Liberal Radio
From FortWayne.com:
This conservative will now begin his scoffing.
The way the liberals are going about solving the perceived "problem" of conservative radio is all wrong. You don't generate an audience by jamming a political mantra down their throats. Listening to a radio show sponsored by the Democratic Party or with the "mission" of further Democratic ideals is about like going to the DNC or GOP website for your news. You simply will not get unbiased information.
People like Ed Schultz would have you believe that Rush Limbaugh is a pawn for the Republican party. He has said as much on his radio show. While I'm not familiar with Rush's relationship with the GOP, I can tell you for certain that has not, nor will he, ever received any money from a political party. Ed Schultz has freely admitted to raising and receiving such money and apparently thinks its a dandy way to fund a radio show. Who's the pawn, Ed?
Radio is an entertainment medium. People tune in to be entertained so are going to listen to programming fills that need. Liberal talk shows haven't succeeded because people aren't listening. I can only assume they're not listening because they're either not entertained or don't like the hosts' political views.
Mr. Athans talks about reinstating the fairness doctrine, an FCC regulation requiring broadcast stations to give equal time to all points of view. While that ideal may be noble, in practice it just isn't practical, nor is it democratic. What makes a radio or televisions how successful right now are the viewers and listeners. If nobody listened to Rush Limbaugh then nobody would advertise on his show and his show would quickly be off the air. The fairness doctrine would require radio stations to put someone on air not based on their appeal to listeners but rather on the simple fact that they disagree with Rush Limbaugh. That just doesn't make sense. I think the only reason the Democrats are now promoting the reinstatement of this little piece of silliness is that its an easy way to force radio stations to broadcast liberal ideals with no worries about the shows actually doing well.
Maybe one day the liberals will find somebody who is entertaining enough to stay on the air, but for right now there just doesn't seem to be anybody who fits that description among the liberal left. I know one thing for certain, Ed Schultz is not the answer.
Just how conservative is talk radio? According to Athans, out of 340 political talk shows, 300 are conservative in nature and 40 are liberal.
A vast right-wing conspiracy? More like a vast number of Rush Limbaugh copycats, say radio insiders. Limbaugh's ratings success sent the industry scrambling to find more versions of him.
Commercial radio stations don't care what a show's political slant is as long as it draws listeners. "Politics doesn't drive radio," says Michael Harrison, editor and publisher of Talkers magazine, a leading trade publication. "It's revenues."
Some liberals blame all the conservative talk on the media deregulation of the Reagan era and the elimination of the fairness doctrine, which called for giving air-time to opposing views on controversial issues.
Liberal attempts at talk radio haven't done well, even with prominent figures like Mario Cuomo as hosts. The perception is that liberals are too stuffy and earnest to master the catchy theatrics of the format...
Conservatives scoff at Democracy Radio's mission and say its premise is faulty.
"The idea that liberals aren't on talk radio isn't the slightest bit true," says Tim Graham of the Media Research Center, a conservative watchdog group. "Any market that has National Public Radio on it has a liberal talk show. I'd say liberals have already got 700 affiliates of NPR to say what they want to say."
Glenn Beck, a conservative talk radio host who's carried in Detroit on WXDX-AM (1310), says it's preposterous for liberals to think they can manufacture programs to advance their cause.
"The idea of having people with varied ideas, boy, that's out-of-the-ballpark great. However, to force them on the air is anti-capitalist," says Beck. "I can't imagine any station that is going to get into business with people who say, `You know what I really want to do is make political points all day that are going to further this political party.' "
This conservative will now begin his scoffing.
The way the liberals are going about solving the perceived "problem" of conservative radio is all wrong. You don't generate an audience by jamming a political mantra down their throats. Listening to a radio show sponsored by the Democratic Party or with the "mission" of further Democratic ideals is about like going to the DNC or GOP website for your news. You simply will not get unbiased information.
People like Ed Schultz would have you believe that Rush Limbaugh is a pawn for the Republican party. He has said as much on his radio show. While I'm not familiar with Rush's relationship with the GOP, I can tell you for certain that has not, nor will he, ever received any money from a political party. Ed Schultz has freely admitted to raising and receiving such money and apparently thinks its a dandy way to fund a radio show. Who's the pawn, Ed?
Radio is an entertainment medium. People tune in to be entertained so are going to listen to programming fills that need. Liberal talk shows haven't succeeded because people aren't listening. I can only assume they're not listening because they're either not entertained or don't like the hosts' political views.
Mr. Athans talks about reinstating the fairness doctrine, an FCC regulation requiring broadcast stations to give equal time to all points of view. While that ideal may be noble, in practice it just isn't practical, nor is it democratic. What makes a radio or televisions how successful right now are the viewers and listeners. If nobody listened to Rush Limbaugh then nobody would advertise on his show and his show would quickly be off the air. The fairness doctrine would require radio stations to put someone on air not based on their appeal to listeners but rather on the simple fact that they disagree with Rush Limbaugh. That just doesn't make sense. I think the only reason the Democrats are now promoting the reinstatement of this little piece of silliness is that its an easy way to force radio stations to broadcast liberal ideals with no worries about the shows actually doing well.
Maybe one day the liberals will find somebody who is entertaining enough to stay on the air, but for right now there just doesn't seem to be anybody who fits that description among the liberal left. I know one thing for certain, Ed Schultz is not the answer.
HG
robert108
goon
The Whistler
Spartacus
pparets
docdave
realitybasedbob
Matt
