America has a history of noisey debates- pulpits and politics. Why
edit? Have we not an educated citizenry that can detect falsehoods? We
don't. We have herds of hysterics.

On Nov 19, 5:07 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.
> As 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 »- 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.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to