The Repubs want to ban TikTok because of the spyware, not because of the speech on the medium. They aren't consistent about that, though -- you're correct. Nearly every app on your phone has spyware elements. And no one is calling to ban all of them, or even regulate them to the extent that they reduce or eliminate the keylogging, surveillance, etc. -- something I think you've mentioned in other threads before.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Saving AM Radio
- Thread starter BruceB
- Start date
They believe in free speech. And the only thing making AM talk appear one-sided is choice. Air America wasn't prevented from taking a shot at left wing talk. No one was trying to shut them down or stop them. Al Franken, Randi Rhodes, Ed Schultz, Tom Hardmann, they all gave it a go (I think Hardmann is still on the air in places). No one stopped them from using the medium. And at the time FM wasn't conducive to an all political talk station. If Air America had succeeded, they'd still be on AM now. So the politics involved isn't the entire point.
And as for minority parties, both political parties are minority parties. The D's are around 26% on a good year, the R's around 23% on a good year. Independent voters are over 46%. So the size of the party is a non-issue. And if Air America had taken off and become successful (it's sad that they failed), then they would be calling for AM to remain in cars. The issue isn't political as much as a media platform issue. There still is a sizable chunk of Americans who drive who listen to AM, even if it's only a couple times a week. Leaving it intact in vehicles costs very little. It's a sunk cost.
Robert Douglas
Banned
Every city I've lived in has a huge 100,000 watt liberal talk station called NPR. Only exception is L.A. where a few thousand watts on a few thousand feet of mountain produces the same effect. I don't think y'all need to worry about a few AM stations, that usually have low ratings and lower power are going to overpower your political bias.
NPR has no liberal talk shows. None. They have nothing at all similar to Mark Levin or Dan Bongino or Glen Beck or Sean Hannity, where one host sits for four hours spouting personal political opinion (liberal or otherwise) unchallenged by anyone. There are no such shows done by NPR.
What they have are news shows that cover a wide range of topics, not just politics. They cover the arts, history, economics, sociology, and various other topics. They have in depth world news. In short, they cover a lot of subjects that have nothing to do with either liberal or conservative politics.
So this statement is wrong.
They have a left leaning slant on the news they cover though you forgot to mention that I think....
News isn't left or right. It's just news. What NPR does that conservative talk hosts don't do is they have lots of different people addressing different subjects. Not just one person expressing his own personal opinion unchallenged. For that reason, there is no one single host for their daily news shows. There are rotating hosts, none of whom have their name in the title of the show.
News is left or right when you have the people reporting the news emphasing the parts of it that benefit one side or another which was is what NPR has done. Do you deny this or....
Which people are you talking about? Be specific. When NPR reports on a symphony orchestra, which side does that benefit?
Here's a link from today's morning edition. The host is interviewing Biden's national security director. It's a very hostile interview, in which the host is challenging points made by the NSD.
The host is not emphasizing parts that benefit one side or the other. They're trying to report the truth.
Sorry.... for you to say NPR doesn't have any liberal slant or bias whatsoever says all I need to know quite frankly. Thanks I dont wish to further engage about it because then I will get looked at as some kind of an instigator when im just trying to point out a clear and obvious fact. And again im not saying I have a problem with NPR having a liberal slant..... obviously conservative talk radio does as well have bias, Im just trying to point something out. I would say NPR is more centrist than most conservative talk shows but to say NPR has no liberal slant or bias is factually inaccurate thanks for your time.
That's your opinion. You're one person, just like one talk show host who presents his opinion unchallenged. What I'm saying is that is not how NPR works. There is not one person presenting his own opinion unchallenged. The example I gave was showing how their host challenges a representative of the president. We don't ever see that on conservative media. There is no equivalence between AM talk radio and NPR. None.
Pretty sure there’s plenty of hosts on conservative media that challenge certain conservative points and policies as well as certain officials. Plenty of times trump has been challenged by Fox News hosts who are so called conservatives….. but I question how conservative some of them actually are.
I would agree that's been the mantra in the past. Recently? I'm not sure what they believe.
However, the government isn't paying for the additional shielding and other changes to the vehicle for allowing a mostly unused feature to exist on modern vehicles. Maybe the automakers should send lawmakers the bill.
But that's all safety-related mandates. Allowing for AM radio, which most people under 55 have largely forgotten, is not an occupant safety feature.
Especially, as mentioned, it involves a potential reduction in political rhetoric.
But I've seen no recent examples where radio, AM, or FM can provide emergency communications, especially after hours or on weekends. If the local authorities have forgotten, or don't activate EAS with relevant information, AM is usually just rolling whatever talk or religious programming.
I've not heard any talk about a required shutdown of AM stations. Not sure where you're getting that impression.
But you aren't privy to what it costs to harden or keep AM radio in modern vehicles. If you had to write the check, I'd bet you would see it differently.
As I understand that issue, it isn't turning AM on an SDR, but the extra shielding required to keep EV speed controllers and other electronics from making the reception difficult and excessively noisy. Again, you're assuming without all the information.
FM frequencies aren't burdened with the susceptibility of noise that the AM/MW band is.
Considering it's all wrapped up in the same system, that's not necessarily true.
The law requires no "additional shielding" nor does it require any specific brand or type of radio device. As long as the device can receive AM. Which is what radios currently do. I'm not aware the government paid for seatbelts or other items that it also mandated. In the same way, the government doesn't compensate broadcasters for the many things it requires them to do.
Would you be offended if I ask how old you are? You remind me of my sister who is 80.
She doesn't like any of that new fangled stuff either.
Fox News is on TV. NPR is on radio. The comment I'm responding to is that NPR is a liberal talk show, similar to the AM talk shows by Levin, Bongino, or all the other radio talkers. If you want to compare Fox News with MSNBC, that's fine. But we're talking about radio here.
Does she listen to AM radio?
Yes! 700WLW AM
@Syfy - I've worked for what was the most listened to NPR station in the country at the time, KQED, and the entire time I was there politics only came up in the context of what guests were going to be on the shows, and we always tried to have either someone from a nonpartisan group on, or balance a Republican guest with a Democratic guest on the same show, etc. Personal politics were never discussed. To this day I have no idea what party anyone belonged to.
There are some journalists who don't vote, or register as no party/independent specifically because they don't want to have their objectivity affected by politicians. I think that view is becoming not as common now but there are still some journalists that believe if they do those things, they can be fully objective.
There are some journalists who don't vote, or register as no party/independent specifically because they don't want to have their objectivity affected by politicians. I think that view is becoming not as common now but there are still some journalists that believe if they do those things, they can be fully objective.
I've heard this from other places, although I don't quite get it. They report the facts quite well, IMHO. There are facts that are disputed by right-wing media (climate change is a big one - how is the earth not a closed system?) so when a reliable news outlet (IE - NPR) reports on something that is disputed they are labeled as left-leaning. By contrast, Amy Goodman's Democracy Now is definitely left-leaning news. If that is your reference point then NPR would be right leaning.
Dave B.