group formed to save lib talk in Boston Boston Herald

[MarcB]

No station will work on 1510. It will costs several million to buy the place and hundred thousand to rent the tower.

 

[Eli Polonsky]

No station will work on 1510. It will costs several million to buy the place and hundred thousand to rent the tower.

I've heard that the tower site rental is $25k/month, and the monthly electric bill for a 24/7 50kW AM is just about that much. In addition to the purchase price, the ongoing high overhead has so far scared away all potential new buyers or operators from 1510, especially for starting up formats that have not been proven to make enough profit to cover such expenses.

Sporting News Radio has sold other failing stations elsewhere and I'd think they would want to sell 1510, but I'm guessing no one is willing step up to buy it once they see what kinds of burdens the package includes. The station is considered a financial black hole. Meanwhile, SNR is running it automated off the bird, to coast by while losing as little money on it as possible.

 

[trifecta123]

Defenders of liberal talk fight to keep it on airwaves
By Jesse Noyes
Boston Herald Business Reporter
Saturday, December 30, 2006

A newly formed local group is planning to fight a decision by radio broadcaster Clear Channel to drop liberal talk from Boston’s airwaves.

It's always interesting to see those of who preach against the evils of capitalism fail miserbly in a capitalist based nation. They should just do what comes natural and go grovel to the government to give them subsidies to stay afloat. Ya see, in a healthy and free market economy if the people don't like your product then it doesn't survive, as with the case of "progressive" radio. The people and the market have spoken! It's now time to let Darwin run its natural course and put "progressive" radio out of its misery.

 

[johnster]

It seems to me a more realistic petition would be to ask Clear Channel to put it on as an HD2 of Kiss or Jamn once the Alliance runs out. The cost of HD radios continues to come down. All these stations will be looking for real formats obviously Clear Channel did think they could get some audience with it at some point. The programing is cheap and requires very little local work so their costs would still be low. Most of the folks in this movement could easily buy radios if this is something they really want to hear. It's a win, win situation to give the format a second chance. Or the group starts raising money now so that it can buy, program, sell a small AM signal or anyone's HD2 when the time comes. The thing is no own owes you anything. So loose that mentality right away. Your either asking or your acting.

 

[Varulven]

Bill Maher

Al Franken hurt the cause. He cost too much money and he was a bore.

Bill Maher or Michael Moore or Cindy Sheehan - people who can communicate and inspire - can take back the mainstream media. NPR is so dull sometimes.

Trifecta123, a new poster, seems to ignore the fact that NPR gets huge ratings, certainly they must outdistance WRKO. Plus, this is not "capitalism", per se, we must come up for a new name for it. Perhaps DICTATORSHIP.

Capitalism would work just fine with a little balance. Bill Gates, Donald Trump and The Bush Family are not the kind of people you want prying in to your private lives.

 

[trifecta123]

Re: Bill Maher

Trifecta123, a new poster, seems to ignore the fact that NPR gets huge ratings,

And partially government funded. They grovel for taxpayers' money to stay on the air. I rest my case. And thank you for admitting that NPR is biased news.

 

[Varulven]

I was actually baiting you. You are a newbie, you took the bait right quick.

NPR is news. You call it "biased" because they don't allow for the propaganda disguised as Democracy you get with Rush Limbaugh.

So your post is implying that Rush Limbaugh and Fox are...objective?

Any good lawyer would NEVER rest his case before proving his point.

 

[AKLes]

Any good lawyer would NEVER rest his case before proving his point.

Foul!

The use of "good" and "lawyer" in the same sentence is a felony in Taxachusetts!

 

[HHH]

A few points:

NPR news is "dull"? I suppose to those who are looking for theatrics in the commercial radio sense (people yelling, demonizing, calling people names, etc). Plus, it is (contrary to the stereotype) the only radio service where a point of view is generally presented by a qualified respresentative from both sides. Hold the clock on the segments, and you will find it pretty balanced.

As far as government aid is concerned for NPR, I don't disagree...this makes me uncomfortable. But also consider that "religious radio" like Family Radio, Moody Bible, etc, get government aid (in a roundabout way due to their "religious" status) to advance their overtly right-wing agenda. So it sort of balances out, although NPR is nowhere near as "overtly leftist" as religious radio is unabashed and unbridled right wing (often with no opposing view every offered).

Yes, Franken can be dull. Ernest, yes. "Entertaining"? Generally, no. I have said many times that Franken dryly reading a list of Tom DeLay's crimes pitted against Bill O'Reilly's silly "the libs are trying to eliminate Christmas" shtick illustrates how theatrics will triumph over substance every time in the commercial radio arena.

The new owners of AAR (or someone) should buy WWZN and go liberal talk, sell off the Waltham site, diplex with WMKI for a fantastic, salt-water 50K non-direction daytime signal, and do the best they can with a night directional from the same sight (which should at least cover Boston proper). Either that or go some kind of 35+ black format (mix of talk and music) from the same WMKI site. It should hit the Urban audience target area pretty well. Right now, WWZN is impossible to get into the black.

 

[raccoonradio]

The yahoo group started to get prog talk radio back in Boston has mentioned that people should
alert the Globe, Herald, and other media, and get a grass roots effort in. It's tough to say what station
it may land on--as I've said, if Mr. Bittner would like to put it on WJIB (but that would mean the end
of his music...last night, was talking to a distant relative who said he only recently discovered WJIB
and found he loves it: "I hated it when talk shows went on 1430, and when Spanish went on WESX...")

The other night while in N. Reading I noticed WWRL 1600 NYC was coming in
There's always trying to get one or two shows on a WTKK or WRKO...what else...?

 

[raccoonradio]

>>It's always interesting to see those of who preach against the evils of capitalism fail miserbly in a capitalist based nation. They should just do what comes natural and go grovel to the government to give them subsidies to stay afloat. Ya see, in a healthy and free market economy if the people don't like your product then it doesn't survive, as with the case of "progressive" radio.

Progressive radio totebags...donorships, a la public radio. Air America, supported by listeners like YOU...

In some places it has done OK, in some so-so, and in some horribly. One would think Boston would be a fertile
market for it but weak signals, not much promotion, no (OK, one for awhile) local shows, and maybe the quality of the shows--
though some have said the Jones shows like Miller and Schultz are good, and that Hartmann deserves to be
listened to...I briefly noticed Hartmann was on AM 870 out of Portland as I was driving on I-93 nr the Herald
building earlier today (he was talking about the attempt to save prog radio in Columbus, OH, then went into
his Brunch with Bernie Sanders segment...btw, of course several ME signals come in well on South Shore
and the way to the Cape: 560, 970, too; though there's a pirate around Quincy and Braintree on 870
which was running Laura Branigan music yesterday and James Taylor today...hmm...

 

[raccoonradio]

Not sure if Globe or Phoenix has gotten the word about this yet, but Herald did.
Note btw that networks can be "news" or "talk". A top of the hour newscast like Fox, ABC, CBS may or
may not necessarily be biased one way or the other, but a talk show can. Perhaps NPR news is as fair
and balanced as Fox is ...btw, can anyone provide a list of conservative talk hosts on NPR?

If good liberal talk radio is out there, like the shows I mentioned, I'm sure it will land on one station
or another, perhaps with a better signal. Will we eventually see stations that offer both left and
right-leaning shows? As long as the host can draw an audience and get ad dollars...What has a better chance of happening in Boston, libtalk getting on the air again, or the GOP getting more than 5 per cent of
officeholders? Liberals, liberals, everywhere, but not a host to hear (..except maybe on NPR?)

 

[Varulven]

Neggy's posts are valuable, though leaning a bit too Conservative, his voice should be heard here.

As for HHH's comments:

HHH Posts: 538

NPR news is "dull"? I suppose to those who are looking for theatrics in the commercial radio sense (people yelling, demonizing, calling people names, etc). Plus, it is (contrary to the stereotype) the only radio service where a point of view is generally presented by a qualified respresentative from both sides. Hold the clock on the segments, and you will find it pretty balanced.

I AGREE TO A POINT, HHH; HOWEVER, NPR comes off STUFFY and HOLIER THAN THOU. Intellectual, yes,
but one thing about intellect is the need for humor. Rush Limbaugh seemed to know that at the beginning,
until he became a walking parody. Humor must be balanced. Rush is condescending and all jokes now,
NPR is stuffy with little humor.

BALANCE makes the world comfortable.

The Government aid makes you uncomfortable:

As far as government aid is concerned for NPR, I don't disagree...this makes me uncomfortable. But also consider that "religious radio" like Family Radio, Moody Bible, etc, get government aid (in a roundabout way due to their "religious" status) to advance their overtly right-wing agenda.

HERE'S WHERE I AGREE WITH THE GOVERNMENT HELPING OUT NPR:

The Bush Regime wanted to infiltrate all of the news media with Propaganda, and their #1 target was NPR.
To bring balance back, with capitalistic Republican Corporations censoring voices (the CCC is as bad as the
KKK - Capitalist Corporations Censoring) the last thing we needed was Government subsidy for more Republican radio.

I don't have a problem with both sides being heard. Right now in a BLUE STATE we have
ALL REPUBLICAN RADIO. One shudders to think that in the Red States that's all they get a steady diet of.

We are talking about things vitally important here. Important for our democracy.

 

[raccoonradio]

>>under-represented

Maybe he can also pass a law making 5 of our 10 Congressmen (soon to be 9) from the other party...
fair is fair; just kidding! The Mass GOP was inept in getting politicians elected so they need a little
help from the government. CC was inept (or, more to the point, unwilling in their efforts) in running a prog.
talk station, so get some help from the government. Idea: go to Matthew Lesko for funding: "this year
the government is giving out BILLIONS OF DOLLARS! To people like you and me! So you can, like, open
up a coffee shop, start your own business, or work on your invention! Heck we could even find a way to
fund you so you can buy a radio station and put Noam Chomsky on it!"

 

[Finn]

NPR news is "dull"? I suppose to those who are looking for theatrics in the commercial radio sense (people yelling, demonizing, calling people names, etc).

If you get used to the higher energy/pace of commercial talk, I do think the pace of NPR can seem dull. I find that if I listen to NPR for a while, commercial is too loud and irritating, and if I listen to commercial talk for a while, NPR sounds dull. It's the same for different types of music.

As far as government aid is concerned for NPR, I don't disagree...this makes me uncomfortable. But also consider that "religious radio" like Family Radio, Moody Bible, etc, get government aid (in a roundabout way due to their "religious" status) to advance their overtly right-wing agenda. So it sort of balances out, although NPR is nowhere near as "overtly leftist" as religious radio is unabashed and unbridled right wing (often with no opposing view every offered).

NPR only gets about 1% of its budget from the government, according to Dan Kennedy: http://bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/dont_quote_me/multi-page/documents/04731986.asp
"...public radio is not nearly as dependent on government funding as public television is. The conservative critique of NPR is not new (you may recall that it was mocked as "Radio Managua" during the 1980s), and it’s hardly unusual for right-wingers to call for an end to public radio’s taxpayer subsidy. Yet, thanks in large measure to a $200 million bequest from the estate of McDonald’s heir Joan Kroc, as well as an upsurge in corporate underwriting (i.e., advertising), NPR today receives less than one percent of its annual budget of about $100 million from the CPB, the nonprofit, quasi-governmental agency that funds public-broadcasting ventures."

Plus, it is (contrary to the stereotype) the only radio service where a point of view is generally presented by a qualified respresentative from both sides. Hold the clock on the segments, and you will find it pretty balanced.

Their listening audience is fairly diverse. Again:

"Andi Sporkin, NPR’s vice-president for communications, says her organization has done surveys of its own that show its audience is approximately one-third liberal, one-third conservative, and one-third middle-of-the-road. 'They wouldn’t be tuning in if they felt NPR went one way or the other,' she says of her conservative and centrist listeners. 'You hear from listeners, you hear from elected officials, that they listen to NPR because it doesn’t offer a particular partisan stance. There’s a sense of having a place where different voices are sought, diversity of opinion is sought, and issues are covered in depth.'"

In other words, elites of all stripes - that is conservative elites, independent elites, and liberal elites, listen to NPR.

To suggest that WBUR and WGBH are the liberal equivalent to WTKK and WRKO in Boston is a joke. This was abundently clear when the tunnel collapsed - WRKO et al were pounding on the MTA and loving Mitt Romney from 6 am until 10 pm, while WKOX and WXKS were talking about the war with their syndicated programming, and WBUR and WGBH were speaking in modulated tones and respectfully interviewing all points of view.

As the election showed, there are many independent voters who would love to hear an alternate point of view, who are not NPR listeners, i.e. they do not identify with the elite establishment.

And, yes, contrary to what O'Reilly, Limbaugh, et al, say, there is a conservative elite and they have done a great job of masking their elitism by pretending they 'are one' with blue collar workers, as they drive to their office parks in their shiny pickup trucks that they use to pull their power boats that they sit in on weekends drinking Coors while they listen to right-wing talk radio for entertainment (NPR to get the news) and imagine that they could plow the back 40 if they really, really had to, if only they knew how to drive a tractor. (don't get me started. oops, guess I did).

 

[exxear]

I've been reading a whole bunch of "this group should do this", that group should buy that", formats that should be on, formats that should be off, etc. Isn't the answer always going to be about MONEY. I don't see any major change being made unless a profit can be made from it. Who is going to come into the market and dump a bunch of money into ANY kind of format, liberal, conserative, ethnic or whatever, and watch the cash go down the drain? Unless there's a benefactor out there with Bill Gates-type deep pockets that absolutely doesn't care if a profit is made, I just don't see anything significant happening unless there's MONEY to be made.

 

[Neggy]

I guess my opinions are not in held in high regards by certain un named parties.

Joe I am more libertarian than conservative, but I appreciate the support.

lets see how long this one lasts

 

[Neggy]

we need lib talk radio, I may not listen to it all the time, I may not agree with it, but I think it is valuable to have all opinions heard.

my post count should be 509, if not..you figure it out

 

[raccoonradio]

By the way http://ltradio.blogspot.com has some "advice for AAR/prog. talk" (in addition to other
suggestions that have been made--stronger signals, more promotion, local content). It includes:
"Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy should lighten up", "Al Franken is really boring", and the fact that they
pursued a win-elections, influence-opinions agenda rather than trying to be entertaining (do the
conservatalkers have an agenda to try and win elections? Maybe, but not at the expense of
entertaining). The blogmaster is a liberal btw, in case you're wondering. Another entry in the blog
points out that Mitt Romney is not to be blamed for CC's decisions as he had "cashed out"
of Bain Capital over 5 yrs ago.

 

[PaulBWalkerJr]

When the format is around, people don't do anything to support.

Yet, when it's gone.. they piss and moan like they are owed something....