Liberal Talk Radio
So a post-doc in my lab was webstreaming the Air America liberal talk radio station yesterday. After about two minutes, I had to avert my attention away because of the shear idiocy of the people the station has talking. The simple fact of the matter is that when you emulate the sensationalistic and profoundly short sighted conservative radio personalities you come of as an idiot, in fact you may be an idiot. Immediate to my thinking that, I realized that there is no point to being a "liberal" or "conservative" if you don't put some thought into what you are saying and ideologues on both sides draw people on both side into the unthinking regimen. Before this point I thought that I might have thought the conservative talk personalities were idiots because of the notions they held, when the real reason that I thought they are idiots (and this goes for their liberal counterparts as well) is that they refuse to upset their brains one bit and consider what they are saying as a part of an argument rather than a dogma.
Suffice it to say, but this trend is most definitely an indication of a downward spiral of political discourse in this country. Blame who ever you want, but people need to stop listening and start thinking...
Suffice it to say, but this trend is most definitely an indication of a downward spiral of political discourse in this country. Blame who ever you want, but people need to stop listening and start thinking...
Comments
Originally posted by billybobsky
Suffice it to say, but this trend is most definitely an indication of a downward spiral of political discourse in this country. Blame who ever you want, but people need to stop listening and start thinking...
It seemed odd that in a country about evenly split with political ideals we had radios that would only provide conservative ideals. now we have the other end of the spectrum. i don't see this as a bad thing.
i guess the issue, and i think you would agree with me, is that so much of the discourse as of late (from both sides) is angry rhetoric. i don't believe this undercuts the importance of the balance caused by having opposing ideologies on AM, but I do believe the tendency toward anger should be considered by programmers and spokesman on these stations. At the same time, moderation doesn't sell.
You have to realize that conservatives where held in a blacked-out condition for years and years---their veiws and the converations of that ideology only existed in newsletters, with Bill Buckley at the tip of an iceberg.
This condition presisted until Limbaugh broke through into the popular media, market forces overcame the blacklisting in a market with comparativley low barriers to entry.
Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, etc. are simply doing for the right what Brokaw and Rather did for the left, but without all the sanctimonious pretensions. In the time that the liberal junta ruled the media world the Boomer generation literally grew up and matured---most in that generation actually see the Brokaws and Rathers as journalists who tell the truth---pretty scary. Their thought world is captive to ABC, CNN, and others who tell "the news" in a certain way---things that deviate form that "norm" actually don't seem real to them. Classic codependant set up.
If you haven't seen the movie The Last Supper go watch it---there is a reveal at the end that pretty much sums up talk radio.
Originally posted by billybobsky
So a post-doc in my lab was webstreaming the Air America liberal talk radio station yesterday. After about two minutes, I had to avert my attention away because of the shear idiocy of the people the station has talking. The simple fact of the matter is that when you emulate the sensationalistic and profoundly short sighted conservative radio personalities you come of as an idiot, in fact you may be an idiot. Immediate to my thinking that, I realized that there is no point to being a "liberal" or "conservative" if you don't put some thought into what you are saying and ideologues on both sides draw people on both side into the unthinking regimen. Before this point I thought that I might have thought the conservative talk personalities were idiots because of the notions they held, when the real reason that I thought they are idiots (and this goes for their liberal counterparts as well) is that they refuse to upset their brains one bit and consider what they are saying as a part of an argument rather than a dogma.
Suffice it to say, but this trend is most definitely an indication of a downward spiral of political discourse in this country. Blame who ever you want, but people need to stop listening and start thinking...
If you're going to debase a whole radio station, at least find one specific time/event to debase. So far, I've found AIr America quite decent. They had Al Gore, Michael Moore, and Nader on the first day, Hillary and Robert Rice yesterday and today they're going to have Howard Dean. Their rating have shot up to #1 in the cities they broadcast[they revealed so on the air yesterday].
Perhaps you're refering to Randi Rhodes? She is essentially a liberal/liberterian female Rush Limbaugh and many people take exception to her style, but she does back herself with facts[unlike Rush]. She's an airforce veteran and everyone knows how military types are...
Originally posted by dmz
Strictly from an economics line, I can't imagine this Network going anywhere, especially with the perponderence of media that epsouses the "Repulicans are evil and Christians should be put in mental institutions" line.
You have to realize that conservatives where held in a blacked-out condition for years and years---their veiws and the converations of that ideology only existed in newsletters, with Bill Buckley at the tip of an iceberg.
This condition presisted until Limbaugh broke through into the popular media, market forces overcame the blacklisting in a market with comparativley low barriers to entry.
Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity, etc. are simply doing for the right what Brokaw and Rather did for the left, but without all the sanctimonious pretensions. In the time that the liberal junta ruled the media world the Boomer generation literally grew up and matured---most in that generation actually see the Brokaws and Rathers as journalists who tell the truth---pretty scary. Their thought world is captive to ABC, CNN, and others who tell "the news" in a certain way---things that deviate form that "norm" actually don't seem real to them. Classic codependant set up.
If you haven't seen the movie The Last Supper go watch it---there is a reveal at the end that pretty much sums up talk radio.
I'm a little confused by your argument. As I understand it, you claim there was enough demand for far-right viewpoints that their political-correctness was irrelevent. would this not, then also hold true, for the far left, thus making the liberal network a wise investment?
perhaps the ultimate assumption you are making is that mainstream media is liberal, thus the liberals already have their demand met. of course, this assertion is, in today's America, quite week.
Research the press coverage from roughly the beginning of the American president Washinton's second term through Second American president Adam's term.
If talk radio (right or left) even approached those sorts of extremes of that era, the FCC would padlock their stations. What you are hearing is literally childsplay, comparativley speaking.
We may just be leaving an era of hegeonomy and approaching normal ambient levels of noise.
Originally posted by progmac
I..........thus the liberals already have their demand met. of course, this assertion is, in today's America, quite week.
I don't know about that, I think the ratio of unserviced whitey-righties was alot biger than the greenie-weenies.
Maybe time for skinhead radio?
Originally posted by dmz
I don't know about that, I think the ratio of unserviced whitey-righties was alot biger than the greenie-weenies.
Maybe time for skinhead radio?
I'm a little confused. You are saying that common-liberal views are as radical as skinhead views? The views purpoted on air america are no further to the left than Hannity et al's views are to the right...and obviously, Americans exist at both ends of the spectrum.
So, what exactly is your argument?
Originally posted by Existence
If you're going to debase a whole radio station, at least find one specific time/event to debase. So far, I've found AIr America quite decent. They had Al Gore, Michael Moore, and Nader on the first day, Hillary and Robert Rice yesterday and today they're going to have Howard Dean. Their rating have shot up to #1 in the cities they broadcast[they revealed so on the air yesterday].
Perhaps you're refering to Randi Rhodes? She is essentially a liberal/liberterian female Rush Limbaugh and many people take exception to her style, but she does back herself with facts[unlike Rush]. She's an airforce veteran and everyone knows how military types are...
Yeah. Her. She does no service to anyone.
just my 2 cents
Originally posted by progmac
I'm a little confused. You are saying that common-liberal views are as radical as skinhead views? The views purpoted on air america are no further to the left than Hannity et al's views are to the right...and obviously, Americans exist at both ends of the spectrum.
So, what exactly is your argument?
basically this:
1. Traditional liberal Ideology was presented as base line truth for many years.
2. More or less, Limbaugh broke through that in the late 80s
3. Then there was some balance. Al least enough for someone who wanted to hear what they believed. Although as big a draw as he is, Limbaugh still can't get big ticket advertisers on his show--stuck with Buy Gold ads---very strange.
4. Now we have Franken, who is going beyond "getting the word out"---he is an attempt by the left to go BEYOND the baseline liberal views that the Brokaws and Rathers preach with a straigh face and perfect modulation.
5. Skinhead radio?
Originally posted by a_greer
why does msnbc/nbc/abc/c, BS!/and yes even the so-called conservative fox news giveing this network so much time, if thh frankin factor surpasses hannity or limbaugh then that is most certinly news and i would want to know, but the fact that many of these reports leaves is that this network has like 3 to 7 affiliates as compaired to limbaugh and his 650+ and hannitys 400+, and the man from whome frankin stole his namesake, the oriley factor on the radio has like 150 or more. and anothewr thing, the affiliates PAY to carry limbaugh hannity or orily but, the lib network is paying it's affiliates, in the same way an infomercial would
just my 2 cents
No, Air America does not have a syndicate strategy. This is a business-move resulting from previous "Limbaughs on the left" flopping when attempting to be syndicated on traditional AM stations, which were (and are) heavily dominated by the right. The idea is that a station should have a format as a whole (you don't go to a country station to hear jazz) and that because the AM market is dominated by conservative giants, the only market entry that makes sense is a complete-format, not the traditional 3-hour syndicated approach.
Originally posted by progmac
No, Air America does not have a syndicate strategy. This is a business-move resulting from previous "Limbaughs on the left" flopping when attempting to be syndicated on traditional AM stations, which were (and are) heavily dominated by the right. The idea is that a station should have a format as a whole (you don't go to a country station to hear jazz) and that because the AM market is dominated by conservative giants, the only market entry that makes sense is a complete-format, not the traditional 3-hour syndicated approach.
I think the whole Randy Rhoads thing shows why liberal radio is unlikely to succeed and that is of course because there is no disagreement to be had or tolerated on the left side of the political spectrum.
Conservatives are not perfect in this regard either but at least there are still arguments to be had and hashed out. So part of this hashing out occurs via normal people on radio. In L.A. we have John and Ken who, while proclaiming to be independent come across as very conservative, almost libertarian. They are bashing Arnold (whom they supported) to avoid giving driver's licenses to illegals. They are bashing Bush for his views regarding allowing undocumented (illegal) immigrants to apply for temporary work visas, etc. But they also bashed McClintock for possibly drawing voters away from Arnold during the recall. However they all kiss, make up, and go on debating. It's easy to do when all the arguments involved don't turn people into evil icons. John and Ken can bash Arnold but, to the left, he is Arnold the sexual harasser, etc. The name calling has replaced debate there.
We've read and heard about the neo-con/con split in the Republican part. We've seen and argued about how Bush is upseting members of his own party with too much spending.
The point really is, and this is what talk radio is about, can we discuss ideas, be they conservative or liberal.
Many lefties have no room left for discussion. They believe they have "the answer" and that everyone else who advocates a different answer is racist, sexist, oppressive, harmful, evil, etc. That doesn't leave much room for debate which is a problem when you've got hours of air time to fill.
I hope there does become room for debate without the demonizing from the left of all dissenting opinion. However I don't think even Franken can get away with that. The Daily Show and of course Real Time do a great job of poking a bit of fun, encouraging debate, and still espousing what I consider to be a leftist view. Too bad they are television and have no radio show. I think Maher especially could pull off what Franken cannot.
Nick
Originally posted by billybobsky
Suffice it to say, but this trend is most definitely an indication of a downward spiral of political discourse in this country. Blame who ever you want, but people need to stop listening and start thinking...
...yes, but if that thinking isn't preceeded by lots of reading (from a variety of sources), it will be for naught. The opinions of the masses will remain uninformed so long as they get their "thinking points" from political ads, propagandist media (News Max, Fox, et al) and the like.
Which in turn brings you to the real problem in America: TV-induced laziness and apathy. The future will be dim in my view until this condition is reversed. In some ways TV is the worst thing that ever happened to this country.
Originally posted by a_greer
so-called conservative fox news
'So-called' by the people that created and run the network and anyone with a political awareness above the 1st grade level.
Originally posted by billybobsky
Yeah. Her. She does no service to anyone.
I agree with you, however, if you read the comments in the link I sent you, plenty of people think liberals need someone like Limbaugh sans drugs and lies. There's a reason liberal talk radio has fallen on its face in the past--it was too boring.
At the same time, I have a feeling there was a thoughtful conservative backlash against the conservative radio personalities. It didn't survive. So I am staring down the once paved road of forgotten conservative intellectuals...
Originally posted by giant
'So-called' by the people that created and run the network and anyone with a political awareness above the 1st grade level.
yes I forgot about Jheraldo Rivera, Allen Clomes and so on.... these are great beacons of conservatisum
</sarcasum>
.
Originally posted by a_greer
yes I forgot about Jheraldo Rivera, Allen Clomes and so on.... these are great beacons of conservatisum
</sarcasum>
Thanks for helping prove my point.
Originally posted by billybobsky
a_greer, I consider myself fairly level-headed in the debate on where the political spectrum lies. Fox news is conservative
.
As sickeningly ignorant as one already has to be to not be aware of it just from watching Fox for 30 seconds, it's amazing that even with Murdoch and Ailes and the whole network discussing it openly, some of their adult viewers still don't understand.
1+1=2, regardless of whether people like a_greer understand basic math or not.