• 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

CBS needs to drop talk on 1210 WPHT

Small Market Guy said:
Except it's the agenda their listeners expect.
Click to expand...

Do they really? Or are you attempting to make a connection that doesn't exist between the politics of its listeners and the integrity of its reporting? I'll say this again: NPR has no reason to slant its reporting. They have no reason to appeal to liberals, no reason to appeal to Democrats, or anyone else. The fact that some of those groups listen says more about them than the product. We already know that liberals didn't support a progressive talk network, as you yourself know. So clearly, if they didn't do it then, they aren't going to do it for NPR either. So there is no benefit to slant news coverage in order to appeal to liberals.

Sure, conservatives like Cal Thomas and Brent Bozell have lots of opinions about bias, but have never shown any examples of it in news reporting. The Bozell example you give is ten years old, and refers to a talk show produced at a member station, not NPR. The fact is that O'Reilly has since appeared on Morning Edition:

http://www.npr.org/2011/09/27/140802802/bill-oreilly-abraham-lincoln-was-our-best-leader

Once again, the Republican House of Representatives has every reason to cut their funding if they feel the news product has an agenda. They didn't. Explain.
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
I could give you a list, but your mind is made up, so it too would be meaningless.

The only people who say it's biased have never presented any facts to demonstrate it...yourself included.
Click to expand...

Considering that all you do is provide links, here's a similar level of proof. Turn on your radio during the time that All Things Considered is on the air. Tune your radio to the station that carries All Things Considered. Listen to it.

There. There's the proof. Use your own two ears!
 
TheBigA said:
Once again, the Republican House of Representatives has every reason to cut their funding if they feel the news product has an agenda. They didn't. Explain.
Click to expand...

This is not the venue for that extension of this conversation.
 
TheBigA said:
liberals didn't support a progressive talk network
Click to expand...

Because they're listening to public radio, and NPR in particular.

Republicans didn't cut the funding because they're tired of the fight. It's not worth having some hack stand up somewhere and claim evil Republicans want to kill Big Bird.

Juan Williams appears on Fox News on a daily basis. And no one is denying THEY have a bias.
 
Small Market Guy said:
I posted a link to the poll that shows who public radio's listeners are. I'm not the one making stuff up here.
Click to expand...

Sure you are. You're drawing false conclusions. You're extrapolating from that poll that they listen specifically for a liberal bias, when it's been demonstrated liberals don't operate the same way as conservatives. That's why Fox gets a disproportionate sized audience in relation to the number of actual conservatives. And you also extrapolate from that poll that NPR News purposely slants its news to appeal to specific kind of listener, when they have no motivation to do so, and in fact federal law would prohibit them from favoring certain groups because they receive federal funds. So you're telling me they're purposely breaking the law when they don't have to. That makes no sense.

One other thing: The article with poll you link says this: "I don’t disagree with Inskeep’s overall conclusion that the average listener, whether liberal and or conservative, tunes into NPR for reasons other than ideology: “Most listeners understand that we’re all figuring out the world together, calmly and honestly, in an atmosphere of mutual respect.”

If you're going to believe the poll, you should also agree with the context.
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
it's been demonstrated liberals don't operate the same way as conservatives.
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you're going to trot out the old "liberals don't need to be told what to think because they're so much smarter" deal again.

This really is tiring. You can believe whatever you want about public radio and NPR in particular. No amount of facts are going to change your mind anyway. Besides, it's not relevant to the discussion of WHYY being an alternative talk outlet, which you actually were right about.
 
Small Market Guy said:
Let me guess, you're going to trot out the old "liberals don't need to be told what to think because they're so much smarter" deal again.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they're smarter or disagreeing with any polls or arguing with any of your sources. But if you're going to post a poll from Forbes and use it to prove a point, then you should also agree with the writer's conclusion (not mine) that "listeners tune in to NPR for reasons OTHER THAN IDEOLOGY." He said it, not me. And I think if you asked people (conservatives and liberals) why they listen, they'd say the same thing.
 
TheBigA said:
I'm not saying they're smarter or disagreeing with any polls or arguing with any of your sources. But if you're going to post a poll from Forbes and use it to prove a point, then you should also agree with the writer's conclusion (not mine) that "listeners tune in to NPR for reasons OTHER THAN IDEOLOGY." He said it, not me. And I think if you asked people (conservatives and liberals) why they listen, they'd say the same thing.
Click to expand...

Anyone who runs any sort of radio station needs to know why the audience he wants to attract listens to the radio. All market segments, especially the genuinely important segments, though comprised of people with similar tastes are also different from other market segments in their tastes. The market segments defined by their members' chosen political alignment are very, very different in what sort of topics and approaches appeal to them. People who like Sean Hannity because of their political alignment prefer a very, very different approach than people who like All Things Considered because they have the opposite political alignment from the Sean Hannity-liking segment.

So, if you determine what people with one particular political alignment want, you'll find that they like to see the world as a pleasant place where everyone shares Coca-Cola and flowers, and sings on mountaintops, and doesn't want to hear about bad news or controversy. To appeal to that segment, you only include things that they like hearing about, and even if it's negative news, it's about the people they already believe are bad. They don't want to have to confront the fact that other people disagree with them. To appeal to a different market segment based on political alignment, they like rough-and-tumble politics, they like confrontation, and like being fired up about issues. They want to hear someone who affirms their preconceived notions.

It's interesting to note that the division of those two market segments has absolutely nothing to do with age, per se. True, some people go through an early stage of life fitting into one of those segments, and move to the other segment as they become more mature. But, you'll find people of all ages in both segments. Age as a defining characteristic of which segment prefers which style of news/talk format is secondary, or even tertiary in importance.
 
Avid Listener said:
Anyone who runs any sort of radio station needs to know why the audience he wants to attract listens to the radio.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that people who run NPR stations do those kinds of polls. But we're talking about the NPR network and the news department. Journalists don't do stories because of who the story might appeal to, and non-commercial stations aren't motivated by audience demographics. But as the Forbes poll pointed out, a very large number of conservatives listen to NPR. Probably a higher percentage than liberals who listen to Hannity or Rush. There has to be a reason for that, and it goes back to the point of the article, which is that listeners tune in to NPR for reasons other than ideology.
 
TheBigA said:
But if you're going to post a poll from Forbes and use it to prove a point, then you should also agree with the writer's conclusion
Click to expand...

Why? I don't need someone to tell me how to interpret a poll. Public radio's listeners tend to be liberal. That's the only point that I was making. I would have linked the raw poll itself, but it's no long available on the site on which it was hosted.

It's human nature to want your beliefs validated by someone in a position of authority or fame. EVERYONE listens to radio that aligns with their sensibilities, aside from the people Media Matters pays to comb through conservative shows to find a quote to take out of context.
 
Small Market Guy said:
It's human nature to want your beliefs validated by someone in a position of authority or fame. EVERYONE listens to radio that aligns with their sensibilities
Click to expand...

I disagree with that. I think insecure people want their beliefs to be validated. People with courage in their convictions are ready for the truth. And I think THAT is really what people are looking for. Whatever that truth is. And if you go back to that poll, what it really shows is that lots of conservatives and independents listen. Not just liberals. The article says 52% describe themselves as conservative or middle of the road. So to generalize and say their listeners "tend to be liberal" isn't substantiated by the very article you cite. As I said, Rush, Hannity, and Fox News don't have that broad range of audience. Why? People tune in to Rush, Hannity, and Fox for a single ideology. But they want something different from NPR. And they get it. It is it's own brand. It is its own ideology, if you will.
 
Last edited:
Small Market Guy said:
Why? I don't need someone to tell me how to interpret a poll. Public radio's listeners tend to be liberal. That's the only point that I was making. I would have linked the raw poll itself, but it's no long available on the site on which it was hosted.

It's human nature to want your beliefs validated by someone in a position of authority or fame. EVERYONE listens to radio that aligns with their sensibilities, aside from the people Media Matters pays to comb through conservative shows to find a quote to take out of context.
Click to expand...

I'd take that a step further. People who agree with the political slant of "All Things Considered" have a different manifestation of their sensibilities. They want to listen to a show that makes them feel good about the fact that they support the arts, they care about disadvantaged people and want to use other peoples' money to help the disadvantaged, and they want to feel like their side is accomplishing good things. So, if you listen to "All Things Considered" (or "Morning Edition"), you won't hear bad news stories that make the current administration look bad. You will hear lots of "puff piece" cultural stories. You'll hear stories with good news about some tree-hugger venture. If you hear a bad news story, it will be about something happening in the third world. In short, you'll hear an extremely well-crafted radio magazine format program that would make anyone who wears Birkenstocks happy.

And we shouldn't forget, what the vast majority of Americans want most from the media is distraction and entertainment.
 
Avid Listener said:
In short, you'll hear an extremely well-crafted radio magazine format program that would make anyone who wears Birkenstocks happy.
Click to expand...

What you really haven't said (or maybe I just missed it) is why YOU listen. Are you, like I've been saying, someone who listens for reasons other than political ideology? Because really when you look at the majority of the stories they cover in a typical ATC or ME, they don't deal much with politics.
 
Last edited:
TheBigA said:
What you really haven't said (or maybe I just missed it) is why YOU listen.
Click to expand...

Compared to the other crap that's on the air when I'm driving in rush hour, it's the least objectionable content on the air. It's bad, but everything else is worse. But then isn't that the driving principle behind broadcasting? Isn't the goal to be the "least objectionable program" on the air?

If all the contestants in a race for the best ratings really suck, then isn't the one that sucks the least the winner?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom