Why Can't Stupid Ideas Stay Dead
Posted by: tony on 06/22/2007 12:05 AM
Updated by: tony on 06/22/2007 11:52 PM
|
Expires: 07/22/2007 12:00 AM
|
 Like the Night of the Living Dead, some stupid bills just won't stay in their graves.
Sister Toldjah tells us about the resurrection (or "zombification", if that is a word) of the "Fairness" Doctrine.
ADVISORY: New Report Documenting Conservative Domination of Political Talk Radio
Conference call to discuss new CAP, Free Press report
Washington, DC – A major new study of all the news/talk radio stations controlled by the top five commercial station owners documents in detail the massive imbalance between conservative and progressive talk radio broadcast each weekday.
The study, set for release this Thursday, June 21st, 2007, by the Center for American Progress and Free Press, raises serious questions about whether the companies licensed to broadcast over the public airwaves are serving the listening needs of all Americans and providing a range of information on important public issues.
Statistical analysis of all 10,506 licensed-stations reveals how media ownership and consolidation over the past decade has contributed significantly to the one-sided nature of political talk radio. The report outlines specific policy solutions to address the imbalance and ensure that the commercial use of public airwaves serves local and community needs.
If this wasn't so chilling, I'd find it humorous.
I used to listen to the local AM talkers in my local area. We had a conservative talk radio station, that pre-empted the talking for every local sports event, we had a conservative station that didn't do that, and we had a sports talk radio channel.
One day I tuned into the "non-preempted conservative talk station" and discovered it had morphed into "progressive talk radio" and it features Air America.
I was curious about what they were talking about, so I tuned in. I was treated to one screechy, hate-filled woman bashing Bush after another. And they really didn't have their facts right.
It wasn't even entertaining. So after a couple of days, I turned it off and never returned.
Liberal talk radio crashes and burns, simply because it's not entertaining. The ideas don't sell. When I listened to Air America that couple of days, the only advertiser I heard was Mother Jones Magazine. What advertiser wants to advertise on a program with that kind of message...
Screechy Host: "Bush is in bed with the eeeeeevil corporations which are sucking this country dry with their corporate welfare!!!"
Smooth Announcer: "This program was brought to you by IBM"
Yeah, right.
The other thing is, liberal talk radio appeals to victims. Victims don't make anything of themselves, they are too busy being victims. Hence, victims don't have a lot of disposable income, therefore liberal talk radio is not a "target rich environment" for any advertiser wanting to make money.
So I'll go for the Fairness Doctrine as soon as they amend it to include any educational institution which receives public funds.
Update: Fred weighs in on the Fairness Doctrine.
Insiders say it was the collapse of the radio show "Air America" that led to this attempt to retool the Fairness Doctrine as a form of de facto censorship. I guess the idea is that, if you can't compete in the world of ideas, you pass a law that forces radio stations to air your views. In effect, it would force a lot of radio stations to drop some talk show hosts -- because they would lose money providing equal airtime to people who can’t attract a market or advertisers.
|
