• 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

A new low for Rush Limbaugh (if that's not redundant)...

MattParker said:
When do people stop playing the "hurt" card?
Click to expand...

Never, as long as it can be used to bring down someone the person being "hurt" disagrees with a few pegs. Inventing outrage is a human trait that will never be stomped out.

Maybe that's a good thing. It certainly puts food on the tables of quite a few people, even some in this very forum. It's all part of the discussion, which can never be an unhealthy thing.
 
Re: re-feed

Holland Cooke said:
RE "And I continue to fear that something bad will happen as a result of this dog whistle being blown over and over again."

MikefromDelaware said:
Holland, I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by the above statement.
Click to expand...

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/17/783621/-Will-Talk-Radios-Dog-Whistle-Spark-New-Violence
Click to expand...

Holland, you raise some important issues. But your conclusion seems to be to blame the listener for the incendiary nature of talk radio today. To paraphrase the Bard, the fault, Holland, lies not in our listeners but in ourselves. Paraphrasing the opening narration to The Outer Limits, we control the content. We control the hosts. We control which callers and which hosts get on the air. Listeners can't change the subject when we decide which subjects get discussed. The only control listeners have is to tune us out (which many of them have done).

And if you really mean what you say here, it seems the honorable thing to do is to drop those clients which carry Rush, Beck, et al.
 
Hey, the world needs postal workers too.

MattParker said:
we control the content. We control the hosts.
Click to expand...

Apparently not.
Many -- possibly most -- Limbaugh affiliates don't listen to his show.
They don't have to.
It's plug-N-chug, on the station dismissively referred to in-house as "the AM."

When -- as in this case -- Limbaugh crosses-the-line, they hear-ABOUT-it, rather than hear it in real-time.
A Limbaugh-affiliated station owner called me yesterday to ask, "What'd he do NOW?"

A sad, self-destructive consequence of the untenable debt owners racked-up during the consolidation pig-out is their inability to control programming. Stations can no longer afford to do what-would-distinguish-them from iPod, Internet-delivered content, satellite radio, and whatever-comes-next...the local programming that non-local media cannot provide.

MattParker said:
And if you really mean what you say here, it seems the honorable thing to do is to drop those clients which carry Rush, Beck, et al.
Click to expand...

Most stations SURE WOULD be better-off with local programming that's better-than-piped-in ANYTHING, let-alone rude creeps like Limbaugh who insult-the-father-of-an-FCC Commissioner. Rush illustrates the difference between "being intelligent" and "being smart." He's intelligent-enough to make millions perpetuating hateful stereotypes; but not-smart-enough to spare station managers the flak they'll catch from angry listeners. Not-himself-being-an-FCC-licensee, El Rushbo skates. He lives The Consequence-Free Existence...for now.

As for your "honorable thing" gauntlet: You suggest it would be more honorable to impose my personal bias on a client station's business plan than to exercise my fiduciary responsibility to that client?

I may be the only person in Talk Radio who thinks his opinion DOESN'T matter...which, I have learned, infuriates whoever-disagrees-with-whatever-my-opinion-is. One consequence of the garbage that dominates syndicated Talk programming is the sense that because-someone-else-feels-differently-than-you-do-they-must-be-wrong.

We've all made our career choices. Nobody put-a-gun-to-my-head and forced me to become that George Clooney character in "Up In The Air," tirelessly trudging the airline's route map in a Teflon suit. Hey, the world needs postal workers too.

Your comments are also welcome here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/11/12/920179/-A-new-low-for-Rush-Limbaugh

HC
www.HollandCooke.com
www.SurvivalSpeech.com
http://getonthenet.com/senior.mp3
 
To thine own self be true.

Holland Cooke said:
As for your "honorable thing" gauntlet: You suggest it would be more honorable to impose my personal bias on a client station's business plan than to exercise my fiduciary responsibility to that client?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do. It sounds like for you this goes beyond just a difference of opinion and into questions of personal ethics and integrity. You apparently disagree with Rush's and Beck's viewpoints and have continued to support client stations which carry them, so you have not imposed your bias. The question here is when are "enabling" someone who violates your standards of right and wrong. Those are decisions we all face and each of us can only make for one's self. If you were not an ethical person, I doubt Rush's "new low" would bother you as it does.

What did you say to your clients who asked "what do we do now?" Williams got fired. Imus got fired. The other day some teacher in New Jersey got fired because he questioned tenure bullet-proofing bad teachers at a teacher conference. Is Rush untouchable?
 
To think that our founding fathers made the most vile comments toward the mothers of others, and yet we must be so touchy feely about politics.

How silly.
 
RE Is Rush untouchable?

Clearly!

And WHY-he-is is less an issue than a symptom.

It's not just that our-particular-industry acquired too much debt to produce more-appealing programming.

It's not just a radio problem.
It's not just a USA problem.
Pull back, and take the wide-angle shot.
We're in a worldwide recession.
It's human nature.
As a species, we over-spend.
The world's people spent more money than exists.

Sitting behind what-we're-told-is a gold-plated microphone, bellicose Limbaugh boasts of his wealth, while bemoaning that "our children will be the first generation that didn't have it better-off than their parents."

WRONG. We, the "their parents" generation, didn't have-it-as-well-off as we-thought-we-did! We live on plastic.

Zoom-back-into radio: Few industries demonstrate the danger of funny money better than radio, which has been burning-the-furniture-to-keep-the-heat-on ever since present owners over-paid for the stations they now struggle to operate.

Radio stations can no longer afford to-do-what-we-do the-way-it-should-be-done. In lieu of offering station-produced programming which would make the station unique to its locale, stations become repeaters for national programming...over-which they have little or no control...as this latest gaffe illustrates.

Bad timing on radio's part, abandoning the local franchise, JUST AS digital media gave listeners lots of new ways to acquire non-local content.

RE: "You apparently disagree with Rush's and Beck's viewpoints and have continued to support client stations which carry them."

It's the-other-way-around.
My client stations support ME, because I help them make-the-most-of what-they've-got.

"...so you have not imposed your bias."

Thank you.

"The question here is when are 'enabling' someone who violates your standards of right and wrong."

That'll be YOUR question. The one I'VE raised launching this thread is about Limbaugh's responsibility/lack-thereof, regardless of the consequence to FCC licensees who support HIM.

I work real hard to make Beck and Limbaugh as-successful-as-possible on stations I work for. It pains me to see how much of station managers' time they waste spewing this offensive garbage. Beck and Limbaugh don't have to answer the phone, or maintain the Public File, or respond to local advertisers who've had-it-up-to-here.

Even after racking-up a reported roster of 200+ national advertisers who refuse to advertise in these shows, there are still enough suckers buying gold at historic highs entering "promo code Glenn" and replying to umpteen other direct response deals that make radio sound as cheap as late-night cable looks.
 
Silkie said:
To think that our founding fathers made the most vile comments toward the mothers of others, and yet we must be so touchy feely about politics.

How silly.
Click to expand...

Tell Charles Sumner that Rush, Glenn Beck and Hannity are the most dangerous thing to ever happen to this country.

The idea that somehow these middle aged guys with microphones will spark some sort of race riots is laughable. This country has undergone much worse things.
 
Thanks for the link to the dog whistle reference. I didn't take Limbaugh's comments that way and truly didn't see the offensiveness in what he said, but maybe I just didn't catch the full meaning of what he was implying ( I'm busy at work and don't listen THAT closely - with Limbaugh that could be dangerous). For me, generally, Beck/Rush/Hannity all are full of it and I no longer bother with Beck or Hannity at all and only occasionally tune in for a sampling of elRushbo to hear what the right wing fringe is saying, as he is the most entertaining of the three. which isn't saying much, but Beck/Hannity are totally unlistenable for my ear.

Possibly the reason I didn't pick up on it was there's some much wolf calling of "that was a racial comment" for no reason, the political correctness egg walking thing, so that you just start NOT hearing even though you are listening, which can a be bad thing, because when a real racial comment or action does happen then it will be overlooked. This is why I believe that Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson actually are a hindrance to the lower class black community.

However, I do now see your point Holland, and it probably would have been better if Limbaugh had said his comments in a different way, but then again, we're talking about Limbaugh and he has no problem offending those with whom he disagrees. In fact, I believe it would be fair to say that his ratings depend on his offending those his dittohead fans disagree with.

So thanks to Don C for this interesting thread and the thinking it caused all of us to engage in, and the discussion that followed. I still would like to hear this sort of real honest discussion about race on national talk radio, because until we get past this, our nation will never truly reach its full potential for all its citizens. I do believe that the Lord wants all the people to be the best that they are capable of being. So as we're all in the same boat, and either the boat floats for all or it will sink for all.
 
I still remember heading out on a call, and tuning in to full-service 50,000 watt WBAP in Fort Worth on January 20, 2009, expecting to hear the rest of Obama's inauguration coverage that I was watching on TV. Instead, they were carrying Limbaugh's regular program, and Limbaugh was saying "I hope he fails." How can any American say that? I was raised that whether your side won or lost an election, you always support..or at least work with...the winner.

Look how Fox also started on Day 1 branding Obama a socialst...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35eRxxZ-Ar0
 
RE "I hope he fails." How can any American say that?

Frank Provasek said:
I was raised that whether your side won or lost an election, you always support..or at least work with...the winner.
Click to expand...

Seems quaint now, eh?

Most-compelling TV of the year: Chilean miners' rescue.
Made you want to stand-up-and-cheer.
Countrymen, brothers, all-on-the-same-team.
We envy 'em.
 
Re: RE "I hope he fails." How can any American say that?

Holland Cooke said:
Seems quaint now, eh?

Most-compelling TV of the year: Chilean miners' rescue.
Made you want to stand-up-and-cheer.
Countrymen, brothers, all-on-the-same-team.
We envy 'em.
Click to expand...

All we have to do is put our lawmakers in a mine during their sessions and bring them out in an oversized cigar tube at the end.
 
New Topic

Rush broke Rule 1: "Only pick on people bigger than you are," when he did a whole segment today ON ED SCHULTZ, complete with what-Rush-calls "audio sound bites" from Ed's Friday TV show.

We'll howl-about-it, on "The Ed Show" tonight, 6-7ET, on MSNBC.

Hopefully, El Rushbo will still be airchecking...

HC

PS: If it's a sound bite...on radio...it WOULD be audio, right?
 
RE "Nobody cares."

It's worse than that!

Seems like nobody-who-manages-a-Limbaugh-affiliate-station LISTENS.
They don't care-enough to LISTEN.
They don't have to. Syndicated programming is plug-N-chug, the station is on auto-pilot.
This once-great station is now dismissively referred to as "the AM."
Meanwhile management spends disproportionate time propping-up sister music FMs that are losing to iPod, Pandora, et al.
(http://hollandcookemedia.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/nielsen-audiominutes.jpg?w=468&h=342)

Managers of Limbaugh affiliates hear-ABOUT -- rather than hear, in real-time -- these offensive episodes.

Few industries exemplify what's-wrong-with the economy better than radio.
Big picture: Why we're in a global recession: debt.
The world's people spent more-money-than-there-is-in-the-world.

Zoom-into close-up shot of radio: 1996 de-regulation went too far.
Station-trading pig-out resulted in untenable debt.
Stations can no longer afford to do the local programming that made radio unique.
So Rush Limbaugh is now -- in late-Bush-era corporate bailout parlance -- "too big to fail."
 
Re: Amen

Holland Cooke said:
It's worse than that!

Seems like nobody-who-manages-a-Limbaugh-affiliate-station LISTENS.
They don't care-enough to LISTEN.
They don't have to. Syndicated programming is plug-N-chug, the station is on auto-pilot.
This once-great station is now dismissively referred to as "the AM."
Meanwhile management spends disproportionate time propping-up sister music FMs that are losing to iPod, Pandora, et al.
(http://hollandcookemedia.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/nielsen-audiominutes.jpg?w=468&h=342)

Managers of Limbaugh affiliates hear-ABOUT -- rather than hear, in real-time -- these offensive episodes.

Few industries exemplify what's-wrong-with the economy better than radio.
Big picture: Why we're in a global recession: debt.
The world's people spent more-money-than-there-is-in-the-world.

Zoom-into close-up shot of radio: 1996 de-regulation went too far.
Station-trading pig-out resulted in untenable debt.
Stations can no longer afford to do the local programming that made radio unique.
So Rush Limbaugh is now -- in late-Bush-era corporate bailout parlance -- "too big to fail."
Click to expand...

Amen.

But let's remember who brought radio "deregulation." The Democrats, generally, and specifically, the inventor of the Internet, Al Gore. Only Nixon could go to China and only Al Gore could deregulate broadcasting. Like station managers don't listen, so-called progressives don't follow the money when Democrats are involved.

Remember the good old days when broadcasting was regulated, people listened and stations were profitable? The old regs were supposed to serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. Maybe instead they protected suits from their own avarice and incompetence.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom