This week, I attended the Public Radio Program Directors convention in Austin. As you might imagine, journalism and politics were prime topics at many of the sessions. Public radio has a long, rich track record for robust news coverage and perspective, all of which has ramped up during the past couple years as the political scene has become a firehose of “breaking news.”
Meanwhile in commercial radio, there are stations focused on news and talk – all of which are designed to discuss pretty much anything – especially politics. But for music stations, not so much. And most consultants and programmers advise air talent on music stations to 
steer clear of the toxic political environment. When the mere mention of the President inflames high percentages of listeners, it’s not productive for most stations and personalities to talk politics.
In today’s guest post from Jacobs Media’s Seth Resler, we’re throwing caution to the wind. Politics is at the center of our conversation. Seth recounts a real radio moment he had this week in Detroit. His observations are telling, hopefully stimulating a conversation at your station.
There are countervailing arguments on both sides of Seth’s reasoning, illustrating just how tricky and gnarly this topic has become for music stations. Here’s a deep dive into the inner-workings of Seth’s brain. – FJ
On the afternoon of Tuesday, August 21st, Paul Manafort, the former manager of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, was convicted on eight of 
the eighteen criminal charges brought against him by U. S. prosecutors. The news broke in the late afternoon. That evening, I was driving to downtown Detroit.
On my drive, I heard a DJ on a local music radio station do a break about Manafort. The gist was something like this: “Paul Manafort was convicted on eight criminal charges today. That sounds like a bad day, until you consider that he was facing eighteen charges, so maybe it’s actually a good day.”
(I’m writing this after the fact, so I confess that this may not be an entirely accurate quote, but you get the general idea. I won’t reveal the identity of the DJ or the station in question, but I’ll give you a hint: the break was delivered over the intro of an Incubus song.)
As soon as I heard this short break, a number of conflicting thoughts flashed through my mind. Here they are:
- Wow, this DJ just did a break about politics. That’s impressive! Outside of conservative talk and public radio, stations have largely ignored the political turmoil in this country, even as every other outlet in the world has been consumed by it. From late night talk shows to football, politics has dominated every aspect of life in the last year and a half – except in music radio. This may be the first time I’ve heard a music daypart DJ tackle a political topic. It made the station sound refreshingly in-tune with what was happening in the world on this big news day.
- I can never decide if commercial radio’s decision to ignore the current political climate on music stations is wise or cowardly. I absolutely understand why these stations avoid it — after all, talking about politics runs the risk of needlessly alienating listeners. Even if your market leans in one political direction or another, it’s never going to be anywhere near 100%. You’re undoubtedly going to piss off somebody — probably a lot of somebodies.
- Nonetheless, America is facing perhaps the most serious issues I’ve seen in my lifetime. I’ve lived through 9/11, the Great Recession, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and the impeachment of a president. But what we’re going through now feels different to me. This feels like an existential crisis for both political parties and perhaps the nation as a whole, yet many music radio broadcasters are choosing to sit out of the discussion because they’re afraid it will cut into their profits. I understand it intellectually, but I don’t know if I find it admirable.
- On the other hand, maybe it’s precisely because it’s so hard to get away from politics these days that music radio stations should ignore it.
Maybe listeners want an escape from the ongoing political debate, and it’s the role of music stations to provide that. - Or maybe that’s the role of Pandora and Spotify. Maybe radio is surrendering the biggest advantage it has over streaming services — on-air personalities — by not letting them talk about the issues that are on most people’s minds.
- Of course, it takes skill and experience to know how to navigate sensitive topics like this successfully, and if we’re being brutally honest, for most music radio DJs — even on morning shows — the risks greatly outweigh the rewards. Even if a broadcaster like Howard Stern or Steve Harvey could address these issues in a way that works, it doesn’t follow that every other personality in America can, too. Given that overworked program directors are managing lots of DJs — including part-timers — and probably not airchecking them as often as they should, it probably is smart for broadcasters to avoid politics altogether.
- This particular DJ, however, did manage to do a solid break about politics while talking up a song. It was topical but also managed to avoid being partisan. That’s a fine line to walk. Well done.
- I wonder if this DJ’s program director will agree. I wonder if the PD will ever hear this break. I wonder how often this DJ gets airchecked. I wonder if the audience will hear it this way. Or whether the mere mention of Paul Manafort’s name triggered the anger and frustrations felt by so many people on both sides of the political aisle.
- In fact, this break was very topical. It was about a news story that was only a few hours old. That means there was likely a live DJ in the studio — or at worst, the break was voicetracked pretty close to the time that it aired. I appreciate that fact – it makes the station sound relevant and current.
- This break was mildly amusing, but not laugh-out-loud funny. I think to be truly funny, it would have to be edgier, while touching on some raw truth. Does that mean it is impossible to do a political break that is both really funny and non-partisan?
- Speaking of radio broadcasters sitting out of the political debate, musicians also seem to be staying on the sidelines in a way that’s historically
uncharacteristic. From the Beatles, Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young, Joan Baez, and Bob Dylan to Rage Against the Machine, Green Day, Public Enemy, and the Dixie Chicks, music and politics have often gone hand in hand. Aside from Eminem, Kid Rock, and Ted Nugent, there seems to be very little politics in music these days. I wonder if that’s because the record label machine that churns out pop music has the same profit motivations that radio companies do. And how come today’s most outspoken artists are all from Detroit? - Incubus? Ugh…
Politics? Music radio?
What thoughts go through your head?
- A Simple Digital Treat to Thank Your Radio Listeners This Thanksgiving - November 13, 2023
- Interview Questions When Hiring Your Radio Station’s Next Digital Marketing Manager - November 6, 2023
- A Radio Conversation with ChatGPT: Part 2 – Promotions - October 30, 2023
Great article Seth. Valid points to consider.
Thanks for reading, Tommy!
Wow, that jock’s comment wasn’t even political, a simple observation on the news of the day.
Country stations going ballistic over the Dixie Chicks was political, dictated by corporate policy.
You’re right, it wasn’t political in that the DJ didn’t insert a political viewpoint into their break. I think many jocks would ignore this news story because they fear that simply mentioning it might be interpreted as making a political statement.
I think the jock handled it really well! His break was topical, but personal rather than partisan. That’s good, because music personalities can’t win by wading into the partisan divide…there’s no way to do that without unnecessarily alienating a significant portion of their audience.
I do, too. I think that’s why it caught my attention. Thanks for reading!
Yes and no. Yes, it may have been topical and non-partisan. No, I made no mention of it on my morning sports talk show. In Iowa, the big story was the murder of University of Iowa student Mollie Tibbetts and the discovery of the body of a missing boy from our county. Sports is a diversion; a fantasy; a way of getting away from all the noise and negativity. Manafort simply did…not…matter to my audience. Consequently, we let CBS cover Manafort. I had stories about the murders within the local newscasts. My guys and I then talked about Cubs baseball.
The Air Talent should be applauded for a well thought out break. No “last word” just the facts, and a bit of a jab at the end. I find it difficult to be political. Maybe too much anger and confusion to write out or think of that break. If I had heard it, I never would have thought of it as political. Applause.
Yes, I always appreciate a topical break — something that is unique to the current pop culture moment. But that’s become harder to do in divisive times. Applause, indeed.
Hi Seth
Here en Bogotá (Colombia) there is a radio station called “LA FM”, always it´s between 15 and 20 radio surveys position; weekdays in the morning this station it´s a talk radio (Politics mostly) but the rest of the day it´s 80´s & 90’s anglo classics. I don´t understand why not it´s a 100% talk radio or 100% music radio, I think it´s a terrible idea mix formats
Regards,
Yes, when I listen to the radio in other countries, I’m often struck by the diverse mix of programming you’ll find on a single station. It’s an interesting cultural difference.
Apolitical is the key. The “bad day good day” bit was the product of a good entertainer!
Yes, it takes skill to find the right wording. Thanks for reading!
It was a personal observation, and it didn’t sound like he was taking sides. I’d be OK with it if I were his PD.
If I ever do a bit or a joke about anything political — which, admittedly, is rare — I do it through the filter of “all politicians are a bit shady”, or I focus on flaws all humans have. There’s no reason to call out either party as stupid, because people tend to take those attacks personally.
That’s definitely the safest route. I do wonder what kind of conversations PDs are having with their air talent around these issues. I assume they’re having conversations and not leaving their air talent without direction. Thanks for the comment!
Funny – if this were Bill Clinton, a raft of impersonators would be on the air. Same with Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan. Where are the Trump impersonators? Anyway I love tove comments they’re as well thought out as that break was. Late night hosts were avoiding politics at the start, but (other than Colbert) the rest started railing on Trump. They claim it’s helping their ratings. I, for one, look for the escape from the hate, venom and divisive talk – and while I’d tolerate a “report” like that-let’s not get into the same boat as the Kimmels, Fallons and Seth Meyers of the world. A great entertainer knows his/her place-and where to draw the lines. From now on I’ll plan a break-and those 12 points will run through my head – of course the break will be over by the time I get it sorted out. The break in question was a great one “for the moment”-and then it’s gone. Thanks for thinkin’ Seth.
That’s a good question — where are the Trump impersonators? I did see one on America’s Got Talent last summer, and he was largely apolitical in that he mocked Trump’s superficial attributes (his hair, his voice, his key phrases) without touching on more divisive issues.
It’s worth noting that the break I heard made no mention of Trump, which I assume was by design. Thanks for reading!
I’ll only dare to go into political territory on air when it has a direct bearing on the music and can be related in a non-partisan manner. I don’t do coverage on David Crosby’s anti-Trump tweets or Ted Nugent’s comments for the President. Yesterday was a good example of a story i did use. Steven Tyler asked the President to stop using Aerosmith’s “Living On The Edge” at his rallies. I pointed out that Tyler’s request didn’t come from his own or the band’s political leanings; he pointed out that his/the band’s music is used for causes, but never individual campaigns or parties. On a deeper level of his cease & desist is his concern for intellectual property rights and copyright issues. Whatever I choose to say on the air or in station social media concerning politics (which is rare) I make sure my phrasing AND my tone of voice is right up the middle and ties in with the music.
That sounds like a smart approach. Thanks, Jay!
Thanks…it’s an interesting line to walk here – I work in a format that indexes to the right in a blue state.
Jay, knowing your audience’s values is part of the intelligence process. Many programmers and personalities aren’t aware of the impact their comments can have on an audience. Thanks for the comment.
I was wrong, Seth. Coming squarely from the “there are already endless outlets where you can hear divisive, political comments/jokes/jabs, so why alienate half your audience?” camp, I was already ready to not like “whatever the comment” turned out to be. But this unnamed personality hit that one EXACTLY down the middle of the ballpark.
I think point 10 of yours resonated most with me. It was a truly funny line, but anything beyond it likely would have elicited greater laughs to one side of the political spectrum to the alienation of the other.
And an aside, I’m glad I got to Fred’s blog later than usual today and got a chance to enjoy some great responses. I thought Don Collett’s in particular was spot on, where he said on the rare occasion he ventures into any such commentary, he does it through the filter of, “all politicians are a bit shady, or I focus on flaws all humans have. There’s no reason to call out either party as stupid, because people tend to take those attacks personally.” Brilliant, Don. Carson and Leno would be proud.
In short, if you’re going to tackle crossing the political tightrope, you better be good, because you’re working without a net. Congratulations our unnamed colleague for a safe, successful crossing.
I think that it really helps to focus on the processes, instead of the individuals or policies. Regarding the former, here are two examples of parody songs/raps by Australian stations regarding this week’s leadership spill(s) in the ruling Liberal party; the second example might be helped a bit more by its secondary focus on other spills over the past decade (including within the Labor party, which is currently in Opposition)…
https://radiotoday.com.au/battle-of-the-lipspill-raps-hit-goldburn-valley-98-1-power-fm-both-spit-rhymes
In contrast, a well-known Mexican personality (Toño Esquinca) has been in a good amount of controversy over the past several months–largely because of his pledge (which he didn’t follow through on) to leave the country, if Andrés Manuel López Obrador ended up winning the presidency. (That said, those comments may have been made when he was going through some major personal issues.)
I’m truly divided on this topic. I do agree this is a quick easy way to sound in the moment and fairly “apolitical” on a current events topic. But I do believe that a lot of people do use music radio to escape the constant drumbeat of politics and “bad news.” Plus the total disconnect between the two “sides” in American politics makes threading the needle very difficult. I’m doing some work for an older demo station and receive constant complaints about “biased news” when trying to air any national news stories (ABC Radio) so it makes me very wary of any sort of political comments from personalities.
That’s pretty much the consensus, Mark. Seth’s schitzoid post sums up the conflicts. Thanks for your comment.
Hey Seth,
Congratulations on a great hook headline, and thought provoking content. The engagement you got on this speaks to its relevance.
Great job!
Gene & Julie