interact with him on social media. Not a day goes by where Josh isn’t engaging with listeners, sharing his personal life, posting photos, and diving into dialogue about things that may make some executives cringe. Heck, his Twitter profile photo is a photoshopped picture of his head on the Iron Sheik’s body, putting rival afternoon host Mike Missanelli in a camel clutch.
Interesting enough, the man who brought Innes to Philadelphia, Andy Bloom, was also the one to put Stern on in Philadelphia during his dominant reign on terrestrial radio. It’s easy to see from afar why Bloom brought Josh to Philadelphia, and he’s dipped into his old playbook, and is providing some tricks and wisdom to his new protege to help him gain traction in the market. And it’s working.
Josh’s arrival though in the city of brotherly love, hasn’t exactly led to a lot of warm and fuzzy feelings among media members. He’s publicly sparred with his rival Missanelli, and former WIP host turned 97.5 The Fanatic morning man Anthony Gargano is also not a fan. Josh has also drawn the ire of the city’s most passionate sports fans, many who have a parochial view, especially when it comes to the people they listen to on local sports talk radio. Ironically, Innes went through a similar love-hate relationship in Houston with media members and listeners.
None the less, he’s created quite a storm, and that buzz has catapulted his afternoon show to the top of the ratings. However, the success in afternoons was also created with Tony Bruno, who has since left the show to focus on his podcasting work. Will the same success continue without the popular Bruno? That’s the challenge that WIP and Josh face going forward.
To move in that direction, WIP has rebuilt the afternoon show into a 3-person program. The show now features Innes, former Eagles player Hollis Thomas, and Program Director Spike Eskin, who is the son of one of Philadelphia’s most successful talk show hosts, Howard Eskin. While the show is brand new and hasn’t had a full month together on-air, there’s no doubt of who the show’s master of chaos is, it’s Innes.
The one thing I’ve learned during my career is that the ones who emerge in this format, have no issue taking tough positions, enduring the wrath of people internally and externally, and their entire lives revolve around the show. Because they’re open and transparent with the audience, and don’t let anyone or anything dictate the way they deliver their content, they gain the respect and loyalty of their listeners, which often leads to strong ratings.
As an example, Angelo Cataldi, Mike North, Dennis and Callahan, Paul Finebaum, Mike Francesa, Colin Cowherd, Howard Eskin, and even Innes’ competitor Mike Missanelli, have all taken that approach during their careers, and its led to a lot of money and success, for themselves and their employers. You can agree or disagree with their opinions and styles, and approve or disapprove of their methods to generate reaction and interest, but their formula works.
In that way, Innes is a throwback. He’s not reinventing the wheel, he’s simply giving it a modern day adjustment. In a crowded marketplace with a whole lot of bravado among personalities, Innes has entered the room, planted his flag, and made sure everyone is aware he’s present. While opinions on him differ, they all realize he’s there and a legitimate threat.
As someone who has watched the Philadelphia situation from afar, and has followed Josh’s rise from Baton Rouge, to Houston, to now Philadelphia, I’m not surprised by his success. He’s continued growing as a talent and individual, and Gavin Spittle (PD at 105.3 The Fan in Dallas, previously PD at 610 KILT in Houston), and Bloom, deserve credit for their role in his development. They’ve taken the risk to bring him into their cities, push him when necessary, but also let him be himself. They stuck by him during tumultuous times, which isn’t easy to do when you’re dealing with public and corporate pressure, and you’re unsure of whether or not it’s deserved.
I remember being in St. Louis programming 101 ESPN, and Innes was on my short list of candidates of people I’d consider if we had an opening. He was from Missouri, a lifelong Cardinals fan, and he had a great sound and lot of talent. While he was young, and still figuring out his path, and did a couple of things that made me scratch my head, any smart programmer could tell he had great ability, and the potential to do great things. It’s why a number of major market programmers had him on their lists too.
What some people don’t know, is how much he studies radio. One of our first conversations revolved around my station in St. Louis. Josh reached out, not because he wanted to tell me why he was the next big thing and needed to be on my airwaves, instead it was to offer praise because he had listened to the station, and was impressed with its presentation. While I wasn’t seeking validation for my work, what stood out were the details of his assessment. Despite not living in my market, he correctly analyzed how I liked to operate my brand, and he had a great respect and understanding of the talent, imaging, formatics, and content.
Josh remained on my list of considerations in San Francisco, and when some changes took place at my former station 95.7 The Game, I gave him a strong look. By the time discussions began though, he was already deep into the process with WIP, so the timing didn’t work. Judging by the way he’s impacted the Philadelphia market, he made the right decision for his career.
Recently I caught up with Josh to get his views on a number of subjects including the transition to Philadelphia, his time in Baton Rouge and Houston, his views on the state of sports radio today, and the reasons behind his approach on-air and on social media. I think you’ll find the discussion interesting and entertaining, two words that best describe my guest, Josh Innes.
Q: Your father Scott spent 30 years in radio and was the cartoon voice of Scooby Doo so entertaining has always run in the family. At what age did you know that you wanted to follow in his footsteps and work in the radio industry?
A: I think I was about 13 or 14. Prior that I wanted to direct movies. My dad bought me a video camera and I’d focus my energy on recreating movie scenes. I would learn how to edit them and add music before it was possible to do that from your cell phone. I wanted to be Alfred Hitchcock. I read books about him and watched his movies. I was addicted to horror movies. I used to attempt to recreate the shower scene from “Psycho” with my best friend. It was odd having a guy in the scene. I wish I still had some of the old videos. In one instance I’m filming the shower scene and in the background my dad walks in and says “What in the hell are you idiots doing?”.
I think it was the summer of 2000 when I decided I wanted to be the voice of the St. Louis Cardinals. My grandpa was a dumpster diver and he found a Talk Boy recorder in someones garbage can. You may remember the Talk Boy from “Home Alone 2”. I would visit my relatives in Missouri and watch the Cardinals games and call them into the recorder. I wanted so badly to be Jack Buck. I read his autobiography countless times, and I watched old Cardinals highlight tapes that featured radio play by play. I would watch them on loop. I am obsessive when it comes to things I enjoy. I lived in Louisiana but I’d listen to the Cardinals games on KMOX which could be heard across the country at night. I’d sit in my dad’s truck and go up and down the driveway. At times I’d sneak the truck to the end of the road and hold the recorder up to the speaker and record the games.
Q: Who were some of the broadcasters you listened to growing up that influenced your desire to pursue this industry?
A: I have such a strange list of influences. My initial influence was Jack Buck. In my opinion he is the best baseball play by play man ever. I know that most will say Vin Scully is the best, but Jack was my guy. I have a picture of him and I at Busch Stadium when I was a baby.
When I was 14 I caught a batting practice home run ball at Busch Stadium. I waited outside the old press box for Jack to come out and sign it. At this point in his life he had very advanced Parkinson’s and a litany of other health issues. He walked out of the booth and I approached him. “Mr. Buck, Mr. Buck” I yelled out. “Could you please sign my ball?“. He has my grandpa and I get into an elevator with him and he signs it. “I’ve read your book 100 times” I tell him. “Did it put you to sleep?” he replied with a grin. We got out of the elevator, he disappeared and I realized I didn’t get a picture with him. The next day I go back to the booth. “Mr. Buck, Mr. Buck…can I get a picture?“. He walks up to me and says “I signed yours yesterday” and walks off. I was crushed at the time but settled for a picture with Al Hrabosky.
If I wanted to I could have focused on being a play by play guy, but I chose to go into sports radio. My radio influences are mostly from formats outside of sports. Howard Stern is an obvious one. He’s the king. I admire guys like Scott Shannon. Scott’s the greatest programmer of the 20th century. I love old FM jocks. I admire them because what they did was an art. I watch old video air checks of all these guys. I’m a dork.
Q: Your first jobs in the business were in the Baton Rouge market (if that’s wrong let me know). You worked for WJBO and WSKR. What were your responsibilities and what did you like/dislike about the job?
A: This will sound lame but I loved everything about those jobs. I was 19 at the time and my job at JBO was originally part time. I’d run SWAC Football and High School Football shows on Saturday mornings, and I’d do the shifts no one wanted to. I worked all the holidays for maybe $6.50 an hour. People assume because my dad worked in the building that I was given these jobs and that they were glamourous, but I earned them by going to the station during Hurricane Katrina and telling Matt Kennedy that I’d do anything they needed me to do.
That night he had me call all of the offices of emergency preparedness to find out about school closings. The next day I’m at the governors press conference with a mic in her face. I was too stupid to know any better. I just did it. When I got the full time job at JBO and Score, I did morning sports updates on the news/talk station. I also babysat 6 radio stations from 3p-11p every day. My job was to do anything they needed me to do, and make sure that if World War 3 broke out that the phone would be answered. I hosted an hour sports show from 3p-4p daily with Matt Moscona who is now the #1 host in Baton Rouge and one of my best friends.
I should point out that before I ever got the part time job at Clear Channel, I did play by play for the Baton Rouge Kingfish of the ECHL and the Baton Rouge Riverbats of the Southeastern League of Professional Baseball. The Kingfish gig came when I was 15. I think they did it as a publicity stunt, but it turned out I was decent and they kept me on for 2 years. I did the 2nd period play by play for home games. I also made some road trips. The Riverbats gig was the time of my life. I thought I had made it. Imagine being a 16 year old kid traveling to Pensacola, FL and Macon, Ga calling games. I set up the whole broadcast. I was such a nerd. I learned everything about engineering broadcasts.
Q: They say you haven’t worked in radio until you’ve been fired and you gained that experience when WJBO parted ways with you in 2009 due to budget cuts. Where were you when you got the news? What was your reaction? And what did you learn from the experience?
A: I was at the station preparing to go on the air and my email wasn’t working. I was naive. I walked into my PD’s office and told him I was having email issues and he said “Me too. I’ll look into it“. A few minutes later I hear an announcement over the intercom, “Josh Innes please come to Dick Lewis’ office“. Dick Lewis was the main guy at Clear Channel Baton Rouge. He called me in and honestly I don’t remember what he said. I remember walking to my car as my dad pulled up to do his shift. I was pretty crushed but I assumed I would be alright. I tried to get a gig on a rock station in town. The demo I put together was so dreadful. I still have it and it’s the one thing I’m actually embarrassed to play on air. Strangely enough they hired me back in August but in November I got the job at KILT.
Q: So you make the move to Houston, where you’re brought in to anchor updates in morning drive and host a solo hour from 10a-11a on Sports Radio KILT. How did the opportunity come about and what made you believe it was the right next step for your career?
A: I used a site called STAA.com. Jon Chelesnik was a real believer in me. He sent my material to a few stations. One was 790 in Houston and the other was 610 KILT in Houston. I was scheduled for an on air audition at 790 followed by an interview with Gavin Spittle at 610, but a few days before I was to drive there, 790 rescheduled. I told Gavin I still wanted to meet with him so I did and he hired me on the spot. What made it seem like the right next step? It doubled my salary and I went from market 80 to market 6. Plus, Gavin had great vision for entertaining sports radio.
Q: After only a few months in Houston, you were chosen to do some fill-ins for Jim Rome. How did that situation come about, considering you weren’t yet hosting a 3-4 hour daily show?
A: Rome used a lot of local guys to fill in. I think Gavin really pushed for me to get that fill in opportunity. It fell on the day after Lebron’s decision. Jason Stewart of the Rome show really liked it and asked me back 8 more times. I also think part of it was that other than Los Angeles, Houston was the biggest market for Rome and they wanted to save the show locally. I choose to believe I was good. Ha!
Q: The station then elevated you to work afternoons with Rich Lord, one of the most popular talents in Houston. Together you had a lot of success, but the relationship between the two of you at times was strained. What made it difficult for you guys to get on the same page?
A: He was an old school guy. At times we really had fun and it was a good show. I just don’t think he liked my style. I think he liked the benefits of being on the show but didn’t really care for my style. I didn’t like a lot of the stuff he did. I think it eventually became a personal thing for both of us.
Q: Despite some personality differences with Rich, your stay in Houston put you on the map, and you had a lot of success. When you reflect back now on the entire Houston experience, how would you summarize it?
A: When you are in the moment it seems a whole lot worse than what it actually was. I met many people who I consider best friends there. When the station was really cooking it was a great radio station. Gavin is the best sports radio programmer in the country. That isn’t a slight against anyone else that I’ve worked for but he gets ratings in markets that he has no business getting ratings. I was young. I had fun. I met my girlfriend. I made a little money. If Gavin wouldn’t have left for Dallas I may still be there. I had a 3 year offer at the end of 2012. Gavin left in January of 2013 and I never signed it.
Q: Next you moved to your current home, Philadelphia. WIP brought you in to host nights and immediately, your arrival was met with mixed reviews among local media people. Why do you believe there was such a divide when you hadn’t even spent a full month yet in the market?
A: Fear. I was met with some of the most ridiculous criticisms from people. When I got to Houston there were long time local talents like Barry Warner who took me under their wing and wanted to teach me about the market. They wanted to help me succeed.
In Philadelphia, no on really wants to help anyone else. That’s not to say that the people are bad. It’s just a different vibe among media people. The local afternoon guy never liked me and told people behind the scenes that I would not make it in Philly. He chirped behind the scenes and I made fun of him on air. That’s my style. That said, it’s not like I had wars with everyone. Angelo Cataldi is the best in the market and I never had any issue with him. Michael Barkann and Ike Reese were very good to me. Steve Trevelise liked me from the jump and has been openly supportive which I appreciate.
Q: Your evening show started to create some buzz, and in February of this year, you were moved into afternoons with Tony Bruno. The show had strong ratings success out of the gate but ended in less than 6 months, when Bruno decided to leave terrestrial radio. How would you characterize the entire experience and your relationship with Tony?
A: I considered Tony to be a buddy. We didn’t run the roads together or double date but I liked him and I still do. We had fun. We went to Vegas for a fight and had a blast. We went to spring training in Florida and had a blast. He’s a good guy. I read everywhere that Tony had issues with me and the way I do things on air. He never told me that. He never once said he disliked anything I did. He laughed all the time on the show. For whatever reason he decided to retire. I wish he would have stayed because we were kicking ass.
Q: One very public item is your well documented opposition to your competitor Mike Missanelli. You’ve referred to him on-air as “Bitchanelli” and the two of you had to be separated at Eagles training camp a few weeks ago. Where does the tension between the two of you come from?
A: He’s my competitor. I’m not a local guy that has long standing friendships with the other guys. I don’t want to have friendships with people from other stations. I have heard stories about how he trashed Howard Eskin when he was trying to overtake him. I know that he treated Bruno like garbage. He punched a producer and got fired. I’ve heard he’s an overall bad dude and I have no reservations about trying to destroy him. I want to win. I was brought here to win. I think his show is boring, lazy and stale. That said, we didn’t almost fight. We had a conversation and he stepped towards me but he’s a 63 year old built like my grandma. He wasn’t going to swing.
Q: With Bruno gone, the afternoon show has been adjusted and you’re now hosting a 3-man show with former Eagles player Hollis Thomas, and the son of one of Philadelphia’s most successful talk show hosts (Howard Eskin) Spike Eskin. How does your approach change working with them versus working a two man show with an established personality like Bruno?
A: My approach is the same. It’s a little different with 3 people but the guys I work with have an understanding of their roles. Spike is a great radio guy. He gets his role. Hollis is learning the business but he’s a sponge. I believe in making people around me better.
Q: One area you’ve made quite an impression in is social media. You’re as active as any talent out there but with that activity comes mixed responses. You’re known to engage in exchanges at times with listeners and even re-tweet some of their hate filled messages which some love and others don’t. What’s your reasoning for taking the approach that you do?
A: My main reason for retweeting hate is that it gets my fans riled up. When people like you they rarely call or tweet to say it. They follow and listen but they don’t really respond. When a fan sees someone hating on the show they are compelled to respond. I use the same approach on air. Rarely do I take the call that says “I love the show“. If the call screen says “Josh is a loser and doesn’t belong in Philadelphia” I take that call. I’m probably screwed up in the head. Eric Bogosian in “Talk Radio” said it best “There’s nothing more boring than someone who loves you“. Retweeting a positive makes you look self serving. That said, I adore my listeners and fans.
Q: I’ve read before that you’ve enjoyed some professional wrestling storylines, and see a natural connection between them and sports radio. How would you explain it to someone who’s not aware?
A: It’s really the WCW/WWE storyline. Eric Bischoff said “competition creates controversy and controversy creates cash“. I don’t look to create controversy in terms of my sports opinions. The WIP/WPEN battle is like a wrestling storyline. My battle with Missanelli is not only good for us but it’s good for sports radio in the market. It’s been front page news for months now.
Q: As it applies to being an on-air talent, how important do you believe it is to play an on-air character and carry a stigma about yourself in order to be successful in sports radio?
A: I am myself on the air. I think it’s important to create an enemy in your own mind. It drives me. Its no different than athletes. They have to create the idea of an enemy.
Q: How much of what the audience hears and reads on social media is the real Josh Innes vs. the radio personality Josh Innes?
A: It’s 100% me. Every opinion is my own. It’s probably too much of me. I don’t have much of a filter. I’ll go on twitter rants about my life and get made fun of the next day. Obviously I’m performing on air and ham it up. However, when you meet me you see that everything I say on the air is real. That’s the key to relating to people.
Q: As someone who has had great success in two top-10 markets despite not being from those cities originally, what would you say is key for being successful as an out of town talent?
A: Be honest. Gavin didn’t like that I would tell people I am a Cardinals fan. I had to. That’s who I am. I also believe in respecting the history of the local teams and learning the market. I may be a fan of the Cardinals but I don’t hate the Phillies. I embrace the teams and root for them. I try to do it in a way that isn’t phony. It’s clear I can’t be a diehard of the teams because I haven’t been around long enough. It doesn’t mean I don’t want them to win. My audience wants them to win. My ratings will be better if they win. I think it’s important to be 100% honest with people. They may hate it at first but they’ll eventually respect it.
Q: On the subject of success, some talents believe that ratings matter and others don’t. Where do you stand on the issue?
A: It may be a flawed system but it is the system we go by. If I don’t win I’m fired. Period. It’s like asking Bill Belichick if winning matters or if it’s how you play the game. If Belichick has back to back 5 win seasons he’s probably fired. Usually the people who say ratings don’t matter are the ones that don’t have them. In TV you can have great shows that don’t have ratings. They can survive. “Parks and Rec” had lousy ratings but made it 6 years. The same can be said for “30 Rock“. In radio there is no Emmy Award that can save a show. You have to have ratings. I eat myself up thinking about ratings. I obsess over it.
Q: If there’s one aspect of your performance that you think needs improvement, what is it?
A: This may shock you but I think I suck. I never listen to a bit of mine and say “boy that was killer“. I listen to bits and think of all the stuff I did wrong. My mental makeup won’t allow me to think I can make it better. I will always judge myself harshly. It’s a sickness really. I judge myself on an unfair scale.
Q: You keep your eyes and ears on the industry and take a lot of pride in it. When you look at the state of sports radio today how would you describe it?
A: Thriving but largely boring. Too many shows sound the same. Too many J-School stiffs. Everyone wants to sound like ESPN. Not enough unique personalities. Toucher and Rich in Boston is a great show. Listen to that. It’s two rock guys who have crushed sports radio. Why? Because they are funny and different. They don’t focus on sounding like everyone else.
Q: Who would you say are the 5 best talents performing in the sports radio format today?
A: Toucher and Rich, Michael Felger, Craig Carton, Angelo Cataldi, Gavin Dawson. Nationally it’s Colin Cowherd. Everyone else is a bore. These are the people who I actually seek out.
Q: For someone who’s considering entering the industry or is trying to make the jump from a small market to a bigger stage, what advice would you pass along to them?
A: Be different. Stand out. Talk Hard. Steal The Air.
BONUS Q: Given your Missouri roots and passion for Cardinals baseball, how come you never pushed harder to come home to St. Louis?
A: Why didn’t you stay in St. Louis?
Josh Innes can be heard weekday afternoons from 2pm-6pm on Sports Radio 94 WIP in Philadelphia. You can also follow him on Twitter @JoshInnesRadio.
Last week I was introduced to a new television program. The show is called “Startup U” and it features a number of students and young entrepreneurs who spend 7-weeks at a place in the Silicon Valley called Draper University. Each person introduces an idea for their own business, and is then tasked with developing their product and skills, working with instructors on ways to pitch themselves and their company, and enduring the wrath of many highly successful business leaders. At the end of the season, each person pitches their idea to billionaire venture capitalist Tim Draper, who chooses one person to invest in and help launch their product.
Similar to every other reality show, the cast are put through various challenges, forced to live together, and with each passing week you see the best and worst in people emerge. What made this show different though was that many of the ideas, strategies, reactions and coaching techniques were very similar to what I’ve endured during my career in radio. Even the final goal (winning Draper’s confidence and money) is no different than what broadcasters and radio companies must do each day (win over listeners and advertisers).
One particular challenge got the juices in my brain flowing. Two teams were asked to take part in a game of Volleyball, except Draper wanted them to change the game and make it better. Many involved in the game immediately questioned the purpose of the challenge, and others seemed unsure what to do because the concept of the original game had been permanently planted inside their heads. When new ideas were introduced, they included serving with both hands, serving multiple balls at once, and serving with your head.
While certain ideas were better than others, it got me to thinking “isn’t this the same exact challenge we face with radio“? I quickly recalled driving across the country in June from California to New York, and each time I reached another major city and flipped on a sports station, I heard a lot of the same things. Break times nearly identical. Voice talent, imaging and sports updates in sync with the companies who were running the format. Callers and Guests filling up each hour around a Host’s opinion on the local teams in the market. In a nutshell, there wasn’t much different between one station and the next, besides the personalities.
Draper challenged the people involved in the volleyball game that day to “break the rules, and make things better” and it got me thinking about whether or not enough of us in radio today care to do the same. There seems to be a lot of “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it” thinking and that’s the type of mindset that eventually gets you caught. You can’t operate a winning brand with a narrow view of the present. If you’re not willing to embrace new ideas, take calculated risks and introduce new voices, styles, and concepts into your presentation, eventually it becomes stale, and when the audience tires of it, and drifts away, good luck getting them back.
I look around and I see an entire industry worrying about earning credit from a PPM meter, more than focusing on the importance of creating killer content that can’t be missed. I know, I’ve been guilty of it myself. But what about the world that awaits us? Are you prepared for the challenge that awaits from podcasting platforms? What about when digital dashboards overtake cars and many of the transplants in your market start listening to their favorite stations back home? How about when the age of your audience changes, and you find that today’s youth between the ages of 12-24 care about brands like YouTube, Spotify, Instagram, SnapChat, and Twitter and don’t even listen to radio?
Sure we have to keep our eyes on the current marketplace too and not be irresponsible, but those who develop great brands and hire talented people, can afford to break the rules, think different and challenge themselves to do things better. If you’ve earned the audience’s trust, they will stand by you while you introduce a few new ideas. If we’ve learned anything over the course of history it’s that people like new things.
I started racking my brain about the numerous things I hear on sports radio today, and what crazy ideas I would’ve come up with if Tim Draper had issued that challenge to me about improving sports radio instead of a game of volleyball. While I can’t say they’d all generate ratings, make more money, or even make sense, I know I wouldn’t have to be asked twice to break the rules to try and make things better. And after all, isn’t that why we do this job in the first place?
Here are some crazy things to think about. We can agree or disagree on their viability, but if you’re not thinking about what you’re going to do to make your product better and challenging yourself to do it, don’t be surprised when the day comes when your employer is looking for someone who does.
Commercial Breaks:
Scan any sports station and you’re going to find the majority of them running 3 or 4 breaks per hour and the commercial inventory usually between 12 and 20 minutes per hour. That doesn’t include sports updates, traffic reports, weather reports, station promos, or recorded liners that lead a show in and out of a break. This is done because stations want to spread out the amount of minutes in a commercial break to not overload the audience, and because they’re trying to gain as much content time inside of a quarter hour to try and gain credit for listening from Nielsen.
However, Nielsen also recommends that stations take as few breaks as possible, as disruptions can often lead to tune outs which don’t return. So what would happen if a station ran one break during an hour during the quarter hour that produced the least amount of listening? For example, if listening was less between :45-:00, is a station better served trying to win the first 45 minutes of the hour and concede the final quarter hour or stick with it’s current formula?
What if the station went with two breaks per hour? Maybe 15 minutes of spots in a row is insane, but what if it’s 7 minutes instead? Is there much of a difference to the audience between a 5 minute break and a 7 minute break? Are you better served with 2 long breaks or 3 semi-long breaks?
If you’re not a fan of long breaks, what about shorter ones? Is it more beneficial to hit the audience over the head with 3 breaks that are 4 minutes long apiece, or give them 6 breaks that are each 2 minutes long? You can also argue, is your talent better delivering focused content for 6 segments which are shorter in length, or 3 which are a lot longer.
I recognize that radio stations want to sell all the commercials they can, but reducing the total amount of minutes per hour and charging premium dollars for ads is where the world is going. I’m sure doing that would lead to a short-term loss in revenue, and no operator or company wants to hear that, but I can watch a YouTube video or listen to a few songs on Spotify with only a :15-:30 second distraction. I can listen to a podcast with a few verbal plugs in content and no disruptions, and I can watch a show on HBO without commercials because I pay for the channel (SiriusXM). You can only force the audience to stomach long commercial breaks for so long. Once they go, then what are you going to tell your advertisers?
Not to mention, if people are coming to you for sports, why are you bombarding them with weather reports, stock reports and traffic reports? Are those items sports related? When was the last time you put on SportsCenter, NFL Live, Baseball Tonight or any other sports show and said “damn, I really want to know the weather”? If it’s strictly about attaching a client to a benchmark, create something different – maybe a team related report, a host commentary, a :60 debate between two personalities, or attach them to your products through social media or website. Your air time is precious and shouldn’t be cluttered.
Imaging Voices and Presentations:
I love Jim Cutler and Paul Turner, and think they are the very best voice talents in our industry today. What I wish we had though were more Jim Cutler’s and Paul Turner’s. Too many stations sound the same, and that’s because a lot of us do what others do, and we seek out those who we already know. If the format looked for on-air talent that way, we’d all be screwed.
I hired Steve Stone to be my voice guy in San Francisco, and I think the work he’s done in making 95.7 The Game sound unique is excellent. I also know how incredible Dawn Cutler is and I wonder “why aren’t more stations utilizing her full-time“?
It raises the question about creating unique brand identities. What I love about television is how so many brands are different. I can turn on ESPN, Fox Sports 1, CBS, NBC or my local sports channels and I won’t hear the same thing. I can watch HBO, FX, TNT, USA and Showtime and the graphics, writing, imaging and voice talent will all be original. If it can be done on that level, then why can’t it be that way in radio?
Must every ESPN sports station and CBS sports station have the same uniformed sound and layout beyond the personalities? And it’s not just the voices, the bells and whistles with much of the imaging are laid out similarly too. I understand the reasons why certain brands do it, but I can equally call into question how it makes them predictable, and we can debate all day about whether or not it generates ratings.
Maybe I’m naive, but I believe there are some outstanding imaging directors and program directors out there who have the ability to make their brands sound distinctive. Each market and group of people are different, yet the same company formula exists. If a connection is made with the audience, and the brand name isn’t compromised, then does it matter if the people on the front lines take a different approach? Why must hundreds of sports stations have the same look, feel and sound, and stifle creativity?
Sports Updates:
While they were important to the audience 10-15 years ago, today many of them are filled with the same stories you hear the talent talking about. They also are often behind the pace of social media, which is where sports fans are seeking out their content first. I’ve always enjoyed them for one reason, it introduces another voice into the show, which provides room for extra creativity, but the update itself has become white noise in many cases.
Once again, if you turn on an ESPN or CBS sports station though, you’ll hear the same exact approach. ESPN brands will give you SportsCenter updates 2-3x per hour, and CBS brands provide 20/20 Sports Flashes 3x per hour. Does the listening audience really seek out this content and value it?
I believe the update is beneficial if it’s going to feature audio in it from other points of the broadcast day to try and engage the listener and give them reasons to listen more, or seek out the content later on the station’s website. I also believe it has value to advertisers since they can get a :10 tag included in them, and when done multiple times per hour, that can lead to numerous messages for the client. But what about the listener?
If we really value the audience, I’m not sure this content is vital. I’d rather see a radio station take their update anchor and put them into a position where they’re writing more content for the website, producing videos on the website, engaging more thru the station and their own personal social media pages, and sending them out to appearances and games to help the station gain something of larger value. I believe the anchor who has the ability to interact with a talk show host and take on more of a personality role in a show is a great thing, but I don’t believe that 3-6 minutes per hour of content time rehashing scores, game times, injury updates, and other lesser news, has great importance to the audience.
Show Lengths:
Based on economics, companies today will usually put a personality on the air for 3-4 hours per day. Hosts like it because they get to talk a lot and try out a number of things, and overall the approach makes sense because there are only so many hours in a day and you can’t employ 40 personalities per day or expect a host to be sharp doing a 6-8 hour daily show.
The one problem though is when it comes to judging its effectiveness. How many personalities really evaluate each of their hours, their content selections, their interview performances, the gains/decreases in caller activity, and whether or not they were better skilled at providing a 1-2 hour show versus a 3-4 hour show?
Most of sports radio today functions with people doing what they think and feel, and there’s no reason for them not to do that. But that’s because there’s not a lot of analysis being done on what does and doesn’t work. We usually give a personality their ratings, tell them if they gained or decreased month to month, and give them a pat on the back and tell them to keep moving forward. Rarely is the focus placed on “why” the numbers grew or dipped, or how to best take advantage of each hour of broadcasting time.
If you look at the best televison programs that deliver massive audiences, they usually involve a large cast, and are either 30 or 60 minutes in length. They maximize every single second of those programs with incredible content, and put hours upon hours into the presentation, including a lot of writing. For example, Jimmy Fallon delivers a 1-hour nightly show, yet he and his writing team will spend all day and night, making sure the product is crisp before it hits the air.
If radio employed Jimmy Fallon, it would expect him to deliver the same quality bits, interviews, punchlines and storytelling, yet throw him on the air for 4 hours per day with minimal preparation time, let alone surround him with a cast of 1 to 2 people. When the performance suffers, the blame shifts on the individual, the audience or the meters, not the process or support towards producing dynamic content.
I’m not sure it makes financial sense for radio stations to deliver 30-minute shows or 1-hour shows versus 3-4 hour shows but podcasters are doing this and growing larger and larger because they provide content which is often polished and shorter in length. People don’t have 3-4 hours of time to give to us, and they’d rather hear 1 great hour, instead of 3-4 good ones.
Show Styles:
Look at the rundown for most sports shows across the country and you’ll see the following hourly layout: 2-3 topics discussed, 1 guest, calls and tweets from the audience. Even when personalities promote their shows, it’s usually the same way – “Can’t wait to discuss last night’s game + guest A at ___ time and guest B at ____ time.”
If the show is built around the personality tweeting out the promotional message, shouldn’t it start with what they care about? If it’s a big guest I get that (EX: Podcast One last week had an exclusive sitdown with Shaq and Kobe – that you promote all day and night), but if you don’t provide some suspense in what you’re going to discuss, and just rely on the appointment times of a guest, you’re not leading the show.
That said, there are better ways to lay out a show too. If a host is great at taking calls but bad at interviews, why book guests on their show in the first place? If the situation is reversed, maybe it’s better to feature 6-7 guests and keep the host away from engaging with callers. The key is concentrating on their strengths and keeping each day interesting, not formulaic.
Have you ever considered making one day of your week only a football day? Only a baseball day? Only a day where interactions come from Facebook, Twitter, Email, Text or Calls? Maybe you create a day where you’re offering a series of 1-hour in-studio panels on themed subjects (EX: hour 1 = the host and 2 guests talking non-stop NFL, hour 2 the host and 2 guests talking non-stop baseball, etc.).
Some of this may work, some of it may not. Much of that depends on the host, producer, program director, and audience habits, but the point is that different things can be done, if you’re willing to open your mind to them. Not every day needs to feature the same layout, with the only difference being your topics.
Promos:
A good friend of mine Scott Masteller refers to promos as “content advancers“. While the word “promo” is seen as a commercial given to the station’s programming team to tout messages of their brand’s greatness, “content advancers” portray a message that the best content will be highlighted and discussed throughout the broadcast day. That makes sense to me.
However, if you listen to a lot of CBS sports stations, they put less stock in promos. While you can question why they wouldn’t use their time to promote things more, I recall attending a sports radio conference and hearing Jim Cutler say it best “A promo to the listener is a commercial disruption“. If the goal is to stay in content and eliminate interruptions, you can make the case that promos aren’t necessary.
If they’re going to be utilized, then shouldn’t the writing, imaging, and frequency of them be analyzed? Some stations try to promote 10-15 things during a given week rather than concentrating on 3-4. Think about this, if you were running CBS Television during the week of the Super Bowl, you’d promote the game again and again. Sure you may have other shows on the air, and they’ll be promoted through other channels (social media, email, newsletter, website, text clubs, etc.) but priority #1 on the air would be the promotion of the Super Bowl.
Look at your radio station and ask yourself “which of my brand items is my Super Bowl“? Do you have 3-4 of them? If you’re not creating promos that stand out, offer something of value, and sound big, then ask yourself if they really need to occupy :30 seconds of air time.
Additionally, do you need 1 promo per hour? 2 per hour? 10 per hour? If a message is pushed enough and carries with it something of substance, it can be branded into the listener’s brain. The question is, how much is enough?
Often station programmers implement clocks and in them come set times for promos, usually a few times per hour. The only problem with that is predictability. While it may be a pain in the ass, mixing it up isn’t a bad thing. If you have higher audiences during two hours of morning and afternoon drive, you may want to push the messaging hard, and not run anything during the lighter times. It’s all about getting the most value, and utilizing your time wisely.
Liners:
I hear some stations go in and out of breaks with music beds. Some do it without any music or production. Others meanwhile have produced liners voiced by the station’s voice talent or a local athlete, which identify the name of the show, station, a slogan, etc.
There’s no right or wrong, but if you look at it from the standpoint of “is this worth airing 3-4x per hour, and taking up :30-:60 seconds of my broadcast time” then you should have a better grasp of whether or not it’s valuable. If you’re not going to use the liner to reinforce your brand position or offer something creative or memorable, get it off the air. They’re denying your best asset (your on-air talent) more content time, which could make a stronger impact with the audience. If you can’t put some time into the writing and imaging, and use them effectively, then save yourself the extra minute. It will only hurt you if it’s not done well.
The only question I have here is whether or not they serve a purpose even when they are done well. I can watch a show without liners leading into segments and it never takes away from my experience of enjoying it. Secondly, does a station need to have them in place every segment? Can you use them 1x per hour leading in or 1x per hour bumping out? Why must it be “always leading into segments“, “always bumping out of segments” or “not at all“. Once again, unpredictability keeps an audience engaged, and maximizing our seconds is necessary for having success.
Conclusion:
There are a number of things about sports radio that could easily be better. The most important one in my opinion is eliminating its predictability. The point of this article wasn’t to suggest that everything we’re doing needs an overhaul because that’s not the case at all. However, we should be thinking about whether or not we’re taking advantage of everything we have at our disposal, and if we’re testing ourselves as best we can. If we’re doing things because they’re simple and it’s how they’ve always been done, then that’s a bad reason to do it. Especially when the future depends on our ability to adapt and create.
When I watched “Startup U”, I found myself thinking of the sports radio format, where it ranks, how it operates, what challenges it faces from other media platforms, and whether or not we have enough operators with the skill necessary to reinvent and make the format cooler. If our industry’s future was on the line, and we had to deliver a winning pitch to a room full of investors, how do you think we’d do? I’d like to believe we’d emerge victorious, but I’m not so sure we would. I guess that answer was predictable though.
To say the Pittsburgh sports radio market has changed over the past 7-8 years would be a massive understatement. Much of that for the local sports community is a good thing though as the format has blossomed. There’s been a strong migration of sports listening to the FM dial, which has fueled the success of the market’s leading sports talkers, but it’s also left open questions about the current competitive landscape.
Before we look at the current climate, it’s important to get a sense of where things were and what’s changed. Let’s start in 2008 where one of the first major changes occurred.
Mark Madden was hosting afternoons on ESPN Radio 1250, and he had built a massive following on the radio station. He was the ratings leader in the format, and the radio station’s top asset. ESPN recognized that and inked him to a long-term contract in 2007.
Then in May of 2008, everything changed. Madden made comments about U.S Senator Ted Kennedy that created a firestorm. He said on-air “I’m very disappointed to hear that Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts is near death because of a brain tumor. I always hoped Senator Kennedy would live long enough to be assassinated. I wonder if he got a card from the Kopechnes.”
ESPN executives were furious with the commentary, and despite Madden apologizing for his remarks, they elected to fire him. This led to Madden being on the sidelines for a few months, before 105.9 The X, operated by iHeartMedia, entered the fold and sought to bring the controversial talk show host on to their airwaves. After some back and forth discussions between ESPN and iHeart, a deal was reached, and Madden was moving to the FM dial in October 2008 to host afternoons on The X.
The next major situation to impact the market took place in 2010. Two sports talkers, 1250 ESPN and 970 Fox Sports Radio, battled for bragging rights as the format’s best local brand. 1250 often led the ratings race, but they struggled financially. For 970, while they were behind in the numbers, they spent less on local programming which likely helped their bottom line.
But then a third party decided to enter the picture. CBS announced they were dropping B94 on the FM dial, and flipping it to Sports Radio 93.7 The Fan. With an FM talker on the scene, and a firm commitment from CBS to go Live and Local throughout the entire day, this put the AM operators in an even tougher position, one which ESPN quickly looked to explore an exit from.
As 2010 came to a close, ESPN did indeed exit out of the format, dropping their sports programming on 1250AM in favor of Radio Disney. This left the market with 93.7 The Fan and 970 Fox Sports Radio. Sensing an opportunity to improve their own product, 970 reached an agreement with ESPN to allow the station to re-brand as 970 ESPN, and give ESPN market clearance for some of their shows which had been previously well received in the market, but were now unavailable due to the 1250 format change.
Eventually ESPN would sell its ownership of 1250AM to Salem Media, leaving the local sports radio scene to feature two full service sports stations, 93.7 The Fan and 970 ESPN. 105.9 The X wasn’t focused entirely on sports, but did have Mark Madden in afternoons delivering a sports program, as well as Tim Benz in the morning offering a mixture of sports and entertainment.
Fast forward to today, and The Fan and 970 ESPN remain the market’s full service sports stations, and 105.9 The X still has Mark Madden delivering a sports focused show in afternoons. The remainder of The X is built around music, but the station also carries Pittsburgh Penguins hockey.
Additionally, the Pittsburgh Tribune newspaper entered the sports audio space in 2011, and have stuck with it, and done a nice job of adding quality local programming. However, it’s hard to measure their performance due to not being included in the Nielsen ratings.
I was curious to see how the Pittsburgh market was performing and how things have changed during the span of the past 12 months when The Fan made some programming changes. The focus of the ratings discussion is on Men 25-54 which is the demographic that matters most to sports talk radio stations.
Here’s a look at the last 3-months as well as the performance year-to-year.
STATION
TIMESLOT/SHOWS
2015 May
2015 June
2015 July
2014 July
Mornings 6A-10A
93.7 THE FAN
The Fan Morning Show
5.1
4.2
4.5
6.6
970 ESPN
Mike and Mike In The Morning
0.9
0.7
0.5
2.2
Mid-Days 10A-3P
93.7 THE FAN
Cook & Poni 10a-2p, Starkey & Mueller 2p-3p
8.8
5.9
6.4
9.6
970 ESPN
ESPN Radio 10a-12p & 2p-3p, Stan Savran 12p-2p
0.8
0.6
0.6
2.1
Afternoons 3P-7P
93.7 THE FAN
Starkey & Mueller 3p-6p, Paul Zeise 6p-7p
7.5
7.1
6.8
7.5
970 ESPN
ESPN Radio 3p-4p, David Todd 4p-7p
0.5
0.5
0.3
1.1
105.9 THE X
Mark Madden
14.2
11.3
13.1
10.1
Evenings 7P-12A
93.7 THE FAN
Paul Zeise 7p-10p, Pittsburgh Pirates Baseball
12.2
13.1
14.4
14.8
970 ESPN
ESPN Radio
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.4
Monday-Sunday 6A-Midnight
93.7 THE FAN
All Shows, Ancillary Programming and Play by Play
8.1
6.9
7.2
8.9
970 ESPN
All Shows, Ancillary Programming and Play by Play
0.4
0.4
0.2
1.4
There are many takeaways from this data, but the three things that stand out are that Mark Madden is the undisputed king of Pittsburgh sports radio, The Fan own the marketplace as the city’s premier sports radio station, and winning teams in a local market lead to additional excitement and listening.
When you analyze the year to year performances, it’s interesting to see that The Fan is down nearly two full ratings points and 970 ESPN has also lost a point. It’d be understandable if the Pirates were bad this year, but they’ve remained strong so that begs the question, is there less interest in the programming, or did a few meters get away?
While meter changes can take a station from the outhouse to the penthouse in a matter of 30 days, Madden’s show is up three full points year to year, so interest in sports radio didn’t decline on his dial. Plus, Pirates baseball and The Fan’s afternoon show held pretty steady during the past 12 months.
When you look deeper, you can find some stories that make sense, and get a better idea of what’s happening with each brand, and where their challenges and opportunities lie. The good news for The Fan, they’re doing incredibly well and are at this point prisoners of their own success. When you can measure yourself against your past performances because you’ve taken control of the scene, that’s a good thing.
Looking at morning drive (6a-10a) which is hosted by Colin Dunlap, Josh Miller and Jim Colony, The Fan delivered a 5.1, 4.2 and 4.5 over the past 3 months. That performance placed them 7th each of those months, and while it’s a healthy number, I’m sure folks internally would like to see it register higher. Why do I say that? Last year in July, the morning show was producing a 6.6, which was two full points higher. That’s a 31% drop over the past 12 months.
While that’s a big dip, bear in mind that the show was different last year. Gregg Giannotti hosted the program, alongside Paul Alexander and Jim Colony. Alexander is no longer with the station, and Colony is still on the show, but Giannotti has since moved to New York where he now hosts CBS Sports Radio Network’s morning show with Brian Jones.
Losing Giannotti hurt, but the new morning show has a lot of talent and has performed very well, despite being together less than a year. If the Pirates continue winning, and the morning show keeps developing, the station will see improvement in morning drive. The only question is whether or not they can gain back two full ratings points, which is what they need to enter the Top 5, and compete against the market’s dominant rock stations.
The next area to look at are middays (10a-3p), and much like mornings, they perform very well. During the past 3 months, they’ve finished between 4th and 6th, and that result is one they should be very satisfied with. Making up the station’s middays are Ron Cook and Andrew Fillipponi from 10a-2p, and afternoon hosts Chris Mueller and Joe Starkey who impact 1-hour of the performance (2p-3p).
Where there is concern is when you look at the results from year to year. The station during that time has gone from a 9.6 to 6.4 which has taken them from a tie for 2nd to 5th, which represents a 33% dip. Additionally, the current programming delivered a fantastic 8.8 rating in the May 2015 book but is down to 6.4 in July 2015, so they’ve lost more than two full points in the past 90 days. Given that Pittsburgh has a strong appetite for football, I’m sure the May book was heavily impacted by the NFL Draft.
Next up is afternoons and this is where things are very interesting. Let’s start with The Fan. Overall they are doing an outstanding job. The time slot which features Chris Mueller and Joe Starkey from 3p-6p and Pirates Baseball Pre-Game/Paul Zeise from 6p-7p has delivered a 7.5, 7.1 and 6.8 over the past 3 months, good enough to place them between 4th and 5th. This is The Fan’s highest rated timeslot, Pirates baseball aside.
Where the story gets interesting though is when you look at what happens when a competitor exists who also shares the FM dial and has market recognition. That comes in the form of Mark Madden who hosts afternoons on The X and is #1 with a dominant 13.1 share. Madden’s program outperforms his entire station by 4 to 5 ratings points, and it’s clear that when he’s on the scene, he’s still seen as the authority for Pittsburgh sports conversation, even if he’s not on a full-time sports station.
Over the past 3 months Madden has been #1 every month, and his ratings were as high as a 14.2 in May. He’s also grown from a 10.0 to 13.1 over the past year, which is a 31% gain in audience. While The Fan should feel great about its own performance, Madden’s presence affects their ability to grab a larger piece of the pie.
The final time slot I want to examine are the nights (7p-12a). This is largely occupied during the spring/summer months on The Fan by Pirates baseball, and with the team performing well, you can see how its benefitted the radio station. For the past 3 months the Pirates have led The Fan to 1st place finishes at night each month, producing shares of 12.2, 13.1 and 14.4.
To put it in perspective, The Fan was 3rd in the April book with an 8.8 in the April book, which was right before the Pirates returned, so you can see that the station has gained 4 to 6 ratings points thanks to the return of baseball.
When the Penguins were in season, they too helped drive large audience numbers for their rights holder 105.9 The X. Pens hockey produced a 14.3 for the April book which placed the station 1st in that demographic, but that number has since dropped to 5.5 in July. Clearly Play by Play programming is a major difference maker in the Pittsburgh market.
While the majority of this conversation has revolved were around The Fan and 105.9 The X, I do also want to shed light on 970 ESPN. Their numbers are very low which makes it a tougher discussion but there are a few items worth noting.
First, the station is under 1 point which is not good, and with other brands performing incredibly well on the FM dial, it raises questions about the ability to perform on the AM band.
Secondly, with so much of its programming time dedicated to national shows, you can see that it doesn’t connect. The local audience wants Pittsburgh personalities talking about Pittsburgh stories, and this hurts 970 for sure.
That story is even more evident when you go deeper inside the numbers. Stan Savran who hosts a show from 12p-2p on 970 ESPN, produced a 1.7, 1.3 and 1.3 during his show the past 3 months. That number is 6x higher than the station’s overall rating and 2.5x higher than the morning show. This means that he is a destination for local fans, and they will seek out his content, even if he’s on AM, and surrounded by national shows.
This makes me wonder, would iHeart Pittsburgh entertain a move full time into the sports radio space on FM? Is there enough audience, and revenue in the market to make an impact?
Consider this, iHeart owns both 105.9 The X and 970 ESPN. Between those two brands, they have Mark Madden dominating afternoons, Pittsburgh Penguins hockey performing strong during the evenings, and Stan Savran on 970, a local fixture who many people love and respect, and who despite the challenges around him, outperforms his station.
They also have the association with ESPN, a proven programmer in Gregg Henson, plus the company has the rights to the Pittsburgh Steelers. Those games air on flagship station WDVE (also iHeart owned and operated) and 970 ESPN. If ever there was a company with the assets to make a run and give The Fan a major battle, it would be iHeart Pittsburgh. That said, there are also larger costs associated with running sports programming, and the company may not want to tinker with 105.9 The X in its current configuration, given its success.
For The Fan, while the station itself sounds great and they offer a lot of talent, the challenge they face is regaining their massive momentum from last year. If they can find those extra 2 to 3 ratings points, they’ll become an even bigger force to be reckoned with, and can then start measuring their performance opposite The X, WDVE and WRRK, music brands which traditionally do well. There’s no question they’ve built an identity as the market leader for sports radio, and the lineup they’ve established is impressive, so now it’s a matter of living up to their past performances, and hopefully exceeding them.
One very important thing to remember with regards to these performances, this is what they look like in May-July. Results are different during other points of the year. Luckily, the Pirates have been strong the past 2 seasons, but if they don’t play winning baseball, you can bet that has an impact on local programs. When the fall rolls around, and the Steelers become the focus of conversation, and the Pirates likely advance to the post-season, don’t be surprised to see many of these shows driving even higher numbers. The key then becomes converting those casual listeners into loyal fans.
In its current climate, the Pittsburgh sports radio scene belongs to The Fan. Mark Madden is the only local host who prevents their total dominance. If iHeart Pittsburgh elects to enter the sports format full time on FM in the future, this could be a very different conversation.
Tim Spence is on his way to Connecticut where he will join iHeartMedia and oversee the company’s sports and news brands in Hartford and New Haven. Spence replaces Dave Zaslowsky who moved home to Chicago and joined WLS-AM 890.
Spence built his programming profile in the Denver market. He oversaw programming for ESPN 102.3 and ESPN 105.5 for the Front Range Sports Network from 2010-2014, and spent 15 years with Lincoln Financial and Jefferson Pilot, most notably serving as the Program Director of 950 The Fan!
Among the stations to fall under his watch will be 97.9 ESPN Radio in Hartford and ESPN 1300 New Haven. Former MLB player and ESPN and Fox Sports Radio personality Rob Dibble hosts locally on those stations. He will also program two news talkers, News Radio 1410 WPOP in Hartford and News Radio 960 in New Haven. His first day will be September 1st.
It comes into play so often too in radio. You have a bad ratings book, and quickly it’s the fault of Nielsen’s PPM system, talent being out sick or on vacation, a lack of marketing, or the competitor having Voltaire. It could never be your fault or the brand’s fault, because that would mean acknowledging your own shortcomings.
First of all, if winning was easy, everyone would do it. Secondly, while people on the programming end care about connecting with the audience and delivering ratings to justify their impact, promotions and sales people, along with station managers, often look harder at generated revenues/profits and customer satisfaction, than they do the product’s performance.
Can you imagine Tom Brady, Derek Jeter, Michael Jordan or Wayne Gretzky saying “let’s do what we’ve done before, that should be good enough“? Each of those individuals are driven by their own desire to be great, that no owner, coach, or teammate needs to say anything to light their competitive fire.
If you’re a sports talk radio station, and your ratings are consistently outside the Top 10 with Men 25-54, there should be some concern and a number of questions being asked. Everything should be analyzed from the station’s name, position and lineup, to the content approach, the market’s appetite for sports radio, and nobody should be satisfied unless solutions are provided to help the brand improve.
As easy as it is to put the pressure on the shoulders of the on-air talent and programmers, I think pressure equally needs to be placed on corporate managers and ownership. The people up top need to set the tone for what is and isn’t acceptable inside the company. Stock prices rise and decline based on performance, and if goals are laid out and agreed to by each department, and the resources and support are provided to help people do their best work, then they should be able to deliver. If they don’t, then they also need to be held accountable.
Great organizations don’t apologize for expecting greatness from their people, and they certainly don’t wait long to make adjustments if the formula isn’t working.
