|
The 'Corporation For Progressive Radio'
Kinda ties into your proposal.
++++++++++++++++++
Commercial Progressive/Liberal Radio Is Not Viable
Why people expect power to support those talking truth to power is beyond me.
There is a ready market of over 40% of the populace in even the reddest of areas that are not currently served by political talk radio. What every business model requires, a ready-made market.
Problem is, the money boys (advertisers, station owners) are from the other side of the political divide, and most apparently would prefer to lose money. Even worse, they are now apparently buying up AAR affiliates with good numbers in order to push them off the air. No station, no problem.
So much for the free market.
Instead of trying to ‘fight the last war’, that is, model progressive talk radio after Reich-Wing radio, a different (and not really innovative), approach is needed.
This approach is . . . . use the NPR model.
In larger, left leaning cities, commercial Progressive radio will be viable due to the critical mass of advertisers. In smaller, or redder, markets, where most of the advertisers are prejudiced, funding would come from the ‘Corporation For Progressive Radio’ to offset losses.
As Liberals/Progressives, we would need to donate $100/200 a year to the corporation (I used to donate this much to NPR). If 1/6 of Kerry voters donated $100/yr., $1 B a year could be raised.
My belief is that until those in the Red areas (Phoenix, Missoula, Atlanta, etc. etc.) are provided access to an alternative to Reich-Wing propaganda radio, Progressive politicians will make limited inroads. Some discount the effect of Reich-Wing propaganda radio on the political shift, and dumbing down, of the electorate, particularly the ‘working class’. I do not. Radio is low cost (for the consumer), convenient, and pervasive among the ‘working class’.
One other change is that the on-air ‘personalities’ would need to accept that they are part of a movement, and park their ego, and need for $1 M/yr paychecks, at the door.
My experience with all cities, and particularly ‘Red’ cities (St. Louis, Kansas City, Denver, Des Moines, Albuquerque), is that the older/university neighborhoods are ‘Blue’, surrounded by ‘Red’ suburbs which are the enclaves of the middle and ‘working’ classes. That is, the part of the electorate that has been consistently voting against their best interest. Therefore, the primary strategy would be to ‘serve’ these areas. The ‘Blue’ would provide a critical mass of funds, with the CPR providing funds to keep the enterprise ‘just in the black’.
A secondary strategy would be a salient into smaller markets with larger universities (Columbia, MO, Springfield,. MO, Iowa City/Cedar Rapids, IA, Fort Collins, CO) and therefore a younger demographic. The dynamic in these smaller cities would be similar to the larger cities, with the relatively large progressive base proving the revenue to operate nearly self-sufficient.
A third, and probably most important, strategy, will be an air-drops into (typically ‘Red’) smaller cities that are rural regional centers (Quincy, IL, Topeka, KS, Waterloo, IA, Quad Cities, IA). These operations would probably require the most funds from the CPR.
Parallel to all of the above, ownership of stations should be the priority, or the sorry situation in Missoula and Phoenix will simply continue. With an adequately funded CPR, when a station comes up for sale, they would be ready. On-line funding drives could even be effected to raise funds to outbid the Christo/Corporatist oligarchy.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
