Fairness Doctrine Would "Ruin Talk Radio"

[dbt]

I read this little gem in the May 14 issue of Radio And Records (the "bible" of the radio biz, for the uninitiated) and found it most telling concerning the EVIL that Talk Radio has brought upon this country.

The article itself is titled Indecency: Are You In Danger? It features repsonses from a number of News/Talk programmers around the country to R&R's questions concerning whether stations have changed their day-to-day programming and whether they favor more strict or more vague definitions of "indecency."

One Peter Theile of WORD in Greenville, SC actually said this:

"Radio broadcasters need to fight this, because, as Rush Limbaugh has said, it opens the door to more censorship. If we are not careful, the fairness doctrine will return, and that will ruin Talk Radio." (Emphasis mine.)

If one needed any proof that Talk Radio fears the concept of fairness, there it is!

BTW, I have been unable to find an online link to said article, but I know that EvilDUers will turn it up if it's out there.

:evilgrin:
dbt

[ClassWarrior]

1. It was the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine...

...that allowed the rise of Rush and his minions of hate.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

2. i don't think it is a fear of fairness

i think it is more the fear of lost profits. RW talk radio has (whether it is liked or not by the LW) a HUGE listening audience. Rush claims 20 million listeners (while that number is obviously debatable)...advertisers salivate over this sort of thing.

What needs to be shown is that left-talk can succeed as well. If AAR succeeds and becomes profitable to a tune even close to the likes of Rush and Hannity then I think a big change will come...money motivates a lot more than political leanings when it comes to corporations...

theProdigal

[dbt]

3. Hey, PJM!

Nice to see you are still around! Thanks for your reasoned response!

:hi:
dbt

[ProdigalJunkMail]

7. howdy...

nice to still be around...I am very much enjoying DU! Good to see you as well...

theProdigal

[Senior citizen]

4. A propaganda tool doesn't have to be profitable

The profits are made from war profiteering, deregulation, privatization, and other things that the Heritage Foundation uses right wing radio to espouse. It is also a useful propaganda tool to get dumbbells to blame immigrants when big corporations export their jobs, or to think that tax cuts to the rich will also benefit the poor.

My area has more registered Democrats than Republicans. If there was a supply and demand free market, advertisers would have demanded at least one leftist or moderate radio talk show in order to reach the majority of local consumers. Instead we went for almost ten years with nothing but shortwave, as if we were in the old Soviet Union.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

11. with the advent of HUGE communications

conglomerates I would have to agree with you. There is almost nothing for local markets anymore where these mega-stations have come in and bought up all the bandwidth...and it really is a disservice to the local listening audience...but unfortunately, that too is driven by a love of the almighty dollar...

theProdigal

[NewJeffCT]

18. welcome to DU

And, you are correct - a lot of these Right Wing radio hosts actually do poorly in the ratings, but are supported by the Republican money machines in Richard Mellon Scaife, Reverend Moon, Conrad Black, Rupert Murdoch and others.

[ProfessorGAC]

6. Not 20 Million!!!

For the 100th time, Rush has about 3 million listeners. The 20 million claimed is the weekly cumulative total of the 5 days, plus Saturday replay, factored upward by Arbitron's "passive listener" formulas.

I think it wrong for DU'ers to accept that 20 million as if it's a fact, when it is not.
The Professor

[ProdigalJunkMail]

8. i did say 'he claims'

and the claims of listenership (and radio rating services) are what drive advertisement purchasing for his time...

But I will withdraw the 20 million in deference to your obviously more informed claim...

theProdigal

[ProfessorGAC]

12. Wasn't Yelling At You, Sorry!

It's just a pet peeve. It's not the basis of advertising, because the ad buyers know how the number is calculated. They know they're only reaching between 2 and 3 million people with each advert.

It's true that Arbitron reports the numbers this way, but they also report average per hour, but that never gets publicized.

So, i think DU is a forum where we can get some smart, interested people to stop using an essentially bogus number.

Sorry again. Didn't mean to take it out on you.
The Professor

[ProdigalJunkMail]

16. Suuure you weren't yelling :-)

no prob...thanks for the Arbitron lesson...was totally unaware. Are his numbers 'far and above' those generated by other talk radio? I just don't have those numbers and I am SUPPOSED to be working...but we know how that goes :-)

theProdigal

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

15. It's more than just the money though. Howard Stern was the number one

AM draw in some (most?) of the markets that Clear Channel dropped him from (STL, PGH etc.) and they SUCK WIND in those markets now. They were willing to give up what was no doubt substantial bucks to serve their master, who in turn scratches their back with favorable legislation. So it's not so simple as "RW radio sells the best."

[ProdigalJunkMail]

17. partially true

they were also facing an onslaught of the holier-than-thou crowd and FCC fines that, by the blowing of the popular winds, might begin to increase dramatically. I will agree there is some political motivation here...but also, there is that whole profit thing going on and money is where it is at for most corps.

What I would like to see, and thus be able to use as an argument for just your point, is AAR offer to buy time on a Clear Channel station...and offer to pay more than the advertising dollars for the slot given to Rush or Hannity...and see what happens. It's not practical over the long term...but it might make one hell of a point.

theProdigal

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Actually, it would enhance it.

We can call the shock talk section, "Two Barking Dogs."

[Stirling Newberry]

9. The Fairness Doctrine is a good idea.

But I have a question - given the hell a candidate will take for pushing it - why do it? It isn't as if they would get enough donations or support to make it worth it.

[Delano]

10. Talk radio stations never get better than a 2 share...

They always lose in the ratings to top 40 stations, so how would it "ruin" anything.

Talk radio's not about ratings, it's about corporations controlling the message...

[kentuck]

13. They want to continue to spew their propaganda without a rebuttal....

Because they know their arguments cannot stand up to the challenges. They are perfectly content with the status quo, I have no doubt.

[leftofthedial]

14. GOOD!

talk radio is a blight on America

[leftyandproud]

19. ruin it!!!

bring it back! come on kerry! get the bastards off the air.

[SoCalDem]

20. It might ruin "some people's" little party....but it's NECESSARY

for a democracy to have a free flow of ideas.. Rightwing radio is RESPONSIBLE for the "right turn" of the less educated, more gullible in society..

These rightwing people are masters of the phrase.. They have doone their homework.. they manufacture "faux outrage"..They are responsible for the "us vs them" mentality that has swept over the nation..

The "post 9-11" good feeling of "we're all in this together" was because people were watching it happem...live..and in their faces.. They did not start to "blame" and lose that feeling until the "hate-spewers" started on the "Blame Clinton" rhetoric..

These people are dangerous..

California is a prime example.. Nov 02 we re-elected Mr Milquetoast (GrayDavis).. He was not charismatic, but he did an ok job..He was re-elected.. Their boy lost and it pissed them off, so "of coourse" , we had to pay..Rightwing radio stirred the pot and was the driving force in the recall..

During the 02 election, Davis had to PAY for his election ads..but that nutcase running against him was often a "co-host" of every winger with a radio show out here..HOURS ON END...DAYS ON END, he sat there "taking calls from the listeners"..and coincidentally TRASHING Davis..

It's a valuable arm of the GOP, and they know it.. That's why they have no intention of sharing the airwaves..They don't want to lose the free advertising..

Can the dems afford 6-12 hours of solids "free ads"???