AAR's Sale To Green Family Complete; Mark Green: "Air America 2.0 Begins Today"

[FilmCritic3K]

AAR's Sale To Green Family Complete; Mark Green: "Air America 2.0 Begins Today"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-green/air-america-20-begins-to_b_42707.html

Sounds like he's got a plan for success. I wish him and Air America Radio the best.

 

[TJStone]

If you want a fair and balanced account, go to The Radio Equalizer. Brian Maloney offers Green's entire "manifesto" from the Huffington Post and then skillfully rebuts it.

http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/

Maloney concludes....

From Mark Green's own words, we can tell right off the bat this is simply yet another case of liberal "investors" moving into the picture without any real idea how a radio network should be run. The money pit lives on!

Meanwhile, there is an elephant in the room. Watch this site for all the upcoming details!

God bless America.

 

[evnlee]

If you want a fair and balanced account, go to The Radio Equalizer. Brian Maloney offers Green's entire "manifesto" from the Huffington Post and then skillfully rebuts it.

http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/

Maloney concludes....

From Mark Green's own words, we can tell right off the bat this is simply yet another case of liberal "investors" moving into the picture without any real idea how a radio network should be run. The money pit lives on!

Meanwhile, there is an elephant in the room. Watch this site for all the upcoming details!

God bless America.

Methinks the 'elephant in the room' is the brother Green, the failed politician that fancies himself a progtalk host....He is not going to be content unless he is behind the mic.

So, who get's the axe to make way for Mark Green?

Also interesting that they both claim they want to run AAR like a business.

But, Mark Green was an old loony Naderite that writes such books as "Selling Out: How Big Corporate Money Buys Elections, Rams through Legislation, and Betrays Our Democracy"

Hey, call me nuts, but that doesn't sound good for AAR. They already have a tough time garnering ad contracts from big Corporations.

So, how soon until we hear about more 'premium memberships', 'tote bags', and 'buy your bumper sticker before it's too late!!"?

ouch.

 

[raccoonradio]

>>they want to run AAR like a business

If that's the case it's good news for them, but:

>>Mark Green was an old loony Naderite that writes such books as "Selling Out: How Big Corporate Money Buys Elections, Rams through Legislation, and Betrays Our Democracy"

More cases of "we'll be right back after these...uh, public service announcements..." right after bashing
big corporations...
As I've mentioned before the book South Park Conservatives mentions a South Park episode that kind of
bashes the libs who are against big corporations (one of the SP creators, btw, was once quoted as
saying "we hate conservatives but we really f---in' hate liberals"). A big coffee conglomerate named Harbucks
moves into town and many people are against it because they're a big corporation--but then they sample
the coffee and become big fans. One of the kids, Stan I think, mentions that big corporations CAN be
good: they provide "computers and cars and canned soup" and he says that once Harbucks WAS a small
company but they did their job well and became a success story, etc.

Hoo boy...am reminded of the old Warner Bros. cartoons that managed to "teach" as well...there was
one where an Elmer Fudd-ish elf helped to teach a shoe manufacturer about how to run a business.
(Then he turns into a mouse and gets chased by a Sylvester-ish cat!)

I took a quick glance at his post in the Huffington-and-Puffington Post and thought he had said he was interested in AAR sponsoring a Dem. debate in N.H. But my eyes were playing tricks on me: he actually said he wanted AAR to sponsor a REPUBLICAN debate, just to show they were fair and balanced.

Right, have one of their hosts moderate it and jump into the discussion to tell Guiliani, Romney, and McCain
how stupid they think they are! Right!

 

[FilmCritic3K]

Right, have one of their hosts moderate it and jump into the discussion to tell Guiliani, Romney, and McCain
how stupid they think they are! Right!

Hey, they'll be as fair as Fox News was the last time *they* hosted a Democratic debate (which was Green's point in mentioning hosting the NH Republican debate in the first place)..

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/990649463?ltl=1171991355

...[C]onsider the September 9, 2003 Democratic debate in Baltimore, Maryland, hosted by Fox News in partnership with the Congressional Black Caucus. Fox News graphics, as well as a banner over the stage, titled the event as the "Democrat Candidate Presidential Debate," a misconstruction of "Democrat" used as an an epithet. Fox News then summarized the debate with a story titled, "Democratic Candidates Offer Grim View of America," continuing with such jabs as, "The depiction of the president as the root of all evil began at the top of Tuesday night's debate...." Controversial questions included the accusation that Howard Dean had a racist gun policy by Fox News analyst Juan Williams. There were also multiple interruptions by protesters throughout the debate, leading to four arrests.

And if Maloney told me it was raining, I'd check the weather. He's a right-winger with an axe to grind.

Wow, the thought of having liberal talk out there at all really gets to you right-wingers, huh?

 

[Radio_Realist]

Re: AAR's Sale To Green Family Complete; Mark Green: "Air America 2.0 Begins Today"

Wow, the thought of having liberal talk out there at all really gets to you right-wingers, huh?

Not really. The only thing that bothers me about liberal talk is that it wastes electromagnetic spectrum with programming that only a few dozen people want to listen to.

As many people have observed in many threads on this subject, the majority of people who vote liberal don't want to listen to liberal talk radio. They want to listen to music or to Howard Stern discussing lesbians and their breast implants.

A few liberal hosts manage to do reasonably well in a few markets. But then, in southern Indiana, people regard a deep-fried pig's brain sandwich as a delicacy. Which proves that there's no accounting for off-ball regional tastes in anything, be it food or radio talk programming. Nevertheless, I doubt if a national radio network of liberal talk shows or a national chain of deep-fried pig's brain restaurants will be very successful.

 

[raymond_shaw]

As many people have observed in many threads on this subject, the majority of people who vote liberal don't want to listen to liberal talk radio. They want to listen to music or to Howard Stern discussing lesbians and their breast implants.

?????? where did you get the idea progressives want to listen to Howard Stern and his lesbian friends? You have some hard evidence on this? If nobody listens, why are Steph and Ed doing so well and why are you guys mostly whining on this board all the time about the evils of progressive talk radio. I mean, who cares.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Re: AAR's Sale To Green Family Complete; Mark Green: "Air America 2.0 Begins Today"

where did you get the idea progressives want to listen to Howard Stern and his lesbian friends?

I never said a word about progressives. I made reference to "the majority of people who vote liberal". You can see those exact words in my post, in black and white. And, I said that those people wanted to listen to "music or to Howard Stern". Based on radio ratings and independent marketing research conducted by companies I have worked for (and paid for at no small expense, which is why I won't reveal exact numbers free of charge), in the overwhelming majority of radio markets in America in a city where liberal candidates won the majority of important elections, the majority of voters who elected those liberal candidates prefer to tune their radios to stations that play music or non-political talk formats.

If you'd a copy of the exact results of the market research studies I referred to, send me a PM. I'll be happy to quote you a price for buying a copy. It won't be cheap.

If nobody listens, why are Steph and Ed doing so well

Who said that "nobody" listens to liberal talk radio? I never said that. I said that not very many people listen. Actually, I used the word "dozens" as bit of hyperbole to make my point, forgetting that liberals have a problem with metaphors, symbolism, hyperbole, and other rhetorical techniques, unless they're using them to make sweeping and inaccurate generalities.

why are you guys mostly whining on this board all the time about the evils of progressive talk radio

I've never said a word about the evils of progressive talk radio. I've expressed negative opinions about liberal talk radio. I'm not aware of any progressive talk radio programs in existence, though I am aware of many liberal talk show hosts who erroneously call themselves "progressive".

More often than not, the word "progressive" is used by those who don't know the difference between "change" and "progress". All modifications to the status quo are "change". Only those modifications to the status quo which bring about general improvement to society as a whole are "progress". Changes to society that make general welfare of society as a whole worse instead of better (which describes the majority of the alleged "accomplishments" of liberals in the past four decades) are not "progress". If anything, they are the exact opposite. Therefore, it is erroneous to describe those who advocate changes which make society worse as "progressive".