poor little murky, so confused. what about all the liberal crap spewed by nbc, cbs, abc, cnn, msnbc, cnbc. where is the other side of the story on these outlets that use the public airwaves? there isn't any. so why are you only concerned with talk radio? admit it murky, this is nothing more than censoring the opposition.
On Nov 19, 6:07 am, margareth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And I thought that the Constitution guaranteed every person the right > to express their opinion, even if it is wrong.However, once you prove > that you are wrong, (by expressing it,) don't be surprised if your > public learns to ignore. Access to the air waves needs to be edited, > at least to avoid it all from simply becoming noise. le muekyAs long as people listen to them, shock jocks will have no difficulty > in finding employment. The basis of commercial media is that it is the > listener that is the product that is being sold to the advertisers. > The programming is simply the bait to attract the listener. > > On Nov 19, 3:21 am, "mike [move on] 532" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > "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 > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
