AIr America

[babeontheair]

I just heard Air America on the air here in State College! With all the talk abou it somebody put it on. Its by a other name, uh um NPR!

 

[mountaineer]

State College's Real #1 Station

All the 3WZ newspaper ads aside, WPSU actually whipped everyone (again) in the Fall 04 book, in total 12+ share--which should be a clue to just how well Air America WOULD do in Lion Country. BTW, the other big non-commercial in the market, WTLR, also kicks butt--tying Hot and beating Beaver & WOWY last time out. Just because Arbitron doesn't list 'em for commercial consumption doesn't mean they don't play a big role in this market.

> I just heard Air America on the air here in State College!
> With all the talk abou it somebody put it on. Its by a other
> name, uh um NPR!
>

 

[shilton]

> I just heard Air America on the air here in State College!
> With all the talk abou it somebody put it on. Its by a other
> name, uh um NPR!
>
Now that's funny.....sorry guys but Air America is dead on arrival. Its faltering even in big cities. Pretty much here is why...tossing the president's current popularity numbers aside...the Republians...the conservatives are in FULL CONTROL. What advertiser in their right mind wants to go against the moral majority? Let's see if Procter and Gamble wants to buy ad time while Al Franken babbles on about women's rights to have an abortion if they want to...its just not sellable! The dems have been beating the same old dead horse for years and America is not buying it...when and if they ever hit he right buttons, they may win an Election and until then...they lack substance in the eyes of most.

Hate Rush or love him...he is sellable...as is O'Reilly...these guys stand up for what is right and just in the eyes of a majority of America. Air America may as well become the Michael Moore Network and put him on 24 hours a day...same effect...It lacks credability.

Besides...the liberals already have enough coverage on something called CNN or the CBS evening News...and the likes!!! The media already pays plenty of attention to them folks...its not gonna fly! Ask Al Gore how the tv network he was gonna launch is coming along...its NOT!!!

 

[shilton]

Re: State College's Real #1 Station

> All the 3WZ newspaper ads aside, WPSU actually whipped
> everyone (again) in the Fall 04 book, in total 12+
> share--which should be a clue to just how well Air America
> WOULD do in Lion Country. BTW, the other big non-commercial
> in the market, WTLR, also kicks butt--tying Hot and beating
> Beaver & WOWY last time out. Just because Arbitron doesn't
> list 'em for commercial consumption doesn't mean they don't
> play a big role in this market.
>
> > I just heard Air America on the air here in State College!
>
> > With all the talk abou it somebody put it on. Its by a
> other
> > name, uh um NPR!
> >
>
WTLR..comeon...I don't think any of us really see them as a force in the market...WPSU either...Its like saying PBS has the same bite as the other 4 big networks...they are there and they have their audience but the average public Joe does not even take them seriously or in some cases know they exist.

Just more reason to add fuel to the old the book is flawed theories. These guys should not show for more than a 1 or 2 share ever.

 

[mountaineer]

WPSU Three-Peat

Actually 91.5/WPSU has been ranked #1 overall (12+ share, total week) for 3 straight books. Come on, Steve--you live in a county where nearly half the adults above age 25 have AT LEAST a bachelor's degree. This is the Academic Ghetto, man--NPR Roolz! Seriously, none of us should be shocked. You'll find the same thing in Ithaca (Cornell), Ann Arbor (UM) and Boston (Harvard, BC, BU, Northeastern, Tufts, etc). Public radio kills in college markets.


> > All the 3WZ newspaper ads aside, WPSU actually whipped
> > everyone (again) in the Fall 04 book, in total 12+
> > share--which should be a clue to just how well Air America>
> > WOULD do in Lion Country.

> WTLR..comeon...I don't think any of us really see them as a
> force in the market...WPSU either...Its like saying PBS has
> the same bite as the other 4 big networks...they are there
> and they have their audience but the average public Joe does
> not even take them seriously or in some cases know they
> exist.
>
> Just more reason to add fuel to the old the book is flawed
> theories. These guys should not show for more than a 1 or 2
> share ever.
>

 

[missaretha]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

I agree with Mountie on this one. I know these numbers to be true as well. Only difference beteen WPSU and commercial stations is that they can't brag about their ratings a la 3WZ.

As for public television, remember, there was a time when cable didn't exist and all you had was a TV with an antenna (a.k.a. rabbit ears) on your set and all you could get were ABC, NBC, CBS and PBS. Am I the only one who remembers putting foil on the rabbit ears?!?!?

I personally don't like much public TV or radio. Only thing I ever got out of it was Sesame Street, The Electric Company, Mr. Rogers Neighborhood and Zoom. But, I was too young to even understand much of anything. I was only interested in when I was going to be able to sing along with Easy Reader.

The students may not get diaries for WPSU but those liberal professors who live within the county sure do.

I still think Air America would flop here...one too many liberal stations on the dial.

> Actually 91.5/WPSU has been ranked #1 overall (12+ share,
> total week) for 3 straight books. Come on, Steve--you live
> in a county where nearly half the adults above age 25 have
> AT LEAST a bachelor's degree. This is the Academic Ghetto,
> man--NPR Roolz! Seriously, none of us should be shocked.
> You'll find the same thing in Ithaca (Cornell), Ann Arbor
> (UM) and Boston (Harvard, BC, BU, Northeastern, Tufts, etc).
> Public radio kills in college markets.
>
>
> > > All the 3WZ newspaper ads aside, WPSU actually whipped
> > > everyone (again) in the Fall 04 book, in total 12+
> > > share--which should be a clue to just how well Air
> America>
> > > WOULD do in Lion Country.
>
> > WTLR..comeon...I don't think any of us really see them as
> a
> > force in the market...WPSU either...Its like saying PBS
> has
> > the same bite as the other 4 big networks...they are there
>
> > and they have their audience but the average public Joe
> does
> > not even take them seriously or in some cases know they
> > exist.
> >
> > Just more reason to add fuel to the old the book is flawed
>
> > theories. These guys should not show for more than a 1 or
> 2
> > share ever.
> >
>

 

[babeontheair]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

I think that it I very similar to if you would walk down the street in State College and ask what college sports team people like. We all know the answer. Yes the “elite” love WPSU and would swear by it. I still don’t follow your numbers. The sample size listed in the book is under three hundred (they try to puff it up by repeating cycles) and if you take into account most of it is the same one person filling out the entire household diary it’s flawed from the get go. One person can claim that there are many others living there and they will fill out the diaries for the family. Metro and TSA sample skips all non residents’ not just dorms, not just barracks. If you are not a resident you don’t get surveyed. I still don’t see the numbers you are showing. Metro has a bump. TSA the same but its out in the boonies where PSU has another stick.

I have lived here my entire life and I always thought it was neat as a kid to go into the copy place downtown. They had on the college station, the one nobody else listened to or even heard of unless you were driving a VW van and from Berkley.

M, if you have a chance flip open the book and take a look at the breakdowns for sample size and how they really did come up with them. I understand your point and see it. I know that it is hell to try to sell Rush anywhere. I imagine that Air America could capture some passion here in the peoples republic of happy valley


> Actually 91.5/WPSU has been ranked #1 overall (12+ share,
> total week) for 3 straight books. Come on, Steve--you live
> in a county where nearly half the adults above age 25 have
> AT LEAST a bachelor's degree. This is the Academic Ghetto,
> man--NPR Roolz! Seriously, none of us should be shocked.
> You'll find the same thing in Ithaca (Cornell), Ann Arbor
> (UM) and Boston (Harvard, BC, BU, Northeastern, Tufts, etc).
> Public radio kills in college markets.
>
>
> > > All the 3WZ newspaper ads aside, WPSU actually whipped
> > > everyone (again) in the Fall 04 book, in total 12+
> > > share--which should be a clue to just how well Air
> America>
> > > WOULD do in Lion Country.
>
> > WTLR..comeon...I don't think any of us really see them as
> a
> > force in the market...WPSU either...Its like saying PBS
> has
> > the same bite as the other 4 big networks...they are there
>
> > and they have their audience but the average public Joe
> does
> > not even take them seriously or in some cases know they
> > exist.
> >
> > Just more reason to add fuel to the old the book is flawed
>
> > theories. These guys should not show for more than a 1 or
> 2
> > share ever.
> >
>

 

[jff110]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

The kind of radio programming that works for conservatives is not the kind of radio programming that works for liberals. They are two completely different mindsets, two different lenses through which the world is seen.

I don't think there will ever be a liberal Rush--not because there aren't enough liberals to support such programming (Kerry did get 60 million votes after all), but rather because liberals are not attracted to people who think and debate in the absolutist way that Rush does. Absolutism is, in my opinion, a lousy way of looking at the world. But it can make for great talk radio.

> I agree with Mountie on this one. I know these numbers to
> be true as well. Only difference beteen WPSU and commercial
> stations is that they can't brag about their ratings a la
> 3WZ.
>
> As for public television, remember, there was a time when
> cable didn't exist and all you had was a TV with an antenna
> (a.k.a. rabbit ears) on your set and all you could get were
> ABC, NBC, CBS and PBS. Am I the only one who remembers
> putting foil on the rabbit ears?!?!?
>
> I personally don't like much public TV or radio. Only thing
> I ever got out of it was Sesame Street, The Electric
> Company, Mr. Rogers Neighborhood and Zoom. But, I was too
> young to even understand much of anything. I was only
> interested in when I was going to be able to sing along with
> Easy Reader.
>
> The students may not get diaries for WPSU but those liberal
> professors who live within the county sure do.
>
> I still think Air America would flop here...one too many
> liberal stations on the dial.
>
> > Actually 91.5/WPSU has been ranked #1 overall (12+ share,
> > total week) for 3 straight books. Come on, Steve--you live
>
> > in a county where nearly half the adults above age 25 have
>
> > AT LEAST a bachelor's degree. This is the Academic Ghetto,
>
> > man--NPR Roolz! Seriously, none of us should be shocked.
> > You'll find the same thing in Ithaca (Cornell), Ann Arbor
> > (UM) and Boston (Harvard, BC, BU, Northeastern, Tufts,
> etc).
> > Public radio kills in college markets.
> >
> >
> > > > All the 3WZ newspaper ads aside, WPSU actually whipped
>
> > > > everyone (again) in the Fall 04 book, in total 12+
> > > > share--which should be a clue to just how well Air
> > America>
> > > > WOULD do in Lion Country.
> >
> > > WTLR..comeon...I don't think any of us really see them
> as
> > a
> > > force in the market...WPSU either...Its like saying PBS
> > has
> > > the same bite as the other 4 big networks...they are
> there
> >
> > > and they have their audience but the average public Joe
> > does
> > > not even take them seriously or in some cases know they
> > > exist.
> > >
> > > Just more reason to add fuel to the old the book is
> flawed
> >
> > > theories. These guys should not show for more than a 1
> or
> > 2
> > > share ever.
> > >
> >
>

 

[McCall]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

> The kind of radio programming that works for conservatives
> is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> liberals. They are two completely different mindsets, two
> different lenses through which the world is seen.
>
> I don't think there will ever be a liberal Rush--not because
> there aren't enough liberals to support such programming
> (Kerry did get 60 million votes after all), but rather
> because liberals are not attracted to people who think and
> debate in the absolutist way that Rush does. Absolutism is,
> in my opinion, a lousy way of looking at the world. But it
> can make for great talk radio.

One reason why there are so many conservative talk radio programs compared to liberal or "progressive" programs: the conservative programs are commercially successful. There have been many attempts at liberal talk radio and most have failed. I'd love to say they failed because their ideas and ideals are mostly short-sighted, illogical, and socialistic (and I believe that), but mostly they failed because they weren't commercial hits. The marketplace is self-correcting, usually.

 

[mountaineer]

The Liberal Rush

I try to look at this stuff as objectively as possible, so not to dismiss a format on the rise; and this thing--progressive talk--has done okay, so far. Like most new formats, it hasn't been adopted by the biggest sticks--instead it's been slapped on stations that had been pulling ZERO shares. In Portland, the station went from a 0.3 to around a 3.5 (where the top station has a 5). In that case, that station and the "Rush" station are both owned by Clear Channel, and they're selling the hell out of it. Most of the large market stations are using a mix of Air America (Al Franken & Randi Rhodes) and Democracy Radio (Ed Schultz & Stephanie Miller). Franken has gotten the most ink because of his prior TV & movie gigs, but Schultz has the most stations--around 100--and is closer in style to Rush than the others. Most radio management types are really non-political. I had Rush on several stations and it always did okay. As for the State College market, yeah--I think progressive talk (Air America or Democracy Radio) could rack up big numbers, even on a station that's been pulling 0.7 shares like WBLF (see Portland). In State College you can't turn the corner without tripping over another liberal. They'd get so excited about it, you'd never have to spend a dime to promote it--just huge "word of mouth." Just like RSC, in that regard.

> The kind of radio programming that works for conservatives
> is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> liberals. They are two completely different mindsets, two
> different lenses through which the world is seen.
>
> I don't think there will ever be a liberal Rush--not because
> there aren't enough liberals to support such programming
> (Kerry did get 60 million votes after all), but rather
> because liberals are not attracted to people who think and
> debate in the absolutist way that Rush does. Absolutism is,
> in my opinion, a lousy way of looking at the world. But it
> can make for great talk radio.

 

[skymax]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

> > The kind of radio programming that works for conservatives
>
> > is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> > liberals. They are two completely different mindsets, two
>
> > different lenses through which the world is seen.
> >
> > I don't think there will ever be a liberal Rush--not
> because
> > there aren't enough liberals to support such programming
> > (Kerry did get 60 million votes after all), but rather
> > because liberals are not attracted to people who think and
>
> > debate in the absolutist way that Rush does. Absolutism
> is,
> > in my opinion, a lousy way of looking at the world. But
> it
> > can make for great talk radio.
>
> One reason why there are so many conservative talk radio
> programs compared to liberal or "progressive" programs: the
> conservative programs are commercially successful. There
> have been many attempts at liberal talk radio and most have
> failed. I'd love to say they failed because their ideas and
> ideals are mostly short-sighted, illogical, and socialistic
> (and I believe that), but mostly they failed because they
> weren't commercial hits. The marketplace is self-correcting,
> usually.
>

Its disappointing to see the same old blather about the 'liberal media'
make this board. If CNN & CBS were liberal outlets, they'd be falling all over themselves to cover the Downing Street memo. Conservatives cry 'liberal media'
when something is aired or printed they don't agree with. Conservative talk radio works because its entertainment. And with entertainment the truth is unimportant. Distort facts, posture, villify, pontificate and the audience gets all worked up. The key is to turn everything into a black/white issue.
Unfortunately, our country & this world and the politics involved are extremely
complex. But its not great 'lowest common denominator' radio to discuss the complexities of an issue and to make people think (And God knows, you can't ask most of the American populace to think). Especially when the simple fact a listener is tuned into a Rush or a Hannity pretty much means their minds are made up already, they just need somebody to give them their 'talking points.'
I see/hear Conservative talk-wanks distort and lie constantly and then, when their lies are exposed, they never retract as real journalists would do. So, listen to Conservataive talk if you want but don't confuse it with journalism.
And lets put to rest the 'liberal media' stuff. Conservatives need to get some new material. Case in point: Can you imagine the coverage if it had been Al Franken who checked into rehab for Oxy-Contin addiction and not Rush L? Or how would the media have handled the Jeff Gannon-Guckert scandal if it had happened during the Clinton years. Lets see, a press pass is given to an inexperienced reporter from a fledgling partisan website so he can toss softball partisan questions to the President? And, oh yeah, he's using an assumed name. Then he turns out to be a gay prostitute who advertises himself online and he's also been admitted to the White House 200 times when there were no press conferences going on? My God, Fox News would be foaming at the mouth and the Republican special prosecutors would be lining up. Heres another 'what if,' what if our President had been a Dem since 9/11? Fox News would be running the daily crawl
"Osama Bin-Laden still at large - Day 1,746...where is he Mr. President?" As it is, all the above scenarios are true its just that Republicans are in control so it isn't covered. So drop the tired 'liberal media' mantra and listen to Rush to get some new material (but that won't work because he's been saying the same thing for 15 years. Ever listen to a jock and know what he's going to say before he/she says it? Thats boring and annoying). So give me someone, conservative, liberal or centrist, who can examine each issue individually on its merits so the audience can make up their own minds. No side is either always right or always wrong but I don't hear that from Conservative talk at all and they, unfortunately, make up 90% of the talk shows. And sheer numbers doesn't make you right or best. Theres a whole lot more Whoppers sold than Filet Mignons. Making up your mind on an issue before you know the facts or while ignoring the facts is dangerous. Dangerous & stupid.

 

[McCall]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

> > > The kind of radio programming that works for
> conservatives
> >
> > > is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> > > liberals. They are two completely different mindsets,
> two
>
> Its disappointing to see the same old blather about the
> 'liberal media'
> make this board. If CNN & CBS were liberal outlets, they'd
> be falling all over themselves to cover the Downing Street
> memo. Conservatives cry 'liberal media'
> when something is aired or printed they don't agree with.
> Conservative talk radio works because its entertainment.
> And with entertainment the truth is unimportant. Distort
> facts, posture, villify, pontificate and the audience gets
> all worked up. The key is to turn everything into a
> black/white issue.
> Unfortunately, our country & this world and the politics
> involved are extremely
> complex. But its not great 'lowest common denominator'
> radio to discuss the complexities of an issue and to make
> people think (And God knows, you can't ask most of the
> American populace to think). Especially when the simple
> fact a listener is tuned into a Rush or a Hannity pretty
> much means their minds are made up already, they just need
> somebody to give them their 'talking points.'
> I see/hear Conservative talk-wanks distort and lie
> constantly and then, when their lies are exposed, they never
> retract as real journalists would do. So, listen to
> Conservataive talk if you want but don't confuse it with
> journalism.
> And lets put to rest the 'liberal media' stuff.
> Conservatives need to get some new material. Case in point:
> Can you imagine the coverage if it had been Al Franken who
> checked into rehab for Oxy-Contin addiction and not Rush L?
> Or how would the media have handled the Jeff Gannon-Guckert
> scandal if it had happened during the Clinton years. Lets
> see, a press pass is given to an inexperienced reporter from
> a fledgling partisan website so he can toss softball
> partisan questions to the President? And, oh yeah, he's
> using an assumed name. Then he turns out to be a gay
> prostitute who advertises himself online and he's also been
> admitted to the White House 200 times when there were no
> press conferences going on? My God, Fox News would be
> foaming at the mouth and the Republican special prosecutors
> would be lining up. Heres another 'what if,' what if our
> President had been a Dem since 9/11? Fox News would be
> running the daily crawl
> "Osama Bin-Laden still at large - Day 1,746...where is he
> Mr. President?" As it is, all the above scenarios are true
> its just that Republicans are in control so it isn't
> covered. So drop the tired 'liberal media' mantra and listen
> to Rush to get some new material (but that won't work
> because he's been saying the same thing for 15 years. Ever
> listen to a jock and know what he's going to say before
> he/she says it? Thats boring and annoying). So give me
> someone, conservative, liberal or centrist, who can examine
> each issue individually on its merits so the audience can
> make up their own minds. No side is either always right or
> always wrong but I don't hear that from Conservative talk at
> all and they, unfortunately, make up 90% of the talk shows.
> And sheer numbers doesn't make you right or best. Theres a
> whole lot more Whoppers sold than Filet Mignons. Making up
> your mind on an issue before you know the facts or while
> ignoring the facts is dangerous. Dangerous & stupid.
>

There was nothing in my post about "the liberal media".
But I disagree with your post, and I also notice that about half of your post is straight from the liberal talking points on the looney left websites.

However, if you are truly looking for somebody to examine each issue on its own merits, you should enjoy Bill O'Reilly's radio show. The liberals call him a conservative and the conservatives think he's a liberal. He must be doing something right.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by McCall on 06/24/05 08:00 PM.</FONT></P>

 

[missaretha]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

As a Democrat who is neither liberal or conservative...that lives with a conservative on the right...whom I never discuss politics with, your post is written in true liberal fashion. Always the same old "if it were the Democrats who did it..." line.

Frankly, this fiscally conservative, socially moderate female thinks the reason why conservative radio does so well is because the people who pay the bills own businesses, are themselves conservative and want to get their commercials out to the people who have money and will buy their product or service. That's capitalism baby and it ain't the die hard liberals who are selling it.

The Al Frankens, Hilary Clintons and Michael Moores of the world want to take your hard earned dollar and divide it equally among everyone so we can all have "shiny happy people holding hands." I do make up my mind on an issue when I have the facts, but I know bullshit when I hear it and I know when someone is trying to pull the wool over my eyes.

And...if were not for our tax dollars supporting 15% of the public radio bill, there wouldn't be any public radio. If public radio is so great, let them go out among the elite liberals that live here in "happy" valley and sell it like everyone else has to sell it. But noooooo...can't do that. Instead, we get a bitch and whine session because the House cut the money. Apparently whining is better than offering better programming because they put the funding back.

> Its disappointing to see the same old blather about the
> 'liberal media'
> make this board. If CNN & CBS were liberal outlets, they'd
> be falling all over themselves to cover the Downing Street
> memo. Conservatives cry 'liberal media'
> when something is aired or printed they don't agree with.
> Conservative talk radio works because its entertainment.
> And with entertainment the truth is unimportant. Distort
> facts, posture, villify, pontificate and the audience gets
> all worked up. The key is to turn everything into a
> black/white issue.
> Unfortunately, our country & this world and the politics
> involved are extremely
> complex. But its not great 'lowest common denominator'
> radio to discuss the complexities of an issue and to make
> people think (And God knows, you can't ask most of the
> American populace to think). Especially when the simple
> fact a listener is tuned into a Rush or a Hannity pretty
> much means their minds are made up already, they just need
> somebody to give them their 'talking points.'
> I see/hear Conservative talk-wanks distort and lie
> constantly and then, when their lies are exposed, they never
> retract as real journalists would do. So, listen to
> Conservataive talk if you want but don't confuse it with
> journalism.
> And lets put to rest the 'liberal media' stuff.
> Conservatives need to get some new material. Case in point:
> Can you imagine the coverage if it had been Al Franken who
> checked into rehab for Oxy-Contin addiction and not Rush L?
> Or how would the media have handled the Jeff Gannon-Guckert
> scandal if it had happened during the Clinton years. Lets
> see, a press pass is given to an inexperienced reporter from
> a fledgling partisan website so he can toss softball
> partisan questions to the President? And, oh yeah, he's
> using an assumed name. Then he turns out to be a gay
> prostitute who advertises himself online and he's also been
> admitted to the White House 200 times when there were no
> press conferences going on? My God, Fox News would be
> foaming at the mouth and the Republican special prosecutors
> would be lining up. Heres another 'what if,' what if our
> President had been a Dem since 9/11? Fox News would be
> running the daily crawl
> "Osama Bin-Laden still at large - Day 1,746...where is he
> Mr. President?" As it is, all the above scenarios are true
> its just that Republicans are in control so it isn't
> covered. So drop the tired 'liberal media' mantra and listen
> to Rush to get some new material (but that won't work
> because he's been saying the same thing for 15 years. Ever
> listen to a jock and know what he's going to say before
> he/she says it? Thats boring and annoying). So give me
> someone, conservative, liberal or centrist, who can examine
> each issue individually on its merits so the audience can
> make up their own minds. No side is either always right or
> always wrong but I don't hear that from Conservative talk at
> all and they, unfortunately, make up 90% of the talk shows.
> And sheer numbers doesn't make you right or best. Theres a
> whole lot more Whoppers sold than Filet Mignons. Making up
> your mind on an issue before you know the facts or while
> ignoring the facts is dangerous. Dangerous & stupid.
>

 

[jff110]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

Commercial stations in State College should be grateful that WPSU is not able to go out and sell time in the typical way that a commercial station does. If they could, they would blow everyone in State College out of the water financially. Not only are there a LOT of people who listen to WPSU here...but those tend to be more highly educated people with lots of disposable income, the kind of people advertisers drool over.

The idea that public television or public radio "needs" government funding to survive just isn't true...even though public stations themselves say that. That's bullcrap. However, if government funding is taken away, that means longer commercials, more commercials, and less content. They would still survive (even thrive) but they would not sound the same.

Public broadcasting was created to be an alternative to commercial radio. If you take away government funding and force it to compete in the marketplace, it WOULD be able to compete, in my opinion. But then it no longer serves its original mandate, and is no longer really "public" radio.


> > > > The kind of radio programming that works for
> > conservatives
> > >
> > > > is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> > > > liberals. They are two completely different mindsets,
>
> > two
> >
> > Its disappointing to see the same old blather about the
> > 'liberal media'
> > make this board. If CNN & CBS were liberal outlets,
> they'd
> > be falling all over themselves to cover the Downing Street
>
> > memo. Conservatives cry 'liberal media'
> > when something is aired or printed they don't agree with.
>
> > Conservative talk radio works because its entertainment.
> > And with entertainment the truth is unimportant. Distort
> > facts, posture, villify, pontificate and the audience gets
>
> > all worked up. The key is to turn everything into a
> > black/white issue.
> > Unfortunately, our country & this world and the politics
> > involved are extremely
> > complex. But its not great 'lowest common denominator'
> > radio to discuss the complexities of an issue and to make
> > people think (And God knows, you can't ask most of the
> > American populace to think). Especially when the simple
> > fact a listener is tuned into a Rush or a Hannity pretty
> > much means their minds are made up already, they just need
>
> > somebody to give them their 'talking points.'
> > I see/hear Conservative talk-wanks distort and lie
> > constantly and then, when their lies are exposed, they
> never
> > retract as real journalists would do. So, listen to
> > Conservataive talk if you want but don't confuse it with
> > journalism.
> > And lets put to rest the 'liberal media' stuff.
> > Conservatives need to get some new material. Case in
> point:
> > Can you imagine the coverage if it had been Al Franken who
>
> > checked into rehab for Oxy-Contin addiction and not Rush
> L?
> > Or how would the media have handled the Jeff
> Gannon-Guckert
> > scandal if it had happened during the Clinton years. Lets
> > see, a press pass is given to an inexperienced reporter
> from
> > a fledgling partisan website so he can toss softball
> > partisan questions to the President? And, oh yeah, he's
> > using an assumed name. Then he turns out to be a gay
> > prostitute who advertises himself online and he's also
> been
> > admitted to the White House 200 times when there were no
> > press conferences going on? My God, Fox News would be
> > foaming at the mouth and the Republican special
> prosecutors
> > would be lining up. Heres another 'what if,' what if our
> > President had been a Dem since 9/11? Fox News would be
> > running the daily crawl
> > "Osama Bin-Laden still at large - Day 1,746...where is he
> > Mr. President?" As it is, all the above scenarios are true
>
> > its just that Republicans are in control so it isn't
> > covered. So drop the tired 'liberal media' mantra and
> listen
> > to Rush to get some new material (but that won't work
> > because he's been saying the same thing for 15 years. Ever
>
> > listen to a jock and know what he's going to say before
> > he/she says it? Thats boring and annoying). So give me
> > someone, conservative, liberal or centrist, who can
> examine
> > each issue individually on its merits so the audience can
> > make up their own minds. No side is either always right
> or
> > always wrong but I don't hear that from Conservative talk
> at
> > all and they, unfortunately, make up 90% of the talk
> shows.
> > And sheer numbers doesn't make you right or best. Theres a
>
> > whole lot more Whoppers sold than Filet Mignons. Making
> up
> > your mind on an issue before you know the facts or while
> > ignoring the facts is dangerous. Dangerous & stupid.
> >
>
> There was nothing in my post about "the liberal media".
> But I disagree with your post, and I also notice that about
> half of your post is straight from the liberal talking
> points on the looney left websites.
>
> However, if you are truly looking for somebody to examine
> each issue on its own merits, you should enjoy Bill
> O'Reilly's radio show. The liberals call him a conservative
> and the conservatives think he's a liberal. He must be doing
> something right.
>

 

[killawatt]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

I think the CDT should be greatful...that's were they spend their money not on local radio. WPSU could have an edge though offering the "Penn State National Champs - can you remember?" DVD and an Al Gore tie with every commercial order of $100 or more.


> Commercial stations in State College should be grateful that
> WPSU is not able to go out and sell time in the typical way
> that a commercial station does. If they could, they would
> blow everyone in State College out of the water financially.
> Not only are there a LOT of people who listen to WPSU
> here...but those tend to be more highly educated people with
> lots of disposable income, the kind of people advertisers
> drool over.
>
> The idea that public television or public radio "needs"
> government funding to survive just isn't true...even though
> public stations themselves say that. That's bullcrap.
> However, if government funding is taken away, that means
> longer commercials, more commercials, and less content.
> They would still survive (even thrive) but they would not
> sound the same.
>
> Public broadcasting was created to be an alternative to
> commercial radio. If you take away government funding and
> force it to compete in the marketplace, it WOULD be able to
> compete, in my opinion. But then it no longer serves its
> original mandate, and is no longer really "public" radio.
>
>
>
> > > > > The kind of radio programming that works for
> > > conservatives
> > > >
> > > > > is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> > > > > liberals. They are two completely different
> mindsets,
> >
> > > two
> > >
> > > Its disappointing to see the same old blather about the
> > > 'liberal media'
> > > make this board. If CNN & CBS were liberal outlets,
> > they'd
> > > be falling all over themselves to cover the Downing
> Street
> >
> > > memo. Conservatives cry 'liberal media'
> > > when something is aired or printed they don't agree
> with.
> >
> > > Conservative talk radio works because its entertainment.
>
> > > And with entertainment the truth is unimportant.
> Distort
> > > facts, posture, villify, pontificate and the audience
> gets
> >
> > > all worked up. The key is to turn everything into a
> > > black/white issue.
> > > Unfortunately, our country & this world and the politics
>
> > > involved are extremely
> > > complex. But its not great 'lowest common denominator'
> > > radio to discuss the complexities of an issue and to
> make
> > > people think (And God knows, you can't ask most of the
> > > American populace to think). Especially when the simple
>
> > > fact a listener is tuned into a Rush or a Hannity pretty
>
> > > much means their minds are made up already, they just
> need
> >
> > > somebody to give them their 'talking points.'
> > > I see/hear Conservative talk-wanks distort and lie
> > > constantly and then, when their lies are exposed, they
> > never
> > > retract as real journalists would do. So, listen to
> > > Conservataive talk if you want but don't confuse it with
>
> > > journalism.
> > > And lets put to rest the 'liberal media' stuff.
> > > Conservatives need to get some new material. Case in
> > point:
> > > Can you imagine the coverage if it had been Al Franken
> who
> >
> > > checked into rehab for Oxy-Contin addiction and not Rush
>
> > L?
> > > Or how would the media have handled the Jeff
> > Gannon-Guckert
> > > scandal if it had happened during the Clinton years.
> Lets
> > > see, a press pass is given to an inexperienced reporter
> > from
> > > a fledgling partisan website so he can toss softball
> > > partisan questions to the President? And, oh yeah, he's
>
> > > using an assumed name. Then he turns out to be a gay
> > > prostitute who advertises himself online and he's also
> > been
> > > admitted to the White House 200 times when there were no
>
> > > press conferences going on? My God, Fox News would be
> > > foaming at the mouth and the Republican special
> > prosecutors
> > > would be lining up. Heres another 'what if,' what if
> our
> > > President had been a Dem since 9/11? Fox News would be
> > > running the daily crawl
> > > "Osama Bin-Laden still at large - Day 1,746...where is
> he
> > > Mr. President?" As it is, all the above scenarios are
> true
> >
> > > its just that Republicans are in control so it isn't
> > > covered. So drop the tired 'liberal media' mantra and
> > listen
> > > to Rush to get some new material (but that won't work
> > > because he's been saying the same thing for 15 years.
> Ever
> >
> > > listen to a jock and know what he's going to say before
> > > he/she says it? Thats boring and annoying). So give me
> > > someone, conservative, liberal or centrist, who can
> > examine
> > > each issue individually on its merits so the audience
> can
> > > make up their own minds. No side is either always right
>
> > or
> > > always wrong but I don't hear that from Conservative
> talk
> > at
> > > all and they, unfortunately, make up 90% of the talk
> > shows.
> > > And sheer numbers doesn't make you right or best. Theres
> a
> >
> > > whole lot more Whoppers sold than Filet Mignons. Making
>
> > up
> > > your mind on an issue before you know the facts or while
>
> > > ignoring the facts is dangerous. Dangerous & stupid.
> > >
> >
> > There was nothing in my post about "the liberal media".
> > But I disagree with your post, and I also notice that
> about
> > half of your post is straight from the liberal talking
> > points on the looney left websites.
> >
> > However, if you are truly looking for somebody to examine
> > each issue on its own merits, you should enjoy Bill
> > O'Reilly's radio show. The liberals call him a
> conservative
> > and the conservatives think he's a liberal. He must be
> doing
> > something right.
> >
>

 

[babeontheair]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

Something about "this broadcast underwritten by" is a big fat ad! You can’t call it anything but. Hell if we could get free money from the gov and brainwash everybody out of the NTR by the tens of thousands to feel warm and fuzzy then all the time getting a big budget and no taxes sign me up!
I would gladly trade the few hundred bucks that you have to beg from each advertiser for a big assed check from two or three local plants. In the typical way you write, yes and they sure don’t have the typical bills or budget. Nothing is about running a business. Last time I heard advertisers would not turn down money and last time I saw a tenured professor did make good money. He almost made as much as a auto worker or steel worker. I would imagine that wealthy prof still drives the same MG or VW he has for the last thirty years while the good old boy buys a forty thousand dollars truck every other year. My old profs sure didn’t buy soap or razors……
> >
>

 

[skymax]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

> > > > The kind of radio programming that works for
> > conservatives
> > >
> > > > is not the kind of radio programming that works for
> > > > liberals. They are two completely different mindsets,
>
> > two
> >
> > Its disappointing to see the same old blather about the
> > 'liberal media'
> > make this board. If CNN & CBS were liberal outlets,
> they'd
> > be falling all over themselves to cover the Downing Street
>
> > memo. Conservatives cry 'liberal media'
> > when something is aired or printed they don't agree with.
>
> > Conservative talk radio works because its entertainment.
> > And with entertainment the truth is unimportant. Distort
> > facts, posture, villify, pontificate and the audience gets
>
> > all worked up. The key is to turn everything into a
> > black/white issue.
> > Unfortunately, our country & this world and the politics
> > involved are extremely
> > complex. But its not great 'lowest common denominator'
> > radio to discuss the complexities of an issue and to make
> > people think (And God knows, you can't ask most of the
> > American populace to think). Especially when the simple
> > fact a listener is tuned into a Rush or a Hannity pretty
> > much means their minds are made up already, they just need
>
> > somebody to give them their 'talking points.'
> > I see/hear Conservative talk-wanks distort and lie
> > constantly and then, when their lies are exposed, they
> never
> > retract as real journalists would do. So, listen to
> > Conservataive talk if you want but don't confuse it with
> > journalism.
> > And lets put to rest the 'liberal media' stuff.
> > Conservatives need to get some new material. Case in
> point:
> > Can you imagine the coverage if it had been Al Franken who
>
> > checked into rehab for Oxy-Contin addiction and not Rush
> L?
> > Or how would the media have handled the Jeff
> Gannon-Guckert
> > scandal if it had happened during the Clinton years. Lets
> > see, a press pass is given to an inexperienced reporter
> from
> > a fledgling partisan website so he can toss softball
> > partisan questions to the President? And, oh yeah, he's
> > using an assumed name. Then he turns out to be a gay
> > prostitute who advertises himself online and he's also
> been
> > admitted to the White House 200 times when there were no
> > press conferences going on? My God, Fox News would be
> > foaming at the mouth and the Republican special
> prosecutors
> > would be lining up. Heres another 'what if,' what if our
> > President had been a Dem since 9/11? Fox News would be
> > running the daily crawl
> > "Osama Bin-Laden still at large - Day 1,746...where is he
> > Mr. President?" As it is, all the above scenarios are true
>
> > its just that Republicans are in control so it isn't
> > covered. So drop the tired 'liberal media' mantra and
> listen
> > to Rush to get some new material (but that won't work
> > because he's been saying the same thing for 15 years. Ever
>
> > listen to a jock and know what he's going to say before
> > he/she says it? Thats boring and annoying). So give me
> > someone, conservative, liberal or centrist, who can
> examine
> > each issue individually on its merits so the audience can
> > make up their own minds. No side is either always right
> or
> > always wrong but I don't hear that from Conservative talk
> at
> > all and they, unfortunately, make up 90% of the talk
> shows.
> > And sheer numbers doesn't make you right or best. Theres a
>
> > whole lot more Whoppers sold than Filet Mignons. Making
> up
> > your mind on an issue before you know the facts or while
> > ignoring the facts is dangerous. Dangerous & stupid.
> >
>
> There was nothing in my post about "the liberal media".
> But I disagree with your post, and I also notice that about
> half of your post is straight from the liberal talking
> points on the looney left websites.
>
> However, if you are truly looking for somebody to examine
> each issue on its own merits, you should enjoy Bill
> O'Reilly's radio show. The liberals call him a conservative
> and the conservatives think he's a liberal. He must be doing
> something right.
>
>Thanks for throwing out all the labels. I'm a Republican who believes
whats going on with this administration is anything but true conservative.
If you're conservative, why are you spending so much time on 'looney left'
websites? Or are you just buying the drivel put forth by O'Reilly, Limbaugh
and Hannity?

 

[McCall]

Re: WPSU Three-Peat

> >Thanks for throwing out all the labels. I'm a Republican
> who believes
> whats going on with this administration is anything but true
> conservative.
> If you're conservative, why are you spending so much time on
> 'looney left'
> websites? Or are you just buying the drivel put forth by
> O'Reilly, Limbaugh
> and Hannity?
>

I find them entertaining.