• 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

NY Post: AAR in "bad finacial shape"

Re: It's about radio ...

> Of course, the right-wing ideologues have been voicing the
> same "opinions," (based on their hopes and dreams), for the
> past year and a half now, and seem no closer to reaching
> orgasm than they did in March 2004.

ROFL. :)

Bob Dole is still pitching Viagra isn't he?
 
It's only politics with you

Your fanatic anti AAR posts are political. It's not about radio at all. There is nothing AAR could do other than shut down that would probably get your approval.
 
Re: It's only politics with you

> Your fanatic anti AAR posts are political. It's not about
> radio at all. There is nothing AAR could do other than shut
> down that would probably get your approval.
>

Wrong, again.

Here is what I approve of...

AAR established that progressive talk needs its own format. Progressive talk can work but sticking a liberal host in a schedule between two conservative hosts won't work (although a few stations still try to do that). Radio is about pleasing some of the people all the time - not all the people some of the time.

AAR got people's attention and created a lot of buzz about the possibility of progressive talk radio.

AAR got Thom Hartmann for straight syndication. A smart business move. Their future is in syndication and they appear to be moving toward that.

AAR had the good sense to pick up Jerry Springer's distribution rights before someone else did and before they lost their late morning clearances as a result of a program that just wasn't working.

Maybe a political metaphor will make my position clearer. I like Dean. I will work to see Dean and his "wing" of the party prevail, rather than DLC Centrists with their "me-too" compromise approach. And I don't like Kerry (although he is the lesser evil). I am more concerned with 20 or 50 years from now than winning the next election. Does that make me any less a Democrat? But that's about politics. This is about radio. Good radio makes our medium stronger. Bad radio does not. State of the art equipment does not make good radio; I've seen good radio come using stuff somebody bought on E-Bay. High priced comedic talent with name recognition and little or no radio experience does not make good radio. And record producers (Arista) and software executives (Real.com)without radio experience don't make good radio.

There is only one way to develop good radio people who make good radio: They start at a small station someplace, go "town to town up and down the dial" and they learn their trade.
 
Re: It's about radio ...

> > i think you should read your caption to your post...this
> is
> > a thinly veiled AAR rant which probably belongs on the off
>
> > the air board...
> >
>
> I wish you political true believers would find your own
> board to haunt so we can get back to the art and business of
> radio, subjects people like you clearly fail to appreciate
> or to grasp.
>
> You assume any criticism of Air America Radio is motivated
> by political disagreement because that is the way you work.
> You turn discussions of radio into cheap shot
> Point/Counter-Point political debates because apparently
> that is the only game you know how to play.
>
> Read the AAR=Pax post, please.
>
> Good radio/bad radio has nothing to do with
> liberal/conservative, agree/disagree.
> Rush is good radio; Mike Gallagher is bad radio; both are
> conservatives.
> NPR is good radio; AAR is bad radio; both are liberal.
>
> Unlike you, I can appreciate radio well done, even when I
> disagree with the point of view expressed. And I can see
> the flaws in radio poorly done, even when I agree. Your
> comments suggest you have no tolerance for political views
> other than your own.
>
> And I have no interest in trying to prove anything to
> someone who hears only what he wants to hear and is
> unwilling to operate outside his own frame of reference.
>
> Goob-bye.
>


Bottom line this comes from a paper with a series of inacurate reporting. A paper that is a hard-core right wing newspaper, and well the facts are just wrong. AAR definatley does have some issues, no question about it. However, this article is a bunch of crap, and it came from a paper that is total crap.<P ID="signature">______________
R.I.P Party 105
5-27-98
9-15-05
</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom