The Los Angeles Times reports that KFI has not lost any ratings during the “month” that KFI has (supposedly) not been airing Rush Limbaugh. (As we will soon see, this reporting is utterly bogus — which I’m sure you find shocking, given the source.) Here’s ace reporter Ryan Faughnder:
It’s early days, but losing Rush Limbaugh to another Clear Channel station didn’t seem to hurt ratings for KFI-AM (640) in January.
Numbers released Tuesday by Nielsen Audio showed little change in KFI’s numbers in the first month after Clear Channel moved the conservative talk show host to KEIB-AM (1150), formerly known as KTLK-AM.
KFI, which has switched to all-local programming, accounted for a 3.1% share of the Los Angeles-Orange County audience for the period of Jan. 2 to Jan. 29, flat with the previous month and ranking at No. 10.
Quiz for those reading this article:
Q: When did KFI begin their new local schedule that omits Rush Limbaugh?
a) Before Jan. 2
b) Beginning Jan. 20
If you guessed b), you are correct. Here’s Richard Wagoner at the Los Angeles Daily News on January 8:
It has been common knowledge for the past month or so that Rush Limbaugh would be moved from his longtime home of KFI (640 AM) to the new “Patriot,” KEIB (formerly KTLK, 1150 AM), so when I logged on to the KFI website Monday to find out who the new host was for the unfilled 1-3 p.m. shift, I was surprised to see Limbaugh still listed as the 9 a.m. to noon host.
I was ready to call KFI/KEIB’s marketing manager, Neil Saavadra, and give him a hard time about the mistake. Until I tuned in and discovered that Limbaugh was indeed on KFI. As well as KEIB. What gives?
“We wanted to make the transition an easy one,” Saavadra told me. So through Jan. 17, you can hear Limbaugh on two local stations. Then, Jan. 20 will mark the beginning of KFI’s almost-all-local format.
Our young Jimmy Olsen said that ratings were unchanged “in the first month after” Limbaugh had been “moved” to a different station — yet it appears that Limbaugh was actually gone for all of nine days of the 28-day period in question.
Reader Steven D. reports:
I sent the author an email and said I didn’t expect a correction, because it is the LA Times and the LA Times isn’t all that concerned with accuracy. Nothing on the story has changed, and I sent emails to the top editors of the Times to tell them about their inaccurate story. Not that they’ll care.
So cynical, Steven D. is!
And, of course, with good reason. Because this paper is truly amazing in its capacity for misstating the facts in service of a partisan slant.
Oh well. They’ll keep telling falsehoods. It’s what they do. We’ll keep correcting them. It’s what we do.