is AAR killing progtalk?

[NewsVet]

Exactly my point. You made the (false) claim that WLIB could be heard "clearly" in the five boroughs, but my point was that it can't be heard clearly in much of the metro area and therefore can never really compete with the 50.000 watt blowtorches in the metro ratings, which include millions of people outside the five boroughs.

But, when the news of the switch to WWRL was announced in August, HuffPo commentors said this:

For those in lower Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and S.I. you will still get AAR. The rest of us won't. WWRL 1600 has a much worse signal than WLIB especially at night. I live 40 miles from Manhattan and I have to stream it now anyway. Next month, I won't even get it in the car during the day. Whoopie!
By: skylinepro on August 04, 2006 at 01:32am

Not only is WWRL transmitter stronger, the higher frequency means the better coverage in the metro area.

WWRL has a 25,000W transmitter operating during the daylight hours, WLIB only had 10,000W.
By: shpilk on August 05, 2006 at 02:17am

On what planet does an AM signal at 1600 give you better coverage than one at 770? Here on earth, just the opposite is true!

And you quote a blogger as saying that WWRL "has a much worse signal than WLIB" and then use that as part of your argument that WWRL has "better coverage in the metro area"??? And black is white and up is down? Both these stations are DIRECTIONAL and if you look at the coverage patterns, you'll see that WWRL has worse coverage than WLIB overall, day and night. And, of course, neither station has coverage anywhere near WABC's.

 

[evnlee]

OK, I stand corrected on Marx, but apparently you've dropped all arguments as they relate to Air America.

for someone who disdains 'intellectual lazyness' ,that's pretty ironic.

Or, were you being 'intellectually dishonest'?

Game,Set, Match.

BTW~ you guys always ask for proof. Always. Then when I ask you to prove something, such as "eminent domain? show me one example of any AAR host taking the Kelo decision to task",or "show me an example of any AAR host refuting the inheritance tax as unconstitutional", y'all clam up.

Typical. RR, I hope you enjoyed the dismantling of Steve's dissertation.

 

[evnlee]

Exactly my point. You made the (false) claim that WLIB could be heard "clearly" in the five boroughs, but my point was that it can't be heard clearly in much of the metro area and therefore can never really compete with the 50.000 watt blowtorches in the metro ratings, which include millions of people outside the five boroughs.

But, when the news of the switch to WWRL was announced in August, HuffPo commentors said this:

For those in lower Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens and S.I. you will still get AAR. The rest of us won't. WWRL 1600 has a much worse signal than WLIB especially at night. I live 40 miles from Manhattan and I have to stream it now anyway. Next month, I won't even get it in the car during the day. Whoopie!
By: skylinepro on August 04, 2006 at 01:32am

Not only is WWRL transmitter stronger, the higher frequency means the better coverage in the metro area.

WWRL has a 25,000W transmitter operating during the daylight hours, WLIB only had 10,000W.
By: shpilk on August 05, 2006 at 02:17am

On what planet does an AM signal at 1600 give you better coverage than one at 770? Here on earth, just the opposite is true!

And you quote a blogger as saying that WWRL "has a much worse signal than WLIB" and then use that as part of your argument that WWRL has "better coverage in the metro area"??? And black is white and up is down? Both these stations are DIRECTIONAL and if you look at the coverage patterns, you'll see that WWRL has worse coverage than WLIB overall, day and night. And, of course, neither station has coverage anywhere near WABC's.

NewsVet, calm down. Deep breaths. Happy place.

Like I said, I thought that WLIB had a decent signal. If that is not true, I apologise and I was wrong. I included the HuffPo posters to attempt to show you that there is a misunderstanding of those signals, not to say that they were the truth. I do not live in NYC, and I was going on the assumption that WLIB's signal was competetive with WABC's. Obviously, some other people thought the same way.

Let me phrase the question as thus: what happens to the ratings if ( hypothetically speaking ) Curtis and Kuby in the Morning move from thier slot on WABC to WLIB? Would thier ratings compare to those of AAR? Would they be pulling a 0.8 share as well?

 

[steve90031]

Or, were you being 'intellectually dishonest'?

Game,Set, Match.

BTW~ you guys always ask for proof. Always. Then when I ask you to prove something, such as "eminent domain? show me one example of any AAR host taking the Kelo decision to task",or "show me an example of any AAR host refuting the inheritance tax as unconstitutional", y'all clam up.

Eminent domain is in the constitution. You may not agree with it or recent Supreme Court decisions, but it is there. There is no inheritence tax in this country. It is an ESTATE tax. It is charged to the estate of the deceased, not the inheritors.

Once again, evnlee/radio realist/marxist...you won one point. That's it.

[/quote]

 

[Radio_Realist]

RR, I hope you enjoyed the dismantling of Steve's dissertation.

I did. But even more enjoyable was Steve's continuing demonstration of why those who espouse the liberal point of view find it so difficult to attract listeners. Steve's contributions in this thread sound just like those of the liberal radio talk show hosts whose programs I have sampled. It doesn't matter if a station is at the high or low end of the AM band, if it is 1,000 watts or 50,000 watts, if the content of what is being broadcast includes the message that Steve has been transmitting in here, combined with his smarmy and unlikeable manner, not very many people are going to tune in.

And, if AAR or any other liberal talk network were to start out on a crappy, low-powered station on the wrong end of the radio dial, if it showed any signs of life, if within the small geographic footprint where it could be received it drew well, then one of those who operate the 50,000 watt stations with good positions on the dial would have jumped on the bandwagon.

The challenge AAR faced in New York City wasn't to outperform the programming on the strong stations. All they had to do was to not embarrass themselves and demonstrate enough drawing power for one of the big stations to pick them up. That's it. And, if there was some merit, some glimmer of drawing power in their programming, they'd have succeeded.

They didn't fail because the deck was stacked against them. They didn't fail because they were on a bad station. They didn't fail because of any conspiracy against them. AAR failed because they just weren't very good.

 

[steve90031]

[
]
You know evnlee after reading what you wrote, lets look at this, since you want a response.


1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

eminent domain? show me one example of any AAR host taking the Kelo decision to task.

Eminent Domain is not the same thing as abolition of private property. It was in our constitution close about 75 years prior to Marx.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

yeah, we never hear that one on AAR. :

We have one of the lowest top tax rates in the world. I think there are differing views of this on Air America as on other stations. Few people call our tax rates "heavy."

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

death tax? hello? show me an example of any AAR host refuting the inheritance tax as unconstitutional.

the ESTATE tax is not the same thing as abolition of all rights of inheritance. After the exemptions allowed, it affects few people.

Apparently you didn't respond to the rest.....


4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralisation of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools.

Now, get back to me with the proof I request.

And Radio Realist/evnlee/Marxist...you guys can have talk radio.
We now have congress...truly game, set match.....
[/quote]

 

[NewsVet]

Like I said, I thought that WLIB had a decent signal. If that is not true, I apologise and I was wrong. I included the HuffPo posters to attempt to show you that there is a misunderstanding of those signals, not to say that they were the truth. I do not live in NYC, and I was going on the assumption that WLIB's signal was competetive with WABC's. Obviously, some other people thought the same way.

Let me phrase the question as thus: what happens to the ratings if ( hypothetically speaking ) Curtis and Kuby in the Morning move from thier slot on WABC to WLIB? Would thier ratings compare to those of AAR? Would they be pulling a 0.8 share as well?

If you go back and read some of the posts on AirAmericaPlace or Randi Rhodes' fan board, you'll find many complaints about WLIB's signal and even more now that most of AAR's programming has moved to WWRL. As for the liberal Kuby and his conservative co-host, I suspect that they'd get about a 1.4 share on WLIB in the overall ratings, the same as AAR got at one point. I'm assuming that at least some of the fan base that they've built up over the years would be willing to strain to hear them over the static as they drove in from Jersey or Queens. And of course Kuby and Curtis would soundly beat the current morning team on WWRL, conservative Armstrong Williams and liberal Sam Greenfield, neither of whom is very good and neither of whom have anything to do with Air America. By the way, much as I'd like AAR to succeed, their current "network" lineup is pretty weak -- the best talent they have, Thom Hartmann, isn't even on WWRL and his weekday show was never on WLIB.

 

[Ultimajock]

Rush did start his talk show career on 50 kw KFBK in Sacramento (Mkt #26). But he had previously been successful in Top 40 radio in Pittsburg

...put down the pipe, pal. Limbaugh was canned in Pittsburgh more times than Iron City Beer and returned to Cape Girardeau as an abject failure...how does a broadcasting "success" go years between shows and has to take a job with a baseball team to make his daily bread?...

 

[country24]

"Limbaugh was canned in Pittsburgh more times than Iron City Beer and returned to Cape Girardeau as an abject failure"

Limbaugh, and lots of other Top 40 DJ's, were canned for being controversial in a day when PD's were scared to death of the FCC. If he had been fired becaue he was a failure, one firing would have put him out of business. As it was, he was usuaslly picked up by another station who wanted his talent for attracting listeners.

"How does a broadcasting 'success' go years between shows and has to take a job with a baseball team to make his daily bread?"

He got out of the radio business because he was tired of all the garbage he had to put up with and went into the public relations profession in Kansas City, not Cape Girardeau. Several years later he decided to get back into radio with a different kind of programming, and a 50.000 watt station in Market #26 gave him a job. That kind of opportunity isn't usually afforded someone who is an "abject failure." An where he went from Sacramento is history.

 

[Ultimajock]

Limbaugh, and lots of other Top 40 DJ's, were canned for being controversial in a day when PD's were scared to death of the FCC.

...Limbaugh kept getting fired in Pittsburgh because he repeatedly broke format and played The Rolling Stones' "Under My Thumb" out of rotation. (Figures he'd jeopardise his job over one of the most sexist POS hits there ever was!) Limbaugh worked for WIXZ in 1971, moving to KQV in 1972 and scurrying back to Missouri with his tail between his legs a year and a half after that. If he *was* a success as a Top 40 jock, he'd have been cut a helluva lot more slack in order for the station to hold onto him (I guess he couldn't steal *that* from Lujack, could he?)...Limbaugh only got into talk radio because KFBK needed a quick "right wing jerk" host to replace Mort Downey. Then Ed McLaughlin shoehorned him into a syndication deal and peddled him to one-lung POS daytimers that couldn't draw flies (and, now that they claim such a pile of crap, can draw a lot of flies). Well, Limbaugh has proven it's possible to do a hypocritical show while stoned out of your head, so I guess he deserves *some* credit...

 

[evnlee]

Once again, evnlee/radio realist/marxist...you won one point. That's it.

But, it's a pretty important point. I understand why you are embarrassed.

RR said "When you preach a doctrine that achieving success is the result of being lucky in winning life's lottery instead of success being what you achieve by your own efforts, you're only going to attract listeners who believe that you achieve success by having it given to you by the government."

And you brought in the subject of 'Marxism', asking for proof.

When it was provided, you argued against said proof, exposing your own intellectual lazyness or dishonesty.

Go on back to the sports board, Steve. You are in over your head in here :

 

[redneckriviera]

Actually, Radio_Realist brought Marxism into the thread in response to one of my comments.

I'll be surprised if this entry survives the moderator, since most of my attempts to defend liberal-progressive talk radio have been deleted; apparently one has to be a Dittohead to participate.

Fortunately the eventual success of lib-talk won't be decided by rightwingers. What we've seen these past few years is only the beginning.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Actually, Radio_Realist brought Marxism into the thread in response to one of my comments.

Actually, I threw it in as an aside, and you pounced on it like a hungry dog on red meat.

since most of my attempts to defend liberal-progressive talk radio have been deleted;

That's because your attempts were to defend liberal/socialist politics, not the talk hosts who espouse that viewpoint. And, your defenses usually consisted of nit-picking on terminology instead of relating your comments to talk radio.

In short, you supported your position in the same manner that liberal talk show hosts present their positions -- in a manner that isn't conducive to gathering receptive listeners or readers.