Progressive radio can never survive in an unregulated market

[Ron Green]

simply because fear and enmity are more entertaining than reason. The number of people who want to hear well-made arguments, rebutted by other well-made arguments, is infinitesimal compared to those who respond to shouting, name-calling and "gotcha!" exchanges. Remember that commercial media are all about selling, and modern selling is done with fear and addiction.

Radio set up in some sort of public trust, given the mandate to bring more light than heat to issues and not be concerned with profit, is the only way that a progressive message, or even a reasoned message, will be carried on the broadcast spectrum. Until sponsors reject the most effective ways of delivering messages to the "lizard brain" and go back to the quaint days of talking about the product's features and benefits, radio will be pointing fingers and shouting, and that just doesn't work for the progressive agenda.

[mmonk]

1. I think liberal radio will survive

unless of course, the brainwashing in America by the right becomes an absolute success.

[unpossibles]

2. I disagree

The optimist in me thinks there are enough people out there who enjoy actual conversations, intelligent points, and satirical humor to support it. Give it a chance. It's like saying that nice restaurants can't survive because people want McDonalds.

[Ninga]

6. The folks who can only afford McDoanld are the ones who need progressive

radio with real information and real debate.

Most people who live bearly above the poverty line would love to have the money I spent in the last year chasing Air America Radio from to XM.

It is a shame what it cost me (spent willingly) to get jerked around by the corporate side of AAR.

[LTR]

3. I disagree somewhat

The nice thing about talk radio is that the tide will likely turn with time. Liberal talk's advantage is that it draws listeners from much more desireable demographics (younger, more women). Conservotalk's listeners tend to be middle-aged white guys, which radio is trying to move away from (look how many oldies stations are dying).

And listen to the ads on conservotalk stations. Air mattresses, steel buildings, get-rich-quick schemes. Terrible advertising! On some liberal talk stations, I've heard ads for nightclubs and soft drinks. Those are younger demos there. Granted, AAR has their share of bad advertising (air mattresses and weird schemes), but they're also pulling in advertisers who have shunned conservotalk.

Of course, building this kind of format takes time. I feel it's going through growing pains now, but the format will survive.

[muesa]

4. Even within progressive radio

Lots of progressives don't like Al Franken's style - or Ed Schultz's - but go crazy over Randi.

Al is definitely a calm, cool, humorous type; and Ed is just a mid-western, tail gate party, jock, to too many progressives.

(I prefer Al Franken and "Will and Willie" and Jon Rothmann -- and even though Ed is younger then me, he reminds me of my Dad's cronies and my Uncle Frank).

[Ron Green]

7. This is really my point - as long as it's commercial, it's got to make

the numbers, so it's got to be entertaining. The sort of public discourse that will save us must go beyond "he said, she said" and even beyond "fair and balanced" (as if these issues are some kind of sports contest.) The truth is VERY difficult to winnow out, and requires citizenship over consumerism, a mass desire to eschew fun and games and wade through complex arguments. I just don't think the American people are up to it.

[napi21]

15. So you're saying unless we have a LW Limpballs we can't make it?

Ireally don't think this is a fair description, but wasn't Malloy SORT OF like that? Isn't Randi SORT OF like that?

If you're right, Why the hell did AAR fire Mike?

[Ron Green]

17. That's a good question. Malloy was certainly one of the most entertaining

AAR personalities, with a "take no prisoners" attitude. Never boring, always ready to mix it up. I don't know the reasons behind his firing, but I think the bigger picture for left-leaning talk radio will have to include people like Malloy and Randi Rhodes, because only "the fight" will bring big audiences.

My overall point is that we haven't sustained an electorate with an attention span sufficient to support a commonwealth, but we have built a mighty machine for consumption. To me that means we're on the way back to slavery, which is much more a natural state than freedom.

[napi21]

16. So you're saying unless we have a LW Limpballs we can't make it?

I really don't think this is a fair description, but wasn't Malloy SORT OF like that? Isn't Randi SORT OF like that?

If you're right, Why the hell did AAR fire Mike?

[napi21]

5. I disagree. I think the BIG problem is the concentration of media

into just a very few hands! I can tell you, there is a big market here in the Atlanta area, but the station that AAR was on was bought out by a religious group, and they canceled carrying anything but Frankin on their station. The rest of it is either religious programming or classical music.

Atlanta has a LOT of radio stations, but the ONLY programs I can get on MY radio is Boortz, Limbaugh, Hannity, and some local RW idiot lady whose name I can't even remember now!

I stream liberal radio all the time! From early in the morning until late at night, and I even stream Bernie Ward & Ray Talliferro all night in the EST zone. I would be thrilled to be able to just turn the radio on, but I CAN'T stand to listen to those RW nuts!

I'm am so very upset that we could loose AAR!

[muesa]

8. Similar to our problem in San Francisco Area (Yes - San Francisco)

AAR and Jones (Ed Schultz) and on KQKE which has almost no signal strength (my wife can NOT get KQKE in her car, I can get get KQKE in my Prius; we can NOT get KQKE on our consumer clock radios -- only on the CCCrane "Plus Radio"s). And that is San Jose.

KQKE has good market share in the City, and in Alameda County (Oakland, Berkeley).

[LTR]

12. KQKE's got a nice signal

Granted, AM radio reception is never perfect, but their signal is not bad for an AM station.

Interference can also come from buildings, location, etc. AM signals tend to be a bit weird compared to FM.

Could it be a problem with the electrical in the car? Have her try other AM stations like 910, or better yet, some SF stations further up the dial (like over 1000 AM).

[newportdadde]

10. I agree, same here in KC. And we wonder why rural Missouri is going RW.

I grew up on a farm when they use to actually play music on AM stations. The only things you can pick up now if your out on a tractor planting all day is Rush or Sports talk.

Progressive radio is locked out of Kansas City at this point.

Our newest addition several months ago was Mancow "RADICAL MUSLIMS are going to KILL US ALL!" Muler.

[FormerDittoHead]

11. Concentration of media is the result of an unregulated market...

I know it wasn't he OP's point, but you hit the head.

and having subscribed to AAR for a year LESS THAN A MONTH AGO, I'd be REALLY pissed if they went off!

[RangerSmith]

9. Progressive radio

can survive in a free market.

You can't start out that far in the hole and have piss poor management along the way.

There will be progressive radio it just might be different owners and managers.

And hey, it could also be AAR.

But no, I'm not interested in controlled thought radio. The free market isn't broke.

[Ron Green]

13. The Free Market isn't broke at all -

In fact, it's doing exactly what unregulated capitalism seeks to do, which is to enslave the weak and enrich the greedy. Without moral controls (by the charitable institutions) and legal controls (by the government), the market will continue to develop controlled thought radio. Commerical brainwashing is just as powerful as totalitarian propaganda, because it's brain candy. The so-called "marketplace of ideas" is mostly a Libertarian talking point.

[RangerSmith]

14. Somehow I get the feeling

you would know exactly which programs should air and which shouldn't.

[Ron Green]

19. I wouldn't know EXACTLY, but I'd know approximately what programs

should air, and so would quite a few thoughtful people who care about citizenship over mindless consumption. Public Radio used to do a pretty good job of airing reasonable discourse in every market in the nation, but look at it now: bought and paid for by Wal*Mart and Archer Daniels Midland. Public TV, at least in my market, is being taken over by baby-boomer nostalgia (in addition to the advertisers) in its desperate search for cash.

Without public money the message is all about market share, and what sells is what appeals to our baser nature.

[RangerSmith]

20. But, the fact

that you are politically aligned at all should disqualify you, right?

Or do you envision an equal number of representatives from the opposing side sharing this responsibility?

I wouldn't let anyone politically affiliated decide who had free speech and who didn't, and for all practical purposes, that's what your talking about here is... who has a voice and who doesn't.

[Ron Green]

21. Political affiliation

As I understand it, those affiliated with the right wing are in control of the message now.

I'm not so much interested in political parties as I am the truth. The idea of "equal time" for each side presupposes that each side has an equally valid picture of the truth, like a sports contest between two equally-matched teams.

I believe, as Plato did, that we ought to be governed not directly by the masses, but by the "wisest and best" as they understand the wishes and NEEDS of the people. The question then is: Are the wisest and best people like Paul Wellstone or people like Dick Cheney?

[RangerSmith]

22. Noble thoughts

but honestly, you lost me at "wisest and best."

Sounds like you're looking for a benevolent dictator.

I've had all I ever want of others deciding what's best for me, individually or by party, and I care not what party they call home.

[Ron Green]

23. The thoughts are noble because they come, as I said, from Plato

and other thinkers about representative government throughout the ages. I happen to agree that some people are more qualified to make policy than others, and I also believe strongly that evil men will seize power when they're given the chance. The challenge for democracy, then, is to build a system that somehow encourages masses of people, who respond to fear and Right Wing radio, to overcome their baser selves and embrace leaders who tell them the truth about sustainability, peace, tolerance, health and all kinds of public issues. In Plato's day, or even Lincoln's, citizens would sit or stand for hours and listen to carefully reasoned debate. In today's electronic media age of short attention spans, the part of "citizens" most engaged is the part that fears an enemy and craves a new car, i.e. the id, the lower chakras, the lizard brain, however you want to put it.

Your thoughts about the "free market of ideas" sound just as noble as mine, I mean Plato's, about the "wisest and best," but I respectfully suggest we need a lot less free market and a lot more wisdom.

[Armstead]

18. Deregulation removed all balance to the commercial imperative

[Ron Green]

24. Agreed. And what that means is that the commercial imperative is naturally

right-wing, because it's need-based and fear-based. It promises much, and delivers squat. Funny, but that's exactly what the 'pukes accuse the left of doing.