Progressive Talk returns to Boston radio!

[Blackroc]

I like Hartmann. He's not the best broadcaster, but he's never going to get banned in Britain like some we know. He has a good show.
Miller is very good. I can't say I'm a fan of Big Ed, but he isn't bad.

 

[SonicOverload]

Progressive radio is nothing but hate radio. How much is the station being paid to carry this?

Pretty obvious that you have never listened to Thom Hartmann. Although Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy definitely do sink into the hate-speech category fairly often, I can't recall Hartmann EVER doing hate speech. (And it sounds as if you've never listened to right-wing talk radio either. You'd be hard pressed to name even ONE right-wing talk host who does anything besides hate radio.)

well, Dan Rea is a pretty civil right-winger/conservative. Hartmann is milquetoast and has a pleasant manner... but it was fun listening to him very effectively debate uber-conservative Congressman Steve King from Iowa the other day.

 

[raccoonradio]

Dan Rea's catchphrase is: "I don't care what you think just so long as you're thinking." Call him, debate him,
just so long as you have a conversation (i.e., make your point, allow him to respond, instead of making a speech...) A couple weeks back I was listening and (can't remember the topic) he had several left-leaning callers on; he was polite to all of them and it was stimulating discussion.

 

[DanStrassberg]

well, Dan Rea is a pretty civil right-winger/conservative. Hartmann is milquetoast and has a pleasant manner... but it was fun listening to him very effectively debate uber-conservative Congressman Steve King from Iowa the other day.

I've always considered Rea to be a MODERATE Republican--a dying reed these days, ESPECIALLY among talk hosts. But there is a real right-winger who, by and large, does not deal in hate speech: Barry Farber. He's well into his '70s, if not his '80s, although I don't think he sounds it. You can hear him from 2:00AM to 4:00AM on WBIX 1060--assuming that you can pull in the night signal. Farber has no use for Democrats, but I think I have heard him interview one or two and I don't think he was unpleasant, mocking, or derisive and he didn't resort to name calling. If he does any of those things, I think he saves them for when he doesn't have a Democrat on the phone or in the studio.

 

[fm100fan]

Great... we all bought into the saint Obama mantra, now look at the mess we're in. Liberal talk = trash.... liberals make about as much sense as a talking horse.

 

[raccoonradio]

Of course we need to use the term "progressive" these days, as folks like Reagan demonized the word "liberal"

Confusing things even more, some people who are considered conservative these days are also known
as "classical liberals"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberal

>>Modern-day American liberalism is a descendant of progressivism. A segment of modern-day American conservatism is the direct descendant of classical liberalism. The term fiscal conservative usually refers to free-market–oriented people who use classical liberalism as their conception of understanding economics.

And keeping this in terms of radio: is a station like WWZN aiming to just appeal to the hardcore left, or perhaps to
those who are more moderate as well (perhaps to the entire "center-left" realm?) If shows are entertaining they conceivably could appeal to all...having a niche is good but appealing to a broader audience can help make a profit. (Thus libtalk, er, progtalk, should blend in some non-political subjects to draw other
audiences in. Heck, have Mighty John in to discuss record collecting. Talk about where you've travelled lately.
Discuss what really irritates you about TV, or supermarkets, or the Net...All politics will get a dedicate audience; and a small one...)

 

[ArtSpooner]

Let's see I have this straight. Conservative talk radio is called right wing extremist hate radio and Liberal radio is called progressive talk radio. Is that about right?

 

[DanStrassberg]

Let's see I have this straight. Conservative talk radio is called right wing extremist hate radio and Liberal radio is called progressive talk radio. Is that about right?

No, it's quite inaccurate. I don't know the names that the various righty talk hosts use to characterize the much smaller number of Progressive talkers, but they have foul-mouthed names a-plenty for their left-wing counterparts. The righties own the playing field for talk on commercial radio. They ARE the major leagues. By comparison, Progressive talk is like Single-A baseball. Why are you bothered so much the presence of this genre that can't compete (in part, because of a highly organized right-wing campaign to choke off ad $$$ for Progressive talk) and is struggling just to maintain a tiny foothold in the few markets where it hasn't yet been pushed off the air?

 

[Dighton Rockhead]

And keeping this in terms of radio: is a station like WWZN aiming to just appeal to the hardcore left, or perhaps to
those who are more moderate as well (perhaps to the entire "center-left" realm?)

You are kidding......right?

The only thing 1510 is appealing to is it's own bottom line!

In case you've forgotten......1510 is...in essence, a 50,000 watt 'billboard', selling space to anyone who wants to get thier message out. In that context, the liberal brokered talk people matter just as much as the bowel health infomercials and Brother Stair. Just so long as the checks clear, they'll all be just fine.

 

[DanStrassberg]

In case you've forgotten......1510 is...in essence, a 50,000 watt 'billboard', selling space to anyone who wants to get thier message out.

But it is legitimate to ask to whom Jeff Santos, the independent program producer and the person who leases the time from WWZN, wants to appeal. There can be little dobut that many of the local listeners to Progressive talk on WWZN regard both the current President and his administration and at least one of the talk hosts in the WWZN lineup (Ed Schultz) as too conservative. These people would rather hear Randi Rhodes and Mike Malloy. The fact that neither one is on WWZN may reflect something about Santos's own preferences, but more likely, it reflects the more centrist views of the program syndicator, Dial-Global (formerly Jones Radio Networks), with whom Santos was able to make a deal. (I conjecture that Dial-Global is putting up some of the money that Santos is using to lease the time on WWZN.) Dial-Global does not syndicate either Rhodes or Malloy. Oddly, though, Rhodes' latest syndication deal is with Clear Channel's Premiere Networks, which syndicates Rush Limbaugh and is involved in the syndication of Sean Hannity. Clear Channel management is notoriously right of center.

 

[ArtSpooner]

Let's see I have this straight. Conservative talk radio is called right wing extremist hate radio and Liberal radio is called progressive talk radio. Is that about right?

No, it's quite inaccurate. I don't know the names that the various righty talk hosts use to characterize the much smaller number of Progressive talkers, but they have foul-mouthed names a-plenty for their left-wing counterparts.

You don't know the names, but you know they're foul mouthed? Sounds like another way of saying "extremist hate radio" to me.

 

[magpie]

And keeping this in terms of radio: is a station like WWZN aiming to just appeal to the hardcore left, or perhaps to
those who are more moderate as well (perhaps to the entire "center-left" realm?)

You are kidding......right?

The only thing 1510 is appealing to is it's own bottom line!

In case you've forgotten......1510 is...in essence, a 50,000 watt 'billboard', selling space to anyone who wants to get thier message out. In that context, the liberal brokered talk people matter just as much as the bowel health infomercials and Brother Stair. Just so long as the checks clear, they'll all be just fine.

My cat has a really nice purr. If I can get a sponsor, we're gonna put him on the air on WWZN....