Fairness Docrine Coming Back?

They do not care about free speech, or a free press. They want to control what we hear, and what is news. They want to be able to lie to us with nobody to call them on it at all.

You are so full of shit, you must only listen to Rush. As to lying to the people, right now that is mighty fucking easy with all the conservative talk shows putting out their lies with no one to counter act them. What a fucking specious argument.

I don't give a crap what you listen or watch. I just want the same chance to listen to a station that I want to listen to.

Leftie Radio stations are successful when the major Clear Channels let them be.

Talk about cutting off freedom of speech, it seems your arguments against a fairness doctrine are more in line with that than the lefts.

ThomHartmann.com - Talking Back To Talk Radio - Fairness, Democracy, and Profits

Setting aside the shrill and nonsensical efforts of those who suggest the corporate-owned media in America is "liberal," the situation with regard to talk radio is particularly perplexing: It doesn't even carry a pretense of political balance. While the often-understated Al Gore recently came right out and said that much of the corporate-owned media are "part and parcel of the Republican Party," those who listen to talk radio know it has swung so far to the right that even Dwight Eisenhower or Barry Goldwater would be shocked.

Average Americans across the nation are wondering how could it be that a small fringe of the extreme right has so captured the nation's airwaves? And done it in such an effective fashion that when they attack folks like Tom Daschle, he and his family actually get increased numbers of death threats? How is it that ex-felons like John Poindexter's protégée Ollie North and Nixon's former burglar G. Gordon Liddy have become stars? How is it that ideologues like Rush Limbaugh can openly promote hard-right Republicans, and avoid a return of the dead-since-Reagan Fairness Doctrine (and get around the desire of the American public for fairness) by claiming what they do is "just entertainment"?

And, given the domination of talk radio by the fringe hard-right that represents the political views of only a small segment of America, why is it that the vast majority of talk radio stations across the nation never run even an occasional centrist or progressive show in the midst of their all-right, all-the-time programming day?

Even within the radio industry itself, there's astonishment.

Program directors and station managers I've talked with claim they have to program only hard-right hosts. They point out that when they insert even a few hours of a centrist or progressive talk host into a typical talk-radio day, the station's phone lines light up with angry, flaming reactions from listeners; even advertisers get calls of protest. Just last month, a talk-radio station manager told me solemnly, "Only right-wingers listen to AM radio any more. The lefties would rather read."

How could this be? After all, an "environmentalist" Democrat - Al Gore - won the majority of the popular vote in the last presidential election, with a half-million more votes than any other presidential candidate (of any party) in the entire history of the nation. How could it be that there are only two Democratic or progressive voices in major national radio syndication, and only a small handful in partial syndication or on local shows?

The issue is important for two reasons.

First, in a nation that considers itself a democratic republic, the institutions of democracy are imperiled by a lack of balanced national debate on issues of critical importance. As both Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia learned, a steady radio drumbeat of a single viewpoint - from either end of the political spectrum - is not healthy for democracy when opposing voices are marginalized.

Second, what's happened recently in the radio industry represents a business opportunity of significant proportions. The station manager I talked with is wrong, because of something in science known as "sample bias." He was assuming his radio listeners represent all radio listeners, a critical error.

Here's why the talk radio scene is so dominated by the right, and how it can become more democratic. First, a very brief history:
 
Thus, the extreme fringe of the right wing dominates talk radio not because all radio listeners are right-wingers, but, instead, because the right wingers and their investors were the first to the market with a consistent and predictable programming slant, making right-wing-talk the first large niche to mature in the newly emergent talk segment of the radio industry. Listeners always know what they'll get with Rush or one of his clones, and programming to a loyal and identifiable audience is both the dream and the necessity of every radio station's management.

any competent radio station program director knows they'll get angry listeners if they drop an hour of Rock or Rap into a Country/Western programming day. It's equally easy to predict that if you were to drop an hour or three of a progressive talker like Mike Malloy or Peter Werbe into a day dominated by Rush and his clones, the listeners will be outraged. After all, those particular listeners thought they were tuned into an all-right-wing station.

But that response doesn't mean - as conservatives in the radio industry suggest - that there is no market for progressive talk radio. What it means is that there's not yet an awakening in the broadcast industry to the reality that they're missing a huge unserved market. But, like with right-wing talk, for balanced or progressive talk radio to succeed it must be programmed consistently throughout the day (and with talent as outrageous and interesting as Rush and his most successful clones).

The station programmers I've talked with who've tried a progressive or centrist talker for an hour or two, only to get angry responses from dittoheads, think this means only extreme-right-wing talkers (and, ideally, convicted felons or those who "declare war on liberals") will make money for their station. And, because they've already carved out the hard-right-Republican-talk niche and alienated the progressive/Democrat niche, they're right.

But for stations who want to get into talk in a market already dominated by right-wing talkers on competing stations, the irrefutable evidence of national elections and polls shows that believing only right-wingers will bring listeners (and advertisers) is a mistake. All they need do is what anybody with music programming experience would recommend: identify their niche and stick with it.

By running Democratic/progressive-talk in a programming day free of right-wing talkers, stations will open up a new niche and ride it to success. This is a particularly huge opportunity for music stations who look with envy at the success of talk stations in their market, but haven't been willing to jump in because all the best right-wing talkers are already on the competition: all they need do is put on progressive talkers, and they'll open a new, unserved, and profitable niche.
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT
 
Going back to elementary school we all learned life is not fair and life will never be fair. If people do not feel there is enough liberal talk shows add more. I do not understand the purpose of reducing conservative voices this is just control and censorship. This is trivial considering the state of our nation. Liberals & conservatives should all have a voice but should not have to repress one and interject another. The determining factor of this should be ratings and who is getting listeners on their shows not some ideal, imaginary fairness that is created by a law. This takes away rights from one group and gives them to another this is not the american way.
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT

Read the article I posted. A station is going to have to put liberal talk on and stick with it so it can build up a following, just like conservative talk did.

But it is definately an untapped market.

And it is true, some rich liberal is going to have to man up and buy up some radio stations. John Kerry, Al Gore, Soros, Huffington, Clinton, hello, Edwards?

Anyways, I think it is laughable to call it a liberal media anymore, in light of all these facts.

If it was, conservatives would be screaming for the Fairness Doctrine. THey know the truth.
 
Going back to elementary school we all learned life is not fair and life will never be fair. If people do not feel there is enough liberal talk shows add more. I do not understand the purpose of reducing conservative voices this is just control and censorship. This is trivial considering the state of our nation. Liberals & conservatives should all have a voice but should not have to repress one and interject another. The determining factor of this should be ratings and who is getting listeners on their shows not some ideal, imaginary fairness that is created by a law. This takes away rights from one group and gives them to another this is not the american way.

You are right, so us Liberals are being careful not to ask for something that is unconstitutional. But now you guys have to give in. We know what you are doing. You are using the public airwaves to present only your side of the story. So a decade of no discussion on evolution, stem cell or gay rights, because you guys control all the media. And you see how this is dangerous after Bush used the media to lie us into Iraq. That was so not good journalism. They went from being watchdogs, which they should be, to being lapdogs, because their bosses are all right wing neo con nuts.

So this doesn't serve the publics interest.

You do understand these are public airwaves. The FCC can and should and probably will yank some stations away if they don't put on some progressive talk.

You are advocating the brainwashing of our society. Sorry, but that is unacceptable. Even if you do approve of the message. The public needs to hear both sides.

And maybe this is why Clinton should not have deregulated the media in 1996. Maybe we should undo that. But you'll see Republicans argue it, because they love the media just the way it is. LIBERAL? :eusa_liar::cuckoo::lol:
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT

Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.
 
Nowhere does it say you have to drop conservative talk shows.

It says if you have a public license you have to offer both sides.

What in the world could scare the right out of a bunch of dumbass liberals ponitificating on the radio?:eusa_whistle:

It's like the first two times I wrote in letters critical of Bush to our local paper. I immediately got several unsigned/no return address hate letters accusing me of everything from being a commie, a child molester and a goat screwer. I actually prefer lambs.:lol: The more reasonable sent me an article written by Rush's son.

I kept writing, and the shitto heads quit their letters.:cuckoo:

Air America is still on even if Rush said it couldn't last.:eusa_liar:

There are "some" on the right who afraid of people hearing both sides of an argument.

Thom Hartman (begin 1967) is one of the better more reasoned and extremely knowledgeable lefties out there.
 
Going back to elementary school we all learned life is not fair and life will never be fair. If people do not feel there is enough liberal talk shows add more. I do not understand the purpose of reducing conservative voices this is just control and censorship. This is trivial considering the state of our nation. Liberals & conservatives should all have a voice but should not have to repress one and interject another. The determining factor of this should be ratings and who is getting listeners on their shows not some ideal, imaginary fairness that is created by a law. This takes away rights from one group and gives them to another this is not the american way.

You are right, so us Liberals are being careful not to ask for something that is unconstitutional. But now you guys have to give in. We know what you are doing. You are using the public airwaves to present only your side of the story. So a decade of no discussion on evolution, stem cell or gay rights, because you guys control all the media. And you see how this is dangerous after Bush used the media to lie us into Iraq. That was so not good journalism. They went from being watchdogs, which they should be, to being lapdogs, because their bosses are all right wing neo con nuts.

So this doesn't serve the publics interest.

You do understand these are public airwaves. The FCC can and should and probably will yank some stations away if they don't put on some progressive talk.

You are advocating the brainwashing of our society. Sorry, but that is unacceptable. Even if you do approve of the message. The public needs to hear both sides.

And maybe this is why Clinton should not have deregulated the media in 1996. Maybe we should undo that. But you'll see Republicans argue it, because they love the media just the way it is. LIBERAL? :eusa_liar::cuckoo::lol:

First, I want to make clear I am not a conservative or a liberal and I want to confess that I am not very familiar with poltics. This has become a new interest for me and I wanted to join these discussions for educational and enlightenment purposes. Second, let me ask a question who or what law or discrimination is taking place that is keeping liberals from accessing the airwaves? Is there a ban on liberal programing on public airwaves I do not know of or restrictions that exsist?
 
Who isn't hearing "both" sides of any argument, and who's to say that there are only two viewpoints to be heard? For that matter, who gets to decide which two viewpoints count as "both"?
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT

Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.

The collapse of Obama 1260 in Washington DC reflected what has been a consistent trend among libtalkers: they don’t get ratings. Bill Press complains that libtalkers get locked out of markets, but Obama 1260 had a good signal in a territory known for its liberal political support. (When was the last time DC voted Republican? Never.) After the election, its ratings disappeared, when one might have expected the wave of support for Barack Obama to result in people flocking to his brand. The owner had to change formats to get advertisers to buy time on the station.

Press claims that ownership is the hurdle for libtalkers and that the government should enforce “fairness” through licensing, but again Obama 1260 is a prime example of why that’s rubbish. The same owner also has a conservative talk station in the same market, which means that he offered the “fairness” that Press demands. Listeners flocked to one station and ran screaming from the other — which is why libtalker syndicator Nova-M just went under.

It's not that difficult...GET RATINGS STAY ON THE AIR
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT

Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.

The collapse of Obama 1260 in Washington DC reflected what has been a consistent trend among libtalkers: they don’t get ratings. Bill Press complains that libtalkers get locked out of markets, but Obama 1260 had a good signal in a territory known for its liberal political support. (When was the last time DC voted Republican? Never.) After the election, its ratings disappeared, when one might have expected the wave of support for Barack Obama to result in people flocking to his brand. The owner had to change formats to get advertisers to buy time on the station.

Press claims that ownership is the hurdle for libtalkers and that the government should enforce “fairness” through licensing, but again Obama 1260 is a prime example of why that’s rubbish. The same owner also has a conservative talk station in the same market, which means that he offered the “fairness” that Press demands. Listeners flocked to one station and ran screaming from the other — which is why libtalker syndicator Nova-M just went under.

It's not that difficult...GET RATINGS STAY ON THE AIR


Exactly.

What the Fairness Doctrine will attempt to do is alter the free market consideration regarding radio. Stations wish to make money - they go with what the market wants. Conservative radio has always been more supported by the market than liberal radio. And then you have the shock-jock type show, which has also done very well.

I also read that the Fairness Doctrine would potentially target web blogs...

Now what we have here folks is the mind police, pure and simple. Some in here wish to talk down the implications of what will be attempted via this Fairness Doctrine, which shows either an alarming lack of intelligence, a deep rooted need to defend the indefensible, or both.

If the Dems wish to wage this battle, I say go for it, as it will only hurt them in the end.
 
Going back to elementary school we all learned life is not fair and life will never be fair. If people do not feel there is enough liberal talk shows add more. I do not understand the purpose of reducing conservative voices this is just control and censorship. This is trivial considering the state of our nation. Liberals & conservatives should all have a voice but should not have to repress one and interject another. The determining factor of this should be ratings and who is getting listeners on their shows not some ideal, imaginary fairness that is created by a law. This takes away rights from one group and gives them to another this is not the american way.

You are right, so us Liberals are being careful not to ask for something that is unconstitutional. But now you guys have to give in. We know what you are doing. You are using the public airwaves to present only your side of the story. So a decade of no discussion on evolution, stem cell or gay rights, because you guys control all the media. And you see how this is dangerous after Bush used the media to lie us into Iraq. That was so not good journalism. They went from being watchdogs, which they should be, to being lapdogs, because their bosses are all right wing neo con nuts.

So this doesn't serve the publics interest.

You do understand these are public airwaves. The FCC can and should and probably will yank some stations away if they don't put on some progressive talk.

You are advocating the brainwashing of our society. Sorry, but that is unacceptable. Even if you do approve of the message. The public needs to hear both sides.

And maybe this is why Clinton should not have deregulated the media in 1996. Maybe we should undo that. But you'll see Republicans argue it, because they love the media just the way it is. LIBERAL? :eusa_liar::cuckoo::lol:

First, I want to make clear I am not a conservative or a liberal and I want to confess that I am not very familiar with poltics. This has become a new interest for me and I wanted to join these discussions for educational and enlightenment purposes. Second, let me ask a question who or what law or discrimination is taking place that is keeping liberals from accessing the airwaves? Is there a ban on liberal programing on public airwaves I do not know of or restrictions that exsist?

No, I have agreed that we need a Rupert Murdoc of our own.

But it is clear that a handful of media giants gobbled up all the good stations and have been only giving us one side of the story. Can they do that? That is up to the FCC to decide.

Just like the old FCC under Bush wouldn't define indecent for Howard Stern. Instead they just fined him until they ran him off the air.

So the new Obama FCC is going to see 1000 conservatives to every 5 liberals and they are going to break up the monopoly.

But the GOP are very slick to maybe give a liberal a chance, for a month, and say, "see, it doesn't work". Or, "no one wants it".

They wish. If Rush gets $1 million, given the same chance against Rush, and Randi Rhodes might actually beat him in time. She beats him in many markets. But air time is a valuable thing. If candidates are willing to pay millions for air time, then it only makes sense that conservatives would sacrafice millions just to keep liberals off the radio.

What laws did they break? Not sure that they have. But this is why the media was regulated before it was deregulated.

These media giants down own the airwaves. We give them licences. And we can take them away too if they aren't being fair with them.

What's fair? Whatever the Democrats say is fair. Same when the GOP ruled, they got to decide.
 
Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.

The collapse of Obama 1260 in Washington DC reflected what has been a consistent trend among libtalkers: they don’t get ratings. Bill Press complains that libtalkers get locked out of markets, but Obama 1260 had a good signal in a territory known for its liberal political support. (When was the last time DC voted Republican? Never.) After the election, its ratings disappeared, when one might have expected the wave of support for Barack Obama to result in people flocking to his brand. The owner had to change formats to get advertisers to buy time on the station.

Press claims that ownership is the hurdle for libtalkers and that the government should enforce “fairness” through licensing, but again Obama 1260 is a prime example of why that’s rubbish. The same owner also has a conservative talk station in the same market, which means that he offered the “fairness” that Press demands. Listeners flocked to one station and ran screaming from the other — which is why libtalker syndicator Nova-M just went under.

It's not that difficult...GET RATINGS STAY ON THE AIR


Exactly.

What the Fairness Doctrine will attempt to do is alter the free market consideration regarding radio. Stations wish to make money - they go with what the market wants. Conservative radio has always been more supported by the market than liberal radio. And then you have the shock-jock type show, which has also done very well.

I also read that the Fairness Doctrine would potentially target web blogs...

Now what we have here folks is the mind police, pure and simple. Some in here wish to talk down the implications of what will be attempted via this Fairness Doctrine, which shows either an alarming lack of intelligence, a deep rooted need to defend the indefensible, or both.

If the Dems wish to wage this battle, I say go for it, as it will only hurt them in the end.

We're just going to find a rich liberal and take one or two stations away from Rupert Murdoc and let the rich liberal buy it from Rupert. No one will be harmed. You are a worry wart.

We don't want to bring back the fairness doctrine. We just want to break up the monopoly on talk radio.

Boy, you guys sure do defend the liberal media. Me thinks you guys were lying the entire time. :eusa_liar: Calling it the liberal media.

Busted!!!
 
The collapse of Obama 1260 in Washington DC reflected what has been a consistent trend among libtalkers: they don’t get ratings. Bill Press complains that libtalkers get locked out of markets, but Obama 1260 had a good signal in a territory known for its liberal political support. (When was the last time DC voted Republican? Never.) After the election, its ratings disappeared, when one might have expected the wave of support for Barack Obama to result in people flocking to his brand. The owner had to change formats to get advertisers to buy time on the station.

Press claims that ownership is the hurdle for libtalkers and that the government should enforce “fairness” through licensing, but again Obama 1260 is a prime example of why that’s rubbish. The same owner also has a conservative talk station in the same market, which means that he offered the “fairness” that Press demands. Listeners flocked to one station and ran screaming from the other — which is why libtalker syndicator Nova-M just went under.

It's not that difficult...GET RATINGS STAY ON THE AIR


Exactly.

What the Fairness Doctrine will attempt to do is alter the free market consideration regarding radio. Stations wish to make money - they go with what the market wants. Conservative radio has always been more supported by the market than liberal radio. And then you have the shock-jock type show, which has also done very well.

I also read that the Fairness Doctrine would potentially target web blogs...

Now what we have here folks is the mind police, pure and simple. Some in here wish to talk down the implications of what will be attempted via this Fairness Doctrine, which shows either an alarming lack of intelligence, a deep rooted need to defend the indefensible, or both.

If the Dems wish to wage this battle, I say go for it, as it will only hurt them in the end.

We're just going to find a rich liberal and take one or two stations away from Rupert Murdoc and let the rich liberal buy it from Rupert. No one will be harmed. You are a worry wart.

We don't want to bring back the fairness doctrine. We just want to break up the monopoly on talk radio.

Boy, you guys sure do defend the liberal media. Me thinks you guys were lying the entire time. :eusa_liar: Calling it the liberal media.

Busted!!!

Bobo, your thoughts are as deep as a parking lot puddle.

Which in a way at least makes them entertaining in a Something About Mary kind of way. Do you happen to have an attractive blonde sister?

TheresSomethingAboutMary.jpg
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT

Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.

The collapse of Obama 1260 in Washington DC reflected what has been a consistent trend among libtalkers: they don’t get ratings. Bill Press complains that libtalkers get locked out of markets, but Obama 1260 had a good signal in a territory known for its liberal political support. (When was the last time DC voted Republican? Never.) After the election, its ratings disappeared, when one might have expected the wave of support for Barack Obama to result in people flocking to his brand. The owner had to change formats to get advertisers to buy time on the station.

Press claims that ownership is the hurdle for libtalkers and that the government should enforce “fairness” through licensing, but again Obama 1260 is a prime example of why that’s rubbish. The same owner also has a conservative talk station in the same market, which means that he offered the “fairness” that Press demands. Listeners flocked to one station and ran screaming from the other — which is why libtalker syndicator Nova-M just went under.

It's not that difficult...GET RATINGS STAY ON THE AIR

As someone in the market, I can tell you that you are exactly right. Roughly about this time last year maybe as late as early summer this network went on the air with Obama 1260 and its companion McCain (now Freedom) 570. They stayed on the air until recently when Obama 1260 was pulled. The conservative side is now the second conservative station in the market. It's filled with the also rans of talk radio radio Bill Bennett, Laura Ingram, Mancow, Monica Crowley and Michael Savage. Somehow, this line of mostly nobodies is getting enough ratings to stay afloat in a market where Crowley competes head to head with Sean Hannity and Mancow competes with Rush.

But first string Libs can't get and audience in a market where Dems outnumber Repubs 70-30. There were probably more Dems listening to Rush than Bill Press. The real reason is that Dems just aren't entertaining. There it is. Even Bill Clinton said the other day that Rush was entertaining.
 
Well,, I dunno,, Fox News just reported that the WH has issued a statement that the obamalama does Not does not does not support the return of the fairness doctrine... time will tell if he speaks the troof! :cool:
 
Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.

The collapse of Obama 1260 in Washington DC reflected what has been a consistent trend among libtalkers: they don’t get ratings. Bill Press complains that libtalkers get locked out of markets, but Obama 1260 had a good signal in a territory known for its liberal political support. (When was the last time DC voted Republican? Never.) After the election, its ratings disappeared, when one might have expected the wave of support for Barack Obama to result in people flocking to his brand. The owner had to change formats to get advertisers to buy time on the station.

Press claims that ownership is the hurdle for libtalkers and that the government should enforce “fairness” through licensing, but again Obama 1260 is a prime example of why that’s rubbish. The same owner also has a conservative talk station in the same market, which means that he offered the “fairness” that Press demands. Listeners flocked to one station and ran screaming from the other — which is why libtalker syndicator Nova-M just went under.

It's not that difficult...GET RATINGS STAY ON THE AIR

As someone in the market, I can tell you that you are exactly right. Roughly about this time last year maybe as late as early summer this network went on the air with Obama 1260 and its companion McCain (now Freedom) 570. They stayed on the air until recently when Obama 1260 was pulled. The conservative side is now the second conservative station in the market. It's filled with the also rans of talk radio radio Bill Bennett, Laura Ingram, Mancow, Monica Crowley and Michael Savage. Somehow, this line of mostly nobodies is getting enough ratings to stay afloat in a market where Crowley competes head to head with Sean Hannity and Mancow competes with Rush.

But first string Libs can't get and audience in a market where Dems outnumber Repubs 70-30. There were probably more Dems listening to Rush than Bill Press. The real reason is that Dems just aren't entertaining. There it is. Even Bill Clinton said the other day that Rush was entertaining.


Now wait a gol darn minute here! There are folks in this thread saying that liberal radio just needs a fair chance! That if they can get some real $$$ and a fair chance why they will be as popular or more than conservative radio.

Yup. That is what they said so it must be true. :lol:
 
D.C. Station Dumps Its Failing Liberal 'Obama 1260' Talk Format | NewsBusters.org

Liberals may want to insist on the "Fairness Doctrine" as a business strategy, since liberal talk is barely moving the ratings needle. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz reported Monday that "President Obama may be riding high in Washington, but OBAMA 1260 is not. The area's only progressive talk station is changing formats, dropping such syndicated liberal hosts as Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller and Bill Press in favor of financial news, starting next week."

Program Director Greg Tantum says he thought the station could work because of enthusiasm over Obama, but that ratings collapsed to a level that could not be measured after the election. But ratings nearly doubled, he says, at...conservative station, WTNT, which features Laura Ingraham and Bill Bennett. Tantum said he will move Schultz to WTNT to give him another shot.


BAD EXAMPLE THO...WASHINGTON D.C IS QUITE THE CONSERVATIVE HOTSPOT

Bullshit! So they gave the station less than 30 days? BULLSHIT! What a fucking joke.

But you make a good point. Liberals are too busy working to be sitting around listening to am bullshit talk radio all day. It's the rich good old boys that sit around listening to rush spew his bs.

Hey Stupid. I'm in the market and I had to hear all the fucking commercials for Obama 1260 all the fucking time as they tried to drive the non-existent audience to that useless station. It was on for months and months. At least 8 months if not a year. The piece of shit, also ran conservative station is still running in direct competition with the Rush and Hannity station.

Face it, nobody likes libs. They suck. Somehow people get conned into voting for them, but the last thing anyone would do is listen to their arrogant bullshit.
 
Exactly.

What the Fairness Doctrine will attempt to do is alter the free market consideration regarding radio. Stations wish to make money - they go with what the market wants. Conservative radio has always been more supported by the market than liberal radio. And then you have the shock-jock type show, which has also done very well.

I also read that the Fairness Doctrine would potentially target web blogs...

Now what we have here folks is the mind police, pure and simple. Some in here wish to talk down the implications of what will be attempted via this Fairness Doctrine, which shows either an alarming lack of intelligence, a deep rooted need to defend the indefensible, or both.

If the Dems wish to wage this battle, I say go for it, as it will only hurt them in the end.

We're just going to find a rich liberal and take one or two stations away from Rupert Murdoc and let the rich liberal buy it from Rupert. No one will be harmed. You are a worry wart.

We don't want to bring back the fairness doctrine. We just want to break up the monopoly on talk radio.

Boy, you guys sure do defend the liberal media. Me thinks you guys were lying the entire time. :eusa_liar: Calling it the liberal media.

Busted!!!

Bobo, your thoughts are as deep as a parking lot puddle.

Which in a way at least makes them entertaining in a Something About Mary kind of way. Do you happen to have an attractive blonde sister?

TheresSomethingAboutMary.jpg

Perfect example of when I take a right winger to the wood shed and they come out with a red ass, but defiant as ever.

I just proved that you can no longer call it the liberal media. Isnt' that great? It's like I discoved something for the first time, only I discovered it FOR YOU. Don't you appreciate it? Now you can stop sounding stupid when you call it a liberal media.

Because if it was liberal, you guys would be fighting to put more conservatives on. Instead you argue that your guys are just more popular. At least you have stopped lying. Now you are just wrong. But that's better than being wrong on purpose. That's lying. Now you are not lying anymore.

Now we just need to prove to you that conservatives also own the tv and papers.

But make no mistake, radio is conservative media.

1 down, 2 to go.
 

Forum List

Back
Top