Air America bites the dust.

[Moonbeam]

blackangst1: No matter where people get their news, I believe people in general have an inate sense of right and wrong.

Thus, the failure of AA. It has nothing to do with Craig's conspiracy of sponsorship directly...it has to do with listenership. Which AA did not have. Its like the guy on the corner yelling about the end of the world. People know when to ignore bullshit.

TheNoblePlatypus : I wish my view of the world was this simplistic, it would be much easier to deal with.

b1: Here's a simple concept for you: generalities are generally true.

M: The notion that people in general have an innate sense of right and wrong is perhaps a correct generalization, but your assertion that that is the basis on which folk rejected AA is just your stupid opinion, which leads to a further true generalization:

People in general have an innate sense of right and wrong that can easily be swamped by programming and partisan training, as it has been in your case.

 

[BladeVenom]

Ha Ha!

 

[Zorkorist]

It was a great hiatus from when Rosen/Rush were in commercial break.

Anything is better than commercials... except more commercials.

-John

 

[blackangst1]

blackangst1: No matter where people get their news, I believe people in general have an inate sense of right and wrong.

Thus, the failure of AA. It has nothing to do with Craig's conspiracy of sponsorship directly...it has to do with listenership. Which AA did not have. Its like the guy on the corner yelling about the end of the world. People know when to ignore bullshit.

TheNoblePlatypus : I wish my view of the world was this simplistic, it would be much easier to deal with.

b1: Here's a simple concept for you: generalities are generally true.

M: The notion that people in general have an innate sense of right and wrong is perhaps a correct generalization, but your assertion that that is the basis on which folk rejected AA is just your stupid opinion, which leads to a further true generalization:

People in general have an innate sense of right and wrong that can easily be swamped by programming and partisan training, as it has been in your case.

Without knowing what I listen to, how can you say this?

 

[Rainsford]

I am simply stating that there is a product people want (FNC) and a product that less people want (CNN/MSNBC).

If Air America offered a product people wanted it would be in business. There are not enough "progressives" in this country to support Air America.

Your first sentence is right, but you're missing a step in your logic with the REASON behind the differing product demand. The fact that FNC shows (particularly the opinion ones) are more popular than other media doesn't mean there are more conservatives than liberals, because you're assuming that conservatives and liberals in equal numbers create the same level of demand for "news".

An alternative explanation is that liberals just don't LIKE O'Reilly style programs, even if they are biased left instead of right. Honestly I'm not sure what's so appealing about angry people agreeing with my political views and/or telling me what to think, but as FNC has shown, it sure is popular with American conservatives. I think there are plenty of liberals in America to support liberal shows like that, if only liberals were looking for that kind of show in the first place.

 

[Rainsford]

No matter where people get their news, I believe people in general have an inate sense of right and wrong.

Thus, the failure of AA. It has nothing to do with Craig's conspiracy of sponsorship directly...it has to do with listenership. Which AA did not have. Its like the guy on the corner yelling about the end of the world. People know when to ignore bullshit.

I'm not sure Air America was any worse in that regard than any of the conservative wack jobs. Yet the latter are more popular than ever...

 

[Steeplerot]

Just goes to show some people could care less about TV/radio spoonfed propaganda and have their own brains.

 

[Moonbeam]

Without knowing what I listen to, how can you say this?

There are two answers to your question. One is that I used my innate sense of right and wrong to pick up on your mistake.

The second is that what you listen to is not at issue. Using my innate sense of what is right and wrong in another area, I know that what people believe is true, and may even believe to be true because of some sense of innate reasoning, where it deviates from real innate reasoning, is the product of the absorption of falsity and lies, the result of mental programming, the inculcated propaganda that pervades and is thus invisible to a local culture, with local being an unfixed term dimensionally.

Thus, I don't really need to know exactly what you listen to or how you acquired your false knowledge. I only have to see you are full of wrong ideas. How you got them is something for you to worry about. I don't need to know how you became crazy. I just know you are.

 

[blackangst1]

There are two answers to your question. One is that I used my innate sense of right and wrong to pick up on your mistake.

The second is that what you listen to is not at issue. Using my innate sense of what is right and wrong in another area, I know that what people believe is true, and may even believe to be true because of some sense of innate reasoning, where it deviates from real innate reasoning, is the product of the absorption of falsity and lies, the result of mental programming, the inculcated propaganda that pervades and is thus invisible to a local culture, with local being an unfixed term dimensionally.

Thus, I don't really need to know exactly what you listen to or how you acquired your false knowledge. I only have to see you are full of wrong ideas. How you got them is something for you to worry about. I don't need to know how you became crazy. I just know you are.

Fair enough.

 

[Double Trouble]

Your first sentence is right, but you're missing a step in your logic with the REASON behind the differing product demand. The fact that FNC shows (particularly the opinion ones) are more popular than other media doesn't mean there are more conservatives than liberals, because you're assuming that conservatives and liberals in equal numbers create the same level of demand for "news".

An alternative explanation is that liberals just don't LIKE O'Reilly style programs, even if they are biased left instead of right. Honestly I'm not sure what's so appealing about angry people agreeing with my political views and/or telling me what to think, but as FNC has shown, it sure is popular with American conservatives. I think there are plenty of liberals in America to support liberal shows like that, if only liberals were looking for that kind of show in the first place.

That might be true, but I find it hard to believe that there would be such a strong distinction in what style of shows people like based on political affiliation. I think it's much more likely that liberals/progressives etc simply have more available outlets that provide them with programming that matches their views. Many conservatives 'take refuge' from all the other media that they feel doesn't represent their views. That's why FNC and conservative talk radio have such high ratings.

I started watching Fox News when I got sick of watching the main stream media (abc, cbs, nbc) espouse mostly liberal views. FNC was the only place I could view things that were not with a liberal slant. Over time FNC went further and further away from "news without liberal bias" to "right-wing propaganda", to the point where I couldn't stomach watching it anymore. Still, I suspect I'm not the only conservative who felt that FNC was simply the only place to get news without a heavy liberal bias.

 

[Zebo]

No one likes to admit they need help so stuff like that doesn't sell.

Selling to the id makes much more sense.

 

[werepossum]

AirAmerica had two big problems. First, it tried to start out national, which meant all their mistakes (as it happens, all their hosts) were very expensive. Second, they tried to do talk radio not realizing that their followers are far too stupid to negotiate a radio dial; they need Internet, where someone will send them a link they can just click on. (And guys, if you listened you'd know talk radio is not news, it's opinions about the news.)

This is very bad news for successful (read: conservative) talk radio. Before, Obama et al would at least have to explain why shutting down Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck was good, but AirAmerica was protected free speech. Now there is nothing to keep Obama's Chavez admirers from proceeding as Chavez has done, controlling all media that does not toe the party line. Look for "community ownership" and "community standards" laws - all determined by the government, of course.

 

[umbrella39]

Just goes to show some people could care less about TV/radio spoonfed propaganda and have their own brains.

Not just some, I would say the majority of people are free thinkers and don't need their news to have commentary along with it.

 

[Craig234]

blackangst1: No matter where people get their news, I believe people in general have an inate sense of right and wrong.

Thus, the failure of AA. It has nothing to do with Craig's conspiracy of sponsorship directly

My what?

I have a conspiracy of Moonbeam making my position up. I am used to it from the right, but...

People in general have an innate sense of right and wrong that can easily be swamped by programming and partisan training, as it has been in your case.

This I agree with.

Manipulating opinion is a big business with trillions of dollars at stake.

 

[blackangst1]

My what?

I have a conspiracy of Moonbeam making my position up. I am used to it from the right, but...

I think he meant THIS conspiracy:

One reason is because deep-pockets propagandist Murdoch spent years spending big bucks to BUY Fox a market position.

 

[Craig234]

I think there is no place in America for a genuine left concerned with social justice and the average man. This is a corporate owned franchise and its headed for self destruction. I don't think anything will stop it.

I don't know it's headed for anything other than a return to the elite/masses economic model.

The people who will decide how to solve things will be the few, not the citizens, however. They're the farm animals only to serve the few economically. They're the illegal immigrants to the land of the wealthy.

The American people have no idea how much of their power is articifical, and removable.

The American people are essentially brain dead.

They're people - and the propaganda industry knows how to direct them like cows to slaughter.

It's not a 'conspiracy', it's the system - the corporate agenda is where the money is, so it wins.

A oerson can first view X as right, but his $50 donation to say so will be dwarfed by $1000 to say it's wrong, and hire an army to spread that view - including possibly hiring him.

There's a reason why the idea of cigarettes being unhealthy had little effect on public behavior for decades - and that was with far less sophisticated marketing used.

There's a reason why it would have gone on much longer without a massive government effort to counter the industry - a government that can not get elected with this ruling.

 

[Craig234]

I think he meant THIS conspiracy:

Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. It's not really a conspiracy theory, in the spirit or letter of the phrase, but more importantly my post was about a key issue with Fox, not with Air America.

It was just responding with one reason why a comparison made between the two was invalid. I don't know why Moonbeam thought the history of Fox was at odds with his views on Air America listeners.

 

[Craig234]

Not just some, I would say the majority of people are free thinkers and don't need their news to have commentary along with it.

I think everyone benefits from quality commentary. I think it's a naive fallacy for people to think they can make sense of our incredibly complex system and a guarantee they'll have wrong opinions.

Any sensible person in my opinion will recognize the need for relying on people who are far better specialists for views on issues.

But they do need to sort out the legitimate views from the misguded and paid propaganda.

When I listen to David Cay Johnston on tax issues, I get a lot of views based on information it's impossible for people to get themseles without such help. I also have to recognize Heritage Foundation is creating propaganda products to contradict Johnston on behalf of their very wealthy donors, to try to sell a false ideology. But the person who reads neither isn't going to have a lot to say about the tax situation for the ultra wealthy.

 

[Zorkorist]

There are some things you should listen to yourself, and make decisions.

For all the rest, there is talk-radio, which serves to educate and inform, no matter the host or idealogy.

-John

 

[Craig234]

There are some things you should listen to yourself, and make decisions.

For all the rest, there is talk-radio, which serves to educate and inform, no matter the host or idealogy.

-John

Talk radio is a place with a very little part of the information you need. Practically none on the right.

 

[Zorkorist]

I don't understand.

Are you saying my pretty faces on my local news channel is the news I need?


You know better, by being an ATOT poster, that being fed news is not where it's at.

We have to talk about it.

-John

 

[ultimatebob]

The left didn't really need another liberally biased radio network... they already have NPR.

Seriously, the liberal spin of NPR's stories as of late is getting on my nerves... and I'm a registered Democrat! They spent most of last week talking about Obama needs to "recover from the setbacks" of the overturning of campaign finance restrictions and the election of Scott Brown... they hardly even tried to cover the point of view from the Republican or moderate side of those stories.

 

[Craig234]

The left didn't really need another liberally biased radio network... they already have NPR.

Seriously, the liberal spin of NPR's stories as of late is getting on my nerves... and I'm a registered Democrat! They spent most of last week talking about Obama needs to "recover from the setbacks" of the overturning of campaign finance restrictions and the election of Scott Brown... they hardly even tried to cover the point of view from the Republican or moderate side of those stories.

You really don't understand bias at all. Go look and I've little doubt you will find stories on President Bush havig a setback when his social secutiry privatization failed. THat's a bias for the 'presidency' angle.

This happend to the president, that happened to the president, the presidnt had a victory, the president had a setback.

You might as well tell your sport column they're biased for saying "Team wins world series with 2-1 wins" and not "team loses world serives with 1-2 loss". They're BIASED!

MPR goes out of its way to put on crap right-wing figures being interviewed who dn't deserve it by quality but get the 'balance' affirmative action.

I'd ask you who their 'left-wing' person is who guests on the nation's liberal propaganda network to balance Juan Williams on Fox, but there is no liberal network like Fox.

 

[nick1985]

You really don't understand bias at all.

We all know you do.

 

[Rainsford]

There are some things you should listen to yourself, and make decisions.

For all the rest, there is talk-radio, which serves to educate and inform, no matter the host or idealogy.

-John

Talk radio does NOT serve to educate and inform, it serves to influence. This is even more true of talk TV like Sean Hannity's show. If you pay attention, it's obvious when people are presenting an opinion to help reach the truth, and when they are doing so to "win" an argument, and talk TV and radio are almost always the latter.

The real problem with opinion programs is that they are targeted at the wrong people. O'Reilly and Hannity and the like (and Air America, for that matter) are aimed at people who already agree with what's being said. NOBODY is going to watch O'Reilly's show and think, "Hey, maybe he's right...maybe I really DO hate America". Instead, shows like that basically serve as an intellectual form of masturbation for their audiences. Fun, maybe...but not incredible productive. And certainly no substitute for the real thing.