• 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

Just the facts ma'am

JerryStevens

JerryStevens

<div align"justify"><font face=arial size=2>I prefer to read about a larger variety of topics than about the conservative versus liberal talk. But since it's obviously going to continue to dominate this board, let's more research and less shoot-from-the-hip vitriol.

I decided to do my own research to check what I consider to be dubious assertions made over and over again. I avoided any overtly political sources. This is difficult to do. As someone said recently on this board: "You can't take the politics out of a discussion of political talk radio." I disagree. But it's hard to get people to go along. I'll try anyway.

Note: Each point contains a link

Dubious assertion #1: "Air America is a failing format kept afloat by large Democrat donors."


Dubious assertion #2: "Air America Ratings are bad and they will go away.


Dubious assertion #3: "Rush Limbaugh was funded by conservatives too."


Dubious assertion #4: "It took Rush Limbaugh a long time to get any ratings"

If you have a logical dispute, please email it to me and I'll post them (if the length is reasonable)

Do have a political opinion you'd like to share? Please email it to <font color="red">[That email was completely UNNECESSARY]

Edited by cabradio on 06/19/05 05:37 AM.</font>

<font color=blue>* Noted and I accede to your moderator-ness but under mild protest. I thought it a very mild expletive, a variant of which is used by at least one other moderator. Example here.</font>

<P ID"signature">______________
Jerry

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - <a href"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Moynihan">late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</a></P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Jerry Stevens on 06/19/05 06:02 AM.</FONT></P>
 
> I prefer to read about a larger variety of topics than about
> the conservative versus liberal talk. But since it's
> obviously going to continue to dominate this board, let's
> try a lot more research and a lot less shoot-from-the-hip
> vitriole.
>
> I decided to do my own research to check what I consider to
> be dubious assertions made over and over again. I avoided
> any overtly political sources. This is difficult to do. As
> someone said recently on this board: "You can't take the
> politics out of a discussion of political talk radio." I
> disagree. But it's hard to get people to go along. I'll try
> anyway.

Whoever said that is right. It is impossible to take the politics out of talk radio since probably 75% of all talk shows are about politics and/or current events. But there's no excuse for the flame-fests.

The others (such as Kim Kommando, Clark Howard, the sports & financial shows, etc.) won't generate too much interest on a general-purpose talk radio board. Their shows are too specialized. And, of course, Radio-Info has a separate sports-talk board already.

> Dubious assertion #1: "Air America is a failing format kept afloat by large Democrat donors."

Whoever is providing the money at this time is entitled to do exactly that. This is a free country and anyone has the right to invest in a business as they see fit. Liberals like money just as much as conservatives & moderates do. Al Franken & Randi Rhodes aren't working for free, and the people investing in AAR do expect a profit somewhere down the road. It may not be their only motiviation, but I'm sure they're not in business to lose money over the long-term.

> Dubious assertion #2: "Air America Ratings are bad and they will go away.

AAR and the others may not have Limbaugh-esqe numbers yet, but neither did Limbaugh during his first year.

But they won't be going away anytime soon. I thought they wouldn't make it once the election was over, but obviously I was wrong (and, for the record, I like fries with my crow :D ).

Liberal talk radio checks & balances conservative talkers. It'll happen even more in the coming years, especially come the 2008 election year. Hopefully, over the long term, this balance will keep everybody honest. There is still too little fact-checking on both sides of the political aisle.

> Dubious assertion #3: "Rush Limbaugh was funded by conservatives too."

Limbaugh's beginnings as a national talk-show host are well known (as you document in your article). I've never heard anyone with an ounce of knowledge about the subject say he was funded by "conservatives."

> Dubious assertion #4: "It took Rush Limbaugh a long time to get any ratings"

He did start out on some smaller stations early-on. But once he got on WLS Chicago (1989) and KFI Los Angeles (1991), he really started taking off.

> If you have any logical disputes, please email them to me
> and I'l post them (if the length is reasonable) If you want
> to express a political opinion, send it to
> [email protected]
>
 
I read an article some time ago where a liberal columnist proudly stated that "Republican operatives" bankrolled Limbaugh until he became profitable. The info on Mclaughlin is accurate, he had a very distinguised career with ABC, and singlehandedly kept Paul Harvey from jumping ship in the late 80s.

The thing about Dr. Dean Edell, he was and is a one hour show at a really weird time (4-5 eastern, which would mean interrupting a show)and I really wonder if anyone clears him live anymore.

My simple answer about any liberal or other host..the hosts have to get ratings and a following as individuals.




> > I prefer to read about a larger variety of topics than
> about
> > the conservative versus liberal talk. But since it's
> > obviously going to continue to dominate this board, let's
> > try a lot more research and a lot less shoot-from-the-hip
> > vitriole.
> >
> > I decided to do my own research to check what I consider
> to
> > be dubious assertions made over and over again. I avoided
> > any overtly political sources. This is difficult to do. As
>
> > someone said recently on this board: "You can't take the
> > politics out of a discussion of political talk radio." I
> > disagree. But it's hard to get people to go along. I'll
> try
> > anyway.
>
> Whoever said that is right. It is impossible to take the
> politics out of talk radio since probably 75% of all talk
> shows are about politics and/or current events. But there's
> no excuse for the flame-fests.
>
> The others (such as Kim Kommando, Clark Howard, the sports &
> financial shows, etc.) won't generate too much interest on a
> general-purpose talk radio board. Their shows are too
> specialized. And, of course, Radio-Info has a separate
> sports-talk board already.
>
> > Dubious assertion #1: "Air America is a failing format
> kept afloat by large Democrat donors."
>
> Whoever is providing the money at this time is entitled to
> do exactly that. This is a free country and anyone has the
> right to invest in a business as they see fit. Liberals
> like money just as much as conservatives & moderates do. Al
> Franken & Randi Rhodes aren't working for free, and the
> people investing in AAR do expect a profit somewhere down
> the road. It may not be their only motiviation, but I'm
> sure they're not in business to lose money over the
> long-term.
>
> > Dubious assertion #2: "Air America Ratings are bad and
> they will go away.
>
> AAR and the others may not have Limbaugh-esqe numbers yet,
> but neither did Limbaugh during his first year.
>
> But they won't be going away anytime soon. I thought they
> wouldn't make it once the election was over, but obviously I
> was wrong (and, for the record, I like fries with my crow :D
> ).
>
> Liberal talk radio checks & balances conservative talkers.
> It'll happen even more in the coming years, especially come
> the 2008 election year. Hopefully, over the long term, this
> balance will keep everybody honest. There is still too
> little fact-checking on both sides of the political aisle.
>
> > Dubious assertion #3: "Rush Limbaugh was funded by
> conservatives too."
>
> Limbaugh's beginnings as a national talk-show host are well
> known (as you document in your article). I've never heard
> anyone with an ounce of knowledge about the subject say he
> was funded by "conservatives."
>
> > Dubious assertion #4: "It took Rush Limbaugh a long time
> to get any ratings"
>
> He did start out on some smaller stations early-on. But
> once he got on WLS Chicago (1989) and KFI Los Angeles
> (1991), he really started taking off.
>
> > If you have any logical disputes, please email them to me
> > and I'l post them (if the length is reasonable) If you
> want
> > to express a political opinion, send it to
> > <font color="red">[edit]</font> >
>
<P ID="signature">______________
"There ain't no reason to fight over a woman. There's two more down the street!".."Senisble Don", 700 WLW</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by cabradio on 06/19/05 05:49 AM.</FONT></P>
 
I don't know if you noticed since I failed to note it at first, but each question points to a link. Some of it elaborates on points you made.

As far as my failure once again to persuade someone that you can take the politics out of a discussion about talk radio, let me try one more time:

Politics is just the platform no which to build entertainment. Reading this board I wonder: If I were to write about "On The Garden Line", would I get flamed for writing about the merits of planting begonias versus marigolds?<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
 
> I don't know if you noticed since I failed to note it at
> first, but each question points to a link. Some of it
> elaborates on points you made.

Yes I did notice, and I read your entire article.

> As far as my failure once again to persuade someone that you
> can take the politics out of a discussion about talk radio,
> let me try one more time:
>
> Politics is just the platform no which to build
> entertainment. Reading this board I wonder: If I were to
> write about "On The Garden Line", would I get flamed for
> writing about the merits of planting begonias versus
> marigolds?

If you were to write about "On the Garden Line," you probably would get few, if any, replies. Gardening interests only a relatively small subset of the public.

Political talk radio is about politics, which should be of at least some interest to everybody since it affects everybody. The hosts may be there to entertain and draw an audience to their advertisers, but the subject matter is not entertainment. It's about our country, our government and our tax dollars, and what the hosts think about those subjects. People will get passionate about their beliefs and their favorite talk show, whether it's Rush, Franken, or whomever. Personally, I think this is a good thing unless the personal insults start flying. Then, the line is crossed.

We'll have to agree to disagree here since I don't think we'll convince each other to change our minds. There's no disrespect intended. I just don't agree with you that you can separate the hosts and their listeners (including people who post here) from their political beliefs.
 
How about some funny facts

Station owners really do put what THEY want to hear on the air....we all know this (at least anyone spending time in a market UNDER 200)

For example, KYVA Grants, NM

The owner George hated country music, his general manager Sammy did too.

They both loved the beatles and would snap along in their office to the AM station.

They both wanted to do a "show" together....that word show is somewhat of a stretch.

They both couldn't do a country or top 40 show....

In moves, Rockin Oldies KYVA....and guess what with...."George and Sammy" every Friday morning (think they still do even with a 24/7 bird on)

George and Sammy wanted oldies and they put it on....for this I must say they did well with 3 FM country and 2 AM Navajo countries in the market....came out as a #2 or #3 every book. So oldies was a good idea. This is also the same market that had no top 40...someone flipped and has been #1 ever since....and George and Sammy scratched their heads....


Here is the funny....I programmed two of their sister stations....one classic rock and one Hot AC

(as we all know in small towns) Sports came into the fold....

One morning, during the Friday fun show....they called us in.

"We think we should do our Friday night games on KXXI (the classic rock station) to get them off KYVA (our fun times oldies station). The listeners think it is a great idea."

a reply of...."Really. How do we know the listeners think its a great idea?"

"We took a poll. The response was 80% to 20%"

a reply of...."When did we do this poll?"

"We did it this morning...didn't you listen?"

at this time the three of us (dubbed the Indiana Mafia) just left the studio and shook our heads....

OK...I see the puzzled look and the "Where's the Funny?"

Remember they were on KYVA (their personal baby good time oldies station) and took a phone in poll with the question....

"Should High School football be on 93X?"

Amazingly, KYVA listeners thought it was a great idea to move sports down the dial.

All three of us should have left that day....

One of us turned in our notice about a month later....

The same day one walked out.....

I (like a fool) stayed for two years and beat my head against the wall everyday



Moral of the story is......

If Salem has a station....and they want conservative talk....SRN it is

If Newsweb has a station...and they want progressive talk....AAR it is


If George and Sammy want to do a 3 hour oldies dedication show and they have a station......OLDIES IT IS......

Uh...so the moral is owners suck...always have and always will....until we are one....then we KNOW EVERYTHING BEFORE ANYONE EVEN THINKS IT!!!

(I am sure the owners take that last one and insert "jocks/cattle" in there)
 
Here's another dubious assertion: "Liberals don't listen to talk radio, or if they do, they listen to NPR, so they have no reason to switch to Air America programming."

But I personally know many liberals who listen to Rush Limbaugh, because they "love to hate" him. And Randi Rhodes has said that many conservatives listen to her, because they "love to hate" her.

And just today, I read this in the Arizona Republic:

"The criticism of Air America, as with conservative talk-radio, is that the ideological hosts are preaching to the choir.

Rhodes disputes that, saying she gets converts on her show on Air America.

Harrison of Talkers magazine said it is a myth that only conservatives listen to someone like Limbaugh and follow in lockstep behind him.

'Half of Limbaugh's audience loves to hate him,' said Harrison, adding that pundits give far too much credit to the power of talk radio."

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0618leftyradio18.html
 
> Here's another dubious assertion: "Liberals don't listen to
> talk radio, or if they do, they listen to NPR, so they have
> no reason to switch to Air America programming."

Yeah, I have read that one too. I'll add it (with attribution) to my list. (We can save a lot of time and space. Every time someone throws out one of these nuggets, we can point 'em to the "Dustbin Of Dubious Assertions".

I'm libertarian not liberal and I like to listen to AAR but I wince every time I hear them* say "I know you right-winger lurkers are out there to get your hate fix." I'm sure some conservative somewhere does the same thing (sounds like something Savage would do) but I know Limbaugh and Hannity will generally acknowledge liberal listeners without insulting them for listening.

I don't care if you're liberal or conservative, if you're only listening to one viewpoint, you're just <font color="red">[edit]</font> your mind. The show hosts should be more accomodating.

*"them" was Mike Malloy and someone else on Morning Sedition.
<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P><P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by cabradio on 06/19/05 05:45 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Get your facts straight, dude

You haven't done your homework either, pal. First, "Air America Radio" is the correct name of the company; not "Air America." Air America is the name of a movie and a company that manufacturers paintball shooters.

Air America Radio is a program producer and syndicator, not a format. Air America Radio provides programs to radio stations. The format is called "progressive talk." However, not all stations which carry Air America Radio programs are progressive talk stations; some are talk or news-talk stations broadcasting a mix of conservative, iberal and other talk programming.

The most successful progressive talk program is Ed Schultz, which has no connection with Air America Radio. Nearly all stations which carry some Air Amercia Radio programming carry two or three talk programs on weekdays from other sources (Jones Radio, Premiere, WOR Networks among others). All progressive talk stations but one are independent of Air America Radio.

Air America Radio does have large Democratic donors. Since the company, by it's own admission, is not yet in the black, it is fair to say the donors keep them afloat.

Progressive talk ratings are not that good yet. And the long-term survival of Air America Radio as a program provider is not a sure thing. I would give better odds on the survival of the progressive talk format but no guarantees here either. Like "Jack," progressive talk is still something of a radio novelty.

I have never heard #3. Did you make those up for the sake of arguement?

It did take Rush time ("long time" is a somewhat vague term) to build up a station list and to build his numbers on individual stations. Rush started out in relatively few markets, often on smaller stations and his program was often aired on delay in the evening or on weekends at first.

I don't see much difference between political true believers of the left or right who say: progressive talk with succeed/fail because it is good/bad and I want it to succeed/fail. You're talking politics, not radio.

OK, you're not a radio person; you're a political person. Politcal types never let facts get in the way of a good argument.




>
> Dubious assertion #1: "Air America is a failing format kept
> afloat by large Democrat donors."
> Dubious assertion #2: "Air America Ratings are bad and they
> will go away.
> Dubious assertion #3: "Rush Limbaugh was funded by
> conservatives too."
> Dubious assertion #4: "It took Rush Limbaugh a long time to
> get any ratings"
>
 
Dude. Pal. Fred. Resp. Jerry.

<font face=arial size=3><div align="justify">"You haven't done your homework either, pal."

And a great big hello to you too! Great to hear from you!

Dude? Pal? You can call me Jerry. It's my real name. Speaking of names, I liked it better when you went by "Fred Flintstone". Why the change? Is it permanent or do you switch back and forth?

First, "Air America Radio" is the correct name of the company; not "Air America." Air America is the name of a movie and a company that manufacturers paintball shooters.

(Hand slapping forehead) Oh my God, what have I done?! Hey, you forgot to mention that Air America is also "an airline secretly controlled by the CIA that supplied covert operations in Southeast Asia during the Second Indochina War. Source: Wikipedia It's "shorthand", an abbreviated version of the full name. Do you get upset when people refer to radio-info<u>.com</u> as radio-info? How about Delta Airlines. Do you go around correcting people who say "Delta" instead of "Delta Airlines"? Just look at all the Deltas! We got a faucet company, a college, a dental plan, an electronics company.. and on and on... whew. This is very confusing isn't it?

"Air America Radio is a program producer and syndicator, not a format. Air America Radio provides programs to radio stations.

And Kleenex is a brand name and not a product. Do your undies tie up in knots every time someone refuses to say "facial tissue" instead of Kleenex?

The format is called "progressive talk."

Some people call it Progressive Talk. Some call it liberal talk. Isn't it presumptious to think that a non-liberal would agree to the name change? Whether or not the movement is progressive or regressive is a matter of perspective. If conservatives decide they want to be known from this point forward as "enlightened", will you go along with it? I think not.

"However, not all stations which carry Air America Radio programs are progressive talk stations; some are talk or news-talk stations broadcasting a mix of conservative, liberal and other talk programming."

We've covered this elsewhere but it bears repeating. So-called Conservative talk stations carry everything from ABC Newsfeeds, to Gardening Shows to Computer Shows and Financial advice shows. They are still called conservative talk stations except by highly anal-retentive types who call them conservative-gardening-news-financial-computer-talk stations.

"The most successful progressive talk program is Ed Schultz, which has no connection with Air America Radio. Nearly all stations which carry some Air Amercia Radio programming carry two or three talk programs on weekdays from other sources (Jones Radio, Premiere, WOR Networks among others). All progressive talk stations but one are independent of Air America Radio."

My aren't we condescending? Do you think this is informative. Did you know it's been all over the trades that Radioactive LLC is purchasing Ed Schultz' Show?
As I've said, as do a lot of people, I have used AAR as a kind of shorthand for liberal talk radio. But if it's going to be this upsetting to you, I'm willing to reconsider.

"Air America Radio does have large Democratic donors. Since the company, by
it's own admission, is not yet in the black, it is fair to say the donors keep them afloat.

I was able to find sources that say investors are Democrats (no surprise there) but was unable to find any reliable source that says Democrats are making donations. If you can source that for me, I'd like to add it to my Q&A. Who are they and how much do the contribute? Where is this published?

"I have never heard #3. Did you make those up for the sake of arguement?"

You accuse <u>me</u> of looking for arguments? You are beginning to test my patience... but (deep breath)... here you are: The most recent reference to this DB (dubious claim) is "Rich conservatives and conservative companies backed people like limbaugh early-on...so what is wrong with rich liberals throwing their money around? Are you against rich people?" Link here

It did take Rush time ("long time" is a somewhat vague term)to build up a station list and to build his numbers on individual stations. Rush started out in relatively few markets, often on smaller stations and his program was often
aired on delay in the evening or on weekends at first.

Yes, "long time" is somewhat vague. Thank you for adding the even vaguer "relatively" few markets and "smaller" stations. The great thing about being vague is that it doesn't require any research and is immune to correction. You may be right that Limbaugh was "often aired on delay in the evening or on weekends at first" but I don't know which stations they were. I don't suppose you can cite a source can you?

"I don't see much difference between political true believers of the left or right who say: progressive talk with succeed/fail because it is good/bad and I want it to succeed/fail. You're talking politics, not radio."

Sometime when I have a couple of free hours, I'll diagram that sentence and figure out what it means.

"OK, you're not a radio person; you're a political person. Politcal types never let facts get in the way of a good argument.

Weeellll. Hookay, resp er Fred or whatever your name is. Thanks for yet another fascinating observation.<P ID="signature">______________
Jerry

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
 
Re: Dude. Pal. Fred. Resp. Jerry.

> "You haven't done your homework either, pal."
>
> And a great big hello to you too! Great to hear from you!
>
> Dude? Pal? You can call me Jerry. It's my real name.
> Speaking of names, I liked it better when you went by "Fred
> Flintstone". Why the change? Is it permanent or do you
> switch back and forth?
>
> First, "Air America Radio" is the correct name of the
> company; not "Air America." Air America is the name of a
> movie and a company that manufacturers paintball shooters.
>
> (Hand slapping forehead) Oh my God, what have I done?! Hey,
> you forgot to mention that Air America is also "an airline
> secretly controlled by the CIA that supplied covert
> operations in Southeast Asia during the Second Indochina
> War. Source: Wikipedia It's "shorthand", an abbreviated
> version of the full name. Do you get upset when people refer
> to radio-info.com as radio-info? How about Delta Airlines.
> Do you go around correcting people who say "Delta" instead
> of "Delta Airlines"? Just look at all the Deltas! We got a
> faucet company, a college, a dental plan, an electronics
> company.. and on and on... whew. This is very confusing
> isn't it?
>
> "Air America Radio is a program producer and syndicator, not
> a format. Air America Radio provides programs to radio
> stations.
>
> And Kleenex is a brand name and not a product. Do your
> undies tie up in knots every time someone refuses to say
> "facial tissue" instead of Kleenex?
>
> The format is called "progressive talk."
>
> Some people call it Progressive Talk. Some call it liberal
> talk. Isn't it presumptious to think that a non-liberal
> would agree to the name change? Whether or not the movement
> is progressive or regressive is a matter of perspective. If
> conservatives decide they want to be known from this point
> forward as "enlightened", will you go along with it? I think
> not.
>
> "However, not all stations which carry Air America Radio
> programs are progressive talk stations; some are talk or
> news-talk stations broadcasting a mix of conservative,
> liberal and other talk programming."
>
> We've covered this elsewhere but it bears repeating.
> So-called Conservative talk stations carry everything from
> ABC Newsfeeds, to Gardening Shows to Computer Shows and
> Financial advice shows. They are still called conservative
> talk stations except by highly anal-retentive types who call
> them conservative-gardening-news-financial-computer-talk
> stations.
>
> "The most successful progressive talk program is Ed Schultz,
> which has no connection with Air America Radio. Nearly all
> stations which carry some Air Amercia Radio programming
> carry two or three talk programs on weekdays from other
> sources (Jones Radio, Premiere, WOR Networks among others).
> All progressive talk stations but one are independent of Air
> America Radio."
>
> My aren't we condescending? Do you think this is
> informative. Did you know it's been all over the trades that
> Radioactive LLC is purchasing Ed Schultz' Show?
> As I've said, as do a lot of people, I have used AAR as a
> kind of shorthand for liberal talk radio. But if it's going
> to be this upsetting to you, I'm willing to reconsider.
>
> "Air America Radio does have large Democratic donors. Since
> the company, by
> it's own admission, is not yet in the black, it is fair to
> say the donors keep them afloat.
>
> I was able to find sources that say investors are Democrats
> (no surprise there) but was unable to find any reliable
> source that says Democrats are making donations. If you can
> source that for me, I'd like to add it to my Q&A. Who are
> they and how much do the contribute? Where is this
> published?
>
> "I have never heard #3. Did you make those up for the sake
> of arguement?"
>
> You accuse me of looking for arguments? You are beginning to
> test my patience... but (deep breath)... here you are: The
> most recent reference to this DB (dubious claim) is "Rich
> conservatives and conservative companies backed people like
> limbaugh early-on...so what is wrong with rich liberals
> throwing their money around? Are you against rich people?"
> Link here
>
> It did take Rush time ("long time" is a somewhat vague
> term)to build up a station list and to build his numbers on
> individual stations. Rush started out in relatively few
> markets, often on smaller stations and his program was often
>
> aired on delay in the evening or on weekends at first.
>
> Yes, "long time" is somewhat vague. Thank you for adding the
> even vaguer "relatively" few markets and "smaller" stations.
> The great thing about being vague is that it doesn't require
> any research and is immune to correction. You may be right
> that Limbaugh was "often aired on delay in the evening or on
> weekends at first" but I don't know which stations they
> were. I don't suppose you can cite a source can you?
>
> "I don't see much difference between political true
> believers of the left or right who say: progressive talk
> with succeed/fail because it is good/bad and I want it to
> succeed/fail. You're talking politics, not radio."
>
> Sometime when I have a couple of free hours, I'll diagram
> that sentence and figure out what it means.
>
> "OK, you're not a radio person; you're a political person.
> Politcal types never let facts get in the way of a good
> argument.
>
> Weeellll. Hookay, resp er Fred or whatever your name is.
> Thanks for yet another fascinating observation.

This could be the best rebuttal ever on this site.
>
 
> We'll have to agree to disagree here since I don't think
> we'll convince each other to change our minds. There's no
> disrespect intended. I just don't agree with you that you
> can separate the hosts and their listeners (including people
> who post here) from their political beliefs.

Yeah, don't worry about it. I'm oh-for-three on getting anyone to agree with me on this so I'm getting used to it.

I may take another stab at it later though. I'm convinced I'm just not saying it right. :) <P ID="signature">______________
Jerry

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" - late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan</P>
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

>
> Air America Radio does have large Democratic donors. Since
> the company, by it's own admission, is not yet in the black,
> it is fair to say the donors keep them afloat.
>


Air America Radio is the only for profit enterprise I have ever heard of that admits to asking for and receiving "donations". I wonder who the donors are - I am certain of their politics - and whether this is a violation of some provision of McCain-Feingold which did such a terrific job of getting big money out of politics.
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> You haven't done your homework either, pal. First, "Air
> America Radio" is the correct name of the company; not "Air
> America." Air America is the name of a movie and a company
> that manufacturers paintball shooters.
>
> Air America Radio is a program producer and syndicator, not
> a format. Air America Radio provides programs to radio
> stations. The format is called "progressive talk."
> However, not all stations which carry Air America Radio
> programs are progressive talk stations; some are talk or
> news-talk stations broadcasting a mix of conservative,
> iberal and other talk programming.
>
> The most successful progressive talk program is Ed Schultz,
> which has no connection with Air America Radio. Nearly all
> stations which carry some Air Amercia Radio programming
> carry two or three talk programs on weekdays from other
> sources (Jones Radio, Premiere, WOR Networks among others).
> All progressive talk stations but one are independent of Air
> America Radio.
>
> Air America Radio does have large Democratic donors. Since
> the company, by it's own admission, is not yet in the black,
> it is fair to say the donors keep them afloat.
>
> Progressive talk ratings are not that good yet. And the
> long-term survival of Air America Radio as a program
> provider is not a sure thing. I would give better odds on
> the survival of the progressive talk format but no
> guarantees here either. Like "Jack," progressive talk is
> still something of a radio novelty.
>
> I have never heard #3. Did you make those up for the sake
> of arguement?
>
> It did take Rush time ("long time" is a somewhat vague term)
> to build up a station list and to build his numbers on
> individual stations. Rush started out in relatively few
> markets, often on smaller stations and his program was often
> aired on delay in the evening or on weekends at first.
>
> I don't see much difference between political true believers
> of the left or right who say: progressive talk with
> succeed/fail because it is good/bad and I want it to
> succeed/fail. You're talking politics, not radio.
>
> OK, you're not a radio person; you're a political person.
> Politcal types never let facts get in the way of a good
> argument.
>
> That kind of person is called A LIBERAL!!!
>
>
> >
> > Dubious assertion #1: "Air America is a failing format
> kept
> > afloat by large Democrat donors."

Who pay the stations airing their programming for ads?! RIDICULOUS

> > Dubious assertion #2: "Air America Ratings are bad and
> they
> > will go away.

I HOPE SO--Liberals have had their choke hold on the media for too long--this is their ultimate last gasp--and having Jerry Springer on?! GIVE ME A !@#$%^ BREAK!

> > Dubious assertion #3: "Rush Limbaugh was funded by
> > conservatives too."

OT--That's like saying Danica Patrick got to where she is thanks to Title IX--the WNBA is a FAILING MISERABLY product of said feminista propaganda! Danica got their because SHE wanted to get into the Indy car circuit and unlike the WNBA where for the most they are unattractive, UNSELLABLE women--some may even use lesbians--Danica is amazingly beautiful and has got that semi-midwestern charm. See those FHM photos--WOW--talk about revving your motors!!!!!! Too bad she is accounted for!

The point--Rush got to where he was because he wanted it so badly--he reached out and grasped that brass ring despite the slings and arrows of those who want to see severe damage to this country. He's doing his thing as an INDIVIDUAL--something the left can't grasp because they always believe government and group think have ends justifying the means. While good in some areas, too much of it is dangerous.

> > Dubious assertion #4: "It took Rush Limbaugh a long time
> to
> > get any ratings"
> >
Where--Pittsburgh, KC, Sacramento, New York?!
>
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> Air America Radio is the only for profit enterprise I have
> ever heard of that admits to asking for and receiving
> "donations". I wonder who the donors are - I am certain of
> their politics - and whether this is a violation of some
> provision of McCain-Feingold which did such a terrific job
> of getting big money out of politics.
>

Danger...danger..will robinson....whoa nellie...this is a post that needs attention....

Do you honestly believe this to be true? Donations? Are you saying that the people that offer capital or are sought after by AAR for funding are political donations?

or do you mean that AAR is asking for "donations". Either way, I think you should have to provide some clear evidence of this rather than do just a hit and run declaration here....The web site at this time has no links to ask for such and no paypal accounts are setup for accepting funds from the public.
No host, that i have heard, has asked or even joked (as far as i know) about taking donations....please provide supporting facts...

Can you prove this to be true....or are you repeating some others comments or blogs or talking points? Im asking because I think many would challenge this without supporting facts.
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> >
> > Air America Radio does have large Democratic donors.
> Since
> > the company, by it's own admission, is not yet in the
> black,
> > it is fair to say the donors keep them afloat.
> >
>
>
> Air America Radio is the only for profit enterprise I have
> ever heard of that admits to asking for and receiving
> "donations". I wonder who the donors are - I am certain of
> their politics - and whether this is a violation of some
> provision of McCain-Feingold which did such a terrific job
> of getting big money out of politics.
>
This is nonsense. When and where did Air America "admit" to asking for and receiving "donations"?

Air America has INVESTORS, just like any other company. And just like most start-up companies, Air America won't be making a profit for its first couple of years, just as the Fox News Channel (funded by conservative Rupert Murdoch) didn't make a profit for several years, and just like Sirius and XM have yet to make a profit (and probably won't for several more years). Presumably, the investors in those companies, just like the investors in Air America, hope their investments will pay off down the line. None of these people are "donors." Talk about drinking right-wing cool-aid!
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> Do you honestly believe this to be true? Donations? Are you
> saying that the people that offer capital or are sought
> after by AAR for funding are political donations?

The AAR defender's post to which I replied used the term "donation". I am pretty certain that one or more of the AAR execs used the term in the HBO documentary "Left of the Dial". I think that the press should investigate the whole matter, but I'm not holding my breath.
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> The AAR defender's post to which I replied used the term
> "donation". I am pretty certain that one or more of the AAR
> execs used the term in the HBO documentary "Left of the
> Dial".

In other words, you got nothing.<P ID="signature">______________
also known as tombetz.</P>
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> > The AAR defender's post to which I replied used the term
> > "donation". I am pretty certain that one or more of the
> AAR
> > execs used the term in the HBO documentary "Left of the
> > Dial".
>
> In other words, you got nothing.
>


I have HBO! Why don't you get it, watch "Left of the Dial" and then get back to us.
 
Re: Get your facts straight, dude

> Why don't you get it, watch "Left of the Dial"
> and then get back to us.

I watched it just last week.

You got nothing.
<P ID="signature">______________
also known as tombetz.</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom