KCRW Reduces Staff

[ChannelFlipper]

That should be in the dictionary definition of "oxymoron": A non-republican Rush fan.

Maybe he means the Canadian band?

David, it is one thing that it should come from an idiot provocateur who has no idea what they are talking about, but I expect more out of you.

I have known people over the years who vehemently disagree with Rush who nevertheless tune in frequently for the reason I already noted - he is a radio entertainer first, an advocate of political positions second. He is the by far the number one political talk show host of all time, maybe number one period, with the only issue being whether Howard Stern has been even more successful. As an astute radio professional, you should be able to articulate the reasons for that success without reciting idiotic bumper sticker talking points.

As the moderator of this board I would assume you would want a higher level of discourse.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

And you don't think that the morning and afternoon news-based segments on NPR couldn't / wouldn't be sold out if you could buy commercial time there? In many markets they outrank the local news / talk station and advertisers wish they could buy ads there. On the other hand, look at the "blue ribbon" list of sponsors that NPR has.

David, it is one thing for you to parrot idiotic platitudes like I already pointed out, but now you are not even paying attention to the thread.

I already said in post # 24 "I believe NPR, as an unsubsized entity, does and would have a place in the free market (which includes listener-funded models, not just a commercial model) and would thrive there, probably as a better product. I feel the same way about AAA, jazz, classical and even KCSN's old format Americana, all formats I love that have very little public support."

Of course they are very popular and in a free market would thrive. There is no shortage of leftists that are willing to subscribe to slanted news coverage and erudite programs with high-brow accents that do nothing but parrot their own prejudices and inside-the-bubble talking points while convincing themselves they are somehow listening to unbiased news coverage of a higher order that is simply above the understanding of the unwashed and uneducated peasants. I work with these people, I know who they are and they will gladly pay a lot to get all of this. So would their corporate employers to buy time if that is required. I restate, an unsubsidized NPR will do just fine in the marketplace.

 

[TheBigA]

I restate, an unsubsidized NPR will do just fine in the marketplace.

You don't seem to be paying attention. The federal funding does not go to NPR. That was removed by Ronald Reagan in 1983.

From their website:

While NPR does not receive any direct federal funding, it does receive a small number of competitive grants from CPB and federal agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. This funding amounts to approximately 2% of NPR's overall revenues.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

You don't seem to be paying attending. The federal funding does not go to NPR. That was removed by Ronald Reagan in 1983.

Big A, since you seem to be such an expert on Federal funding, you should be able to process that just because NPR is not the original recipient of federal funds, does not mean they do not receive federal funds. They receive them as pass through funding. You can't just assume because you can twist a fact that people can't see through it. We can.

Ah, now I see you have updated your post to prove my point. Thank you for finally admitting the truth.

While NPR does not receive any direct federal funding, it does receive a small number of competitive grants from CPB and federal agencies like the Department of Education and the Department of Commerce. This funding amounts to approximately 2% of NPR's overall revenues.

 

[davideduardo]

Of course they are very popular and in a free market would thrive. There is no shortage of leftists that are willing to subscribe to slanted news coverage and erudite programs with high-brow accents that do nothing but parrot their own prejudices and inside-the-bubble talking points while convincing themselves they are somehow listening to unbiased news coverage of a higher order that is simply above the understanding of the unwashed and uneducated peasants. I work with these people, I know who they are and they will gladly pay a lot to get all of this. So would their corporate employers to buy time if that is required. I restate, an unsubsidized NPR will do just fine in the marketplace.

I listen to NPR news blocks when possible and when I have extended time to spend. As a registered Independent, I find the reporting for the most part quite balanced. I find the ABC, CBS and NBC news casts more slanted to the left, in fact.

As a US citizen who lived for 25 years in a part of the US where I could not vote for the President, senators or representatives, I have a somewhat different perspective which is a bit more international and with a totally different focus.

Your perspective is so "red" that it bleeds. I find the extreme right and extreme left to be a major problem, and they cause an inability of the two major parties to work together as they did do in the past.

I went off on a political position in a non-political thread because attitudes are what define the perspective on NPR and affiliate stations. Were i the fake Puerto Rican, Alexandria Ocasiio, I'd find NPR way too conservative. And were I one of Michigan's kidnapping militia members, I'd find it way to leftist. But the fact is that NPR is relatively centrist.

 

[TheBigA]

They receive them as pass through funding. You can't just assume because you can twist a fact that people can't see through it. We can.

Is there something illegal about it? Or do you just resent it? You said they get federal funding and I showed you that they don't.

The station membership fees are not required. They're not automatic. Stations could keep it all for themselves and not share it with NPR. I've mentioned a couple stations here that do. Or they could use that money for American Public Media or any of the other content providers. They also receive CPB funds. It puts the local stations in charge of how the money gets used instead of the government.

And as I keep on saying, the funding continues to get approved by YOUR elected representatives. Don't blame the people who get the money. Blame the people who give it to them.

Ah, now I see you have updated your post to prove my point. Thank you for finally admitting the truth.

So you want them to give back the 2%? It's not an appropriation or even a subsidy. They are competitive grants. Anyone, including you, can apply for them. The difference is that NPR was awarded the money.

 

[CTListener]

Were i the fake Puerto Rican, Alexandria Ocasiio, I'd find NPR way too conservative.

I find this amusing considering that I used to lurk in rec.radio.broadcasting in the halcyon days of Usenet and see so many of your critics brand you "the fake Hispanic."

 

[ChannelFlipper]

Is there something illegal about it? Or do you just resent it? You said they get federal funding and I showed you that they don't.

The station membership fees are not required. They're not automatic. Stations could keep it all for themselves and not share it with NPR. I've mentioned a couple stations here that do. Or they could use that money for American Public Media or any of the other content providers. They also receive CPB funds. It puts the local stations in charge of how the money gets used instead of the government.

And as I keep on saying, the funding continues to get approved by YOUR elected representatives. Don't blame the people who get the money. Blame the people who give it to them.



So you want them to give back the 2%? It's not an appropriation or even a subsidy. They are competitive grants. Anyone, including you, can apply for them. The difference is that NPR was awarded the money.

Who said or even implied it was illegal? Your arguing yourself into a knot. Any time you get free money you are being subsidized. My business got a PPP loan/(grant) this year. NPR probably did to. We were all able and eligible to apply for the funds and those who qualified got approved. I am not afraid to admit it - my business was partially subsidized by the government this year. Just like NPR.

Oh, but you say the money is not "free", they had to spend it on certain things? Same here. I had to use it for payroll or other approved expenses. That money that the government gave me that freed up my payroll liability was actually applied by my business to other non-subsidized expenses (we discussed the overall concept of fungibility above).

I am not a terribly big fan of the PPP program just like I am not a big fan of money that goes to NPR, but my business benefited from the subsidy and I do not begrudge NPR for asking for the money any more than my business did with the PPP. I just think the government should not be offering it to either of us in the first place. (This is probably a poitical position that is "so red it must be bleeding") lol.

Again, you are really going out of your way to make a simple concept quite unnecessarily complex.

 

[davideduardo]

I find this amusing considering that I used to lurk in rec.radio.broadcasting in the halcyon days of Usenet and see so many of your critics brand you "the fake Hispanic."

That's amusing, considering that for 60 years my household language, my work language and even my thought process has been Spanish. "Hispanic" is a culture based loosely on the Spanish language; it is not a race or an ethnicity or even a nationality.

Hispanic is, of course, a 100% United States construct; I remember being in the newsroom at news/talk Radio 10 in the early 2000's when it was the number one station in Buenos Aires and being asked "what the heck is that "Hispanic" thing they talk about in the US?" They asked that because in Latin America, the term was basically unfamiliar and considered, in Spanish, to apply to someone from the former Roman territory of Hispania, present day Iberia.

Ocasio is a Newyorican. That's the term applied to later-generation persons of Puerto Rican parents or grandparents but who don't and haven't live on "la Isla" ever.

So being "Hispanic" by the OMB definition created in the late 70's, someone whose culture is based on speaking or descending from those who speak Spanish. It included everyone from Andean Incas to pure Italian heritage Argentines to the big Japanese and Chinese colonies in Peru... just to name a few. And it is terribly inaccurate, as, for example, in Ecuador where some of my family still remains, a huge percentage of the population is not native Spanish speaking with Quechua being the mother tongue. I had to learn basic Quecha to speak to my transmitter site attendants who did not speak good Spanish, particularly if a transmitter had decided to emit sparks and smoke!

A rather amusing statement by a friend who was a professor in Sociology at the Central University of Puerto Rico in R?*o Piedras was that you can tell a person's true culture by either of two things: the language they engage in the final moments of sex in or the one they use if they hit their thumb with a big hammer. In my case, if I hit my thumb, I say, very rapidly, "coñocarajomierdapuñeta". So I guess that determines that issue.

I was reading an interview with the person who is rumored to be the next head of Univision, Luis Silberwasser. Born in the US, he was raised in Medell?*n, Colombia, and has worked most of his life in Hispanic media including leading the team that took the World Cup broadcast rights from Univision to Telemundo. Because he was born in the US of American parents, but grew up in Latin America and has worked with Hispanics all his career, nobody would doubt that he is truly Hispanic.

In the interview, he detailed how the Hispanic culture in the US is so poorly understood because it involves values, relationships and many things that go beyond just the language. See https://thestateindia.com/2020/10/1...esident-luis-silberwasser-the-ny-journal/amp/ for a fascinating interview with Luis about his feelings regarding the Hispanic market in the US.

 

[TheBigA]

Who said or even implied it was illegal? Your arguing yourself into a knot. Any time you get free money you are being subsidized.

How do you define "free money?" They work for it. They provide a service in exchange for the money. There are costs involved, in terms of people and facilities, and because they're non-profit, they are required to spend every dime. You invent terms like "free money," and then perform calisthenics to force something to fit your definition. And then tell me I'm making a simple concept "unnecessarily complex." It's not complex at all. I've explained it the same way several times. A law was passed that appropriates money, and the appropriation is renewed every year. That's pretty simple. Nothing complex about it at all. And it's not free by any stretch.

I just think the government should not be offering it to either of us in the first place. (This is probably a political position that is "so red it must be bleeding") lol.

And yet it's all the so-called conservatives who keep giving it all away. As I said, don't blame the people getting the money.

 

[davideduardo]

Who said or even implied it was illegal? Your arguing yourself into a knot. Any time you get free money you are being subsidized. My business got a PPP loan/(grant) this year. NPR probably did to. We were all able and eligible to apply for the funds and those who qualified got approved. I am not afraid to admit it - my business was partially subsidized by the government this year. Just like NPR.

Oh, but you say the money is not "free", they had to spend it on certain things? Same here. I had to use it for payroll or other approved expenses. That money that the government gave me that freed up my payroll liability was actually applied by my business to other non-subsidized expenses (we discussed the overall concept of fungibility above).

I am not a terribly big fan of the PPP program just like I am not a big fan of money that goes to NPR, but my business benefited from the subsidy and I do not begrudge NPR for asking for the money any more than my business did with the PPP. I just think the government should not be offering it to either of us in the first place. (This is probably a poitical position that is "so red it must be bleeding") lol.

Again, you are really going out of your way to make a simple concept quite unnecessarily complex.

That's just not a logical argument. If I get a promise of money from McDonalds, they expect I will perform by running their advertisements. If a public station takes a government or even a private or individual grant or donation, there is an expectation of a certain action in response. If I support a classical station, and they change to hip-hop, I no longer will donate. If I support NPR because of the news content, and they reduce or eliminate news, I stop donating. The same goes for corporate and government grants.

There are government grants for all kinds of cultural activities at the national, state and local levels. Museums, concerts, arboretums, ballet and all kinds of other activities are given taxpayer money to support things that help enrich society. If you don't like opera, that is not the issue... it's about doing a variety of things that would not be done in the for-profit sector.

NPR and local stations that are affiliated are an example. OK, you don't like them. Some don't for political reasons, some because the content is above their educational level or their intelligence. But the government does lots of other stuff that, one by one, give value to life to all kinds of people and interests.

I don't go to the senior bridge games in my city. The government sponsors and hosts them. But I don't play and I don't hang around with a bunch of players whose culture is not the same as mine. It's my choice. But the city has some great trails and parks, and I love the trails and am glad they keep them open and safe for me. That is part of a government of, by, for the people and because not all people are alike or like the same things!

And I don't think I find the bridge players on the trails I frequent. Which of itself is a good thing!

 

[TheBigA]

That's just not a logical argument. If I get a promise of money from McDonalds, they expect I will perform by running their advertisements.

Exactly...perhaps the corollary to "free money" is "selling air." That's what we do in commercial radio. There is no tangible product that an advertiser receives in exchange for advertising on Rush Limbaugh's show. They recognize the audience, they wish to reach that audience, so they write a check. Poof! In all my years in radio, I've never gotten dirty or worked up a sweat.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

That's just not a logical argument. If I get a promise of money from McDonalds, they expect I will perform by running their advertisements. If a public station takes a government or even a private or individual grant or donation, there is an expectation of a certain action in response. If I support a classical station, and they change to hip-hop, I no longer will donate. If I support NPR because of the news content, and they reduce or eliminate news, I stop donating. The same goes for corporate and government grants.

There are government grants for all kinds of cultural activities at the national, state and local levels. Museums, concerts, arboretums, ballet and all kinds of other activities are given taxpayer money to support things that help enrich society. If you don't like opera, that is not the issue... it's about doing a variety of things that would not be done in the for-profit sector.

NPR and local stations that are affiliated are an example. OK, you don't like them. Some don't for political reasons, some because the content is above their educational level or their intelligence. But the government does lots of other stuff that, one by one, give value to life to all kinds of people and interests.

I don't go to the senior bridge games in my city. The government sponsors and hosts them. But I don't play and I don't hang around with a bunch of players whose culture is not the same as mine. It's my choice. But the city has some great trails and parks, and I love the trails and am glad they keep them open and safe for me. That is part of a government of, by, for the people and because not all people are alike or like the same things!

And I don't think I find the bridge players on the trails I frequent. Which of itself is a good thing!

Now you are twisting yourself into a pretzel like the Big A.

I never said NPR (or CPB if you like) should not be funded because of their politics or because "I don't like them". I said, the government should not be subsidizing (or "making grants available that were approved by my legislators" if you will) for ANY radio stations or format, even the ones I like which I named earlier in the thread. The free market can and should, and if given the chance, surely would, take care of that. You can't say I am not consistent on this point.

It is one of the most amazing things that asking a radio format or organization to pay its own way and compete in the marketplace can engender so much negative response. That is all I said - a "blood red" position for sure - lol again.

 

[TheBigA]

I said, the government should not be subsidizing (or "making grants available that were approved by my legislators" if you will) for ANY radio stations or format, even the ones I like which I named earlier in the thread.

What do you base this on? What makes radio any different from anything else? And where do you derive this power to say what government should or should not do?

 

[davideduardo]

Now you are twisting yourself into a pretzel like the Big A.

I never said NPR (or CPB if you like) should not be funded because of their politics or because "I don't like them". I said, the government should not be subsidizing (or "making grants available that were approved by my legislators" if you will) for ANY radio stations or format, even the ones I like which I named earlier in the thread. The free market can and should, and if given the chance, surely would, take care of that. You can't say I am not consistent on this point.

It is one of the most amazing things that asking a radio format or organization to pay its own way and compete in the marketplace can engender so much negative response. That is all I said - a "blood red" position for sure - lol again.

Some would say that a lowly Pissaro or Oller is not worth millions of dollars and might suggest we take the artwork from urban freeway underpasses and exhibit them in museums.

That is because not everyone likes fine art, and not everyone ever goes to a museum to see good examples. But the government supports art, education, and a variety of things that don't benefit everyone.

Your argument is similar to one I hear from the "get off my grass" seniors in my community: taxes for schools are too high because they don't get any benefit from them.

Radio is a form of communication, and NPR radio is a form that could not sustain its current level of effectiveness without government support. I have heard it told that the budget of the NPR station in San Francisco has a higher budget than the entire top 10 commercial stations. While that may be a bit exaggerated (and certainly does not cover the cost of money) it does illustrate why valuable community assets like the NPR affiliates should get the same kind of support as adult education, museums, zoos and senior assistance. All those things, including NPR, contribute to the soul of a community.

Frequently I seen in personal finance magazines and online similar sites details of the best towns and cities to live in. One thing in common used as a factor are community "pluses" like universities and such. Yet if the magazine is focused on retirement living, why would a college be of any interest? Simple: it contributes that catch-all quality of culture and humanity to the city. So does NPR.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

What do you base this on? What makes radio any different from anything else? And where do you derive this power to say what government should or should not do?

Nothing. The government shouldn't be subsidizing restaurants, dry cleaners, car manufacturers , radio stations, my humble little company, or anything else. Where do I get the power? I have none. I am a lowly scrub just offering an opinion on a radio board (we are talking about radio here). I never foisted my views on anyone; you are free to disagree and have done so ably. It is a discussion board and I am quite sure business would be bad for the board if we all agreed on everything all of the time.

In any case, I don't question your motives, why should you question mine? Furthermore, why does a view that doesn't agree with yours engender so much hostility? It is after all, just a discussion, no real change is coming out of this (CPB will always get its money as you correctly observed).

One last thing - you don't have to push back on everything you disagree with. I stay out of a lot of conversations on the board and I do not feel the need to reply to every post, even ones that are wildly inaccurate. I have spent some time on this conversation because I find it interesting and, for the most part, you and David E. are generally reasonable and civilized debaters (The "blood red" comment was uncalled for, but I have rolled with it just fine nevertheless). I just think this issue has unfortunately struck a little to close to home so you are responding more aggressively than usual.

 

[TheBigA]

Nothing. The government shouldn't be subsidizing restaurants, dry cleaners, car manufacturers , radio stations, my humble little company, or anything else.

You call it a subsidy. The government considers it an investment. They expect something in return.

I just think this issue has unfortunately struck a little to close to home so you are responding more aggressively than usual.

Not at all. I only comment on subjects where I have something to say. This is one of those things. No hostility here at all.

 

[Kelly A]

That should be in the dictionary definition of "oxymoron": A non-republican Rush fan.

Sort of like: Jumbo Shrimp, or Military Intelligence.

 

[CTListener]

Sort of like: Jumbo Shrimp, or Military Intelligence.

Hot-water heater. Oh wait, that's a redundancy, like tuna fish.

 

[david]

KCRW sadly will be ending its broadcasting in Berlin, Germany at 104.1 FM on December 13, 2020, due to COVID-19 related financial crisis impacting non-profits revenue everywhere.
https://www.radioszene.de/149701/kcrw-berlin-ende.html