Slow Fade

[Radknowski]

From Inside Radio, Wednesday, 9-13-06:

Cash crunch at Air America Radio?But the picture looks murky from outside - hard to tell what's going on. There are rumors that Chairman Rob Glaser may be out of the mix, and that there are a couple of potential buyers for the New York-based progressive talk network and syndicator. We know that some support staffers were laid off earlier this week as Jerry Springer leaves the network lineup and there's a shuffling of morning and evening talent. Meanwhile a posting on ThinkProgress.org suggests that a "major restructuring" is coming on Friday - and they make the point that progressive talk is alive and well, with non-Air America talkers like Ed Schultz and Stephanie Miller growing their lineups.

So... is Air America on a respirator with intermittent beeps leading to a long sinusoidal tone? Or is there another White Night waiting and wanting to rescue it? WHLD doesn't seem to have done much and with the news of Ray Marks' retirement, one can only as if WHLD's progressive talk days are numbered.

KB hasn't set the AM band on its ear, so it's fair to ask if it would have done better with Adult Standards after WECK threw in the towel on that format. I'm on record as saying music doesn't cut it on AM, but it just might be that select formats such as oldies and standards might have a legitimate purpose on AM, and greater success than progressive talk.

It may simply be that Buffalo can't support more than 1.5 talk stations... WBEN would be the "1" and the ".5" would be WGR whenever the Sabres go to the playoffs. [/Mike]

 

[Mike Sheridan]

I led the charge to FM in the early days because it sounded better, had fewer commercials and it was like a new frountier full of stations and formats that I hadn't heard before.

Now FM in many markets is worse than AM ever was, long spot sets, overplayed, safe, over researched music. It's a bit like looking for Baked Alaska, at McDonalds. This is why people buy iPods and Satellite radio.

To have an oldies or standards format on AM would be great, but don't phone it in and don't voice track or automate it. If you paid so much for the station that you can't afford to staff it 24/7 with at least one live body then you paid too much. It's not like on air people make a lot of money. They do the job because they have a passion for it and want to communicate! As for being on AM we boomers aged and sadly our high frequency hearing is fading anyway.

All the talk about liberal and conservative national politics is a bit like talking about the weather. It doesn't really matter, you can't do much about it anyway. Has just one of these shows ever changed you mind about any issue?

 

[Element9]

Oldies and standards may be the last bastion of AM radio and good points have been made about the need for staffing and presentation, which brings up the discussion of the PERSONALITIES that often can be found on Standards and Oldies stations.

The truth is, Oldies and Standards offer some of the finest music ever recorded, however the PERSONALITIES that often staff these types of stations are from the old guard. Personalities that think listeners pine for recollections of the old days are doomed. The "back in the day stories" of the Beatles on Ed Sullivan and meeting Peter Noone as well as other chestnuts are of interest to only a small segment of the potential audience.

Lots of 18-35 year olds like Oldies and Standards but don't care for the geezer presentation. Don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting jocks talk about Greenday after playing Bobby Vee and I'm not minimizing the importance of live bodies in the mix. A point can be made that one of the reasons that KB failed as an Oldies station (other than the lousy jingles and music rotations) was the personalities' presentation and content. This contention may ruffle a few feathers here, but it's an arguable contention for which a good case can be made.

The best Oldies and Standards jocks realize that the best way to be successful is to live in the present and relate to what's happening now, not 1964. It's not a crime to call the format "Oldies" or "Music Of Your Life" as long as the presentation is centered in "today."
-9-

 

[hmmm]

HELLO McFly!!! You just hit the nail on the head. I'm in that geezer demo and I really don't want to re-live 1964,65,67 all over again, once was enough, thank you. Talk to me about what's happening today not what happened 30 years ago! By the way I still enjoy that music as well as Maroon 5 and Jack Johnson.

 

[Bob1370]

Air America's main problems have been twofold; 1) too many amateurs in the front office, and 2) not enough real radio pros on the air. It has sounded a lot like preachy stations of the ilk of New York City's WBAI, or some of the more painfully earnest college stations around the country.

There are plenty of real and successful pros among the ranks of progressive-minded hosts--Brother Wease in Rochester, Jay Marvin and Ed Schultz out in the Midwest, Stephanie Miller out on the coast, Jay Diamond and Lynn Samuels in New York all come to mind and that's FAR from a complete list. A progressive net could recruit people like that, along with Randi Rhodes (the one real pro Air America signed on with) and have a successful lineup. Why Air America didn't go in that direction, rather than recruit "names" better known for their notoriety than their ability to carry on spontaneous conversation for hours on end every day, is beyond me.

Radio has to do more than have a point of view. It has to entertain too. Air America's final chapter hasn't been written--maybe it won't be for a long time--but if it wants to survive much longer it has to figure that out. The one saving grace it has, is that conservative talk radio is giving it another chance through its evolution into something quite lame. Right wing radio has lost its own sense of humor and become far too preachy to entertain any longer, leaving an opportunity for anyone who wants to send a different message with entertaining wit. (Try listening to Rush these days and you'll see why blowtorch stations in big markets like Baltimore and Minneapolis-St. Paul are deciding they don't need him any more.)

 

[Philip_Airtime]

I'm not going to predict WHLD's days are numbered. But I will say any chance it had to be a player in the Buffalo talk radio market has passed. Ray Marks' decision to leave was a fatal blow. I used to listen to Ray at least two or three times per week. But I'll admit not tuning in since the Newsroom guys took over in the mornings. Their problem is they're not broadcasters. They're clearly intelligent. They know the issues. But they don't know how to do a radio show. I can't imagine that show gaining any traction in the market. Ray Marks and Alex Blair knew how to do a radio show. And their loss will be deeply felt. I was really rooting for this station when it started. And with the future of Air America uncertain, I agree with the title of this thread -- we're seeing a slow fade at WHLD.

 

[raymond_shaw]

I hear they're having a few problems lately and I have doubted from the beginning that they could be a player in the Buffalo market - has anyone ever heard of a startup AM building an audience base in recent years(not counting a few nostalgia formats courting upper demos). While losing Ray in the morning(is he still the GM?) is a blow, I should point out that they have a clever thing going.

The group that operates WHLD - Niagara Independent Media - originally ran as a non profit group that purchased(through donations) air time on WHLD to run Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman every morning. Now that they run the station, they run DN! and other Pacifica daily programming on a daily basis - for cash. Apparently yet another non profit group, Radio Free Buffalo, now purchases the airtime for these shows through donations from on-air solicits. NIM, in effect, has apparently gone from the leasee to the leaser. This makes WHLD sort of a quasi commercial-station.

In my opinion, if/when NIM purchases WHLD from Citadel, they might consider becoming a non for profit. KB could cherry pick any Air America programming they might want. I personally thing this is the future of at least much of AM radio - dead AM stations don't all have to go relgious.

BTW, there is a group in Rochester that has the funding to purchase DN! but no takers.

 

[Bob1370]

"BTW, there is a group in Rochester that has the funding to purchase DN! but no takers."

They seem to have set their sights on carriage on WXXI-AM, even though it's not a good formatic fit (advocacy shows stick out like a sore thumb on a straight-ahead news/talker) and therefore it's never going to happen on 1370.
I don't know if the Democracy Now advocates have approached Entercom to fund a slot for it on WROC-AM 950, but that show would be a much more natural fit there...and I'm sure Entercom would be more than happy to broker the time to bring in extra cash for the place.

 

[raymond_shaw]

They seem to have set their sights on carriage on WXXI-AM, even though it's not a good formatic fit (advocacy shows stick out like a sore thumb on a straight-ahead news/talker) and therefore it's never going to happen on 1370.
I don't know if the Democracy Now advocates have approached Entercom to fund a slot for it on WROC-AM 950, but that show would be a much more natural fit there...and I'm sure Entercom would be more than happy to broker the time to bring in extra cash for the place.

From what I heard along the grapevine, they gave up on XXI a long, long time ago. I hear they approached Entercom and didn't get a reply(despite having plenty of cash to give them on the spot) - perhaps the rumors are true and Entercom is selling WROC - or they have lost their fondness for money

 

[Bob1370]

"I hear they approached Entercom and didn't get a reply(despite having plenty of cash to give them on the spot) - perhaps the rumors are true and Entercom is selling WROC - or they have lost their fondness for money."

I doubt Entercom has become a charitable organization. ;-)

Leaving that aside, the ownership rules are in flux and no one knows if the FCC will leave them be, reinterpret them to let Entercom keep WROC, or tighten them. My money, especially since the staff report on the bad effects of media concentration got flushed out, is on nothing happening for the rest of this administration. And God knows what the FCC appointed by the next President will do. So selling or keeping WROC isn't even going to be decided until everyone knows what the ownership rules will be, and that won't be for some time. Their best course of action is to get as much money in through the door as they can while the station's still in their portfolio.

In that kind of environment, the Democracy Now fans may find that if they try again, Entercom might be interested in pulling in some extra bucks from their programming.

 

[judy_newtoradio]

I'm with the group that has been trying to purchase time on the air for 'Democracy Now'. We have been reading your discussions re. the changes at Entercom with some interest for a few weeks now. I have to say that we are pretty surprised that it is so difficult to get someone to take our money. I see some positive energy around WROC, but, truthfully, I don't hold out much hope for them because they didn't even return our call this last time. Maybe things are uncertain and they don't know for sure what will be going down, but if they had any interest in taking our money, I think they would have called us back. It is a very small courtesy.

As far as WXXI goes, you can call what they present, straight talk/news. but I perceive it as news within the (rather narrow) socially/politically acceptible spectrum that caters to the educated listener, and to offend no one in the middle political spectrum. I don't call that 'straight talk'. Nor do I consider 'Democracy Now' to be advocacy. 'Air America' is advocacy radio. It has a spin and it spins it. And I like Air America sometimes. When I'm in the right mood, Randi Roades picks me right up.

But 'Democracy Now' is something else. It merely reports facts that support a different perspective on what is happening. It doesn't spin them. 'Democracy Now' presents the information they present in a very straight forward 'news' format with very little commentary. I don't know of any news show where the moderator or anchor expresses less direct opinions than Amy does. What they do present is facts that cause one to consider alternative perspectives. This is 'heresy' not 'advocacy'.
I think that people need to hear more prespectives if they want to make informed choices. I consider Randi Roades entertainment, but 'Democracy Now' is news. Every station has some news. Why not some juicey, spicy interesting news.

WXXI was our first choice because it lends authority to it's content. NPR is kissed by the powers that be. A little additional content and perspective would enhance their presentation, not corrupt it. However, the people who police that space are utterly rigid, arrogant and fixed in their viewpoint. These are not qualities likely to come up with any particularly interesting insights. What I learned from our negotiation is that 'authority' is so heavily guarded as to be, from the standpoint of content, vacuous.

I feel very sad that WHLD is in trouble because what they are doing is great. They are adding something to the mix. They were our inspiration when we went to WROC, but we had no idea what a cold and unresponsive world we were approaching. We got a lot of information and encouragement from them. Their programming is truly creative and interesting. I would really like to see WHLD continue, but I see that there is a problem. The amount of money it takes to stay in the game appears to be prohibitive from the standpoint of people interested in communication.

For myself, I would think that people would like to hear something different at least some of the time. The same old news perspective is just as empty as the same old 25 oldies. A couple of weeks ago the FOX played the old Traffic song "John Barlycorn" one day, and I have been listening (albeit intermittently) ever since, in hopes of hearing another true classic.

So, we haven't given up. We are exploring other options. But it does seem rather sad that the establishment appears to be closed to us even if we have money. It is like there is this big open space that is owned and kept closed to the public so that the forms within will not be tarnished by content. No wonder AM radio is dying.

 

[SirRoxalot]

News?

As far as WXXI goes, you can call what they present, straight talk/news. but I perceive it as news within the (rather narrow) socially/politically acceptible spectrum that caters to the educated listener, and to offend no one in the middle political spectrum...

In other words, they're reporting the story in a truly "fair and balanced" way, which leans neither left nor right.

But 'Democracy Now' is something else. It merely reports facts that support a different perspective on what is happening. It doesn't spin them.

Reporting "facts that support a different perspective" isn't spin? I think I'm beginning to see WXXI's problem with the "Democrats Now" presentation. I learned that providing some of the facts that support any particular perspective was what we used to call "yellow journalism", or "slanted journalism" - both of which are oxymorons.

I think that people need to hear more prespectives if they want to make informed choices. I consider Randi Roades entertainment, but 'Democracy Now' is news. Every station has some news. Why not some juicey, spicy interesting news.

I agree that people need to hear more perspectives if they want to make informed choices. What you describe isn't "news", it's opinionand/or infotainment. News is neither "juicey" nor "spicy".

It sounds to me that WXXI is doing exactly what they should with a PUBLIC radio station - presenting content that of general interest from a balanced point of view. Should they present alternate perspectives? Yes. Should they present purported "news" that is slanted? No to my way of thinking.

I feel very sad that WHLD is in trouble because what they are doing is great. They are adding something to the mix. They were our inspiration when we went to WROC, but we had no idea what a cold and unresponsive world we were approaching. We got a lot of information and encouragement from them. Their programming is truly creative and interesting. I would really like to see WHLD continue, but I see that there is a problem. The amount of money it takes to stay in the game appears to be prohibitive from the standpoint of people interested in communication.

Well, my advice is that you gather several thousand of your closest friends and get them to listen to WHLD so that they show up in the ratings. Heck gather a few hundred of your closest friends, and they might approach a 1 share. Otherwise, it costs money to run a radio station, and nobody wants to put their money into somebody's personal soapbox.

Of course, I'm aware of the value of my own advice, so don't bother reminding me...

It is like there is this big open space that is owned and kept closed to the public so that the forms within will not be tarnished by content. No wonder AM radio is dying.

Obviously, you don't have enough money to compensate for the lack of interest from listeners.

 

[raymond_shaw]

Obviously, you don't have enough money to compensate for the lack of interest from listeners.

But it shouldn't be about having enough money, it should be about the federal government allowing as many diverse voices on the airwaves as possible.

LPFM has never taken place in urban areas because the NAB, protecting their own member's selfish interests, drove a truckload of money to Congress' door and got their way. Part of their lobbying efforts included sending members of congress a bogus CD ROMs, produced in a recording studio with distortion added to the audio to create what they say would happen to exisiting FMs if LPFM stations were to go on the air. The FCC's engineering department says this is crap.

It should be pointed out that NPR was lobbying against LPFM as well as the commercial chains. Everybody's looking out for their own self interest - the hell with everyone else. I wouldn't be surprised is changes soon.

 

[Radknowski]

I'm with the group that has been trying to purchase time on the air for 'Democracy Now'.We have been reading your discussions re. the changes at Entercom with some interest for a few weeks now. I have to say that we are pretty surprised that it is so difficult to get someone to take our money. I see some positive energy around WROC, but, truthfully, I don't hold out much hope for them because they didn't even return our call this last time. Maybe things are uncertain and they don't know for sure what will be going down, but if they had any interest in taking our money, I think they would have called us back. It is a very small courtesy.

Agreed. The least Mr. Doyle could do is to say "thank you for your interest." He's probably too busy trying to figure out what the hell he's gonna do with the money making stations Entercom just swallowed in the CBS Rochester cluster.

As far as WXXI goes, you can call what they present, straight talk/news; but I perceive it as news within the (rather narrow) socially/politically acceptible spectrum that caters to the educated listener, and to offend no one in the middle political spectrum. I don't call that 'straight talk'.

Guess I fall within that socio-economic spectrum. But I consider NPR and WBFO outstanding sources for in-depth, objective news and feature reporting to the extent that I get my second news fix from them every day (the first news fix comes from TV, the pictures help me wake up) and I must spend at least 20 minutes (total TSL, not one sitting) with the station each morning.

Nor do I consider 'Democracy Now' to be advocacy. 'Air America' is advocacy radio. It has a spin and it spins it. And I like Air America sometimes. When I'm in the right mood, Randi Roades picks me right up.

But 'Democracy Now' is something else. It merely reports facts that support a different perspective on what is happening. It doesn't spin them. 'Democracy Now' presents the information they present in a very straight forward 'news' format with very little commentary. I don't know of any news show where the moderator or anchor expresses less direct opinions than Amy does.What they do present is facts that cause one to consider alternative perspectives. This is 'heresy' not 'advocacy'.

I think that people need to hear more prespectives (sic) if they want to make informed choices. I consider Randi Roades entertainment, but 'Democracy Now' is news. Every station has some news. Why not some juicey, spicy interesting news.

This line actually made me laugh... almost as much as "Fair and Balanced" makes me laugh whenever I stumble upon that bilge that is known as Fox News. "Juicy News" bwahhhhha-ha that is genuinely funny. You should start using that phrase. The source for Juicy News. Get a big ballsy voiced announcer to do your bumpers and intros. I'm nearly serious.

WXXI was our first choice because it lends authority to it's content. NPR is kissed by the powers that be. A little additional content and perspective would enhance their presentation, not corrupt it.

WXXI apparently doesn't need heresy.

I feel very sad that WHLD is in trouble because what they are doing is great.They are adding something to the mix.

Yes, and all of 28 listeners who cume the station love what it's doing; "something new" doesn't equate to attracting and building a salable audience.

They were our inspiration when we went to WROC, but we had no idea what a cold and unresponsive world we were approaching. We got a lot of information and encouragement from them. Their programming is truly creative and interesting.

No. For the most part, their programming is inept and pathetic. You mentioned "news" earlier. You should know that a talk radio station cannot succeed without a bonafide 24-7 news department. WHLD will NEVER put a dent in WBEN. Ever.

For myself, I would think that people would like to hear something different at least some of the time....

....We are exploring other options.But it does seem rather sad that the establishment appears to be closed to us even if we have money.It is like there is this big open space that is owned and kept closed to the public so that the forms within will not be tarnished by content.No wonder AM radio is dying.

It's good that you posted your observations, having been watching this thread unfold. When I made the initial post, I based it on what I had read and observed concerning Air America.

If you, as your screen name suggests, are in fact "new to radio," you might learn a few things from reading and posting on these boards. We welcome the dialogue. Most of us are tolerant of other's opinions (despite the appearance of smug-assed-know-it-alls). In this sense, these boards may be much like Democracy Now. We extract truth and facts from stories and use those facts to bolster our contentions to create arguments about issues facing broadcasting, radio and the Buffalo-Rochester markets. There's a PhD and a JD who post here, and of course, guys like Sir Roxalot who, while obstinate and opinionated, often makes valid points. I will be the first to admit that many of MY posts are based on what I INTERPRET to be the facts. I will also freely admit that I am NOT always right.

Much of what I hear on Progressive Talk and Democratic-Liberal Talk Radio is lacking. Let me say however, that I've admired "Big Ed" Schultz for a long time and as much as she sounds like a dreadful harpie, Randi Rhodes knows how to do talk radio. She and Ed are equal to the challenge of Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly and the other conservative spinmeisters and gasbags.

Take no offense, but what is heard from Democracy Now is eminently boring. Soporific. While posing interesting counterpoints to the bile excreted by the republican media machines such as Fox news, Democracy Now and much of the local programming on WHLD just doesn't have a lot of entertainment value. Scoff if you like, but Limbaugh knows how to entertain. So does Ed Schultz. Hell, even NPR knows how to weave a fairly attractive tapestry consisting of factual news and entertainment. Democracy Now? Droll. Like eating dried latex paint chips.

The democratic spin machine needs to get a clue. It gets trapped between NPR (which I believe is a very sound and credible news source) and the rightwing agenda's heavy hitters who are very capable and entertaining. When labor-based radio, the lefties and progressives figure out just who the hell they are and who their audience is, perhaps it will result in a radio station that can contend and eventually beat an entrenched right wing monolith like WBEN. It's not impossible, just arduous. You may get some help from a guy like Randy Michaels, who helped invent Rush and now backs Big Ed Schultz. Michaels knows it takes a street brawl to unseat the entrenched powers. It can get pretty bloody out there.

If you want to wave your money in front of a local manager-owner-operator, you might try WJJL or WLVL, both of which have daytime signals that cover at least the northern suburbs of Erie county. It's a fair bet they'd be happy to take your cash.[/Mike]

 

[judy_newtoradio]

If you, as your screen name suggests, are in fact "new to radio," you might learn a few things from reading and posting on these boards. We welcome the dialogue.

I am indeed new to considering radio from the business standpoint, but actually, I have already been learning by reading your posts. And I appreciate your generous response to my introductory post.
I'm not going to run off the page, but I would like to respond to a couple of your remarks.

WXXI apparently doesn't need heresy.

This made me laugh. Neither did the Catholic church, but what can you do. That doesn't mean it doesn't have an audience.

Take no offense, but what is heard from Democracy Now is eminently boring. Soporific. While posing interesting counterpoints to the bile excreted by the republican media machines such as Fox news, Democracy Now and much of the local programming on WHLD just doesn't have a lot of entertainment value.

I can't disagree. Democracy Now is 'news' not 'entertainment'. Leaving WHLD out of the discussion for the moment, DN is a 1hr news show that frequently adds something to what is covered on NPR, and during national or international crises, it often has the story before they do. It's only boring if you are expecting entertainment.

For entertainment, Randi's 'got it all goin on'. I saw a clip of her online one day, from a regular news show where she was a guest. She was completely sane and normal, and expressed a well reasoned opinion in a serious tone. It knocked me out. I had forgotten that her radio personna is just that, a personna, entertainment.

But, Democracy Now has lots of fans and we still want to put it on the air. Your recomendations are probably good, but we live in Rochester and I think northern Erie county would put us in competition with WHLD, which I would not want do. There isn't much open to us in Rochester right now, but we're looking at micro-transmitters for low power am.
Cheers!

 

[Call Me Sherlock]

Judy, have you considered podcasts?

 

[Element9]

But, Democracy Now has lots of fans and we still want to put it on the air.Your recomendations are probably good, but we live in Rochester and I think northern Erie county would put us in competition with WHLD, which I would not want do. There isn't much open to us in Rochester right now, but we're looking at micro-transmitters for low power am.
Cheers!

Rather than low-power Part 15 transmitters, consider carrying real time audio on your website or podcasts, as suggested by Sherlock. With the possibility of Entercom having to spin off a few Rochester FM's from the CBS purchase, you might want to contact Mr. Doyle's bosses and explore the possibility of buying one of the FM's. Also, Bob Savage's AM has a fairly good signal in the Rochester Metro, which will get even better, especially during the day, when 1040 WYSL increases power.
-9-

 

[dampier]

As far as WXXI goes, you can call what they present, straight talk/news. but I perceive it as news within the (rather narrow) socially/politically acceptible spectrum that caters to the educated listener, and to offend no one in the middle political spectrum. I don't call that 'straight talk'. Nor do I consider 'Democracy Now' to be advocacy. 'Air America' is advocacy radio. It has a spin and it spins it. And I like Air America sometimes. When I'm in the right mood, Randi Roades picks me right up.

WXXI's management will never run Democracy Now no matter how many postcards Metro Justice hands out, so I'd give it up as far as they're concerned. My suspicion is that WXXI doesn't want to air programming that makes them a political target, so they stay in the safe zone. WXXI is fine for news and informational programming, and they have the only local talk programming that respects the listener's intelligence, but is not going to be a place for advocacy programming.

But 'Democracy Now' is something else. It merely reports facts that support a different perspective on what is happening. It doesn't spin them. 'Democracy Now' presents the information they present in a very straight forward 'news' format with very little commentary. I don't know of any news show where the moderator or anchor expresses less direct opinions than Amy does. What they do present is facts that cause one to consider alternative perspectives. This is 'heresy' not 'advocacy'.

Listen, I like Amy Goodman and I have no problem with DN, but we have to be honest. DR is like Fox News on the left. It chooses topics that interest a left-leaning audience, brings amplification to left-wing opinionmakers and it dwells on their issues. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It belongs on the radio.

Since WROC already has a relationship with Metro Justice, call them and find out who they are talking to at WROC. You need to realize WROC is a totally automated second-thought operation to Entercom. They don't have a staff sitting there just thinking about what WROC is programming that day. Instead one employee can have responsibilities at multiple Entercom stations locally, and trust me, WROC is not their priority. As far as a weekday run, perhaps with Randi Rhodes shrinking her show by one hour, there might be some extra time somewhere, but that window won't stay open long. And you can't expect them to run the show live.

So, we haven't given up. We are exploring other options. But it does seem rather sad that the establishment appears to be closed to us even if we have money. It is like there is this big open space that is owned and kept closed to the public so that the forms within will not be tarnished by content. No wonder AM radio is dying.

You might also talk to the college radio stations in town and see if anything can be done there as well.

 

[judy_newtoradio]

Thanks everyone for all the great advice.
I did think about Real Audio and Podcasts, but DN already does that on their own website, and basically, all websites are available in the same locations, so it really doesn't make sense. If we did links to our special interests, I think we could give them a promo and a link. I have to talk to some people.
Philip, your description of DN's leaning left is accurate. I don't know if I would class it with Fox, but it is a little different than Rush Limbaugh and those guys. It's one thing to pick your topics and your experts, another to rant and rave and attack anyone who disagrees. But the point is, as you say, we can use the balance. DN belongs on the air.
We are having fun with our transmitter, but I think it would be a good idea to be a little more persistent with WROC. I am going to address that. Also, I am not sure what you mean by Bob Savage's AM, but I will ask around. I didn't think we had another real option.
I would love to buy one of the fms, but I am not sure we have the resources.
Thanks again.
Judy

 

[AMonFM]

Take no offense, but what is heard from Democracy Now is eminently boring. Soporific. While posing interesting counterpoints to the bile excreted by the republican media machines such as Fox news, Democracy Now and much of the local programming on WHLD just doesn't have a lot of entertainment value. Scoff if you like, but Limbaugh knows how to entertain. So does Ed Schultz. Hell, even NPR knows how to weave a fairly attractive tapestry consisting of factual news and entertainment. Democracy Now? Droll. Like eating dried latex paint chips.

I'm from the other end of the state, so don't often post on this board. But I do lurk, and I've gotta say that Mike is right on the money with this statement. Here in Albany, we have Democracy Now on one of our local college stations (WRPI), and it seems like I have to go out of my way to absorb an hour of this show. The topics are mostly interesting, but the overall presentation is the electronic equivalent of Sominex. To the point where I'll tune in to see whats being talked about, then click off the radio and just surf the web for the info.
NPR on the other hand can be reasonably balanced, but they also have the production skills necessary to actually keep an 'educated' listener interested, even if the material has a CBC-like mundaneness. Unlike WNY however, our public radio station (WAMC) does - sometimes blantantly - lean toward the political left, so public radio is a poor example of 'balanced' in these parts (unlike neighboring North Country Public Radio which is strictly a local full-service public radio station with no political agenda, a refreshing change for the few of us down here in the state capital that can hear it).

I'll agree with the gallery here: Democracy Now would be better suited to live on a college radio signal, vs. a commercial outlet. And for those parties trying to get it on the air in WNY, perhaps a cheaper alternative.