Tweet
In the radio business, broadcast licenses are substantial currency — he who owns the station, controls the content and, thus, controls what listeners in the broadcast area do or do not get to know through a radio format. I’ve been following the brouhaha ignited by a recent Center for American Progress report about talk radio with quite a bit of amusement — although, to be honest, the findings of the report aren’t exactly a surprise for those of us who have given any thought at all to the radio message control strangle-hold the Right Wing Wurlizter money folks have maintained…for years.
I guess it was the shock of having someone put it into a compact report form that sent the wingnut radio hosts over the edge. Because anything that threatens that payola gravy train is not to be taken lightly. As CAP reports:
Among radio formats, the combined news/talk format (which includes news/talk/information and talk/personality) leads all others in terms of the total number of stations per format and trails only country music in terms of national audience share. Through more than 1,700 stations across the nation, the combined news/talk format is estimated to reach more than 50 million listeners each week.
As this report will document in detail, conservative talk radio undeniably dominates the format:
Our analysis in the spring of 2007 of the 257 news/talk stations owned by the top five commercial station owners reveals that 91 percent of the total weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and 9 percent is progressive.
Each weekday, 2,570 hours and 15 minutes of conservative talk are broadcast on these stations compared to 254 hours of progressive talk—10 times as much conservative talk as progressive talk.
A separate analysis of all of the news/talk stations in the top 10 radio markets reveals that 76 percent of the programming in these markets is conservative and 24 percent is progressive, although programming is more balanced in markets such as New York and Chicago.
This dynamic is repeated over and over again no matter how the data is analyzed, whether one looks at the number of stations, number of hours, power of stations, or the number of programs. While progressive talk is making inroads on commercial stations, conservative talk continues to be pushed out over the airwaves in greater multiples of hours than progressive talk is broadcast.
These empirical findings may not be surprising given general impressions about the format, but they are stark and raise serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans.
There are many potential explanations for why this gap exists. The two most frequently cited reasons are the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 and simple consumer demand. As this report will detail, neither of these reasons adequately explains why conservative talk radio dominates the airwaves.
Our conclusion is that the gap between conservative and progressive talk radio is the result of multiple structural problems in the U.S. regulatory system, particularly the complete breakdown of the public trustee concept of broadcast, the elimination of clear public interest requirements for broadcasting, and the relaxation of ownership rules including the requirement of local participation in management.
Yikes. Taylor Marsh takes it a step further:
When Reagan deregulated the airwaves and nixed The Fairness Doctrine, up came the rise of Rush.
Unfortunately, throughout the 1990s, Democrats remained clueless. I was talking to people about wingnut radio in the 1990s only to see their eyes glaze over. Most just wanted radio shows that drew listeners and raised ad revenue. Fine. All I wanted to do was provide a counterpoint. See eyes glaze over again. Profit is critical, absolute reality, but outright ownership of the airwaves is the public’s job and there are a lot of liberals in America, as well as independents who deserve to hear more than one point of view without having to pay satellite prices.
When Republicans found out what radio could do their greed reached a peak. They used it on Clinton throughout the 1990s and it worked, with that success fueling more campaigns. They cemented Hillary Clinton’s persona as well. They’re doing it again with immigration, which is what has brought Trent Lott and others out.
The Fairness Doctrine is one issue, but the bottom line truly is regulation of the airwaves so one company and one political party doesn’t own them.
There is a lot of greed on the wingnut end of radio — licensing fees, franchise bits, wingnut publishing and bulk book sales…the list is endless in terms of how much cash they can squeeze out of their listeners. Which means that both the owners and the radio hosts are not going to give up their stranglehold on the message machine, gleaned from the evisceration of the Fairness Doctrine, without a big, stinking fight.
The good news is that, this time anyway, they’ve got one — because this issue is too important to back down from and Taylor and others on the radio end of things know it. What the wingnut radio folks fear most is that broadcast licenses will be doled out fairly — which is exactly what this nation needs. I just wanted to take a little time today to say that we have CAP and Taylor and anyone else who is fighting this fight’s back on this one — and so should every thinking progressive out there.
Taylor has more on this issue here and here. And, while I’m thinking about it, why hasn’t some enterprising radio owner picked up Taylor as a talk show host — she’s wonderful, well-prepared, articulate and a hottie to boot.
(Photo of “On Air” sign via njum.)
UPDATE: Meant to link this up as well — C&L has a great clip of Ed Shultz smacking Sean Hannity around verbally.
94 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Zed?
Dos!
Hey, Christy, we weren’t done with your first fantastic post of the day yet, and now you serve up another!
Bob in HI
There was a list a while back of sponsors who insisted that their ads not be placed on Air America programs.
It’s not just corporate ownership, but it is advertising as well. The right wing nuts who will hawk do it yourself seal skinning kits on their shows do have a structural advantage in that regard.
They are extremely pro big business who also happen to spend alot of the dollars that makes talk radio profitable.
Companies like Whole Foods, Costco, Ben & Jerry’s are not advertising on my local AAR station, and I wonder why. We need all the help we can get due to the imbalance in ownership in radio markets.
The key to changing the terrain of the AM talk turf is getting at the sponsors. Even Subaru, of all companies, demands that its franchisees NEVER advertise on progressive talk radio. I remember seeing a list somewhere of all the companies which enforce such a chilling policy.
It was blowback to sponsors which got Imus off the air, and it will be pressure on sponsors – hard, well organized and unrelenting -which will even the playing field on the AM dial. Where I listen, so you don’t have to…
TBS, Taylor’s stuff on this is fantastic! Thanks, Christy.
Bob at 3 — Well, I needed to hit this issue today. The fact that this is making Sean Hannity’s head explode makes it more than fun…
Y’all should listen to the HORN on Internet Radio! Even better, if you have some kind of business you should advertise on one of the shows.
In Rwanda talk radio had a very powerful and negative effect. Just… something to think about.
If this is the case, and I have no doubt it is, who do we go after? What are the motives behind conservative desire to control talk radio? And how do we deal with it? And is it just radio we should be worried about?
Hi Christy.
Apologies. EPU’d below a couple min. ago.
don’t suppose you or another legaleagle could address this when time permits?… thanks.
Respective of control of talk radio by conservatives. Is it ideology or money which motivates?
Media was the bullhorn to catapult the propaganda, isolating and marginalizing egalitarian concerns, a divider rather than a uniter.
The aggregate message…Maintain the status quo in a paternalistic, classist, racist society and maintain the fiction of societal superiority while doing so.
Mirror the worst fears of your target audience and magnify them. Paralysis, followed by manipulation.
Decades of this, generations growing and never knowing any different or for that matter wanting to know.
All rise for the national anthem
>:-(
I tried listening to Air American once. Didn’t last long. Not my “cup of tea”. I don’t think that we win by becoming them. That just makes no sense to me.
Normalcy isn’t as entertaining as the train wreck that is right-wing nutlandia. Or, to be fair and balanced here, leftist nuttystan. Neither do much for me.
I heard some woman call into Washington Journal, parroting all of the talk radio propaganda. She said something like:
Obama’s middle name is Hussein, and he went to school with muslims..
Clinton is basically a communist.
Gore is a hypocrite because of his SUV and house.
Finally, she was interrupted and asked who she supported on the Repub side, and she said Mitt Romney and Roooody, so she was asked why? She stuttered…and spattered and said Mitt Romney looks good and Rooody was so great after 9/11.
Her opinion was all based on attack, attack, attack points, which she had loyally memorized as taught by the Limbaugh crew, with absolutely no comprehension of the issues or anything about the very candidates she proposes to elect.
Air America has been a major source of inspiration and enlightenment for me. In fact, I found out about FDL when Jane was a guest on an Air America affiliate about two years ago.
OKK at 11 — Sadly, for a number of the funding folks, ideology and money are one and the same in large measure. Not certain that you can separate the two for some of those folks.
ET — You are correct that Taylor’s work on this issue is stellar. She is a gem — and she’s been hitting this issue, and hard, for a long time. She and Jane and Digby have been preaching the need for reform on this for a long, long time.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 11
Probably both but the Don Imus affair showed that when push comes to shove money wins out.
wigwam @ 15
Me too. Rachel Maddow talked about FDL a few times.
noen — I think it depends on the host with regard to Air America. I’m doing Sam Seder’s show later today — I adore Sam, he’s witty, well informed and it shows because his broadcasts are a great conversation on the issues. I’m not much for the smack around stylings on talk radio — but I love shows like Sam’s that dig into the meaty parts of the issues.
BTW, FDL got mentioned by contributing KOS blogger on Washington Journal this morning!
You can imagine where I stand on this…
Back later, gang. Gotta go mow before (hoped-for) rain..
Christy Hardin Smith @ 19
Do you have a link?
I’ll give it a fair hearing.
I am so not a centrist you know. It’s just that I have this aversion to extremism no matter where or whom it comes from.
If our country weren’t in meltdown stage 3 I would happily go back to my science blogs.
The very best in progressive programming is Ian Masters’s programs, which run from 11:00 to 1:00 (about a half hour from now) on Sundays from KPFK in LA — 90.7 FM and streaming from kpfk.org. The typical format is three interviews during the first hour and two during the second. Guests are usually progressive journalists, authors, academics, politicians, and/or government officials. A bit dry, but excellent information content.
Noen at 23 — You can listen live via the Air America website. I’ll be on around 5 pm ET.
I just realized that I repeated a meme that is probably false or at least unsubstantiated.
This is an unproven truism. I believe that there may be radio that is smart and liberal and popular not insane. I don’t know of any in my area though. NPR doesn’t count.
The fairness doctrine should be restored, I agree.
But I would expand the fairness doctrine.
Candidates for office are forced to raise an obscene amount of cash to buy airtime to get their message out.
This is the source of the corrupting influence on our government – legalized bribery.
A condition for all licensees broadcasting over the publicly owned airwaves should be to provide a reasonable amount of airtime to our candidates for public office.
Public campaign financing is not enough if the media continues to gouge our democracy.
.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 19
I want to second that. Sam is excellent. I also liked Al Franken and listened to him every morning on my short drive to work. His humor got a bit tedious, but his guests were excellent: Joe Conason, David Sirota, and many other excellent progressive voices.
I also like Thom Hartmann, who brings in an economic focus that is missing from much progressive commentary.
I used to hear Randi Rhodes on my way home from work. She’s pretty shrill at times, but she’s well informed and has some good insights. I could usually tell in 30 seconds which kind of a show it was.
A lot of the local programming on Air America affiliates seems to be a left-wing version of Rush with lots of incoherent ranting. But there is also a lot of good stuff mixed in.
Isn’t radio loosing listeners if talk radio were not supported by wingnut welfare’s attempt to shape public opinion and they gave lefty radio a real try then maybe they would gain listeners. The President despite his cheering fanclub is only in the high tweenties now which goes to show you can yell all you want to a donkey but that is not going to make move a step if he doesn’t want to. I wonder how much wingnut welfare is costing Republican/Corporate interests by tying up their money in less profitable assets compared to a simple market performing S&P 500 index fund. Given that their audience is Bush’s base and that base is shrinking to the high twenties wouldn’t a sane radio station try and capture the 70% of the potetnial audience who opposes the war after all 70% is more than 28%. Certainly a sane advertiser should so just what are they teaching MBAs these days? I wonder how well Air America would be doing if all these Corporate sponsers were not boycotting it.
wigwam at 29 — Absolutely. Laura Flanders, for example, is on now and I think she’s done some great radio work as well. It’s a good show, and very much in the conversation mold of things. I tend to pick and choose — I’m not a screamer, in case you guys didn’t notice that already, and I tend to like shows which do in-depth discussions rather than just throw surface blather at me.
Which is why I’m still so pissed about the whole replacing same with that idiot Lionel guy. He just sucks, there’s no two ways about it.
I listen to AA in Seattle, and the advertising is maddening. There’s a small amount by actual progressive businesses, but the rest of it is just like RW talkkk radio:
“Buy gold! Government paper money will be worthless in the coming crisis! The Social Security system is doomed. Run around like a chicken with your head cut off!”
PhilK at 32 — I hear you on that — the advertising needs serious help. Which I why I generally hit the mute button for a few minutes when it comes on…since I’m listening online, I can do that.
Conservative life is a fairy tale of elitism triumphing over the ‘not chosen’ ones.
A monolithic story so ridiculous that it has to be broadcast as ‘the truth’ over and over to a willfully ignorant audience of loyal dreamers/haters.
As time goes by…the monolithic story departs further and further from the facts of present reality – and the terms become evermore strident.
The Conservatives can Never be Wrong – that must Always be the fault of Others. The Story can never change – St. Ronnie will Always be St. Ronnie.
Eventually a point gets reached where the Fairytale must either end apocalyptically or be exposed to all as a Fraud of Hateful Human Invention.
The Loyal Bushies can’t stop their screaming, warring run through history because they are nothing more than a cult of Elitists hellbent on Armageddon to validate their ‘truth’ at the expense of the rest of us.
radiofreewill at 34 — But what do you really think. Don’t hold it in… *g*
“When Reagan deregulated the airwaves and nixed The Fairness Doctrine, up came the rise of Rush.”
Saint Ronnie was the perfect front man. The government is bad, welfare moms, blah..blah. He was the perfect actor for the Kleptocrats pulling the strings. Most of the structural dysfunction, (FDA, EPA, on and on) was put into place at that time. The lizard brains who listen to talk radio, still love Ronnie, and this is the group that has been the most fucked over.
If another Reagan (Jeb perhaps) had been elected instead of “W”, Rove’s vision of majority forever would have come true. “W”’s obsession with dad and therefore with Iraq hopefully will be the “turd in the punch bowl” for the fascists.
Believe we should be encouraging Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) to resubmit her bill, Fairness and Accountability in Broadcasting Act (FAB Act); she’d submitted it twice under the 108th and 109th Congresses, where it died in committee both times because of the Republican majority.
The public supports fairness; if memory serves, polling showed better than 70% support for the reintroduction of a Fairness Doctrine. Even wingers are afraid of the so-called liberal media and will support a Fairness Doctrine if they believe it will preserve their share of the airwaves.
The FAB Act should be introduced first; the ownership issue will take a bit more time, and may be encouraged by the introduction of a Fairness Doctrine as outlined in the FAB Act since profitability will change the dynamics of ownership on its own. I suspect that in some cases the benefits to the owning corporations are not the profits from right-wing broadcasting, but from the benefits of manipulating policy via manipulation of public opinion. Tax policy was the reason behind Jack Welch’s purchase of NBC by GE, after all; NBC didn’t have to be profitable, it only had to encourge tax policy that favored GE in such a way that the tax savings paid for NBC and then some.
If the complexion of talk radio were to change, ownership migh not be able to get tax policy and other legislative benefits to compensate for the cost of broadcast outlets; they may want to divest just to invest in other more lucrative opportunities. I’d suggest the 110th Congress tackle the FAB Act, and that the next Democratic administration and Congressional majority then build different media ownership policy.
Yep, it’s going to be a fight. That’s why they are fanning out their sockpuppets to call in to shows that do reach the heartland (like Ed Schultz) to challenge the report’s conclusion as the result of the “liberal media bias”. Big Eddie is not buying it. He is beginning to make money and they are threatening it. We have enough business invested in this that it will be a fight indeed.
Here in Boston, arguably one of the most liberal markets in the country, there is not a single 24-hour progressive station. Just after Bain Capital (Mitt Romney) bought Clear Channel, they axed their low-power daytime-only Air America affiliate and replaced it with RUMBA!! at 10 times the wattage. If Cambridge & Boston has a bigger market for Latino music than liberal talk, it’s definitely time to clamp down on the illegals. ;-)
Columbus, Ohio had a progressive talk radio station, but that changed last year. That same station, which was making money for Clear Channel, now has the lowest ratings of any station in the area because it is conservative talk radio. According to RadioandRecords.com, WYTS has a 0.4 rating. Any lower and they won’t exit. Obviously, Clear Channel and others aren’t interested in profits or they would have stayed with progressive talk.
Ratings info from: http://www.radioandrecords.com…..7&CE=0
Michael Smerconish contends that CBS would replace him with a Communist if they thought it would get them more advertizing. I might believe that were it not for the fact that when it comes to progressive radio, advertizers seem to not want to go there. Witness the list of major advertizers from a few months ago who were found to be avoiding buying ad space on Air America. And we’re talking major markets here, like New York and San Francisco.
Market forces? I don’t think so.
radiofreewill could have added that the almost exclusively white male AM local market hate jocks mask their sexual and intellectual inferiority by attacking women, darker people than the host – read that as immigrants and Muslims – and gays continuously. They almost gag if forced to deal honestly about unions, public schools or any caller who has a problem with health care issues.
but radiofreewill’s assertion that the bottom line on these programs is the pounding, pounding, pounding of the myth that we live in a society where any listener – that’s YOU, Bubba – can become the next gazillionaire if he repeats Reaganesque mantras, is very true.
From last thread, to SP CPA if he’s here:
Stephen Parrish, CPA @ 110
Let me throw this idea out for further consideration. Remember all the hoohaw about Cheney’s conflict of interest, holding Halliburton stock in a trust that he’d received as CEO or other deferred income from the same? He finally divested it, making a donation post-Katrina, if memory serves. But in spite of his donation, he and Lynne still cleared a chunk of change on the deal because of a one-time tax code change that encouraged charitable donations because of the tsunami and Katrina within a tight time frame.
Ahem.
So…what if Halliburton expected a short-term tax code change that would behoove it to declare income earlier rather than later, and take post-tax profits now as well? And are there consequences to earning those tax-dollars offshore if they are moved to Dubai next year instead of taking those earnings here on-shore this year?
edit: Uh-oh…server burping? Had some difficulty with submission…
I just tuned in to Background Briefing (Ian Masters) streaming from KPFK.org. Guests will include:
– Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson
– Robert Baer, former CIA case officer.
– Glenn Greenwald
– Obrey Hendricks (spelling?) author Politics of Jesus
– Robert Morrison.
radiofreewill @ 33: This reminds me of something from Philip Slater:
from Earthwalk, by Philip Slater, 1974.
Yow!
YES Christy!
It is not only the talk radio shows that shape public opinion. I’ve worked a lot of construction gigs all over and there is always the obligatory radio blaring out the local hard rock station. The hourly news summaries re-enforce ideas such as the Iraq connection to terrorism.
ET: speaking of local white male djs, I read that one rightwing dj in my area had photos of Paris Hilton on his website & thought it was a joke. I checked out his website & it wasn’t. He (white male in his 60’s) had a lot of photos of Paris & his sportscar. Eeeew. They were gone when I tried to show a friend.
O.M.G. Marcy’s connecting major dots..on the USA scandal. Remember all those 750,000 Indian affairs documents…
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c…..l#comments
Honestly, any Christians that thought Dubya was going to lead them in a New Exodus, out of the American jungle of diversity, to the promised land of gated communities full of cookie-cutter pasty believers segregated from the little people – seem to have forgotten everything both in the Constitution and said by Jesus.
BushCo Evangelicals, imvho, have severely failed in in their responsibilities to be good followers.
After all, blind followers in a faith demonstrated by loyalty wouldn’t know if they were following Satan, or not – until it was too late.
We can’t stop them from being sheep, but we can, and imperatively must, take the reigns of power away from them – our Country is bigger than their Fairytale.
My beef with today’s media isn’t so much the political aspect, though it’s damn dispiritng. I love Rayne’s comment @36 about FAB. I’d love to see “Saint” Ronnie’s “reforms” reversed: re-instituting anti-ownership-concentration bylaws in the FCC Act so that local ownership has a prayer of flourishing once again, thus ensuring that locally focused programs (and the diversity they bring) have a chance to take hold. This could only be done with a Democrat in the White House–and a progressive one at that…which is one reason I’m suspicious of Dem candidates who are too cozy with corporate funding sources. Returning the public’s airwaves TO the public will require a deep moral commitment and a lot of courage on the part of our next President and the ‘08 congress, and it’s one of the criteria I’m using to judge the current candidates.
look, I just got back from 7-11 where I picked up some shelled pumpkin seeds and I just wanted to see what was in the papers
with all that is going on, new york newsday has a full front page GLARING lead about some FRIGGIN cheating on some tests
THE FRIGGIN FRONT PAGE STORY!
when gore was running for president I remember they used to CUT OFF the sound so you couldn’t hear the applause and you could LITTERALLY hear them turn up the volume on the audience from a clip of bush
it was SO obvious it made me nutz
Spaghetti Happens @ 40 has a very good point. I used to listen to Air America WLIB 1190 in NY while driving, but they lost some good people, and especially THEIR ADVERTISERS WERE EMBARRASSING! Can’t recall specifics, but the sort of down-market late night adverts in a second class market. Folks, this was a station in Manhattan, NYC! I do remember the ads for prefab steel buildings, to fulfill your warehouse or worship needs in mere weeks saving 100’s of kilodollars over custom brick and mortar. This in morning drive prime time. The advertiser was either a moron or a saint; undoubtedly the latter. Then their much discussed financial woes, and it got too painful. I really should give them another chance
OfT:
Greg Sargent has heard from the NYT on the Edwards hit piece. NYT addressed the narrow criticism, but not the overall issue of fairness (surprise!).
radiofreewill at 34
Amen. It truly is a “beat-down”. Makes me just wanna go surf and let it go sometimes.
VJB @ 52
they have some embarrasments as hosts now
sammy and army should be on abc they’re so rediculous and they broadcast these right wing idiots twice a day
they have some guy that makes believe he’s a pro military man when all he does is say how correct the administrations decisions are and we know as a fact the military thinks this adminstrations decisions were moronic
they have radio-evangelicals on sunday morning that drive you nuts and the guy that replaced sam sedar is hard to take for more then 45 seconds
thankfully randi is still on, thom hartman is a genious, rachael is the bomb, the kennedy is great, “the state of belief is also a great show”…in my opinion they too will slowly be purged
Hi all!
Been busy and haven’t even been able to lurk but have to add to this comment; Veritas78 @ 38
Here in LA Clear Channel also owns the Air America station KTLA. Recently they changed stuff around by delaying Racheal Maddow and putting her on a bad time. They then axed one of the most liberal of the weekend commentators and put in some weak local DJ durring the afternoon drive time. Everytime I grit my teeth and listen to the new guy, I am floored by the stupidity of the converstaion. The guy is an uniformed idiot who prefers to talk about finger sandwhiches and LA real estate then politics. He doesn’t even know the difference between the Roman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire. And they are pushing him in all their adds. I sometimes wonder if this isn’t a plan to slowly ruin progressive radio by making it stupid.
After all Clear Channel was the leader in the “Burn the Dixie Chicks Albums ” rant some years ago and is a huge supporter of Bush.
Topanga-lib. That guy used to be at At KABC as “Mr. KABC”. I agree, he’s maddening. KTLK has really screwed up out here.
no recess.
if the soldiers and marines can have their tours extended, Congress can stay in the swamp and do some work.
At the very least, Waxman et al can do some more nice hearings. nothing like live tv during summer rerun season.
First, Blair admits he’s been a secret convert to catholicism (political near-suicide in England) since before becoming a politician. Now it is revealed he planned to do a “cheney” to the UK government and Labor party!
Linky.
In a lot of ways, modern talk radio is a descendent of the pseudo-religious RW propaganda radio of the type sponsored by the Hunt brothers back in the 50’s and 60’s. I’m not sure how you’d research this, but I suspect this is about the time that Jesus started supporting tax cuts.
The religious aspect of this kind of radio was acceptable in the South, but not so much elsewhere, so reactionary religiosity was replaced with reactionary bellicosity, and bingo! Modern talk radio!
I probably left a few steps out, but not to many.
Alfred Kelgarries @ 59
Oh. My.
A Brit posted at DailyKos in response to a comment I’d made that something was seriously wrong with the U.S., that it had multiple sequential failures of its government for decades. I had all I could do to make a civil reply.
Obviously something has been extremely f*cked up in the UK as well. And the Catholicism thing — jeepers, that’s like the invasion of the Illuminat* Opus De* branch, being so secretive. Gives this recovering Catholic the heebie-jeebies…
Topanga-lib @ 56
I think the guy’s name is Mark Germain. And I agree with your assessment.
On the drive home from work, I used to listen to Rand Rhodes, who was shrill but smart and well informed.
Alfred Kelgarries @ 59
Them pesky secrets just don’t know when to keep outta the light do they? Bushie’s poodle plopped a big one there…
PhilK @ 61
any linkys? I grew up in Dallas. I know about the Three Amigos (the Hunt boys). The only one who has had any success is the gay one. He built a lovely hotel/conference center right on the Trinity River with the biggest single phallic symbol ever seen in dallas. I used to eat there a lot with my firends while going to SMU, one of their daddies was the chef in the restaurant.
linky. The obvious one to the left.
watertiger upstairs on the shadow fourth branch emperor
Rayne @ 61
If you read the whole article carefully, it becomes clear that a member of BLAIR’s inner circle leaked this stuff. Appropriate or not, a huge anti-catholic bias still exists in upper class English circles.
And this is curtains for Poodle’s career and his wife’s as well. They will have to move to spain now, I am not kidding. (This is almost, but not quite, as bad as having it disclosed that Bush and Cheney are in fact, lovers, over here, IMHO).
Watertiger upstairs pups!
We Don’t Need No Stinkin’ Constitution edition
I think you have to consider that some mediums are better suited for specific messages than others. The conservative message is very well suited for radio. Their message is blunt, simple and certain.
In contrast, the liberal message is better suited for blogging. It is nuanced, complex and
Something can and should be done to make KPFK in LA a more effective progressive voice. I like Ian Masters’s programs but the rest lack something in topicality.
I understand that anyone who donates is free to join the programming board by some process or other.
Rayne @ 11:09 am -
I hope it wasn’t the comment I posted that gave it indigestion :)
I would, if it is possible, look at KBR’s statement of income rather than Halliburton’s (even though I know that KBR is a subsidiary of Halliburton that is about to be spun off) and look at the section of the financial statements that reconciles financial statement income with taxable income and then repeat the procedure with Halliburton so that we can compare net income appearing on a consolidated statement of income with taxable income reported on Halliburton’s consolidated corporation tax returns.
While I could see a rationale under certain circumstances for booking prepaid income in the year it is deposited, I don’t think that Halliburton would have prematurely reported undeposited taxable income that wasn’t even billed in the year a contract was signed, since it did not have constructive receipt of those funds.
I’m not as up to date as I would like to be about the foreign tax matters mentioned in your second question.
Alfred Kelgarries @ 66
Sure smelled inner circle to me, like somebody had a bone to pick with Blair that’s been festering or like they were worried Blair would come back…and I’ll put money on this not being the worst of it by a long chalk.
Isn’t this funny? this anti-Catholic bias goes back to the Tudors, nearly 600 years; after all this time they are still threatened by a theocratic power that they felt abused them.
But why aren’t we Americans just as afraid of those who would violate our Constitution, treat it as just a “goddamned piece of paper” after hundreds of years of rejecting monarchic power?
Just doesn’t make sense.
KQKE the San Francisco progressive alternative is very good on weekdays. On weekends though its absolutely intolerable. Vitamin infomercials and shitball cooking shows. It’s wretched weekend radio around here. I’ve been screaming at them to air Laura Flanders, Sam Seder, and Kennedy/ Papintino during the day when there is a listening audience. (by the way Papintino is awesome!)
Are the AAR hosts THAT expensive to franchise their broadcasts?
In the meantime I’m going to buy a mortgage or a mattress or something that advertises on KQKE.
AK @59
Sad that in a piece about inaccurate media your first bit is simply not true. Blair is talking only now about converting. He is currently an “Anglo-Catholic” which is a colloquial name for those in the established(Anglican) Church of England who are enamoured of ceremony and traditional splendour. Indeed, he has been censured by the RC hierarchy for taking Catholic communion, when not a Catholic, along with his wife Cherie who is and has always been a Catholic.
There are many Catholics in British Government, though there are clear genuine issues about a Catholic Prime Minister having the right to appoint Bishops in the established Church of England. The issue about Blair has always been not his religion but his appearance of religiosity, which led to his then spin-doctor Alistair Campbell famously telling a journalist that in interviews “we don’t do God.”
Secondly, actually, had Blair sacked Gordon Brown, it would have been nothing like the Cheney situation.
We have no written constitution, nor do we have separation of powers. The head of the legislature (usually leader of the largest party), is head of the executive. The Prime Minister has a clear and absolute right to hire and fire ministers at will, and does so regularly.
Actually, the probable reason he didn’t is that he would not have got away with it, as support for Gordon in the Labour Party has for many years been very substantial.
Goodness, you have no idea how strange it seems defending Blair, but facts must out.
When I comment on here I try to understand the USA first. It would be nice if the same respect was shown to the UK.
Let me try again. This is a doctrinal, not prejudicial, problem. Prejudice against Catholics is simply not widespread. England, not the whole of the UK by the way, has an established church, i.e. the Church of England is part of the State. If that sounds to you something like the Christian equivalent of an Islamic republic, I can only agree. I’m explaining, not supporting. Under our system, the Queeen is Head of the Church of England and as most of her powers are delegated to the PM he appoints the Bishops. If anyone can’t see that a PM who is not at least nominally a member of the Church of England does this it is clearly a problem, they are not thinking. Now to the gggod bit, Gordon Brown, as a Scots Presbyterian, has exactly the same problem, and it will be interesting to see how he deals with it. Be sure, as my country, Britain, falls apart slowly, the English are not going to let him, as a Scot, away with it easily.
Chetnolian @ 74
But being American now, nearly a lifetime since John F. Kennedy’s presidency, the entire notion that different sects of the same Christian faith are beholden in any way to any other sect in relation to governance is patently challenging. Mind you, we do have our concerns about concentrations of persons of any one sect, like that of the Supreme Court Justices weighted towards Catholicism; their religious values are not supposed to enter into the application of the law in any way, and we’d likely have the same concerns if there was a concentration of any other sect within the ranks of the justices, or within the houses of Congress. But that the head of state or any other branch was to be subordinate to a titular head of a church? Anathema, just as all branches being subordinate to a monarch would be.
Because our nation in theory is founded upon the separation of church and state, and because we rejected a monarchy, many of us will struggle with the issue of CoE v. RC v. ScotsPresby in relationship to government. It simply looks prejudicial.
But perhaps that’s why we’ve struggled with understanding Islamic theocracies, too; we’ve acquired our own biases over time in trying to escape other biases.
Thank you Rayne, we’re getting there. I actually agree with all you say. The British constitutional arrangement is a best strange, at worst ridiculous.My problem was the suggestion from Alfred Kilgarries that it was a simple matter of anti-Catholic prejudice. Would it was that simple.
Chetnolian @ 76
And thank you for your input Chetnolian. My suggestion in regard to cheney was not constitutional (you are right, the UK does not have a single source document like we have) but rather in the revelation that Blair was planning to removed long-held authorities from Treasury and give them out to policy drones rather than career civil servants with expertise; this is the exact process Cheney did as soon as he and Bush were installed in power here.
And my statements about upper-class prejudice against catholics are based solely on personal experience with a dozen or so upper-crust brits who are either business associates of long standing or personal friends. Cannot and do not claim to speak for the brit on the street.
I personally am a functional atheist. I respect personal faith to the max, but when you start to organize it my tolerance goes down very very fast.
Well as someone who challenged right-wing talk radio and kicked their ass both financially and in the media, I know something about this issue.
I spent a lot of time thinking about how to do it and the methods to use. I’ve determined that they aren’t unbeatable.
One thing is to help people figure out ways to beat them using their own rhetoric against them. They scream about the fairness doctrine and say, “LET the MARKET DECIDE!” yet when we actually got the market (their advertisers) to decide, it cost them 28 major advertisers and about 1/2 a million in revenue. They of course used lawyers against me, (They hate lawyers until they want to use them for their own intimidation tactics) because they don’t REALLY want the market to decide. They want to control the market and will use all the power of a huge owner to suppress real choice.
As most of you know they responded by shutting down my blog and threatening to sue me for “everything I’ve got!” Then when they lost more advertisers they cried, ‘They are threating our free speech!” Their hypocrisy was stunning but not unexpected.
They will use all their power, both corporate and broadcasting bully pulpit, to attack anyone who challenges them. And believe me, getting attacked for three hours on air by four scared, angry right-wing radio “professionals” is not a pleasant experience.
But it is nothing compared to getting a threating letter from ABC/Disney. They attacked me financially, they attacked me in the blogosphere and they attacked me personally on the air.
And they aren’t through.
Going after me financially and attacking my pseudonym (Spocko) wasn’t enough. Someone who claims they are Catherine Moy, Ms. Morgan’s co-author of the book filled with salacious details of Cindy Sheehan’s life, sent me a nice little mash note the other day, talking about how some judge will bust the anonymity of someone for defamation.
Moy knows that *I* never defamed them, but they like to drop threats right before they actually act on those threats.
They were begging for Cindy Sheehan to sue them, because they knew what a long uphill battle it is and how they would benefit from the PR from the wingnut crowd during the time of a lawsuit. For them it was a win-win with a potential downside covered by insurance.
Now Moy wants to re-engage me because they want the PR? They like to pick fights on people smaller than them and threaten people and then use the corporate bosses to do their dirty work. And if we do actually take them up on the rants and are successful they cry, “But he’s trying to take away my livelihood, and I’m not trying to take away his.” as Morgan said in the SF Chronicle
I was so grateful for all the support I got from the blogosphere and other groups like the EFF and Media Matters, but I have had trouble keeping it up, because unlike wingnut welfare groups like the Media Research Center who fund Newsbusters, or any of the talk radio hosts– I’m not paid.
If Moy decides to go after my identity and research me (like she did Obama, where she used dubious sources to make her case- See this Media Matters story) in the real world there is nothing that will keep them from trashing me. People say I shouldn’t care what they say about me, but why should I have to subject myself to the same hateful attacks that they leveled against Cindy Sheehan? That will be how they use the public airwaves. To attack me personally and subject my family to any kind of dirt they dig up. And they know that they can get away with it too because they will claim I’m a public figure and they know I can’t do anything about it.
Disney used its brand to sell the violent rhetoric and anti, “any-religion-except-right-wing-killer-Christianity” to support Rodgers, Morgan, Sussman and Benner at KSFO. They are SO happy that they are no longer part of Disney, but Disney sold their violence-spewing program and protected them as they lost advertiser after advertiser. They extended their brand around them and kept supporting them by getting new advertisers to replace the ones they lost. Disney figured that they could take the brand hit and not feel a dent. I don’t know if their new owners, Citadel Broadcasting, will be as generous.
By showing advertisers that they can choose to NOT have their brand associated with these people, we put right-wing radio on notice that their free ride on the ignorance of the advertisers is over.
Alfred Kilgarries @77. Great, we are at one on attitude and principles. Actually, as a radical Scot living mainly amongst upper-crust English deep in the countryside, I keep being surprised by a. how many of them are Catholic and b. how very little anyone cares, which is, in my book, good.
However I think you have slightly misinterpreted the Independent piece. Blair’s office (who were the usual coven of slavering sychophants that always adheres to power – in that our countries are alike)were not suggesting civil service change, as despite the creeping onset of “political advisors” our civil service is almost totally career, but a division of the actual spoils among ministers, i.e politicians, and doing it for reasons which had little to do with political strategy and more with childish personal spite. At least your lot knew why they were doing it!
Chetnolian @ 79
Ah! Thanks, Chetnolian. I must admit it felt like I was missing a dimension there. Now it all fits.
General note to the lake: I spent most of my life advocating positions in the us defense establishment against a horde of adversaries. I usually won, mainly by the strength and force of my writing. So like any good soldier, I learned to be very good with my primary weapon. I’m afraid the bombastic style has carried over here to the lake. The difference is, here I’m just giving (largely) personal opinions about subjects. I try to base them on all available facts but I do miss things, a lot. I NEVER mind being challenged on the facts if said challenger has better knowledge of them and can demonstrate it. (Actually it makes me throw myself on the floor and chew the carpet while screaming in rage. but you guys can’t SEE that, so I’m safe.)
Alfred Kilgarries@80
I understand as well! Sounds like we’ve been in the same business, that’s why I’m obsessed with the USA. I think I know the sort of people you’ve met.
Good to chat. Let’s do it again sometime.But for now it’s getting near my bedtime.
The Liberals seem to have the leg up on the Wingnuts as far as the internet goes. That’s where I go to get my news and political opinion because of the seemingly endless choices out there. I can see the Conservatives of accusing Liberals of trying to regulate everything when the free market should be the decider in what gets on the air. Bill O’Rielly made this same argument just last night on his show. The argument makes sense until I read this article that makes the situation more clear. It seems like a few rich liberals could pitch in to keep liberal radio stations on the air. It’s a really important thing they could do without having to be so public about it or spend their valuable time a charity would require.
Chetnolian @ 81
Cool! I’d really enjoy that. drop by again! and keep your shotgun handy, those UC types have unsavory habits…:>
Re Independent article linked to by Albert Kelgarries @ 59:
That was a fine piece of writing in that article. I have just finished griping to no one in particular that the articles in today’s NYT are so ‘atmospheric’ that after finishing them I had no idea what the significance is of the conditions described.
Also, the machinations described parallel in all too many ways what we think has happened in our government. The secrecy, the elbowing, the plotting …
Good luck to the Brits with Brown. At least it sounds that he may still have some intention — perhaps over a decade old but at least present at some time in the past — of helping the less fortunate.
AlFRED, not AlBERT Kelgarries. Sorry.
marshen @ 82
The entry fee to set up the Internet equivalent of a radio station is relatively small — no need to purchase a license and/or transmitter. With a bit of effort, one could even do the phone-in talk format without a studio.
There are two down sides to Internet radio:
– It doesn’t reach automobiles.
– The fees for broadcasting music are much higher.
A good investment for a well-funded progressive organization would be to get a really good 24/7 progressive stream onto XM. It would reach everyone who has satellite radio, and some of us would buy satellite radio just to have that available.
Most so called institutions of higher learning are flooded with leftist. If “fairness” is what we are striving for lets start there but I don’t think fairness is the motivating factor behind this push.
The reason talk radio is so popular is that it is a counter balance to most television, print,govt. media (NPR, PBS) and are universities which are completely dominated by the left.
You know it all, high horse liberals can’t see/admit this but we all know its the case.
noen @ 13
I don’t know who you listened to on Air America, but Thom Hartmann is one of the brightest and most interesting radio personalities in the nation. He is smarter by a landslide than anyone the right has to offer.
It’s something I haven’t put much thought into mostly because, like you said, it’s something you expected (wing-nut sovereignty over the radio).
But, you raised many excellent points Christy. The air waves do indeed belong to the public, if only at least technically. It’s hard to say what the right play is in this situation. Something needs to be done consistently until it’s balanced out for sure… I know too many old-timers back home who have completely skewed perspectives of politics because their only intake of information is early morning, extremely nutty conservative talk shows that have been airing the same message for thirty years.
Maybe the Fairness Doctrine was a little off, but something similar would suffice. Anything publicly owned should without question function in their good will. Ninety percent conservative doesn’t sound very good for anybody.
James at 87 — Yes, from my perch here atop the ivory towers of…West Virginia…in small-town US of A, where I was born and raised, where tap water is the beverage of choice, where our sons and daughters go off in uniform at the highest per capita rate of any state, where we grow our own garden and can our veggies by hand, and we still say things like “that girl is cuter than a speckled pup under a red wagon,” what we all want is for a Viagra-overloaded, oxycontin addicted, bloviating fact-challenged ego-driven moron to dominate our radio time. Because, heaven forbid, we get think for ourselves, or know the other side of the story, instead of having someone put thoughts in our heads for us.
Jeebus, could you have been more off in your assessment of who I am, or did you think by putting it at the end of the thread that I would miss it? Idgit…
PS — I don’t know where in the hell you went to school, but at my college, I had a seminar on conservative political theory, in the heart of “liberal” Massachusetts, among several other courses that explored both liberal and conservative governmental principles and underpinnings. Educate yourself a little more about the facts before you hurt yourself.
…..and you people wonder why we fear you?
How will TV networks be properly regulated? Do Republicans get to forge some documents about a Demcorat and go to air with them?
Regulated speech is not free. The government making licensing decisions based on perceived (by whom?) political beliefs would make the Founders roll over in their graves.
The Real Sporer at 91 — So, you’re for monopolistic control of the airways by large monied conglomerates over local broadcasting then? Good to know.
“Doling out licenses fairly” means instead of just giving them to the other side’s rich corporations, our side’s rich corporations should get them too. Thanks but no thanks. Rich corporations all by definition have exactly one interest and it’s not OUR interest.
The real answer is get rid of broadcast licenses altogether, and turn the spectrum over to unlicensed services (wifi, low powered broadcasting, do-it-yourself cell phones, etc). Getting rid of all the entry barriers is the only way to make things progressive.
Christy Hardin Smith was featured today on “Seder on Sundays” which you can hear live on http://www.airamericaradio.com, on selected stations that buy it, or by subscribing to it–like I do–listening whenever you want to hear smart passionate conversation.
It is this tantalizing glimpse of what progressive talk radio could be-=could do–that makes us both passionate and maddened when other Americans don’t get to hear it, and thus don’t get to learn what’s true.
Please support Sam Seder and progressive radio wherever you can.
And forget NPR!