Air America bites the dust.

[blackangst1]

So, if - since you have offered no facts to contradict this, I can make it a possibility - Air America was shut out of markets by right-wing ornership, so they were only able to get broadcast in a very limited manner, but in the limited markets they did play in, they had ratings an average of double the top right wing show in their same market, but the discrimination by major networks like ClearChannel made it financially a problem.

I'm not saying that's what happened, but it might be for all we know from your uninformd posting. But hey, it's not complicated, so you have nothing to say.

If thats not what youre saying happened, why say it? Its NOT what happened. What happened is, AA tried to grow too fast, and assumed it would have the listenership to support its venture, without realizing their audience was so small the best they could do is probably a 3 or 4 city local show.

 

[hal2kilo]

I think you misunderstood my post...I basically agree with what you're saying. The right has "countered" what they claim are left leaning news media organizations mostly with opinion media that makes no pretense at being unbiased. In other words FNC (with a FEW anchor exceptions) is the right-wing counterpoint to Air America, not CNN.

I've always found the justification of Fox News viewers very confusing. As far as I can tell, the logic goes that if you're bothered by the slight political bias of one media outlet, you should switch to a media outlet that's ridiculously unbiased...as long as it's unbiased in YOUR direction. I live in the DC area and read both papers regularly, and I have to say, calling the Washington Times an "alternative" to the Washington Post is like calling drain cleaner an alternative to beer. FNC and CNN are the same way.

In fact, this pattern repeats all over the place. Conservative complain about the "bias" of one organization, and instead of supporting an UNbiased version of that organization, they support one that's even MORE biased, just in the other direction. The ACLU is a bunch of liberal communists? Fair enough, so where's the conservative civil liberties organization? I hear they'd start one, but they're too busy at their weekly NRA meeting. Academia leans left? Ok...so to combat that we have INCREDIBLY biased religious universities and pseudo-scientific "think tanks". Good trade...

"Liberal bias" is and always has been a red herring. That's not to say it couldn't possibly exist, but "bias" has never been what conservatives who complain about "liberal bias" are really concerned with. Instead, it's a way to not look like a bunch of intellectually dishonest jackasses when they support a right-wing group that makes no pretense of being "fair".

A very nice cogent explanation. Oh course you just wasting your breath with the already brain washed.

 

[werepossum]

Why because they voted against the Republicans who fucked the country up over the previous 8 years? You can't fault them for being optimistic hoping that there is something better than the crap they were stuck with even if that doesn't end up being the case. It seems that it isn't taking us long to realize that the Dems are as bad as the Republicans, unfortunately the Republicans are the only other choice, not much of a choice IMO.

This. I would prefer the Republicans in power - but if we make it too easy, the Pubbies will think they're back in power because their ideas are favored, not because Democrats went bat-shit crazy. So far the Republicans have advanced few new ideas, so when they are back in power we can assume they will be spending only slightly less than Democrats. Digging a hole slightly more slowly is still digging a hole. If our country is not to trail off into oblivion with a whimper someone needs to figure out how to bring manufacturing back to our country without wrecking our standard of living OR convince us that like the Danes we don't need "stuff" and can therefore live within our reduced means.

Two years of blessed gridlock would be a great breather, but sooner or later we have to figure a way out of this mess. As it stands the party out of power always stinks slightly less than the party in power, so no matter which way we turn the reeking level remains the same.

 

[umbrella39]

A very nice cogent explanation. Oh course you just wasting your breath with the already brain washed.

X2 Very well put and will fall on the usual deaf ears.

 

[blackangst1]

Oh, it's not cmplicated, you say. Then for each of the top liberal shows, what was their share relative to each of the right-wing shows at the same time in each media market? You have this info, right?

AA nationwide averaged a 1.3 Arbitron share. Their highest rated affiliates were KPOJ in Portland at 3.7, WXXM in Madison, WI at 3.5, and KABQ in Albequerque at 2.6.

These are absolutely terrible ratings. Compare that to someone like Limbaugh who has held the top spot in over 600 cities for years.

Oh, if you want specifics you can get them at www.arbitron.com.

 

[Craig234]

LOL . So you think somehow Clearchannel has control over what some other radio station can broadcast somewhere? hahahahaha. Businesses are motivated by profit. If a broadcaster can earn a profit broadcasting Maddow or some other moron like her, they'd do it in a second. You just keep on believing in your vast right-wing conspiracy though!

No, you don't get to say what didn't happen. ,when you dodge the questios and say it's so simple. when you say how they competed head head is 'irrelevant' to which show people preferred.

You post didgens, and refuse to answer, and reufse to post any info, then you are not in a position to say 'oh, wait, that is relevant and I want to sayit didn't happen'. Not relevant so you have nothing to say.

And yes, your roadkill level reading comprehension was right - by saying "I'm not saying this happened", of course you correctly interpret that as "I'm saying that's what happened".

Nice going.

And you add one more to the virtual 100% rate of lying about what I said.

My scenario was merely to point out that the issue isn't necesarily 'simple', that head to head comparisons aren't 'irrelvant', as you said. You sure are quicj to want to jump and try to say what's wrong to it.

 

[PokerGuy]

More irrelevant banter Craig. Bottom line: low ratings = no money = off the air. You can yap on about other irrelevant things all you want, but they are off the air because their ratings sucked and thus they could not make money.

 

[Craig234]

More irrelevant banter Craig. Bottom line: low ratings = no money = off the air. You can yap on about other irrelevant things all you want, but they are off the air because their ratings sucked and thus they could not make money.

No one argued with the claim they had insufficient listeners to make money. You state the obvious. You have no interest in the issues? I don't care. THen don't post on it.