Jackson Jambalaya

Most folks I know, including myself gave up on SuperTalk after the dropped Dave. I even removed it from my favorite radio settings. I listened to that station for 10 years and now I'd forever done - they really let me down.

I gave up on it long before Dave left. Couldn't stand that show anyway. Gallo seriosly began getting on my nerves after a while. Fortunately, I'm inside the 103.9 listen area. I'll stick with Boortz, Savage, and occasionally listen to Fox on Sirius.

I must say this is objective reporting at its best. I enjoy this blog because in my opinion it highlights facts. You would never see this story on a JFP, or associated blog if a liberal media outlet was receiving AD money from a leftist government.

KF,,your stock just went up ALOT with me.

Count me among those who think Dave's departure is an improvement. I recently lost my XM radio service, and the local radio is as bleak as I remember. Fortunately the new car has a CD player.

IIRC the argument made the last time JFP made a stink about this was that TeleSouth is the only statewide radio outlet for state agency advertising. (MPB has a similar reach but doesn't run ads). I can't recall hearing Supertalk running ads advertising where in MS to sign up for food stamps though ;-)

Salter does a very good job IMO. I thought it would be hard for him to make the transition to radio but after listening to him for a long time now -- I turn it @ 5 to Wade -- I came to realize that Salter pulls his punches in his newspaper work. Salter is more conservative than his newspaper work lets on. If Gannett dumped Hampton and gave the job to Salter I think he'd produce a less offensive newspaper than the Clarion-Obama has become.

8:16 AM Kingfish has a few sacred cows ... but nothing near a herd.

WFMN is the only one?

Anyone noticed how only a handful of radio companies own all the radio stations? Last time I checked, Clearchannel owned quite a few stations throughout Mississippi.

Question that should be asked is how much money should the state really be spending on advertising right now. I think everyone knows the police are out in force every holiday weekend and don't need an advertising campaign to remind them of that fact. Or a bunch of ads at Ole Miss or JSU games to a bunch of drunks reminding them to not drink and drive.

The various state agencies have a number of messages to disseminate. They use more radio than only Davenport's outfit. My guess KF is that if you totaled the annual ad spend with all non-Supertalk radio stations statewide that you'd see a different picture than what yoiu are presenting here. Furthermore if you include the 2006 PEER data point it appears there is a declining trend.

Frontier Strategies: $1.2 million in 2010. $2.2 million in 2009. $111,311 so far in 2011. Frontier is owned by Josh Gergory (Magnolia Report) and Quinten Dickerson.

Ramey: $520,836 in 2009.

It sufficeth to say, Telesouth probably gets more money than any other media outlet. Given the owner's penchant to play around in Mississippi politics, its perfectly legitimate to discuss the amount of money it gets from the state.

Divide the Telesouth total by 9 to come up with an average spend per station. Then compare that number to the average spend per station for all non-Telesouth stations in the state.

Nobody is saying it isn't legit to discuss. But lacking an apples-to-apples comparison it is beginning to look like you've got some type of burr in your saddle for Davenport.

While I always appreciate the DPS holiday reminders about drinking and driving -- God knows what damage I might have caused had Steve Simpson's enormouns head not reminded me 18 times a day the last three weeks that drinking and driving are BAD -- I'd much rather that money go toward hiring additional officers.

I don't need to see the face of Jim Hood to understand that internet criminals might be after me, I don't need to see Tate Reeves' face to learn that I can pay for my 18-month old's college education TODAY, etc. These guys should not flatter themselves that they are "celebrity endorsers" whose presence can make or break an educational effort.

I do have a SERIOUS problem with agency directors and such appearing in those commercials. Serves ABSOLUTELY NO informational or persuasive purpose, as related to the supposed-substance of the ads. But that's a hell of a lot of free media going to people who have political aspirations. The DPS ads alone have bought Simpson the kind of name-recognition that other candidates might sell a kidney for.

Another interesting thing to point out is that Quentin Dickerson's Frontier Strategies -- which has the Phil Bryant campaign and everything other state Republican campaign -- got his $1.2 million contract only SIX MONTHS after he came back from D.C. where he had been working for Mississippi Republicans.

Nice contract to land when you have no advertising agency experience.

And what exactly did the state GET for its $1.2 million? There's always a chance it could have gotten funneled into other uses.

Seriously -- what do ag agencies do in Mississippi? That's a LOT of fancy folders and pamphlets or second-rate TV ads.

Fish-Checked to see if those ads were paid with state funds or with earmarked federal grants? Occasionally, you will see a whole crapload of money thrown at one cause (the abstinence campaign, anyone?) where the state isn't actually paying for it. Usually, they've received federal grants to back the advertising.

I'm not saying this is true AT ALL. Just wondering from previous experience....(i.e. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-dwipatrols_29met.ART.Central.Edition1.359bac7.html)

I also agree that I would rather that million be thrown at actual SERVICES (like maybe alcohol service?) rather than spent telling me how i shouldn't drink and drive. But, if they received it from the NHTSA than they can't do crap with it BUT the advertising campaign.

Butter makes some good points. These are state contracts so the assumption is state funds although it is possible federal moneys are used.

9:03AM Can you list other radio stations receiving state largess such as this? Very cute to divide by station and then claim its not that much. The true number is the aggregate number, not a statistician's sleight of hand-generated figure.

Show me Kingfish where I "claim[ed] its not that much". That is BS. If there is a "sleight of hand" going on it is your own. It is your blog. If you want to be statistically dishonest in order to prop up a post thrown together using incomplete data and weak support then have at it. We all know you will but when you do so you are just as transparent as the JFP.

Actually, the only fair comparison is to look at dollars-per-listener, which is how radio ads are billed. If the state decides, for whatever reason, that they have a message they want to get to all residents, and they further decide that radio ads are a reasonable way to reach residents (just to make something up - say they extend the deadline for filing state income taxes a week because of a natural disaster), then the Supertalk NETWORK (I think it's 9 stations), the only commercial network that reaches pretty much the entire state, may be the most cost-effective route when you divide the dollars by the number of listeners they reach. Nothing reaches every resident of the state, which is why they would also put out press releases for the papers, TV and radio news programs, etc, but it may be the most judicious use of tax dollars. If a competitor can reach more people for less money, then by all means transfer the account to them.

I agree that agency heads should not be promoting themselves in these ads - let them pay for that crap with campaign funds.

Last time I checked, these contracts were not bid out. Am I wrong in making that assertion? Please correct me if I am.

11:16: Rich, is that you?

Does anyone have access to exactly how many listeners this "network" actually has? The idea that it covers the whole state is mistaken.

I like 103.9 for Savage & 1180 or Laura Ingram and Rush and Kimmmmmmm Wade & Larry on Thur and Friday am (could do with out his sidekick Kent Dear)

Lots of good thoughts here, but I agree with the basic Kingfish point: Do the taxpayers EVER need to pay for true advertising? The extended tax filing deadline isn't advertising - that's more newsworthy and probably would be reported as such - but there are countless examples of the meaningless crap that government pays to advertise. It ALL needs to stop and the money either needs to be returned to the taxpayers (HA!) or spent on more worthwhile endeavors...Bill Billingsley

I come to this blog because Kingfish actually is fair and balanced.For the most part, anyway. More than I can say for news networks and newspapers.

Its been a long time since I worked at a 1000 watt stick but back then we had freebes called PSA'a

True, but PSAs are voluntary with no control over what time they will run, and no guarantee they will run at all. That's why they're not ads, which is the topic under discussion.

Bill, I am on your side. I am not a fan of spending dollars on traditional media that targets a broad general mainstream channel. If they are going to spend some money, why not set up a FB and Twitter account with a person (dedicated) to sending the message out 40 hours a week, responding to messages, encouraging participation in their programs, ad nauseum....and pay them 40K a year. Imagine the messages I could get out there with the target population with that kind of dedication to a message. I could get out messages like, abstinence, DUI Don't DO IT, etc. with about a team of five and I would charge the state probably a third of what they currently spend...Oh, and BTW, I can provide measurements to show impact, interaction, effectiveness.

Bill, the world is changing, this is my premise, the problem is, we have legislators and State systems relying on the past to send messages we need to have in the general public (educational). The issue is are they reaching their intended target or are they having a fine meal and drinks at Tico's?

I would sit in front of EVERY one of these folks and ask for MEASURED RESULTS. They can't do it. I guarandamnteeyou! This is their biggest fear, when they are exposed as the charlatans they are, meaning they are successful in some regard with these levels of spending and the results are not important... THIS is what they fear, because if they would let me, I would give them results, not over generalizations, simplifications...

I'd show them the communication, the discussions resulting from their message. And the success of any message sent.

Oh and Hey Bill...

Don't get me started that Advertising is Mind Control...

Noam Chomsky Manufacturing Conscent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media - while a bit left, its pretty much a linguistic argument we are but sheep

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky

If they are going to spend some money, why not set up a FB and Twitter account with a person (dedicated) to sending the message out 40 hours a week, responding to messages, encouraging participation in their programs, ad nauseum....and pay them 40K a year.

Kappy, please take a course on target marketing. You need it badly.

I have Fortune Five background exprience with Consumer Marketing (10 years). Teach me something; your response comes off as someone with an extreme the fear of exposure.

I'm not talking about Oil. What did you drink today?

Your response comes off as that of a marketing ignoramus.

Send out constant facebook messages and see how fast the fan base will dwindle. Huge turn off.

As I have been bested by a Marketing Genius, aka, oversimplify the conversation to make a pointless point, I will post an example later for your review and you can show me how I must not know what the hell I am talking about.

A politician in office wants to use state advertising money to get their name and face identified with a " mom and apple pie" message. Free continued campaigning.
We've forgotten that First Ladies didn't always have a " cause" until someone figured out they could be a political asset.
Whether it's beautifying America, picking up trash,exercising or reading a book, it helps their husbands politically. How effective such campaigns are given the dollars spent and alternative approaches is debatable.
I've never liked the practice. I'd be for supporting some efforts if the advertising can be shown to be useful but think the First Lady or politician's face/name should be banned from the effort. Get a non-political celeb instead.
Let's face it, Miss Mississippi in spandex would get more men out walking !
Kudos KF, the only way we can stop politicians from rewarding their supporters with our tax dollars is for unrewarded supporters to object. Of course, the best way to silence that will be to offer some spoils to the ones raising questions ...that's the way it works.

Russ Latino on Supertalk for 60 minutes this morning bloviating as an expert in all things. And if you didn't get enough of him he'll be in Hattiesburg bloviating there about immigration reform. No telling when he is going to fill in for the Garden Mama and pass himself off as an expert horticulturist.

Give Davenport time, give Davenport time.

One of the biggest influences on how state agencies communicate their messages is, honestly, legislators and board members. I have worked with agencies who were trying to adopt a more modern approach to communication, icorporating email, social media, etc., but were criticized by legislators or their board members for doing so.

The problem is that the legislators and board members tend to be OLD -- and because a technology is something they don't use every day, they see no reason for any agency to try and meet the diverse needs of Mississippians who are not so limited.

One agency I worked with a few years ago was going through a website redesign. After they posted the new design, they got BLASTED by a member of the House who had gotten a complaint from a constituent that the agency's site was now too hard to use. Turns out the constituent was using a slow dial-up connection and it took forever for ANYTHING to load on his computer. The Rep didn't care -- he said it was the agency's responsibility to make sure the site was "plain enough" for that man to access it quickly.

Take a look at the PEER site -- it's God-awful, probably because they got the same kind of feedback.

I would love it if someone would make it a point to sit in on the Board meetings of the agencies that fail to incorporate up-to-date and low-cost communication strategies, such as moving newsletters to email and such. If the topic were to come up, I bet 95% of the Board members would be opposed to such changes.

Actually, KF, there's a good study in the making there. How much money is wasted by agencies relying on outdated communication methods? What really keeps them from taking steps to realize those savings?

"he said it was the agency's responsibility to make sure the site was "plain enough" for that man to access it quickly."

He is right. Just as schools have to teach so the slowest student can grasp the material, taxpayer-supported agencies have to perform their mission so the poorest and least tech-savvy residents can receive the services. This is terrible for those who can handle something different (just as it is for the brightest ones in a class) but that's the way it is. In the poorest state in the union you can't force people to pay for broadband to access information after they have paid taxes to generate that information. A dual approach would make the most sense but I realize the Luddites in the legislature would probably object to that too.

10:24 MAYBE I could buy that reasoning IF the constituent has no access to a public library or cyber cafe etc.
By the legislator's reasoning, we'd have no computer availability to constitutents as surely there is ONE illiterate in his district!
Of course, until we face the fact that "born equal" never was intended to mean that every person born has the same abilities and talents, we'll continue to get this nonsense. Our Founding Fathers, unlike our current politicians knew that not every person born was able to graduate from high school or attend college or even be literate or to be a responsible citizen who understood the issues at hand.

Here you go. This is an election example, but the same principles can be applied to a state agency that is tasked with getting out a PSA message. It would probably be more impactful because the message can be TARGETED to people you actually see, measurements you can actually take, and not just a general shot in the dark targeting a general demographic via radio. Same thing that happened to news papers is going to happen with radio advertising. It is old school. And think about this, if you are bombarded with messages, you might pick up on a few, but if your friend, your mom, your brother/sister, recommends something, the marketing impact of your message sky-rockets, but then I don't know crap.

Notice too the integration across multiple platforms.

http://www.facebook.com/finseth#!/electbobmarshall?ref=mf

Kingfish, you are so right on target with your investigative reports. Too bad there is no way to source all of the federal grant money agencies use for advertising with Telesouth/Davenport, Or the (est 15 million) in BP PR money, the state directed to Frontier Strategies for 'tourism' advertising.
You have hit on some interesting linkages. Have you looked into Phil Bryant's past campaign finance reports or fundraising invitations? They establish some interesting links to Davenport and Frontier Strategies, but also to David Landrum and other bottom feeders that give the GOP a bad rap. Keep up the good work!

Hey 10:23, stay on topic.

topic isn't how our tax dollars are used to benefit the players in the game of politics?

Noting that the recipents of the tax dollars also make campaign contributions isn't relevant?

Problem is 9:18 AM that Kingfish only very lightly addresses those issues and more indirectly than directly. This post is an attack on Telesouth not some heady discussion as you allude.

KK, 10:23 is 'right on target'. Granted, he understood the overall issue of ST's largess of state appropriated funds.

Fish, not disagreeing at all with your report, but Butterknife is on target with his comments. There are many, many more dollars being spent by agencies than what is reported thru the DFA site, because of federal funds that are provided only for advertising. The DPS ads mentioned here featuring Simpson are a prime example - these NITSA funds are ALL federal monies, and must be spent on advertising. The cost of these ads are not included in the totals you reported. There are other examples, including coaches' comments following football games.

Check Davenport's history - he claimed for a year that he was going to have the appropriation committee chairman reappointed via his campaign contributions (both $$s and visability on his stations, endorsements by JT&Dave et.al., and his pure power influence) solely so that he could insure continued inclusion in appropriation bills. He failed in maintaining the chairman, and the amount of advertising spending has dropped, but not stopped.

Keep digging - there's a lot of dirt in this hole.

I believe that the issue is really about Old Media, Good Ole Boys, and the fact it can be done different, better and in a more relevant, less expensive manner.

The delusion of an attack on Telesouth is just that, delusional.

The reason I mentioned Telesouth was because it was the only radio station mentioned. Is it a coincidence its owner is active in republican politics and is becoming even more partisan in primary politics? That is for you to decide.

Show me some other radio stations and I'll put them up here. Otherwise its just more comments of the "Kingfish is attacking someone" variety that the Steadivest fraudsters, Irby defenders, Bell defenders, and similar parties have made on this website.

KaptKookBrain wrote:
I believe that the issue is really about Old Media, Good Ole Boys, and the fact it can be done different, better and in a more relevant, less expensive manner.

You must be dropping mushrooms KK.

Here the crux of Kingfish's argument, in his own words, as he originally set it up:

"However, the question must be asked: why the state of Mississippi is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in advertising with Telesouth and over $100,000 with Godwin in the last two years, when agencies are laying off employees and cutting programs left and right?"

Please come down from your high because you are really screwed up.

Show me some other radio stations and I'll put them up here. Otherwise its just more comments of the "Kingfish is attacking someone" variety that the Steadivest fraudsters, Irby defenders, Bell defenders, and similar parties have made on this website.

Is there wrongdoing alleged Kingfish, on your part, by Telesouth or anyone else associated with this ad spending by the state? Are you alleging some type of quid pro quo at play here?

Because if not then your associating comments challenging you on this with comments made on those other criminal acts is nothing but another bullshit dodge, tuck and run on your part.

You are all over the map on this one.

Nice try at using the strawman technique perfected by Obama.

I didn't say anything about wrongdoing by anyone and you damn well know it. I didn't allege any kind of quid pro quo.

I am merely asking why the state is wasting millions on advertising when there is a budget crunch and every dollar counts. If you think there is something nefarious in asking that question, then I can't help you.

Right ... that is what you are doing by attacking specifically Telesouth and drawing connections between Davenport, the GOP and Bryant.

Here are your own damn words:

However, the question must be asked: why the state of Mississippi is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in advertising with Telesouth and over $100,000 with Godwin in the last two years, ...

You aren't asking some larger questions as you now crawfish that you were. You called out two specific business relationships and one business owner's connections to the GOP and Bryant.

If ANYONE is playing Obama here pal it is you. You could join his staff today and never miss a beat.

I chose them because they were the largest receivers in the PEER report as well as Frontier. Keep trying. You'll find a conspiracy somewhere, I'm sure.

I have been watching this commentary on this article posting, so I have looked into this a little. State agencies spend money with the Mississippi Network which is owned by Telesouth and has 65 plus stations across the state owned by various entities. It is the only statewide, commercial news network here in Mississippi that I have found. At least it is a Mississippi Company... Unlike Clear Channel or Cumullus. According to my #'s, the state spent roughly 13 million on advertising, of wich Telesouth got about 3%. If Phil Bryant is such a good friend of Davenports, he sure isnt helping him out much...

Nice try September 9, 2010 10:18 AM, but the fact remains, the new media is nipping at your heals. You do seem a bit perturbed to so cursedly dismiss my comment with trite name calling.

You, Old Radio hound you...

I'm just trying to make it like everyone else, it just so happens my mousetrap is a bit better than the traditional one. And I can show how it works with measured, physical results.

Who gives a hoot about your demographic reach projections and your audience estimations? Statistical as you might believe them, remember, There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.