[Nicko]

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...type=printable

"We are going to put it to Bush," Franken said during a conference call with reporters. "Bush is going down in November, and then we're putting it to the rest of the right-wing media."

Will it thrive? I have no idea, but it sounds like fun

[SimeyTheLimey]

Air America Radio, said Wednesday it will go live March 31

Two thoughts occur to me:

1. Isn't the start date a day early?
2. Is this Air America funded by the CIA like the last one?

[dcolton]

The questions are:

Who is picking it up?
In what time slots will it air?


Have they struck a deal with any of the major radio clusters? I don't know.

Simey, here is a question for you as the budding lawyer:

Equal time. Do you think that, since it is political season, Air America will try to get equal time? I know it may be far fetched to make the claim - but if Air America wants good time slots, do you think they can challenge stations to equal time?

(Like I said, I know it is far fetched, but I can see the arguments - and although I don't want to hear the liberal left on my radio, my belief of balance in the media necessitates(sp?) equal time to people with opposing view points.) May be off topic, but also, what do you think about the recent ruling that companies can own more radio stations and they can now own tv stations as well.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
Two thoughts occur to me:

1. Isn't the start date a day early?
2. Is this Air America funded by the CIA like the last one?

Letsee... the first one dropped pigs from the sky for terrorists, and this one sends news by terrorists over the air for pigs.

Hmmm... same thing.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by dcolton:
The questions are:

Who is picking it up?
In what time slots will it air?


Have they struck a deal with any of the major radio clusters? I don't know.

Simey, here is a question for you as the budding lawyer:

Equal time. Do you think that, since it is political season, Air America will try to get equal time? I know it may be far fetched to make the claim - but if Air America wants good time slots, do you think they can challenge stations to equal time?

(Like I said, I know it is far fetched, but I can see the arguments - and although I don't want to hear the liberal left on my radio, my belief of balance in the media necessitates(sp?) equal time to people with opposing view points.) May be off topic, but also, what do you think about the recent ruling that companies can own more radio stations and they can now own tv stations as well.

I thought that this was intended to be a network, not just a show? Anyway, I don't know anything about FCC regulations. I really can't answer your question.

In any case, equal time slots to what? Liberals already have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR and PBS, as well as the Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, Baltimore Sun, Time, Newsweek, etc, etc. It seems like conservatives are the ones who should get equal time!

But I say let the market decide. The more viewpoints out there the better.

[dcolton]

In radio, although it is a netwrok, it still needs to be picked up. For example - Michael Savage is (or was) on the Talk Radio Network (TRN). Radio station "pick up" his show via satellite. Even with huge companies like Clear Channel, it is often left up to the individual stations to decide their program line up. (With the exception of the "big hitters" like Rush who commands money versus commercial trade outs).

[slow moe]

Contrary to the protests of many liberals, there is no shortage of left-leaning voices in radio, TV, and in the newspapers. The majority of this new network's target listeners are currently tuned into NPR, CNN, and The New York Times.

If there was a crying need for a liberal radio network, there would already be one.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by slow moe:
Contrary to the protests of many liberals, there is no shortage of left-leaning voices in radio, TV, and in the newspapers. The majority of this new network's target listeners are currently tuned into NPR, CNN, and The New York Times.

If there was a crying need for a liberal radio network, there would already be one.

Trust me, I am not liberal...but there is a lack of liberal talk radio. It is easy to clump radio, tv, and print into the generic category of media, but I think it is dangerous because of your point exactly. Most television and newspapers are extremely liberal - if you lump then together, then you get liberals with a justifiable gripe and an allusion that the "Media", the 4th estate, is "unbiased" and "balanced".

It used to be that a radio station owner was limited to radio and by the number of stations he could own in a market. The FCC has changed those rules, so one company can saturate a market with it's version of the truth on both radio and tv - closing out different points of view. Not saying that any person or company would shut down a marketplace of ideals, but the opporunity is there. And judging how people are easily influenced - it is a scary thought.

I don't think this "Air America" will work though. Smaller stations (AM) are historically conservative and the bigger stations are already committed to the Rush Limbaughs, Michael Savages, etc. That leaves late night and early morning time slots for liberal radio. That is why I was asking if the liberals will try to use Equal Time to get better time slots *IF* they are unable to secure stations to air there propoganda. I think there is a bigger issue here.

[Zimphire]

Franken already made himself a laughing stock after the tackle.

Too late for him.

What the idiot doesn't get is, the only people that will actually care to listen are the people that already aren't going to vote for Bush.

Or ones tuning in to laugh at the spin.

There will be no changing of minds because of this.

Franken is going to be disappointed.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Equal time. Do you think that, since it is political season, Air America will try to get equal time? I know it may be far fetched to make the claim - but if Air America wants good time slots, do you think they can challenge stations to equal time?

It's not an equal time issue - that only applies to candidates. That won't necessarily prevent them from making the argument, but it will be a policy argument, not a legal one.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by zigzag:
It's not an equal time issue - that only applies to candidates. That won't necessarily prevent them from making the argument, but it will be a policy argument, not a legal one.

I realize this. But what if Rush Limbaugh (or even a local host)makes the mistake of having a republican candidate as a guest. The host offers the democratic candidate the same opportunity, but the democrat canididate declines, stating that the interview would not be fair. (Or the candidate agrees, and the interview clearly is not fair). I am no lawyer, but making a legal argument for equal time, whether on the "policy" level or the "legal" level is not too far fetched.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Franken already made himself a laughing stock after the tackle.

Too late for him.

What the idiot doesn't get is, the only people that will actually care to listen are the people that already aren't going to vote for Bush.

Or ones tuning in to laugh at the spin.

There will be no changing of minds because of this.

Franken is going to be disappointed.

Z,

You will find that conservative hosts have a large liberal audience because they listen to get mad and disagree. I worked in radio for 4 years, and you will be suprised how many people called to say how much they hated our conservative line up but listened every day. You would also be suprised at how many weak minded liberals (I always have to throw in the cheap shots ) change their minds because of a talk show host.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by slow moe:
Contrary to the protests of many liberals, there is no shortage of left-leaning voices in radio, TV, and in the newspapers. The majority of this new network's target listeners are currently tuned into NPR, CNN, and The New York Times.

If there was a crying need for a liberal radio network, there would already be one.

Those are mainstream news outlets. They might have biases, but they aren't in your face leftists, they don't call Republicans "retards" etc. I think the idea is to promote left-leaning loudmouth counterparts to Limbaugh, who can go on the air and just rant for three hours.

I ran across a Rush broadcast the other day, the first time in years. Since I didn't recognize his voice at first, from the tone of it I thought it was a religious show. I then realized that he's essentially a preacher masquerading as a political commentator. During the entire half-hour I listened in, he didn't address a single policy question in a calm, detached way - he just ranted on and on about how much he detested liberals/Democrats. It struck me as incredibly juvenile. Oh well, to each his own. I would just say that if this is what the liberal broadcasters have in mind, they can have it.

I think it's just another phase in the political cycle. When I was growing up, it was the left that had most of the anger and dominated the rhetoric. Then the right had its day and the left couldn't find its voice. Now you see the left expressing a more visceral type of anger, like Limbaugh's, so it wouldn't surprise me if it developed into a trend - a lot of people are angry at Bush. If Bush wins re-election, it will more likely grow; if he doesn't, it will more likely dissipate. Only time will tell.

[daimoni]

.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by daimoni:
What I love best about this new network is that it's hosted by comedians.

Again, the keyword here is: comedy

And that can only be a good thing.

Yeah, the fact that some of them are comedians might make it more palatable. That was the one redeeming thing about Limbaugh in the early days - he's always been a windbag but the occasional spoof of Teddy Kennedy or Clinton could be genuinely funny.

[daimoni]

.

[Millennium]

If they want to get their own talk radio, more power to them. Though it should be noted that the right wing doesn't get its own network, so I really hope they aren't trying to call this a balancing factor.

[daimoni]

.

[slow moe]

They should just call it NPR2

Millennium's right, there is no such thing as a conservative radio network. Rush, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, etc. are all on the air because station managers choose to have them on their stations, and they choose to have them because that's what their audiences want, and if the audience is big enough, then it's easy to get advertisers, and that make these shows even more attractive for local stations. What I'm saying is that there is a nice business model going on here.

Now, if Franken, or whoever, wants to do a show, fine. Let them do a show, and put it up on satellite, and let the people decide if the show will survive or not. If that was what this "network" was about, great, I'm all for it, but it's not. The group behind it knows they don't stand a chance if they have to make it like Rush did. That's why they want to buy up stations in the nation's top markets to broadcast their programming, so they don't have fool with the great unwashed masses.

[slow moe]

Originally posted by dcolton:
That leaves late night and early morning time slots for liberal radio.

What! Late night? Dude, Coast to Coast AM rocks.

[mo]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I thought that this was intended to be a network, not just a show? Anyway, I don't know anything about FCC regulations. I really can't answer your question.

In any case, equal time slots to what? Liberals already have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NPR and PBS, as well as the Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, Baltimore Sun, Time, Newsweek, etc, etc. It seems like conservatives are the ones who should get equal time!

But I say let the market decide. The more viewpoints out there the better.

Chicago Tribune? There's a new and novel addition to the liberal media conspiracy lineup.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by mo:
Chicago Tribune? There's a new and novel addition to the liberal media conspiracy lineup.

I'll take your word for it.