"murky is a socialist " i take it you meant me and misspelled my name . and all i can say to the claim that i am a socialist is thank you ! i would prefer liberal socialist but i will settle for either one . On Nov 18, 5:57 pm, mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > murky is a socialist. murky is waiting in line to join up with > nobama's new gestapo. trying to reason and use facts with murky is a > total and complete waste of time. he is too busy drinking his koolaid > laced with wild turkey. he will never admit, despite overwhelming > evidence, that the unfairness doctrine is designed for one purpose. > to silence conservative talk radio, the voice of opposition to the > fourth reich. > > On Nov 18, 5:16 pm, OMS-II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I never once....while AirAmerica was on the air.....EVER heard you > > demand that they give equal access to conservative points of view. > > > Personally, I don't listen to talk radio. NPR is all I listen to. But > > I don't have a problem with it. I listened to AirAmerica while it was > > on the air....and in my opinion, it was just as skewed as right wing > > radio.....but I didn't have a problem with them then....and I don't > > with right wing radio now. I just choose not to listen to it. If Rush > > was made to allow opposing views on his show, I still wouldn't listen > > to it. But if a radion station makes money off of it, more power to > > them. > > > You know full well that if shows were made to air opposing views, > > listenership would suffer....and many shows wouldn't make the > > financial cut. Furthermore, what you are demanding is that some people > > be allowed to air for free what others have to pay for.....hardly > > fair. > > > You want a fairness doctrine? How about this: you can say what ever > > you want on anyone's program....but you have to pay for your share of > > air time. THAT would be fair. > > > On Nov 18, 4:31 pm, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > i always discus things honestly ! > > > > On Nov 18, 4:22 pm, OMS-II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Oh....can you name a media source that doesn't have a fee? Web access > > > > requires a fee...as does a domain. Want to air your grievances in the > > > > NYT? You have to buy an ad to guarantee it makes copy. They don't > > > > print all letters to the editor. TV? Should the Colbert Report have to > > > > give equal access to conservative commentary? For free? > > > > > As I've said.....ad nauseum....regarding this conversation you insist > > > > on bringing up again and again....you aren't willing to discuss this > > > > topic honestly. > > > > > On Nov 18, 4:14 pm, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > so you support free speech only for those who can pay for it ? > > > > > > On Nov 18, 4:09 pm, OMS-II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Anyone who wants to air a program can do so. Period. Put up the > > > > > > cash, > > > > > > and air your program to your heart's delight. Right, left, it > > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > matter. As such, free speech does prevail. > > > > > > > You cannot cite me one instance of a station denying access based on > > > > > > anything other than unwillingness on the part of the programmer to > > > > > > pay > > > > > > the price. > > > > > > > Again, had AirAmerica been successful, we wouldn't be having this > > > > > > discussion. They were poorly managed, and even more poorly marketed. > > > > > > End of story. You lose. Again. > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 4:06 pm, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > [ The entire premise of this thread is false. ] > > > > > > > you are against free speech for all ? > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 4:01 pm, OMS-II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > All talk shows are supposed to be fair and evenhanded? > > > > > > > > According to > > > > > > > > who? You? > > > > > > > > > Ever listen to NPR? Their gardening shows cater to people who > > > > > > > > like to > > > > > > > > garden. Their news shows are for people who like news. Their > > > > > > > > call-in > > > > > > > > shows like Car Talk and Kim Commando cater to car lovers and > > > > > > > > software/ > > > > > > > > computer geeks. Should they be forced to field calls about > > > > > > > > plumbing? > > > > > > > > Talk radio caters to a particular crowd. When AirAmerica was on > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > air, they sure as hell didn't give fair time to > > > > > > > > conservatives....did > > > > > > > > they? > > > > > > > > > The entire premise of this thread is false. > > > > > > > > > You really need to let this topic go. You argue from a > > > > > > > > dishonest point > > > > > > > > of view. As such, any further threads initiated by you will > > > > > > > > drip with > > > > > > > > your usual bullshit. > > > > > > > > > On Nov 17, 4:35 am, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Former News Radio Staffer Spills the Beans on How Shock Jocks > > > > > > > > > Inspire > > > > > > > > > Hatred and Angerhttp://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/107326/ > > > > > > > > > I first got into journalism because I thought I could make a > > > > > > > > > difference. > > > > > > > > > > I wrote for the school newspaper and did “news” reports on a > > > > > > > > > radio > > > > > > > > > station a friend and I started at my high school in > > > > > > > > > Springfield, Mo. I > > > > > > > > > got my first professional job at age 20, while still in > > > > > > > > > college, at a > > > > > > > > > local radio station’s news department. Three years later, I > > > > > > > > > became a > > > > > > > > > news director, and 12 years after that, in 1995, I was > > > > > > > > > recruited to > > > > > > > > > move to Milwaukee to become news director at WTMJ, one of the > > > > > > > > > largest > > > > > > > > > and most successful news/talk radio stations in America. > > > > > > > > > > That was where my real education occurred. > > > > > > > > > > I worked for three years as news director, and then, in 1998, > > > > > > > > > gained > > > > > > > > > the additional title of assistant program director, a role I > > > > > > > > > held > > > > > > > > > until leaving the station in July 2006. From that position, I > > > > > > > > > worked > > > > > > > > > closely with our talk show hosts and became intimately > > > > > > > > > familiar with > > > > > > > > > how they appeal to listeners and shape their vision of the > > > > > > > > > world. Let > > > > > > > > > me tell you some of the lessons I learned. > > > > > > > > > > To begin with, talk show hosts such as Charlie Sykes – one of > > > > > > > > > the best > > > > > > > > > in the business – are popular and powerful because they > > > > > > > > > appeal to a > > > > > > > > > segment of the population that feels disenfranchised and even > > > > > > > > > victimized by the media. These people believe the media are > > > > > > > > > predominantly staffed by and consistently reflect the views > > > > > > > > > of social > > > > > > > > > liberals. This view is by now so long-held and deep-rooted, > > > > > > > > > it has > > > > > > > > > evolved into part of virtually every conservative’s DNA. > > > > > > > > > > To succeed, a talk show host must perpetuate the notion that > > > > > > > > > his or > > > > > > > > > her listeners are victims, and the host is the vehicle by > > > > > > > > > which they > > > > > > > > > can become empowered. The host frames virtually every issue > > > > > > > > > in us- > > > > > > > > > versus-them terms. There has to be a bad guy against whom the > > > > > > > > > host > > > > > > > > > will emphatically defend those loyal listeners. > > > > > > > > > > This enemy can be a politician – either a Democratic > > > > > > > > > officeholder or, > > > > > > > > > in rare cases where no Democrat is convenient to blame, it > > > > > > > > > can be a > > > > > > > > > “RINO” (a “Republican In Name Only,” who is deemed not > > > > > > > > > conservative > > > > > > > > > enough). It can be the cold, cruel government bureaucracy. > > > > > > > > > More often > > > > > > > > > than not, however, the enemy is the “mainstream media” – > > > > > > > > > local or > > > > > > > > > national, print or broadcast. > > > > > > > > > > Sometimes, it can even be their own station’s news director. > > > > > > > > > One year, > > > > > > > > > Charlie targeted me because I had instructed my midday news > > > > > > > > > anchor to > > > > > > > > > report the Wimbledon tennis results, even though the matches > > > > > > > > > wouldn’t > > > > > > > > > be telecast until much later in the day. Charlie gave out my > > > > > > > > > phone > > > > > > > > > number and e-mail address on the air. I was flooded with hate > > > > > > > > > mail, > > > > > > > > > nasty messages, and even one death threat from a federal law > > > > > > > > > enforcement agent whom I knew to be a big Charlie fan. > > > > > > > > > > In the talk radio business, this concept, which must be > > > > > > > > > mastered to be > > > > > > > > > successful, is called “differentiating” yourself from the > > > > > > > > > rest of the > > > > > > > > > media. It is a brilliant marketing tactic that has also > > > > > > > > > helped Fox > > > > > > > > > News Channel thrive. “We report, you decide” and “Fair and > > > > > > > > > Balanced” > > > > > > > > > are more than just savvy slogans. They are code words > > > > > > > > > signaling that > > > > > > > > > only Fox will report the news in a way conservatives see as > > > > > > > > > objective > > > > > > > > > and truthful. > > > > > > > > > > Forget any notion, however, that radio talk shows are > > > > > > > > > supposed to be > > > > > > > > > fair, evenhanded discussions featuring a diversity of > > > > > > > > > opinions. The > > > > > > > > > Fairness Doctrine, which required this, was repealed 20 years > > > > > > > > > ago. So > > > > > > > > > talk shows can be, and are, all about the host’s opinions, > > > > > > > > > analyses > > > > > > > > > and general worldview. Programmers learned long ago that > > > > > > > > > benign > > > > > > > > > conversations led by hosts who present all sides of an issue > > > > > > > > > don’t > > > > > > > > > attract large audiences. That’s why Kathleen Dunn was forced > > > > > > > > > out at > > > > > > > > > WTMJ in the early ’90s and why Jim and Andee were replaced in > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > mid-’90s by Dr. Laura. Pointed and provocative are what win. > > > > > > > > > > There is no way to win a disagreement with Charlie Sykes. > > > > > > > > > Calls from > > > > > > > > > listeners who disagree with him don’t get on the air if the > > > > > > > > > show’s > > > > > > > > > producer, who generally does the screening, fears they might > > > > > > > > > make > > > > > > > > > Charlie look bad. I witnessed several occasions when Sen. Russ > > > > > > > > > Feingold, former Mayor John Norquist, Mayor Tom Barrett or > > > > > > > > > others > > > > > > > > > would call in, but wouldn’t be allowed on the air. > > > > > > > > > > 12345Next page »- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
