A pleasant experience on Friday

[cabradio]

> Aparently, some of the lesser-known
> conservative hosts get on the same way.


This is true. And it's not really a bad thing, especially if you have the financing to get started. But just remember that because you can pay for time doesn't necessarily mean people want to listen to you! LOL

But my point was that if you are going to claim that (which dampier wasn't), then you better be prepared to prove it!<P ID="signature">______________



</P>

 

[doc9464]

> I might point out that you are not the defacto programming
> expert either.

I didn't open my post attacking you "for not knowing what you were talking about".

> I might also ask why you hate Ed Schultz so much.

I don't hate Ed but I do not like his show at all. I too can post a personal preference and I prefer Randi.


> I expressed a personal preference. I don't enjoy her
> voice, her accent or her style. I don't question her
> intentions, and based on the HBO documentary, it seems she
> was treated shabbily by Air America in the beginning. I
> also consider her on-air shots at Ed Schultz to be rather
> petty and unprofessional.

There has been "bad blood" between these two for a while...both have commented publically about each other...both have been unprofessional but I would agree that Randi is the more agressive .....I question Ed's intentions based on how he entered the liberal talk radio market. Its my strong opinion that he saw an opportunity to switch from an also-ran conservative host to a "progressive" host.
>
> You, on the other hand, attack Ed Schultz as not well
> informed, for trying to emulate Rush (I don't hear it but,
> again, I'm no expert) and for being a puppet to "puppet
> masters."

How many times have you heard Ed pull up information on a specific issue? Ed tends to speak from the cuff. When I have listened to him, I have not heard him mention research or even preparation of notes. Stephanie Miller and Randi Rhodes have gained my respect for their follow up on issues, posting resources, or directing their listeners to dig deeper. If you listen to Ed, im sure you know that this is NOT Ed's strongest point. If you look at his website, you see little that is issues oriented..no posts, no links...just a lot of self promotion...and a message board. He also tends to drift into sports discussion at various times...which I think is also a way to endear himself.

Regarding style, I don't think there is a person on this board besides you who sees Ed's obvious efforts to become the "liberal" Rush. He calls his listeners "Ed heads"....nuff said...

Regarding Policy, his attacks on MoveonPAC for fighting the bankruptcy bill are one example of his not being informed. He has also agresssively attacked Howard Dean without really knowing how much money he has actually raised or his efforts to escape corporate donors. His interview with Dean on the air made it clear that Ed is simply grandstanding without doing his due dilligence. These are only a couple of examples...and as the topping on this bad deal.. his ridiculous descriptions of the right as "righties" and the left as "lefties" simply makes a vein pop out every time I hear him say that. (its petty but its my opinion). Jay Marvin was able to discuss the issues and them point listeneers to key information as well as reference more than one resource ...especially on the Downing Street Minutes. Ed doesn't do this very much if at all.


> You also intimate stations and bump Randi because
> of some agreement. Do you know about such an agreement or
> you making it up? And do you know what Schultz' deal is
> with the show's new syndicators or are you just making it up
> that what he says and how he says it is under their control,
> too?

I think there have been several comments about CC's agreement with Jones to clear Ed and air his show live. I do not know about other agreements. There may or may not be financial incentives as well but since I do not have details...ill just say that its possible there are incentives. Democracy Now has been vague about what is offered to new affiliates.
>
> And while we are talking about hating people, why do you
> hate Rush Limbaugh so much to call him "the enemy?" I
> mostly don't agree with him but I acknowledge him as a
> talented broadcaster and a professional who does his job
> well. Do you hate everyone with whom you disagree?

I think you fall into the same trap many do....If Rush was presenting it as it actually was in the world and not distorting / lying so much, maybe I would respect his talent. I have posted that he is successful but its not from telling the truth. If you want to believe that Rush is not lying, just review the audio and video at Media Matters. Rush is an excellent liar. Hows that for a compliment.

Do you hate everyone you disagree with? I thihk we can limit the scope to Rush and Schultz for now...

> You are trying to puff Jay Michael. I'm glad there is
> another talk show host of whom you approve. I've never
> heard him so I have no opinion about him.

The host's name is Jay Marvin and I just heard him myself ....and I wasn/t asking you for your opinion or to be honest, my post didn't ask for an opinon at all..but since you have none....thats even better. I don't represent any host as a promoter, agent, or otherwise.

 

[bierkenstock]

> I'm not saying this is paid programming (ie. WLIB time buys).

Air America Radio leases WLIB 18 hours a day. They had lease agreements (LMA - local management agreements) with stations in Chicago and LA orginally, until their checks started bouncing. Originally, AAR planned to lease stations in all markets so ALL stations would carry ALL AAR programming - wall to wall - through out the day. Democracy Radio had wanted to follow a more standard syndication business model and place individual shows on stations. AAR and DR reportedly parted company over this issue. IMHO both were partly right. Progressive talk needed to be its own format; sticking a liberal host in with conservative hosts on station's schedule would not work (and hasn't worked in the past). And AAR's "network" model (actualy one station under god with transmitters and repeaters for all) wasn't economic. AAR would have to pay the landlord (actually the "stationlord") upfront and then go sell time; they assume all the risk and the station owner is a creditor. Under the syndication model, there is little or no upfront time cost. The syndicator and the station are partners; both have an incentive to sell time and make the arrangment work. So now, except for the lease on WLIB, AAR does not "buy time." Stations take shows a la carte from AAR, DR and other syndicators (most often Jones, Premiere and WOR) just like conservative talk stations.

PS: No, Les. With all due respect, I'm not going to go back and look all this up. If you are really interested, that's what Google is for.

 

[bierkenstock]

Doc, I think part of where we differ is I listen to talk radio (1) as broadcaster, interested in how someone else in the field does it; and (2) for entertainment. Talk radio is not journalism or a research project in history or political science. It's the equivalent of water-cooler or bar room conversation about politics (with somebody who is more interesting to listen to than the guy on the next bar stool is likely to be). For me, it's not important how much homework any of them do. And it's all a certain point of view. You say Rush "distorts." For me, he's coming from a different viewpoint. Distortion is in the eye of the beholder. Sorry, but I don't take my political opinions that seriously; I've changed them enough during my lifetime. What does concern me is when I hear liberals casting the political discourse in terms of good versus evil, showing no tolerance for differing opinions and be unwilling to understand where people who disagree are coming from. When that happens, I start to see liberals as essentially no different from conservatives; like ballplayers are ballplayers but they play for different teams. Then I just want to wash my hands of politics and listen to Oldies.

 

[cabradio]

> PS: No, Les. With all due respect, I'm not going to go back
> and look all this up. If you are really interested, that's
> what Google is for.
>

Les and I are two different people. He is Les and I am More...I mean I am Charlie...LOL...(sorry Les, I was j/k) He mods a couple other boards.

My point before was that there were some bold comments made, and references as to where the information came from was important to validate the post. Otherwise, it's just an opinion, being construed as fact. That's something I don't like to see.

What you have posted I already know, and have known from day 1. That's nothing new. I thought dampier was sugesting that Democracy Radio was buying time on ALL their stations, and I wanted some proof. He has since clarified that is not the case, he meant something else, and I misunderstood. BTW it's not up to the reader to search for proof of every comment made. If you want to be respected and taken seriously, offer the references with your post.<P ID="signature">______________



</P>

 

[Scribbler]

Re: A Pleasant exp

> Both Diamond and Marvin, in my opinion, could get the South
> and also the conservative small towns in Rocky Mountain
> States for Air America...
>
I listened to Marvin for the first time this morning and was not overly impressed. I prefer Thom Hartmann of all the non-AAR lib talkers I've heard. And what's with all the concern about conservative small towns? Seems to me that libtalk has to get established in big and medium markets first -- and it's questionable whether it will ever catch on in "conservative small towns."

 

[kaufcom]

> A pleasant experience for me would be to learn Randi Rhodes
> had been fired and her whinning nasal NooYawk voice had been
> silenced. Ed Schultz is a breath of fresh air. You, sir,
> do not know what you are talking about. But that gives you
> much in common with Randi. There is a reason most
> progressive talk stations bump Randi.

I find your observation rather change. Ed has had the live spot on virtually all lib talk stations for over a year now and Randi is carried taped delay on most of these same stations. Why do you waste our time pointing out something that everyone who has listened to lib talk over the past year already knows?? I've read the posts on the rest of the thread and have learned a few things. Maybe DS pays stations to give Ed the live spot. (Haven't heard this one before.) Ed and Randi don't like each other (don't we all know this?)

The fact is that Randi gets better great ratings because her show is carried in PM drive which has more listeners than Ed's mid day slot when everyone is at work. Sounds to me like Randi (who also does four hours versus Ed's three) has a better deal. And she does not take "political money" and suck up to politicos like Ed does.