The stark difference in audience between a pro-market radio station and one that advocates for a strong state

It’s no use presenting radio survey numbers that deal with situations we have always questioned. I do not doubt the integrity of the surveys, but rather their effectiveness. For years, interviewers have asked: “Which station do you listen to? At what time? On which days of the week? What color are your host’s socks?” Of course, the questions are based on studies and are often well formulated. But there is no denying that the method is subject to countless distortion factors, many of them involuntary on the part of respondents. Personally, I do not find this type of data very reliable; that is my particular view.

There are, however, peripheral ways of measuring audience that offer much greater quantitative accuracy. Streaming panels are a clear example. This is not even a survey: it is real-time measurement of instantaneous audience. There is no doubt whether there were “around 10,000 or 50,000 people” at 10:53 a.m. on a Wednesday. What we have is exact data: “18,578 IPs were connected to the program at 10:53, and by 10:59 that number had already reached 19,051.” That is a direct thermometer, not a vague estimate without measuring instruments. In audio and video streams, such as on YouTube, the numbers are raw truths.

Even without official comparisons between nationally reaching stations such as Jovem Pan and CBN, just look at YouTube: if one has 100 times more viewers than the other there, it is hard to believe that on radio this relationship would be reversed, to the point that CBN would surpass Jovem Pan. Even more: does it make sense to imagine that a difference of 100 times on YouTube would translate into only 10% or 20% more listeners on radio? Or worse: that surveys would place CBN ahead? That is at the very least reason to raise an eyebrow.

With all the caveats, discounts, and “what ifs,” there is no reduction coefficient that makes me believe that CBN even comes close to Jovem Pan, at least in the noon to 2 p.m. news slot. The difference is practically 100-fold in audience. This phenomenon reflects the same audience logic that follows networks like Mitre in Buenos Aires or Fox News in the United States. I have many reservations about Fox: the “passion factor” often weighs too heavily, making it a model I would not adopt. But it is undeniable that, in the case of Radio Mitre, there is a more consistent balance: it aligns with the liberal profile of its audience, but without concealing flaws or turning politicians into gods.

A reality check

Scoreboard 09/18 1:05 p.m.: JP (79,426) vs. CBN (835)

.

The difference between declarative research, based on interviews and subject to distortions, and direct audience metrics, such as streaming and YouTube, which provide objective records free from response bias, is stark and revealing.

As I have explained on other occasions, talk radio focused on debates, sports, and news often operates under a paradox: stations provide exactly what the audience seeks, debates, sports, and news, but frequently from a perspective disconnected from that very audience. The prevailing mindset among journalism professionals, heavily influenced by Marxist references, is treated as if it were a great virtue. Yet it would be more honest to admit that inapplicable hypotheses cannot truly be called theories, especially since the so-called “social virtues” never materialized in the lives of their “virtuous” formulators.

The outcome is a clear mismatch: on one side, an audience passionate about numbers, news, and sports; on the other, that same audience largely favors reducing the burden of low-return taxes and easing the bureaucratic suffocation imposed by the State, a State so often glorified by most journalists. It is no secret that stations choosing a pro-market stance end up dominating the ratings, while the others are left with meager results. This happens due to a lack of even basic investigation and an inability to recognize that they are, in practice, driving away the very audience they should be winning over. The irony is that this supposedly “aligned” audience with the hegemonic journalistic mindset often chooses entertainment shows, music, or, in many cases, simply doesn’t care for radio at all.

Stayin' alive

Unfortunately, the liberating principle of not being chained to politicians and the State, a principle defended by pro-market advocates, is often demonized in many academic programs. In these settings, the exact sciences are also subtly or openly discredited. The hegemonic mindset of hostility toward capitalism and the fascination with communist theories are strongly present in the training of most professionals.

Many of them fail to develop an appreciation for numbers and instead are seduced by poetic rhetoric from Cuba or Venezuela. But this kind of seduction is not a trap that fools most small shopkeepers, micro-entrepreneurs, or the vast majority who face unfair battles and still have to swallow hard as they watch on TV the government subsidizing large corporations while tightening the tax burden on their own small businesses. At the same time, it raises unchecked supersalaries in state sectors, blows up the public budget, and then puts on a sorrowful face to justify higher taxes and “politically negotiate” the approval of projects that, in many cases, are designed precisely to collect even more revenue.

And still, many reporters openly cheer for the expansion of the State, for the proliferation of public jobs, for guaranteed stability regardless of performance, for welfare policies at any cost, and ultimately for suffocating the oxygen that keeps entrepreneurship alive.