• 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

AAR Scandal Posts

C

cabradio

Guest
While AAR may be investigated, it is not the network who will be charged with wrong-doing. That would be like every Enron employee assuming a role in that scandal. It will be limited to those in the management chain who were responsible.

I think discussion on the issue can be healthy...to learn how radio executives play the game etc. However...what is quickly becoming unhealthy for the board is all the talk that AAR is a scandalous network.

Keep the posts relevant. Speculation is fine...when stated as such.

If the "scandal" posts offend you...there isn't anything I can do, unless someone posts something that is defamatory to a specific individual. Reporting all these posts because you don't like them is senseless. The "scandal" is worthy of discussion.

If you are close the network and have specific information that would help alleviate some of the discredit...share it. If you need anonymity, email me privately. I can help you with that.

Generally this board is a great discussion of Talk, even if it becomes centered around AAR. The most important thing to remember is that AAR is a Progressive Talk Network, but AAR is NOT the Format....Progressive Talk is the Format.

Feel free to discuss....


<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
> While AAR may be investigated, it is not the network who
> will be charged with wrong-doing. That would be like every
> Enron employee assuming a role in that scandal. It will be
> limited to those in the management chain who were
> responsible.
>

This makes no sense. You're jumping to conclusions about who will be charged.


> I think discussion on the issue can be healthy...to learn
> how radio executives play the game etc. However...what is
> quickly becoming unhealthy for the board is all the talk
> that AAR is a scandalous network.
>

Doesn't sound like you're following this issue closely.

> Keep the posts relevant. Speculation is fine...when stated
> as such.
>

> Generally this board is a great discussion of Talk, even if
> it becomes centered around AAR. The most important thing to
> remember is that AAR is a Progressive Talk Network, but AAR
> is NOT the Format....Progressive Talk is the Format.
>
> Feel free to discuss....
>

You allow a few people plug A.A.R. here every day, often in ways that just aren't honest, but want to keep a lid on scandal discussions? Wow.
 
Actually, I think you are lucky CAB is letting you discuss this issue online at all, let alone beat it to death as some are doing.

I have seen posts dealing with the business of radio (personnel practices, sales practices) and with broadcast executives deleted from various boards with moderator posts indicating that while programming and on-air performance are fair game, comments about station management are not. Well, this topic has nothing to do with the progressive talk format, AAR's execution of that format, their on-air product or their on-air talent.

This topic is not even about Air America Radio but about the company that used to own AAR (and the individual who was CEO of that company).

Maybe there should be a distinct board for people who can not or will not talk about radio except in terms of whether they agree or disagree with the political slant expressed. Leave this board for people who want to talk about radio.


>
> This makes no sense. You're jumping to conclusions about who
> will be charged.
>
> Doesn't sound like you're following this issue closely.
>
> You allow a few people plug A.A.R. here every day, often in
> ways that just aren't honest, but want to keep a lid on
> scandal discussions? Wow.
>
 
> > While AAR may be investigated, it is not the network who
> > will be charged with wrong-doing. That would be like every
> > Enron employee assuming a role in that scandal. It will be
> > limited to those in the management chain who were
> > responsible.
>
> This makes no sense. You're jumping to conclusions about who
> will be charged.

"Who will be charged" is what's jumping to conclusions.

> > I think discussion on the issue can be healthy...to learn
> > how radio executives play the game etc. However...what is
> > quickly becoming unhealthy for the board is all the talk
> > that AAR is a scandalous network.
>
> Doesn't sound like you're following this issue closely.

What did AAR, the network, do that is scandalous? Evan Cohen took the money, and both AAR and GW agree that payment has begun on a two-year plan to get money back to them.

> > Keep the posts relevant. Speculation is fine...when stated
> > as such.
> > Generally this board is a great discussion of Talk, even if
> > it becomes centered around AAR. The most important thing to
> > remember is that AAR is a Progressive Talk Network, but AAR
> > is NOT the Format....Progressive Talk is the Format.
> >
> > Feel free to discuss....
>
> You allow a few people plug A.A.R. here every day, often in
> ways that just aren't honest, but want to keep a lid on
> scandal discussions? Wow.

I interpreted "Feel free to discuss" differently.
 
>> This makes no sense. You're jumping to conclusions about who
> will be charged.


No conclusions...I am clarifying that the WHOLE network will not be held responsible (if there is even any wrong doing found AT the network itself). Did you not read the line about Enron? I notice that you are one of the few that I always have to "clarify" what I'm saying to. Just like I had to do with my kids when they were 4 and 5.


> Doesn't sound like you're following this issue closely.

You're right. I'm not. I have a life. I have kids that I like to play with. I have my own business to run. What happens (if anything) is irrelevant to my life specifically. I'll let the people who are paid to figure it out, do so. I don't like AAR, but I will gladly fight for their right to be on the air. I'm not into ONE ASSIMILATED VIEWPOINT. I'm certain if there was any wrong doing, it was by one or two specific individuals who were careless and reckless and had NO clue what they were doing. Does that mean that AAR is wrong for being on the air? Should they be instantly removed? No...I'm sure there are many instances in our country's history where something began as an illegal operation, only to be reinvented legally (Napster comes to mind, for just one example)

> You allow a few people plug A.A.R. here every day, often in
> ways that just aren't honest, but want to keep a lid on
> scandal discussions? Wow.

I allow just as much discussion about AAR as I would about ANY network programming. The thing is that most people seem to live and die by AAR. I don't live or die by ANY network. You can start a thread about WW1 or TRN, or BTR or USA or Premiere. There are MANY networks to talk about. It just seems that noone is interested in those right now. Or more specifically, if you want to see more discussion about Rush or Hannity, start a thread. Want to talk about Art Bell or Lou Dobbs, feel free. It's an open forum. You don't only have to complain about AAR...you can praise your favorites too.

There's plenty of room to discuss ALL Talk programming. Someone just has to be interested enough to start the conversation. As far as I'm concerned, EVERYONE has an agenda. And for most it's to keep this country divided.

The scandal discussions are beating the same dead horse, over and over and it's getting old and repetitive. It's like the 6pm news coverage of a shooting that happened at 5:55pm. All the facts aren't in, an investigation is underway, but some people feel they should report inaccuracies for the sake of getting the story first. I'm making a point...don't take it out of context. IOW, Don't twist this to mean that I am saying what has been reported about AAR isn't factual, because I personally have no idea, nor do I care.

Now let's practice our ABC's...come on I know youcan do it...A...B...C...D...E...everyone now....
<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
Yeah why is that?

> Generally this board is a great discussion of Talk, even if
> it becomes centered around AAR.

Yeah why is that?<P ID="signature">______________
• K5ZN</P>
 
Re: Yeah why is that?

> > Generally this board is a great discussion of Talk, even
> if
> > it becomes centered around AAR.
>
> Yeah why is that?
>


Why is it a great discussion of talk or why does it become centered around AAR?


<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
What? A separate board?

> Maybe there should be a distinct board for people who can
> not or will not talk about radio except in terms of whether
> they agree or disagree with the political slant expressed.
> Leave this board for people who want to talk about radio.
>

As one who suggested that AAR have its own board (and was shouted down as being "against AAR") I can only watch in amusement as the whole board has been rendered useless for anything EXCEPT AAR.

Now an AAR proponent suggests that this is not a fit place to talk about the BUSINESS side of radio and that those people who want to post about it should get their own board. This is rich.
 
Re: What? A separate board?

This topic is not about the business side of radio. It is people griding a political axe. Same is true with earlier threads about Rush and pills.

This is all ridiculous. People don't go on the country board and chortle because some rock signer got busted for drugs. People don't go on the CHR/Pop board all turned on because some country singer is in rehab. These posts are all cheap shots motivated by politics. It's not about the business, art, science or craft of radio or anything related to radio at all.

People on the Sports board talk about radio - the sports talk format, play by play sports broadcasts, and sports broadcasts. They don't have the online equivalent of barroom arguements over whether the Yanks or Red Sox are better. They can tell the difference between sports and radio. Apparently people on this board can't tell the difference between sports and politics.

>
> As one who suggested that AAR have its own board (and was
> shouted down as being "against AAR") I can only watch in
> amusement as the whole board has been rendered useless for
> anything EXCEPT AAR.
>
> Now an AAR proponent suggests that this is not a fit place
> to talk about the BUSINESS side of radio and that those
> people who want to post about it should get their own board.
> This is rich.
>
 
Re: What? A separate board?

>> I can only watch in
> > amusement as the whole board has been rendered useless for
>
> > anything EXCEPT AAR.

Useless? Is someone preventing you from posting about other subjects? Seems to me that YOU'VE been posting almost exclusively about AAR. Why not start a thread about some other aspect of talk radio instead of griping about the existing ones?
 
Re: What? A separate board?

>This is all ridiculous. People don't go on the country board and chortle because >some rock signer got busted for drugs. People don't go on the CHR/Pop board all >turned on because some country singer is in rehab. These posts are all cheap >shots motivated by politics. It's not about the business, art, science or craft >of radio or anything related to radio at all.

>People on the Sports board talk about radio - the sports talk format, play by >play sports broadcasts, and sports broadcasts. They don't have the online >equivalent of barroom arguements over whether the Yanks or Red Sox are better. >They can tell the difference between sports and radio. Apparently people on this >board can't tell the difference between sports and politics.

You are echoing the points I've made in the past. I was told "you can't take the politics out of a discussion about political talk".

I am convinced that this board has the highest percentage of non-radio people on Radio-Info. There are some people who only post about AAR. And then they go over to "Off The Air" and flamebait over there.

I did a quick Google on a couple of the screen names and note that these guys post on political websites the same comments using the same screen names.
 
> I have seen posts dealing with the business of radio
> (personnel practices, sales practices) and with broadcast
> executives deleted from various boards with moderator posts
> indicating that while programming and on-air performance are
> fair game, comments about station management are not.

Even within forums the rules can be as consistent as snowflakes. There are a few moderators who treat their positions as jail sentenced work programs, becoming literally angry if they get reported post e-mails. They can't be bothered with that! The usual response is to delete the thread. Of course, these are the same people who tell you it's a Bosnian War Crime even to question a moderator action. Some people need to get a different hobby if their egos are threatened to that degree, especially because forum participants eventually learn to play the moderator by getting hot and bothered about the topics that offend them, knowing that the very action of complaining stands a good chance at getting those threads censored at zero risk to them.

I applaud CAB for remembering that this is only a message forum, and that the topic headings provide ample opportunity for everyone to make a choice as to whether to proceed to a message thread or not. As CAB has noted, there is no daily post limit here, and anyone who doesn't want to deal with AAR topics can start their own new thread about something else. Quite often, folks will run with that.

Further, it's not a stretch to question the true motives of those who would demand censorship of issues that are opposed to their personal political persuasion, be it about radio or not.
 
Re: What? A separate board?

> As one who suggested that AAR have its own board (and was
> shouted down as being "against AAR") I can only watch in
> amusement as the whole board has been rendered useless for
> anything EXCEPT AAR.

Gosh, I seem to be having trouble finding any original posts from you about non-AAR topics. If you'd venture to post one, then the whole board won't be about AAR.
 
Re: What? A separate board?

> Gosh, I seem to be having trouble finding any original posts
> from you about non-AAR topics. If you'd venture to post
> one, then the whole board won't be about AAR.

Golly.

You can't find one therefore I never wrote any huh?

I haven't done so in a long time because posting a non-AAR post here is like posting a question about electrical wiring on a plumber's board.

I note that virtually ALL of your posts are politically charged accusations..such as this gem you posted over on Coast-To-Coast. I guess News/Talk was full that day?
 
Re: What? A separate board?

This is getting personal...let's count to 10 before responding...make that 100! LOL..

<P ID="signature">______________



</P>
 
Re: What? A separate board?

> I note that virtually ALL of your posts are politically
> charged accusations..such as this gem you posted over on
> Coast-To-Coast. I guess News/Talk was full that day?

So in order to complain about AAR topics taking over this forum, you post links to messages about AAR topics in other forums?

Obviously you are spending more time worrying about what other people post instead of working on some messages of your own. Since I don't have a problem discussing AAR issues, payola, ratings, DX'ing Radio Marti, easy listening as a format, the endless downward spiral of news broadcasting in general (all issues in messages posted by me that you obviously never read), you instead want to focus on how awful these AAR messages are while never trying to come up with any topics that interest you. Like Madge, you enjoy soaking in it. Admit it. :)<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by dampier on 08/08/05 04:47 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: What? A separate board?

> Whatever you say, Dampier.

Indeed. I look forward to seeing you join me in the Peter Jennings thread.
 
Al Franken replied to scandal critics on his show today. *DELETED*

Post deleted by cabradio
 
Re: What? A separate board?

> >> I can only watch in
> > > amusement as the whole board has been rendered useless
> for
> >
> > > anything EXCEPT AAR.
>
> Useless? Is someone preventing you from posting about other
> subjects? Seems to me that YOU'VE been posting almost
> exclusively about AAR. Why not start a thread about some
> other aspect of talk radio instead of griping about the
> existing ones?
>

Anyone can post what they want. I find this whole discussion quite humorous as there is no restriction to talk about any news/talk related issue. For those who listen to news on the radio, there are certainly dozens of topics about news in general or news as related to the talk show hosts. For those who are listening to talk radio, there are a majority of conservative hosts, from Rush to Jay Severin to Hannity to Michael Graham there are plenty of hosts you can post about and Im curious since its my perception (and opinion) that those of us who enjoy or listen to the new liberal talk radio format are in the minority.

Is it possible that a lot of the news that occurs around talk radio is talking about the re-entry/resurgence of liberal talk? People like myself who are big activists for the format are enjoying all the good news. We enjoy all the new hosts that enter the market, we enjoy the news here and there when we are doing well, we ask questions to see how the new hosts can improve...theres just a lot of enthusiasm to see a real alternative to the conservative side of talk radio. Maybe the other talk show hosts aren't doing a lot right now or maybe they are.

Outside of the "truth" tour, have hosts on the right been making announcements or starting up new stations or ????? I don't know as much as these hosts activities but if they are doing something you deem worth posting, please post it.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom