YOUR "FAIR" SCHEDULE

[gr8oldies]

OK, professional and amateur PDs alike. Its 2009, Hillary or Barack is President, its a Democratic majority in both houses and the 2009 version of the Fairness Doctrine goes into effect Monday. You're the PD of the dominant news talker who runs morning news 5-9am , Glenn Beck or Mike McConnell 9-12, Rush 12-3p, Hannity 3p-6p, Savage 6-10, I'm not sure who 10-12 and George Noory overnights. You know that liberal interest groups have all of their complaint paperwork ready to be filed Monday morning, What shows do you drop, what do you add or do you abandon the format?

 

[Radio_Realist]

What shows do you drop,

I drop them all, and switch to Jack.

 

[smedge2006]

I drop them all, and switch to Jack.

On an AM? Seriously?

AM stations had choices in 1987. Many of them stuck with music for too long. Changing back to a music format now would be economic suicide, far worse for the bottom line than any horrors your imagination can concoct with regards to any Fairness Doctrine, even the totally imaginary "stopwatch" scenario that sends chills down conservative spines. (PD's did not stand in front of their talk hosts with stopwatches in the 1980's, I can assure you.)

If your imaginary FD came in tomorrow, my plan would be: Local, local, local. Local liberal and conservative hosts in alternating shifts with overlap, one host goes on the previous show and they fight it out. Promote "Battles of the Talk Show Hosts" because you would have a lineup of people on the air who would actually disagree with each other on major issues. This sort of thing is what successful talk stations did in the 70's and 80's under the "STALINIST HORROR" of FD. And kept doing until Rush Limbaugh arrived and Talk PD's stopped growing talent and started paint-by-syndicated-numbers radio.

 

[Radio_Realist]

On an AM? Seriously?

Sorry. In the market where I listen to the radio, the best talk stations in town are both on FM. We have a news/talk station, a hot talk station station, and a Christian talk station, all on FM. There's still an AM talk station that has 100% of the over 60 audience with their radio's tuning dials rusted to 1020 AM.

So, if I had to do something and it had to be on an AM station, I guess polkas or "The Music of Your Life".

The point is, I wouldn't want to even bother with the crap that would go along with trying to comply with any sort of Fairness Doctrine II. Forget what the old one said, it's dead and gone. Any new Fairness Doctrine will, in this litigious day and age, be a pure nightmare and something better off being totally avoided.

Of course, that would be the goal of any new Fairness Doctrine, wouldn't it?

 

[MikefromDelaware]

I'd air the morning news 5am-9am then Glenn Beck 9-12noon, then Bill Press's show even if taped delayed, then Limbaugh in delay, afternoon news drivetime, Randy Rhodes in delay, then Hannity in delay, and Bohannan live. That's about as balanced as you could make it. Granted the station would probably lose it's shirt as the conservative listeners would tune out during the lib shows and the lib listeners would tune out during the conservative shows and possibly neither would tune back. We radio geeks forget that the average listener doesn't play with their radio's they just tune in to their favorite station and leave it there. So conservative talk fans tune in to the station that brings them Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity. Where as the lib talk fans when they listen to talk probably tune in to NPR, but if they tune in to other lib talkers they'd stay there.

Another way possibly to deal with this is if you own two stations in the same market, have one air conservative talk with promos telling listeners about the lib talk on their sister station. On the lib sister station have promos telling listeners about the conservative talk on their sister station.

Bottom line to this is, the so called "fairness doctrine" is an out dated doctrine that serves no real useful purpose in improving the broadcast day of any radio station. Yes allow the market to decide rather than the pointed headed people running Washington DC. NPR does well, so there are libs listening there. Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity all do well, again so there are conservatives listening there. Actually I listen to both, Beck, Limbaugh and NPR, sometimes to Hannity. What's not fair about the fairness doctrine is that the libs are only targeting radio, why not network television that is basically liberal? Whoops, I guess I just answered my own question. Not many if any conservative talk shows, editorialists, or news reporters on ABC, CBS, NBC, or PBS. Seems unbalanced if you ask me.

 

[smedge2006]

Yes allow the market to decide rather than the pointed headed people running Washington DC.

Just keep repeating your talking points, folks. Washington didn't micromanage talk radio programming in the FD days and it wouldn't now. There was talk radio in the FD period and there would be now if we had one. Music of Your Life is a 55-plus buy and the possibility of getting younger demos with the talk format is far more attractive than the alleged problems of any imaginable (and at this point, it's all imagination and speculation) FD.

By the way, most NPR stations run classical music for most of the day. They aren't even talkers, much less fountainheads for left-of-center talking points.

 

[david5258]

in columbus, cc tried to do exactly that--conservative and local talk on 610wtvn and error amerika on 1230. along the way, error amerika went into bankruptcy, cc tanked 1230 and put tier 2 conservatalk on 1230. now 610 has local am, mornings and pm drive(conservative), el rushbo, savage, hannity and norry. 1230 has people like laura ingraham, rusty humphries AND otherss. to add more "balance into the equation". tedmusic fm became talkfm with bob and tom(liberal), glenn beck(conservative), dennis miller(comedy talk????), local drive time sports and fox sports overnights. tvn is STILL the dominant station in the market.

 

[smedge2006]

in columbus, cc tried to do exactly that--conservative and local talk on 610wtvn and error amerika on 1230. along the way, error amerika went into bankruptcy, cc tanked 1230 and put tier 2 conservatalk on 1230. now 610 has local am, mornings and pm drive(conservative), el rushbo, savage, hannity and norry. 1230 has people like laura ingraham, rusty humphries AND otherss. to add more "balance into the equation". tedmusic fm became talkfm with bob and tom

1230 doesn't balance anything -- it is conservative. Its only purpose is to keep somebody else from putting those shows on the air. Since they are both under the same ownership, obviously they're not TRYING to beat 610 with 1230 -- if anything, the experience of 1230 in Columbus shows what a bad idea it was to dump liberal talk in that market. Ditto Cincinnati, where 1360 is now onto its second post-progressive talk format. By the way, Dennis Miller would definitely fall into the "conservative" column nowadays. If you don't believe me, listen to his show if you are able.

Conservative talk is not a thousand success stories. It's a few heritage stations with good syndicated stuff, plus a lot of also-rans that survive with no staff and no overhead despite having second-tier syndicated stuff.

We don't want them "pointy heads" in Washington dictating content. No sir ee Bob. Let's leave it to the pointy heads like the Dickey brothers and Ed Atsinger with their lack of localism and cookie-cutter syndicrap that survives economically despite low ratings and does nothing but undermine the longterm future of radio.

Question: Does being conservative mean hating local radio?

 

[Radio_Realist]

Washington didn't micromanage talk radio programming in the FD days and it wouldn't now.

That was then, this is now. The people in charge in Washington in the days of the old Fairness Doctrine are, for the most part, retired or dead. In the past two decades there has been a serious turnover in personnel in the government. Maybe the woman who was married to the Governor of Arkansas didn't have much input in the operation of the FCC, but that woman is now attempting to become President. You can't judge what she'll do now based on what different people did back then.

What convincing argument can you make that the current leaders of the Democrat Party are going to to the exact same things their predecessors did two decades ago or longer?

There was talk radio in the FD period and there would be now if we had one.

Not that much, and it tended to be self-censored. But even more important is the point you keep ignoring, the "inconvenient truth" that just won't go away. The old Fairness Doctrine said one thing. A new Fairness Doctrine, if passed, will say something different. Can you grasp that concept? Can you understand that this isn't about dusting off the old Fairness Doctrine, it is about writing a brand new one?

at this point, it's all imagination and speculation

Maybe you do get it, after all. Perhaps you should look at the question as it was posed in the first post of this thread. "Its 2009, Hillary or Barack is President, its a Democratic majority in both houses and the 2009 version of the Fairness Doctrine goes into effect Monday." That's asking about a scenario in which the Democrat Party is totally back in charge, with a carte blanche to write whatever sort of legislation they want. We're not talking about a compromise Fariness Doctrine that's watered down enough to either not get vetoed or at least bland enough that a few Rinos can be talked into selling out the GOP to over-ride a veto.

We're talking Hilary (or Obama) getting exactly what they want in Fairness Doctrine II. And, even if it's Obama instead of Hilary, that still means that Pelosi will also be involved, as well as Dennis the Menace. So what makes you think that if the Democrats take over total control of the government, they'll enact a mild, watered-down, fair new edition of the Fairness Doctrine?

By the way, most NPR stations run classical music for most of the day. They aren't even talkers,

NPR's drive time programming isn't "talk" radio in the sense of one host for hours with the occasional phone caller. But their drive-time programming is "spoken word", it mostly covers news and politics, and includes both news and "analysis", which is a code word for "after we tell you the news, we'll give you the liberal spin on the stories". The fact that NPR's drive time programming doesn't have the same structure as a typical commercial news/talk program doesn't lessen it's appeal to people who enjoy listening to spoken word programming and who also enjoy hearing liberal propaganda that they can enjoy agreeing with.

And, for what it's worth, the primary NPR station in my market plays jazz during non drive-time hours. The secondary NPR station plays classical, but only carries NPR headlines. The tertiary NPR station plays eclectic rock and AAA, plus NPR's headlines.

Question: Does being conservative mean hating local radio?

No, it means hating third-rate, semi-pro, minor league radio.

 

[evnlee]

Yes allow the market to decide rather than the pointed headed people running Washington DC.

Just keep repeating your talking points, folks. Washington didn't micromanage talk radio programming in the FD days and it wouldn't now. There was talk radio in the FD period and there would be now if we had one. Music of Your Life is a 55-plus buy and the possibility of getting younger demos with the talk format is far more attractive than the alleged problems of any imaginable (and at this point, it's all imagination and speculation) FD.

By the way, most NPR stations run classical music for most of the day. They aren't even talkers, much less fountainheads for left-of-center talking points.

all this speculation is about whether the next administration would use the 'new improved FD' to 'balance' talk radio and get the liberal message out is a misplaced. The true intent is to eliminate the format entirely, even if it means sacrificing thier own.

read this:

http://www.aim.org/aim_column/5577_0_3_0_C/

 

[justareporter]

There's that paranoia again.

 

[Radio_Realist]

There's that paranoia again.

When they really are out to get you, paranoia is nothing but right thinking.

 

[MikefromDelaware]

We don't want them "pointy heads" in Washington dictating content. No sir ee Bob. Let's leave it to the pointy heads like the Dickey brothers and Ed Atsinger with their lack of localism and cookie-cutter syndicrap that survives economically despite low ratings and does nothing but undermine the longterm future of radio.

Question: Does being conservative mean hating local radio?

Low ratings? Rush has the #1 radio show of all time. As far as I have been able to find out, no other radio show ever has had as large of an audience as Limbaugh's. Like him or hate him, bottom line is the guy has been successful. Same with Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Michael Savage. Someone is listening to those shows. Limbaugh's on over 600+ radio stations, the others are on 300+, not bad. Air America would have liked to have had that many stations. You may not agree with their politics, but you can't argue with success and Conservative Talk Radio has been very successful and like it or not Liberal Talk radio OTHER than NPR has not been successful.

No being conservative doesn't mean hating local talk radio. Just like with television, not much local programming there, why are you not complaining about the lack of local yokel shows on TV? Because generally the local shows just are not as good as the nationally produced product, due to the lack of money involved, same with radio. Some local radio talk shows are good, but many are not. So just as the television industry and the viewers favor nationally produced programming over local yokel (the local news being the exception to this rule) so goes radio. Just as in the 1930's and 40's the best radio shows were network nationally produced shows, same goes for talk radio in the 21st century.

 

[smedge2006]

Question: Does being conservative mean hating local radio?

No, it means hating third-rate, semi-pro, minor league radio.

Then you must by that definition hate Mark Levin, Rusty Humphries, and anybody who's on a Salem station.

No being conservative doesn't mean hating local talk radio. Just like with television, not much local programming there, why are you not complaining about the lack of local yokel shows on TV?

For the second half of the 20th century, radio was a local medium. Market forces didn't change that. Consolidation created a false economy of scale. The average large market talk station in the mid-90's had Rush surrounded by a day full of local hosts.

Let's leave it to the pointy heads like the Dickey brothers and Ed Atsinger with their lack of localism and cookie-cutter syndicrap that survives economically despite low ratings and does nothing but undermine the longterm future of radio.

Low ratings? Rush has the #1 radio show of all time.

My comments are specifically directed to Cumulus, whose conservative talk launches in Houston, Indianapolis and Cincinnati have been fiascoes, and which underperforms in small markets where it's lucky enough to have Rush -- mainly because it cheats the "local" aspect of the mosaic. Atsinger of course is with Salem, and their poor performance with an all-conservative lineup is well documented.

No being conservative doesn't mean hating local talk radio. Just like with television, not much local programming there, why are you not complaining about the lack of local yokel shows on TV?

If it got back to the same level of localism as TV, it would be an improvement. Right now local radio doesn't have as much localism as television -- many markets have no local news, no local talk outside of morning drive. Most network-affiliated TV stations have two to four hours of local news in the morning, an hour at midday, and a couple of hours in the late afternoon and evening.

Radio is a less expensive medium, therefore it can and should be more local, as local programming is easier and less costly to produce than a local TV show. That was the case from the takeover of television in the fifties to the dereg of the 80's and 90's. I still think that a locally-focused talker, conservative or liberal, that has local talent in prime dayparts and promotes itself heavily, as did the Jacor stations in the 80's, can make a splash. Most of the heritage talkers of today are living off the fumes of their previous local orientation. Rush wins in part because he is on most of those heritage stations.

Most listeners do not have a choice. They don't have a local show on their talk radio station. They never got the chance to choose to tune out Air America, because it was never on in many markets, including:

Houston, Tampa, Orlando, Milwaukee, Nashville, Charlotte, Louisville, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Hartford, Syracuse, Omaha, and Oklahoma City, to name a few.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Then you must by that definition hate Mark Levin, Rusty Humphries, and anybody who's on a Salem station.

Not at all. I only hate those local programs that fit the definition I posted. I never said nor implied that all local programming fit that definition. You inferred it.

For the second half of the 20th century, radio was a local medium.

True. And the vast majority of that local programming was disc jockeys playing records. Records which were, interestingly enough, nation-wide hits. Talk format radio was only a small portion of the total radio picture. What's more, from the death of network radio in the 1950's to the rise of syndicated talk shows in the late 80's, the cost of national program distribution was prohibitively high. The development of satellite distribution had more to do with the rise of nationally syndicated news/talk programming than any other single factor.

 

[justareporter]

The FCC should require every radio station to provide 6 or 8 or whatever hours of locally produced (as in at the station's studios) programming during the hours of 6a-midnight M-F. Weekends don't count and neither do the hours of midnight to 6a. Shopper shows and the Bible hour (pick your bible) would not count either.

 

[Radio_Realist]

The FCC should require every radio station to

You don't take that far enough. The FCC should require every radio station in the country to include two hours of programming consisting of music recorded by local musicians. They should also be required to carry one hour of live music performed in their studios by local musicians.

All stations must carry a proportional mix of recorded music based on the ethnic and racial demographics of their transmitter coverage. This proportional mix must be balanced within every hour, so that no ethnic or demographic group has it's music relegated to off-peak times.

All news/talk and opinion programming must include proportional coverage, as measured in minutes devoted to any perspective on any topic, as determined by the election results of the most recent election. If the results were 51% Democrat, 41% Republican, 5% Green, and 3% Libertarian, then within each hour of programming, then all opinions expressed must be 51% Democrat, 41% Republican, 5% Green, and 3% Libertarian.

All stations must program the same amount of music and spoken word programming as every other station in their market.

All radio stations must hire on-air talent without any discrimination based on accent, dialect, or tone of voice. Since it might be possible to determine a person's race or ethnic heritage by their accent or dialect, hiring authorities will no longer be permitted to include audio recordings of any job candidate for an on-air position. Also forbidden will be live auditions. On-air talent must be hired solely on the basis of a written job application that includes no indication of prior speaking experience.

Stations must make an affirmative effort to hire persons challenged by speech impediments, including but not limited to stuttering, stammering, and Tourette's Syndrome. Stations must hire at least one announcer with Tourette's Syndrome for live announcing work. Stations that violate regulations about obscene speech, such as an announcer using the "F" word on the air, will have their licenses revoked.

To verify their conformance with these new rules, every single word spoken or sung on the air must be written out long-hand on approved three-part forms, with one copy retained on file for ten years, another copy sent to the FCC, and a third copy made available to anyone who requests it. All lyrics of all songs played on the air must be written down. Violations of copyright laws, including making copies of song lyrics, will be strictly enforced. Station operators must comply fully with both of the last two requirements.

 

[mobile-exradiodj]

The FCC should require every radio station to

You don't take that far enough. The FCC should require every radio station in the country to include two hours of programming consisting of music recorded by local musicians. They should also be required to carry one hour of live music performed in their studios by local musicians.

All stations must carry a proportional mix of recorded music based on the ethnic and racial demographics of their transmitter coverage. This proportional mix must be balanced within every hour, so that no ethnic or demographic group has it's music relegated to off-peak times.

All news/talk and opinion programming must include proportional coverage, as measured in minutes devoted to any perspective on any topic, as determined by the election results of the most recent election. If the results were 51% Democrat, 41% Republican, 5% Green, and 3% Libertarian, then within each hour of programming, then all opinions expressed must be 51% Democrat, 41% Republican, 5% Green, and 3% Libertarian.

All stations must program the same amount of music and spoken word programming as every other station in their market.

All radio stations must hire on-air talent without any discrimination based on accent, dialect, or tone of voice. Since it might be possible to determine a person's race or ethnic heritage by their accent or dialect, hiring authorities will no longer be permitted to include audio recordings of any job candidate for an on-air position. Also forbidden will be live auditions. On-air talent must be hired solely on the basis of a written job application that includes no indication of prior speaking experience.

Stations must make an affirmative effort to hire persons challenged by speech impediments, including but not limited to stuttering, stammering, and Tourette's Syndrome. Stations must hire at least one announcer with Tourette's Syndrome for live announcing work. Stations that violate regulations about obscene speech, such as an announcer using the "F" word on the air, will have their licenses revoked.

To verify their conformance with these new rules, every single word spoken or sung on the air must be written out long-hand on approved three-part forms, with one copy retained on file for ten years, another copy sent to the FCC, and a third copy made available to anyone who requests it. All lyrics of all songs played on the air must be written down. Violations of copyright laws, including making copies of song lyrics, will be strictly enforced. Station operators must comply fully with both of the last two requirements.

And U don't take it far enough...FCC should allow only one FM & AM to be owned by the same company within any given market. Also, no cross-ownership with billboards

 

[kaufcom]

Low ratings? Rush has the #1 radio show of all time. As far as I have been able to find out, no other radio show ever has had as large of an audience as Limbaugh's. Like him or hate him, bottom line is the guy has been successful. Same with Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Michael Savage. Someone is listening to those shows. Limbaugh's on over 600+ radio stations, the others are on 300+, not bad. Air America would have liked to have had that many stations. You may not agree with their politics, but you can't argue with success and Conservative Talk Radio has been very successful and like it or not Liberal Talk radio OTHER than NPR has not been successful.

Rush might be the number one talk radio host, but his ratings are down by 40% over the past ten years (when Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996.) Also, in the past ten years talk radio ratings have been flat. Yes, despite the launch of new shows by Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Bill O'Reilly, and 75 lib talk stations, talk radio ratings have not grown even 1/10th of point in the past ten years. Also, during this past ten years ad revenues are down, station ownership is down 34%, radio stocks have tanked. Consolidation and syndication have been a disaster for radio in general and talk radio in particular.

 

[justareporter]

I'm not sure I really care about the billboards but you could convince me otherwise. As for ownership caps in a market...absolutely.

Maybe if we could get some local owners back owning these things there might be a future for radio. Right now their owners treat em (for the most part) like gas stations (how little do I have to pay people ?)