• 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 Sun On Those Supposed Loans To AAR

N

NewsVet

The New York Sun, a conservative newspaper, has moved the Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club/Air America story forward. The top executive of the club told the Sun that Air America agreed to pay the group the entire amount that Evan Cohen received as "loans" from the club (much of it supposedly for Air America) even though the current owners of AAR maintain that they are not legally responsible for the debts.

As you may remember, AAR has said that it made this agreement with the Boys & Girls Club months ago. The Sun also reports that it's not clear if any of the money from the club was actually received by Air America. Cohen, you may also remember, was the former Republican operative who talked his way into a top management spot at Air America and was forced out in May 2004.

http://www.nysun.com/article/17846

<a href=http://www.nysun.com/article/17846>ARTICLE</a>
 
> The New York Sun, a conservative newspaper, has moved the
> Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club/Air America story forward.
> The top executive of the club told the Sun that Air America
> agreed to pay the group the entire amount that Evan Cohen
> received as "loans" from the club (much of it supposedly for
> Air America) even though the current owners of AAR maintain
> that they are not legally responsible for the debts.
>
> As you may remember, AAR has said that it made this
> agreement with the Boys & Girls Club months ago. The Sun
> also reports that it's not clear if any of the money from
> the club was actually received by Air America. Cohen, you
> may also remember, was the former Republican operative who
> talked his way into a top management spot at Air America and
> was forced out in May 2004.

Are you meaning to tell me that Al Franken did not steal from poor kids, as so many titles of blog entries declared? Because when I'm looking to steal money, I know the first place I turn to is poor people -- they're loaded!

Putting the snark away, I do think this is a good caution for bloggers of all stripes to not get ahead of a story.
 
NY Sun: Franken Unaware Of Cohen's Alleged Loans

From The New York Sun on August 2, 2005:
"Franken Unaware Of Ex-Colleague's Alleged Loans"

The comedian Al Franken, Air America Radio's most prominent host, said yesterday that he did not know whether the hundreds of thousands of dollars apparently lent to the radio network by a Bronx social-service organization had indeed been relayed to Air America by Evan Montvel Cohen. Mr. Cohen simultaneously served as director of the liberal network and development director of the nonprofit Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club.

-- snip --

Mr. Franken said he has learned details of the story only in the last week. He said Piquant LLC, current owner and operator of the radio network, found a record of the transfers while conducting a "forensic" investigation into the finances of the previous owner, Progress Media, which was run by Mr. Cohen. That internal probe was conducted before the city agency became involved, Mr. Franken said. Efforts by The New York Sun to reach Mr. Cohen for comment in recent days have been unsuccessful.


Complete article at <a target="_blank" href=http://www.nysun.com/article/17921>http://www.nysun.com/article/17921</a>


> > The New York Sun, a conservative newspaper, has moved the
> > Gloria Wise Boys & Girls Club/Air America story forward.
> > The top executive of the club told the Sun that Air
> America
> > agreed to pay the group the entire amount that Evan Cohen
> > received as "loans" from the club (much of it supposedly
> for
> > Air America) even though the current owners of AAR
> maintain
> > that they are not legally responsible for the debts.
> >
> > As you may remember, AAR has said that it made this
> > agreement with the Boys & Girls Club months ago. The Sun
> > also reports that it's not clear if any of the money from
> > the club was actually received by Air America. Cohen, you
>
> > may also remember, was the former Republican operative who
>
> > talked his way into a top management spot at Air America
> and
> > was forced out in May 2004.
>
> Are you meaning to tell me that Al Franken did not steal
> from poor kids, as so many titles of blog entries declared?
> Because when I'm looking to steal money, I know the first
> place I turn to is poor people -- they're loaded!
>
> Putting the snark away, I do think this is a good caution
> for bloggers of all stripes to not get ahead of a story.
 
>
> Are you meaning to tell me that Al Franken did not steal
> from poor kids, as so many titles of blog entries declared?
> Because when I'm looking to steal money, I know the first
> place I turn to is poor people -- they're loaded!
>
> Putting the snark away, I do think this is a good caution
> for bloggers of all stripes to not get ahead of a story.
>

I agree that some in the blogosphere may have used rather hyperbolic speech, but for the work of several blogs, this story might never have come to light. The liberal newspaper The New York Times (as well as almost all of the MSM) have yet to touch this story, in contrast to the hoopla that accompanied the launch of AAR.

And it may well be true that Al Franken (unknowingly) received funds intended for poor kids.
 
> I agree that some in the blogosphere may have used rather
> hyperbolic speech, but for the work of several blogs, this
> story might never have come to light. The liberal newspaper
> The New York Times (as well as almost all of the MSM) have
> yet to touch this story, in contrast to the hoopla that
> accompanied the launch of AAR.

The reason this story isn't getting much MSM attention, aside from their lack of excitement about AAR in general, is that the facts just aren't in on this story. For a while, everybody was just regurgitating some anonymous source from one guy who wrote for a newspaper with no website. Now the NY Sun is telling us that, after some initial investigation, they haven't a clue whether AAR ever received the funds, or if AAR would have been aware of the source if they did. They do report that AAR is doing the right thing anyway in making sure the Boys and Girls Club gets its money back.

The time when this would actually become a story is when the investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able to wait till then.
 
>
>
> The time when this would actually become a story is when the
> investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able to
> wait till then.
>
Do you ever stop pumping up and defending Air America on this page?
 
Ah, yes

> The time when this would actually become a story is when the
> investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able to
> wait till then.
>

Ah, yes - the time honored credo of investigative journalism: "Wait until the official investigation is over." And if there is no investigation?

The MSM seemed to have no problem immediately jumping on two Rush Limbaugh stories that originated in a supermarket tabloid (with a website) before any investigation was complete.


Woodward and Bernsein had a different credo (suposedly): "Follow the money."
 
> Do you ever stop pumping up and defending Air America on
> this page?
>
Those who would like to see AAR succeed seem to be greatly outnumbered on this board by those who want it to fail.

I notice that 156 people took the time to read the recent "AAR gets bad news in Philly" post, while only 86 were interested in reading "KPOJ (AAR) Gets Good News In Portland."

That's almost a two-to-one ratio.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Scribbler on 08/02/05 08:31 PM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: Ah, yes

> > The time when this would actually become a story is when
> the
> > investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able to
> > wait till then.
> >
>
> Ah, yes - the time honored credo of investigative
> journalism: "Wait until the official investigation is
> over." And if there is no investigation?

There IS an investigation. That's about all we do know. If more was known, it would be reported.

> The MSM seemed to have no problem immediately jumping on two
> Rush Limbaugh stories that originated in a supermarket
> tabloid (with a website) before any investigation was
> complete.

That's because there were actual facts to report, including the maid or whomever talking to the press and the legal wrangling over Rush's medical records. No such info is forthcoming here. Just because they're not reporting on it doesn't mean the MSM isn't making calls and seeking more information. But as the reports from the Sun point out, there's not a heck of a lot to report here. And most people don't know who Evan Cohen is, though they do know who Rush is. And Al Franken appears to be only tangential to what happened.

> Woodward and Bernsein had a different credo (suposedly):
> "Follow the money."

Yeah, real Watergate stuff here. Evan Cohen is nowhere near as important as the president. But if "following the money" actually leads anyone anywhere, you'll hear about it. The investigators, though, seem to be in a much better position to get information here.

Other than radio and political nerds (such as myself), most people don't care much about what's happening with Air America. That's another big reason there isn't a huge scandal here. Rush Limbaugh? Biggest name in radio, most people know him. Evan Cohen? Who's he?
 
> > The time when this would actually become a story is when
> the
> > investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able to
> > wait till then.
> >
> Do you ever stop pumping up and defending Air America on
> this page?

I was commenting from a journalistic standpoint. This story isn't ripe. That's just one reason why you're primarily seeing blogs and partisan sources reporting on it at this point. No need to slam me for making reasonable observations.
 
Re: Ah, yes

> > > The time when this would actually become a story is when
>
> > the
> > > investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able
> to
> > > wait till then.
> > >
> >
> > Ah, yes - the time honored credo of investigative
> > journalism: "Wait until the official investigation is
> > over." And if there is no investigation?
>
> There IS an investigation. That's about all we do know. If
> more was known, it would be reported.
>
> > The MSM seemed to have no problem immediately jumping on
> two
> > Rush Limbaugh stories that originated in a supermarket
> > tabloid (with a website) before any investigation was
> > complete.
>
> That's because there were actual facts to report, including
> the maid or whomever talking to the press and the legal
> wrangling over Rush's medical records. No such info is
> forthcoming here. Just because they're not reporting on it
> doesn't mean the MSM isn't making calls and seeking more
> information. But as the reports from the Sun point out,
> there's not a heck of a lot to report here. And most people
> don't know who Evan Cohen is, though they do know who Rush
> is. And Al Franken appears to be only tangential to what
> happened.
>
> > Woodward and Bernsein had a different credo (suposedly):
> > "Follow the money."
>
> Yeah, real Watergate stuff here. Evan Cohen is nowhere near
> as important as the president. But if "following the money"
> actually leads anyone anywhere, you'll hear about it. The
> investigators, though, seem to be in a much better position
> to get information here.
>
> Other than radio and political nerds (such as myself), most
> people don't care much about what's happening with Air
> America. That's another big reason there isn't a huge
> scandal here. Rush Limbaugh? Biggest name in radio, most
> people know him. Evan Cohen? Who's he?
>



I guess then we'll have to wait for Al Frankens's maid to talk (for money) to
the National Inquirer.
 
Re: your comment...

you commented:
"Those who would like to see AAR succeed seem to be greatly
outnumbered on this board by those who want it to fail."

I think that's an oversimplication. Programmers and consultants who contribute to this board know that what counts is ratings and revenue since commercial AM talk radio is a business. In some parkets, progressive talk stations are not even making 1 (one) share 12+. Several progressive radio station programmers/consultants regularly provide constructive criticism on air america and other progressive hosts/networks on this forum. Very few, if any, of these posters want to see Air America fail. So if you see criticism of air america or liberal radio, it might be coming from "the left," it is not necessarily always coming from "the right."<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by this Tom: on 08/03/05 05:52 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: your comment...

> you commented:
> "Those who would like to see AAR succeed seem to be greatly
> outnumbered on this board by those who want it to fail."
>
> I think that's an oversimplication. Programmers and
> consultants who contribute to this board know that what
> counts is ratings and revenue since commercial AM talk radio
> is a business. In some parkets, progressive talk stations
> are not even making 1 (one) share 12+. Several progressive
> radio station programmers/consultants regularly provide
> constructive criticism on air america and other progressive
> hosts/networks on this forum. Very few, if any, of these
> posters want to see Air America fail.

But the post wasn't about "programmers/consultants" who provide "constructive criticism." It was about people who obviously want Air America to fail for ideological reasons -- and who evidence this by eagerly reading about a 1000 watt station that fails to get good ratings while refusing to read about another station with a good signal that gets terrific ratings.
>
 
Re: Ah, yes

> Ah, yes - the time honored credo of investigative
> journalism: "Wait until the official investigation is
> over."

That seems to be the angle the White House is using with Rove. The WH Spokeshole implores journalists to wait until the investigation is over before commenting.

> And if there is no investigation?

There is one.

> The MSM seemed to have no problem immediately jumping on two
> Rush Limbaugh stories that originated in a supermarket
> tabloid (with a website) before any investigation was
> complete.

Just as they did to the delight of conservatives about Paula Jones and Jennifer Flowers. The problem isn't who is being talked about, it's that the mainstream media relies on tabloid journalism at all.

> Woodward and Bernsein had a different credo (suposedly):
> "Follow the money."

You are talking about this like there is no investigation. There is one. What you are upset about is that they simply aren't reprinting the allegations in Newsmax and right wing blogs as fact.
 
Re: Ah, yes

> > > > The time when this would actually become a story is
> when
> >
> > > the
> > > > investigation yeilds some results. The MSM seems able
>
> > to
> > > > wait till then.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ah, yes - the time honored credo of investigative
> > > journalism: "Wait until the official investigation is
> > > over." And if there is no investigation?
> >
> > There IS an investigation. That's about all we do know.
> If
> > more was known, it would be reported.
> >
> > > The MSM seemed to have no problem immediately jumping on
>
> > two
> > > Rush Limbaugh stories that originated in a supermarket
> > > tabloid (with a website) before any investigation was
> > > complete.
> >
> > That's because there were actual facts to report,
> including
> > the maid or whomever talking to the press and the legal
> > wrangling over Rush's medical records. No such info is
> > forthcoming here. Just because they're not reporting on
> it
> > doesn't mean the MSM isn't making calls and seeking more
> > information. But as the reports from the Sun point out,
> > there's not a heck of a lot to report here. And most
> people
> > don't know who Evan Cohen is, though they do know who Rush
>
> > is. And Al Franken appears to be only tangential to what
> > happened.
> >
> > > Woodward and Bernsein had a different credo (suposedly):
>
> > > "Follow the money."
> >
> > Yeah, real Watergate stuff here. Evan Cohen is nowhere
> near
> > as important as the president. But if "following the
> money"
> > actually leads anyone anywhere, you'll hear about it. The
>
> > investigators, though, seem to be in a much better
> position
> > to get information here.
> >
> > Other than radio and political nerds (such as myself),
> most
> > people don't care much about what's happening with Air
> > America. That's another big reason there isn't a huge
> > scandal here. Rush Limbaugh? Biggest name in radio, most
>
> > people know him. Evan Cohen? Who's he?
> >
>
>
>
> I guess then we'll have to wait for Al Frankens's maid to
> talk (for money) to
> the National Inquirer.
>
Wait, does Al Frankens maid know anything about Limbaughs illegal use of drugs? Wow, maybe I'm in the wrong business.
 
Re: Ah, yes

>
> The MSM seemed to have no problem immediately jumping on two
> Rush Limbaugh stories that originated in a supermarket
> tabloid (with a website) before any investigation was
> complete.

Of course that scandal had to do with Rush Limbaugh, a certifed celebrity. This scandal has to do with Evan Cohen. a nobody. What if this involved, say, a top management guy at Salem, who was forced out over a year ago, shortly after arranging for a loan from a Boys & Girls Club? Would the MSM be all over that story? No. Would Newsmax, Michelle Malkin, Brian Moloney, and the New York Post be all excited? Definitely not.
<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by NewsVet on 08/04/05 03:49 AM.</FONT></P>
 
Re: dampier, make up your mind

> > > And if there is no investigation?
> >
> > There is one.
>
> Previously you said that there should be no MSM coverage
> because there is no investigation and now you say that there
> should be no MSM coverage until the investigation is over.

No. You have been saying all along that Air America Radio is being investigated. You say this often to the exclusion of the city officials and the former CEO who were directly responsible for the transaction. I have been saying there -is- an investigation, but it is focused on the latter two parties.

You then went on to question why the MSM is not covering this, in play with the talking point that there is some liberal media bias/conspiracy, and why there isn't an investigation of this. I replied that there is an investigation. The coverage we are getting now comes from a few newspapers who rightly focus on the parties who were involved, and from Newsmax & Friends the story is heavily slanted as a thinly veiled partisan attack on Air America Radio.

I don't care whether the MSM media covers it or not. I am consistent on that point. Too many of my friends at Newsmax and the Unequalizer, and their supporters, do care and hypocritically say this story should be covered by investigative journalists, but things like the Karl Rove story cannot be covered by same reporters because that would "impede" an ongoing investigation.
 
Re: dampier, make up your mind

> > > > And if there is no investigation?
> > >
> > > There is one.
> >
> > Previously you said that there should be no MSM coverage
> > because there is no investigation and now you say that
> there
> > should be no MSM coverage until the investigation is over.
>
>
> No. You have been saying all along that Air America Radio
> is being investigated. You say this often to the exclusion
> of the city officials and the former CEO who were directly
> responsible for the transaction. I have been saying there
> -is- an investigation, but it is focused on the latter two
> parties.
>
> You then went on to question why the MSM is not covering
> this, in play with the talking point that there is some
> liberal media bias/conspiracy, and why there isn't an
> investigation of this. I replied that there is an
> investigation. The coverage we are getting now comes from a
> few newspapers who rightly focus on the parties who were
> involved, and from Newsmax & Friends the story is heavily
> slanted as a thinly veiled partisan attack on Air America
> Radio.
>
> I don't care whether the MSM media covers it or not. I am
> consistent on that point. Too many of my friends at Newsmax
> and the Unequalizer, and their supporters, do care and
> hypocritically say this story should be covered by
> investigative journalists, but things like the Karl Rove
> story cannot be covered by same reporters because that would
> "impede" an ongoing investigation.
>


Do you write the press releases for AAR?
 
Re: Ah, yes

> Wait, does Al Frankens maid know anything about Limbaughs
> illegal use of drugs? Wow, maybe I'm in the wrong business.
>

If you are a joke writer, you are. ;-)
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom