Sheldon Drobny On Air America

[Scribbler]

Interesting post by Air America founder Sheldon Drobny on Huffington Post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-drobny/air-america-complaint-dep_b_28024.html

An excerpt:

I am no longer a part of management nor do I have anything to do with programming. I agree with many of the criticisms of AAR, but I am only a minority owner. As a result, my wife and I started a company to acquire radio stations to support the liberal talk format. We have stations in Phoenix and Little Rock and we saved Air America in Phoenix after a Christian radio company bought the AAR affiliate in Phoenix. With the help of the community and our resources, we paid $500,000 to get AAR back on the air in Phoenix. We handle our own programming in Phoenix and Little Rock and some of it is the best that Air America offers.

 

[fred flintstone]

Interesting post by Air America founder Sheldon Drobny on Huffington Post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-drobny/air-america-complaint-dep_b_28024.html

An excerpt:

I am no longer a part of management nor do I have anything to do with programming. I agree with many of the criticisms of AAR, but I am only a minority owner. As a result, my wife and I started a company to acquire radio stations to support the liberal talk format. We have stations in Phoenix and Little Rock and we saved Air America in Phoenix after a Christian radio company bought the AAR affiliate in Phoenix. With the help of the community and our resources, we paid $500,000 to get AAR back on the air in Phoenix. We handle our own programming in Phoenix and Little Rock and some of it is the best that Air America offers.

Interesting article.

I find it interesting that Drobny seems to voice many of the criticisms that I and others (otherwise sympathetic to progressive talk radio) have made on this board.

He says dissatisfaction with aspects of AAR led him to back local stations in Phoenix and Little Rock. But those stations appear to have made little use of alternative progressive talk programming sources and still appears to see progressive talk and AAR as synonomous.

Drobny has expressed public support for the Palestinians, concern for the plight and criticism of Israel ("Zionists"). AAR on the hand appears generally pro-Israel. It seems strange he does not mention this.

Drobny makes a point of mentioning early contacts with Bill and Hillary and Al Gore (and their contacts) being instrumental in the founding of AAR. This seems to support the view that AAR is an organ of the DLC (so-called "centrist" or "moderate") Democrats, rather truely representing the views of "progressives" in the Democractic party.

I admire Drobny's willingness to put his money where his mouth is.

 

[Scribbler]

fred flintstone wrote:
Drobny has expressed public support for the Palestinians, concern for the plight and criticism of Israel ("Zionists"). AAR on the hand appears generally pro-Israel. It seems strange he does not mention this.


Huh? Two of the three AAR talkers that I listen to, Rhodes and Malloy, are ANTI-Israel, or at least "anti" the policies of the current Israeli government. Franken is the only pro-Israel talker that I've heard on AAR, although I wouldn't be surprised if Springer is too.

Drobny makes a point of mentioning early contacts with Bill and Hillary and Al Gore (and their contacts) being instrumental in the founding of AAR. This seems to support the view that AAR is an organ of the DLC (so-called "centrist" or "moderate") Democrats, rather truely representing the views of "progressives" in the Democractic party.


He says just the opposite...that the people he contacted through Bill and Hillary and Gore did NOT support AAR. Here's what he wrote:

At the time, I was a big donor to the Democratic Party and had personal contacts with Bill and Hillary Clinton as well as Al and Tipper Gore. They opened the door for me to meet with everyone on both coasts to try to raise some follow-on money for our project.

We had hundreds of meetings with the kind of people and organizations that collectively were worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Not a single one made an investment with us although many promises were made.

And Rhodes and Malloy certainly are NOT "moderate" Democrats. I don't think Maddow and Seder are either, although with my schedule I rarely get to hear them. And of course, to the ears of most conservatives, everybody on AAR is a wild-eyed left-wing extremist.

 

[fred flintstone]

And of course, to the ears of most conservatives, everybody on AAR is a wild-eyed left-wing extremist.

Won't argue that! ;D

 

[Radio_Realist]

Drobny makes a point of mentioning early contacts with Bill and Hillary and Al Gore (and their contacts) being instrumental in the founding of AAR. This seems to support the view that AAR is an organ of the DLC (so-called "centrist" or "moderate") Democrats, rather truely representing the views of "progressives" in the Democractic party.

This is where the confusion over the terms "liberal" and "progressive" comes from. While there are some on the extreme right who regard everyone else in the world as "extreme left", many of the policies that the Clintons and Al Gore have advocated are hardly "centerist" or "moderate". This is not the proper place to argue whether or not the Clintons' plan to turn the American healthcare system over to socialism is good or bad. But, whether one supports or opposes that socialist healthcare plan, it is impossible to accurately describe it as anything other than socialist. Likewise, whether one agrees or disagrees with Al Gore's stand on environmental issues, one cannot argue that it is anything but socialist.

As I said, discussing whether one believes that socialism is a good thing or a bad thing is not appropriate for this forum. But when discussing the point of view on the political spectrum that a given news/talk network or program has staked out for itself, the issue of whether or not advocating socialism is accurately described as "centerist" or "moderate" is germane. If "progressive" means "centerist" or "moderate", and the hosts on AAR support socialist agendas which are far to the left of "centerist" or "moderate", then it follows that the term "progressive" is not an appropriate or accurate descriptor.

 

[evnlee]

As I said, discussing whether one believes that socialism is a good thing or a bad thing is not appropriate for this forum. But when discussing the point of view on the political spectrum that a given news/talk network or program has staked out for itself, the issue of whether or not advocating socialism is accurately described as "centerist" or "moderate" is germane. If "progressive" means "centerist" or "moderate", and the hosts on AAR support socialist agendas which are far to the left of "centerist" or "moderate", then it follows that the term "progressive" is not an appropriate or accurate descriptor.

well put! your sure to get someone upset, but words mean things, and so do labels. If some people have a problem with 'labels' then they should be secure enough in thier own political ideology to say 'I am a liberal because....' and not try to change the terms or hide behind other meanings.