News/Talk Radio has spent years making the case that it’s the most trusted format in all of media. Hosts build loyal audiences by promising accuracy. News anchors stake their credibility on getting the facts right. It’s the foundation the format is built on.
So why are so many news/talk stations broadcasting a very different message the moment someone visits their website?
This past week, I came across a Cumulus news/talk station whose website still listed Imus in the Morning as its featured morning show. Don Imus has been dead for six years. That’s six years of a dead man’s name sitting on a live station’s homepage. Jim Bohannon was listed as an overnight host. He died more than three years ago! It listed Clark Howard as its afternoon host. Clark retired five years ago!
I also found a Salem Media station still promoting America at Night with Rich Valdes — a radio show that’s been off the air for four months. These aren’t ancient archives buried three clicks deep. They’re front-facing pages that represent the brand to every potential listener and advertiser who visits.
It’s easy to dismiss this as a minor housekeeping issue. I’d push back hard on that.
Think about what these stations are asking advertisers to believe. They’re asking businesses to trust them with their brand, their message, and their money — and then they can’t keep their own programming grid current. If a station can’t manage the basic task of updating a show listing, why would an advertiser feel confident that their spot will air correctly, their copy will be handled with care, or their campaign details will be executed properly? The argument sells itself, and not in a good way.
The listener side of this equation is just as damaging. News/talk’s entire value proposition rests on credibility. When a local listener stumbles onto a website promoting a show that no longer exists — or worse, a host who’s no longer alive — what conclusion do they draw? They’re not thinking “web team oversight.” They’re thinking this station doesn’t pay attention. And if it doesn’t pay attention to its own details, why should they trust its reporters, its anchors, or its hosts to get their news right?
That’s a brutal message to send, and it’s entirely self-inflicted.
The problem doesn’t stop at outdated show listings, either. Some stations still don’t offer their podcasts or on-demand audio on their own websites. Others have the infrastructure in place but don’t maintain it. One brand that performed extremely well in our recent Top 20 of news/talk radio series — a station that by every competitive measure should be proud of its product — hasn’t posted on-demand audio for its afternoon show in over four months. Four months. That’s not a glitch. That’s a choice, even if it wasn’t an intentional one.
Here’s the thing about passive neglect — it sends a message just as clearly as active decisions do. A stale website tells the audience that digital presence is an afterthought. It signals to advertisers that the attention to detail stops at the studio door.
News/talk can’t afford that signal right now. The format is competing for ears against podcasts, streaming audio, and an endless supply of on-demand content that is always current, always available, and never lists a deceased host. The bar for digital execution isn’t impossibly high. It’s just consistency. Update your show pages. Post your audio. Make sure what’s on your website reflects what’s actually on your air.
Advertisers are always looking for a reason to say no. Listeners are always looking for a reason to tune out of a radio station. A neglected website hands them both reasons before a single word of content is ever consumed. That’s a problem entirely within a station’s control to fix — and there’s no good excuse for leaving it broken.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
