Nah, it's just not worth it. I think their main issue was taking folks with no real experience in radio and putting them on the air. Yes, they gave most of them a handler to guide them through things but the few times I listened in they just weren't entertaining. Add to that they just didn't have the listeners and the advertising to pay their way. How many places were they paying to be put on the airwaves? It was more than a few IIRC. Not a good business model if you ask me.
Personally, I've become unamused by talk radio as of late on both sides of the aisle. The blowhards on the right and left just yell and yammer on and call each other names and just generally piss me off anymore. I'll still listen to Boortz because he can be so insensitive that it's funny but the rest of the lot drive me bonkers.
The real question here is will the Dems (if they gain control of Congress) put the equal airtime stuff back into place. I say no since it is the role of the FCC to manage the airwaves and ensure that the broadcaster who has paid for that airwave can use it with no interference.
I could care less if you are on the radio talking about Nazis molesting poodles while wearing those damn Croc shoes. If you've paid for the license to that airwave it is your right to yammer on about whatever you want.
Sadly, the FCC doesn't seem to agree with my opinion and have taken a role as our thought and decency police. We'll just have to see what happens.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2395 times:
Quoting Dtwclipper (Thread starter): Air America Radio, a liberal talk and news radio network, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, a network official told The Associated Press.
My only regret is that this doesn't necessarily mean that it will go off the air.
Frankly, in my opinion, National Public Radio (NPR), which is center-left, is far more interesting than Air America. If listeners to Air America would give NPR a chance -- it's found on your FM dial -- it's likely that they would be better informed, less inflamed, and more educated, in my view, than what would result from a force-feeding of the likes of Randi Rhodes. As I see it, Randi Rhodes is nothing more than the left's equivalent of Ann Coulter at her most vicious.
What Air America has tried to do, I believe, is to create a "yahoo" culture of left-liberalism that echoes the wild abandon of the mileu of the 1960's. But America has changed since four decades ago -- not least of all because the 1960's have already occurred. And 2006 is less susceptible to political fun-and-games than back then; I think that 9/11 has proved that with a fairly significant degree of emphasis.
Besides, why, exactly, did Mike Malloy lose his place at Air America? There are various theories, and most of them are hardly flattering to AM radio's most leftist major network.
NPR is the closest that the United States has to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), which is to praise neither the BBC nor NPR, but to say that Air America is, in my view, a continuing failure and a travesty. Air America is a horrible means by which the prejudices of the left are legitimized in the same way that those of the right are supported by borderline-demagogues with far more idealism than sense, and by supporters with far more enthusiasm than wisdom.
It cannot go off the air fast enough -- if only it would.
I'm going to guess that Air America's biggest star, Al Franken, whose company is owed hundreds of thousand and is entitled to priority as to only $10,000.00, going from the schedules, can't be too happy. I think he's said that he hasn't been paid for a while.
Mike Malloy is also named as a creditor, among dozens of others.
Millions of dollars of other liability on the part of Air America Radio (through its parent) are described, including to such famous names as Clear Channel, etc. Interesting reading.
I can't help noting that this bankruptcy filing comes after a denial a little while ago that Air America was going to do just that.
Bushpilot From South Africa, joined Jul 2007, 0 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2283 times:
I honestly didnt realise they were still on the air. I heard about it when it first came out, then it fell of my radar, but that probably has something to do with the fact I live in the middle of nowhere, we do have a local radio station though, it does air NPR news...but mostly local stuff.
Halls120 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2272 times:
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2): What Air America has tried to do, I believe, is to create a "yahoo" culture of left-liberalism that echoes the wild abandon of the mileu of the 1960's. But America has changed since four decades ago -- not least of all because the 1960's have already occurred. And 2006 is less susceptible to political fun-and-games than back then; I think that 9/11 has proved that with a fairly significant degree of emphasis.
You can say the very same thing about many of the hosts of the extreme right wing radio programs - instead of creating a "yahoo" culture of left-liberalism, they have been intent of creating a culture of right-conservatism.
I understand you are conservative, but for crying out loud, you ought to at least be fair.
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2270 times:
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 11): You can say the very same thing about many of the hosts of the extreme right wing radio programs - instead of creating a "yahoo" culture of left-liberalism, they have been intent of creating a culture of right-conservatism.
I tend to agree, to some degree. I never quote Rush Limbaugh here, for example. And, as might be inferred from one of my postings, above, I think that Ann Coulter can go too far, despite the fact that I've defended some of her statements in the past.
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 11): Don't like opposing viewpoints, eh? Sounds like you are a fan of fascism....
Only if you disregard my comments about NPR, above, among many of my other comments in this Forum.
Texan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4280 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2251 times:
Air America...you know, I listened to it a few times back in Dallas. It seemed to be WBAP's alter-ego: instead of Rush you have Malloy, who is just as much of an idiot (if he's the guy who was on around midnight); you have Hannity's opposite; you have O'Reilly's opposite. It is still just a bitch and moan station for the most part. It would have been better, in my opinion, if maybe they had tried constructing some ideas for how to improve our situation instead of just bashing it out of hand and decrying every conservative idea as evil before they even think it through. Not all of the hosts did this, just the ones who happened to be on as I drove to and from work. It is hypocritical, in my view, to blast the repugnant crap Rush throws out there and then throw the same bag of crap from the left side of the road. And don't get me wrong, I disagree with many ideas of our current conservative government (and Texas' conservative state government), but the ideas are not all bad. By looking at the ideas of your opposite, you might find that there are some facets that you could adopt to your position. Anyway, this rant has gone on long enough. Air America is not a bad idea, it just seems they forgot what they set out to do and what we needed them to do.
"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2229 times:
Quoting Texan (Reply 14): Air America is not a bad idea, it just seems they forgot what they set out to do and what we needed them to do.
Texan, you are quite right in this, may I say.
If only Air America would hire or prominently and consistently interview impartial experts in their respective fields, for example, then its listeners would stand to benefit.
It is a shame that the left does not sufficiently take into account its own critics. Nor does the national media give such critics the role they deserve in a debate where both sides of an issue should be heard, leaving each side to present only a biased viewpoint to such an extent that it may easily mislead an audience. For example, Michael Scheuer, author of Imperial Hubris and a critic of both the Bush and Clinton approaches to terrorism, has been extensively featured on at least one conservative radio talk show (the syndicated Larry Elder Show) for his statements that, during a forceful defense of his policy on Fox News Sunday, former President Clinton outright lied about the CIA's assessment concerning bin Laden. Scheuer should know -- he headed the CIA's bin Laden desk during former President Clinton's Administration.
On CBS's Early Show the morning after Pres. Clinton's comments, Scheuer had said that the accusation that the CIA had refused to certify bin Laden's role in terror attacks cited by Mr. Clinton was false and defamatory.
(Excerpt from a third source)
Quote: In his role of CBS News terrorism analyst, Scheuer was asked Monday to comment on Clinton’s Sunday performance and provided more than his questioner apparently bargained for. To claim that the CIA could not verify that bin Laden was responsible for the attack on the USS Cole, said Scheuer, “the former president seems able to deny facts with impunity.”
Scheuer continued: “He defames the CIA . . . and the men and women who risked their lives to give their administration repeated chances to kill bin Laden.” Asked whether Bush was no less responsible for letting bin Laden escape from Tora Bora in Afghanistan, Scheuer replied: “The fact of the matter is that the Bush administration had one chance that they botched, and the Clinton administration had eight to 10 chances that they refused to try. At least at Tora Bora, our forces were on the ground.”
Scheuer was just interviewed by Larry Elder, a prominent Republican talk show host and attorney and reaffirmed those statements.
Air America, as far as I know, would never interview someone like Scheuer or give any quarter to the idea that Pres. Clinton was mistaken his policies on the war against terror. In fact, the mainstream national media, with the exception of the CBS program mentioned above, has not given Scheuer's claims their due. To see this, one need only execute a Google search.
Air America could still be a reasonable alternative to right-wing radio by dropping its partisan approach and allowing a bipartisan debate on the various issues of the day -- something that conservative talk radio does not often promote.
Instead, Air America has turned to comedians such as Al Franken and so-called "young turks" for nothing less than the leftist version of Rush Limbaugh. For this, it deserves to fail, in my view.
ArtieFufkin From United States of America, joined May 2006, 704 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2186 times:
Let's just say for sake of argument that NPR is a liberal program. Has no redeeming qualities.
This is a great example of where blue collar right wingers are just not sophisticated enough to know what's in their interest and what's not in their interest.
The amount of money NPR gets is so incredibly tiny compared to the Billions squandered on a bogus war. Compared to the money GOPers gave in tax cuts to oil companies. Jesus Christ, they proposed a social security program that would cut your kids SS payments by 40% (with the private accounts). The present program could have been fully funded if they had raised the SS tax cap on those making over $250K per year. And all you can come up with is NPR, flag burning, and Defense of marriage act...LOL
AirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2181 times:
I'm not into talk radio. Personally I think it's a waste of time, most keep talking about the same issues over and over. We had to listen to political radio for a pols class and talk about what we heard. The left talk shows seemed almost childish, kind of like the high school radio stations, filled with stupid jokes and heavy radio sound effects. Almost 99% of the time they were negative about everything that is going on right now, top of that the callers were NEVER against the host, you would never hear a person on the right call in to defend. On the other hand the right talk shows were a little more boring but at least they talked with some common sense about the issues and 90% of the time callers were people on the left trying to go against the host. Something that I don't get is why left shows never get peole to call in to object??
AerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2175 times:
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 19): SAying you are glad they are off the air comes pretty close. Tells me that while you are OK with middle of the road liberalism a la NPR, you would rather not have really liberal content on the air.
I hope Air America is kicked off the air not because of its left-liberalism, but because I think it's garbage. If it so happens that I think that it's the left-liberalism that makes it garbage, then that's my prerogative. I'm not obligated to be unhappy that it could be off the air out of a sense that I should be nice to everyone: Not everyone is entitled to be on the air.
[Edited 2006-10-13 22:23:18]
: Just one question - if this doesn't happen they way you think it will, does that imply that American has spoken and rejected the Democratic party yet
: nwa742 I wasn't clear in my post who I was replying to. My blurb you quoted was in response to the poster bashing NPR. Like it's some big deal. All li
: Apparently over at the Air America message boards, they're discussing up a storm about the Chapter 11 thing. Or maybe not. See: http://www.airamericap
: This statement exemplifies the biggest problem of the far left wing. They seem to feel that all decisions should be made by government bureaucrats (m
: And I assume that you are smart enough to know what is better for all Americans? I mean, that is a pretty condescending and disgusting attitude on yo
: Bad argument. If government shouldn't be funding it, it shouldn't be funded. Really? Who IS entitled to be on the air, in your view?
: Anyone who can make money at it and who doesn't espouse blind hatred or puerile garbage. You know, Michael Savage, on the right, sometimes crosses th
: 43% of these dumbasses think Saddam was involved in 9/11. How could you not have contempt for Bush's base? Hall want don't you get about me saying ju
: (Note: The following is SATIRE.) By the way, if you're concerned about Air America's financial health, you, too, can ask Barbra Streisand and George S
: Oh and another thing about the common man? The common man is coming home from the military and signing up to run as Dems to the tune of 24 to 1 this e
: Keep digging the hole, Artie...(be careful, too, you are almost in China) Source? Please, you already showed how much you 'liked' the common man abov
: Run away little boy. As if my credible source would make a dent in your ideology. Google it yourself.
: Actually, re-enlistment rates are fairly high, so I'm not sure of the accuracy of your statement. That was uncalled-for, might I say. AndesSMF is a r
: You are managing to totally fulfill my expectations today!
: I sure am glad you aren't an FCC Commissioner or in Congress. Garbage and hatred might be objectionable to you, but you aren't the arbiter of broadca
: That's marginally interesting, and quite beside the point. Everyone has the ability to decide for themselves whether or not they like a radio offerin
: I'm confusing nothing. When I come across a TV show or a radio program I find objectionable, I change the channel/station. I don't suggest that it is
: That's your prerogative. You certainly can't reasonably believe that no one else is entitled to think differently. If something can't make money and
: You are free to think/believe what you want. What does making money have to do with the right to be on the air? LOL, changing your tune now, I see. N
: Absolutely agreed. Chalk up another victory for free-market capitalism...boo-yah. Seriously though, is it really any surprise that a leftist radio st
: That's my original position, all right. I want it to get off the air, and soon. Why is that inconsistent with my lack of support for the network? You