Fairness Docrine Coming Back?

[del]

How is giving people MORE INFORMATION curtailing free speech my dear?

the equal time for politicians was incorporated in to the FCC rules already....those are there, in place, already.

The Fairness doctrine is about issues of great public interest only....

And the FCC DOES NOT FILE a claim against the radio stations, INDIVIDUALS file claims with the FCC if they feel the PUBLIC'S radio station is not allowing them to get their point of view on the issue of PUBLIC IMPORTANCE is not being covered. The FCC reviews these complaints....to see if they are true, and if they are, they request the PUBLIC radio station cover the issues.....NOT WITH EQUAL TIME.....

Yes, there may be the paid for internet, there may be the paid for satellite stations, this is NOT the FREE PUBLIC airwaves....which ARE LIMITED....in their reach to the Public and many times only one station gets the lease to reach the masses and other stations are given limited reach.....

so, I respectfully disagree with those that oppose this and are making a mountain out of a molehill for the sake of partisanship, in my humble opinion.

care

Who's to define 'important' and 'fair'? That's the first problem you are not addressing.

When you have broadcast heads, the Chairman of the FCC, law professors, the media museum, all in agreement regarding the 'chilling effect', it gives you no pause?

This was the case when it was law previously, there didn't seem to be a problem... why do you think there will be one now?

PEOPLE, file complaints with the FCC....i would bet there were also guidelines on how the FCC handled each....i don't believe it was willy nilly...this was NEVER a complaint about the Fairness doctrine when it was law....?

it was never law, ever.

 

[Care4all]

Who's to define 'important' and 'fair'? That's the first problem you are not addressing.

When you have broadcast heads, the Chairman of the FCC, law professors, the media museum, all in agreement regarding the 'chilling effect', it gives you no pause?

This was the case when it was law previously, there didn't seem to be a problem... why do you think there will be one now?

PEOPLE, file complaints with the FCC....i would bet there were also guidelines on how the FCC handled each....i don't believe it was willy nilly...this was NEVER a complaint about the Fairness doctrine when it was law....?

it was never law, ever.

ok, when it was 'regulated' by our gvt previously.

 

[sealybobo]

This was the case when it was law previously, there didn't seem to be a problem... why do you think there will be one now?

PEOPLE, file complaints with the FCC....i would bet there were also guidelines on how the FCC handled each....i don't believe it was willy nilly...this was NEVER a complaint about the Fairness doctrine when it was law....?

it was never law, ever.

ok, when it was 'regulated' by our gvt previously.

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

 

[user_name_guest]

Rachel Maddow = Terri Schiavo. They share the same intelligence. Like they pulled the tube with Terri Schiavo, they should pull Rachel Maddow off the air. If you think right wing talk shows brainwash people and you watch Rachel Maddow, you are a hypocrite. Then again you are sealybobo...the person who has the liberals do your thinking because you can't think for yourself. Seriously Sealybobo, you have my support if you are planning to jump off a cliff. You can actually cut your political pollution that's causing a lot of hot air (s^2 0). Here's a nickel. Maybe you can start saving for your child's college fund. Oh wait, no one would ever sleep with you. Unless its rape. But she'll probably get an abortion.

it was never law, ever.

ok, when it was 'regulated' by our gvt previously.

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

 

[Care4all]

it was never law, ever.

ok, when it was 'regulated' by our gvt previously.

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

Sealy,

I differ with you on that part....talk show hosts are entertainment, in the form or guise of the news.

And the Fairness Doctrine is primarily about the news and ONLY regarding news relayed to the public on very important issues to the public....so alot of the news and getting both sides told, doesn't even relate to anything that would be considered of great importance news worthy.

And Cable channels are unlimited and are not part of the Free Publically owned airwave media with limited access to the public, as in public radio and public tv.

And honestly sealy, i agree with you on the radio side of the public airwaves, that they are mostly owned and controled by Republicans and their talk show hosts are mostly conservatives, or overwhelmingly republicans and this does skew their station tremendously....

but talk show hosts as said, are entertainement and are not considered "the news" so the only time the fairness doctrine would come in to play imo, is on an issue of importance to the public, where it was not already reported on, in their news programs or special reports etc....

And even though i believe you were correct, that these people once the regulations were stripped, came in and gobbled up all the stations they could, so to control the media as much as they could....

BUT, know that this was fair game....if some rich democratic guy had thought of it, it would be them gobbling up the market share after the deregulation....so this was a strategic move on their part that out smarted the Dems when you get down to it.

What the dems can do, is have some rich dude make some of these mega radio conglomerates a price they can't refuse.....to buy up some of those stations, perhaps.

the Fairness Doctrine just doesn't cover talk show hosts, no matter how much it may seem like it should, or make some sort of requirement for their to be equal time for hosts of opposing views.....that would be like dictating how someone runs their business, just because they are leasing the land from you....

though i do agree the person owning the property has a right to put some limitations on their leases of it to others, i don't believe we can tell them how to run their business.

Care

 

[sealybobo]

Rachel Maddow = Terri Schiavo. They share the same intelligence. Like they pulled the tube with Terri Schiavo, they should pull Rachel Maddow off the air. If you think right wing talk shows brainwash people and you watch Rachel Maddow, you are a hypocrite. Then again you are sealybobo...the person who has the liberals do your thinking because you can't think for yourself. Seriously Sealybobo, you have my support if you are planning to jump off a cliff. You can actually cut your political pollution that's causing a lot of hot air (s^2 0). Here's a nickel. Maybe you can start saving for your child's college fund. Oh wait, no one would ever sleep with you. Unless its rape. But she'll probably get an abortion.

ok, when it was 'regulated' by our gvt previously.

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

Rachel Maddow used to start every radio show off with what was really going on in Iraq.

Right wingers want to suggest that Rachel Maddow is right and their people are just right. WRONG! Rush, O'Reilly or Hannity are wrong and she is right. To suggest that both sides are lying/spinning is rediculous. Just because your side is dishonest, doesn't mean our side is too.

The GOP will continue this tactic until it sinks in, or until someone like me debunks it. They did it with the word liberal. They turned a great American thing and turned it into a dirty word.

What is it that Rachel says that bothers you? I can give you specifics if you ask me when/where does Rush lie. Can you show me where Rachel is wrong/lying?

 

[Andrew2382]

lol rachel maddow

ugly fucking dyke

It's amasing how al the libs love her and praises her yet no one watches her cause she gets creamed bhy Fox news everynight just like that other prick Keith

 

[sealybobo]

ok, when it was 'regulated' by our gvt previously.

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

Sealy,

I differ with you on that part....talk show hosts are entertainment, in the form or guise of the news.

And the Fairness Doctrine is primarily about the news and ONLY regarding news relayed to the public on very important issues to the public....so alot of the news and getting both sides told, doesn't even relate to anything that would be considered of great importance news worthy.

And Cable channels are unlimited and are not part of the Free Publically owned airwave media with limited access to the public, as in public radio and public tv.

And honestly sealy, i agree with you on the radio side of the public airwaves, that they are mostly owned and controled by Republicans and their talk show hosts are mostly conservatives, or overwhelmingly republicans and this does skew their station tremendously....

but talk show hosts as said, are entertainement and are not considered "the news" so the only time the fairness doctrine would come in to play imo, is on an issue of importance to the public, where it was not already reported on, in their news programs or special reports etc....

And even though i believe you were correct, that these people once the regulations were stripped, came in and gobbled up all the stations they could, so to control the media as much as they could....

BUT, know that this was fair game....if some rich democratic guy had thought of it, it would be them gobbling up the market share after the deregulation....so this was a strategic move on their part that out smarted the Dems when you get down to it.

What the dems can do, is have some rich dude make some of these mega radio conglomerates a price they can't refuse.....to buy up some of those stations, perhaps.

the Fairness Doctrine just doesn't cover talk show hosts, no matter how much it may seem like it should, or make some sort of requirement for their to be equal time for hosts of opposing views.....that would be like dictating how someone runs their business, just because they are leasing the land from you....

though i do agree the person owning the property has a right to put some limitations on their leases of it to others, i don't believe we can tell them how to run their business.

Care

That's what they said on the radio yesterday. We need some rich dems to buy up some airwaves.

But if they won't?

Those are public airwaves, and if you ask me, it did not serve the public any good that for the last 8 years we had a lopsided debate on global warming, abortion, stem cell, iraq, iran, nafta, blablabla.

They ruined this country in 8 years and the media was in their hip pocket. Or 90% was.

See how this can be dangerous?

You wouldn't buy a public road and only allow Honda's to drive on it, would you?

Well that's what they did with our public radio stations.

I hope it doesn't take a law. The Fairness Doctrine is not necessary. But what we need is some bit of balance. Not one to one, but GOD DAMN IT, Randi Rhodes or Ed Schultz or one of our liberal talk radio hosts better be syndicated soon. They have the popularity. The idea that it can't be sold is insane.

And so people who think the media is liberal are or flat out

 

[Andrew2382]

Sealy,

no one is against balance

here is the problem...your left wing networks fucking fail because NO ONE LISTENS TO THEM.

Here in Miami... A LIBERAL TOWN. The left wing network has changed 5 times since I've lived here while the right wing one has been constant.

 

[WillowTree]

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

Sealy,

I differ with you on that part....talk show hosts are entertainment, in the form or guise of the news.

And the Fairness Doctrine is primarily about the news and ONLY regarding news relayed to the public on very important issues to the public....so alot of the news and getting both sides told, doesn't even relate to anything that would be considered of great importance news worthy.

And Cable channels are unlimited and are not part of the Free Publically owned airwave media with limited access to the public, as in public radio and public tv.

And honestly sealy, i agree with you on the radio side of the public airwaves, that they are mostly owned and controled by Republicans and their talk show hosts are mostly conservatives, or overwhelmingly republicans and this does skew their station tremendously....

but talk show hosts as said, are entertainement and are not considered "the news" so the only time the fairness doctrine would come in to play imo, is on an issue of importance to the public, where it was not already reported on, in their news programs or special reports etc....

And even though i believe you were correct, that these people once the regulations were stripped, came in and gobbled up all the stations they could, so to control the media as much as they could....

BUT, know that this was fair game....if some rich democratic guy had thought of it, it would be them gobbling up the market share after the deregulation....so this was a strategic move on their part that out smarted the Dems when you get down to it.

What the dems can do, is have some rich dude make some of these mega radio conglomerates a price they can't refuse.....to buy up some of those stations, perhaps.

the Fairness Doctrine just doesn't cover talk show hosts, no matter how much it may seem like it should, or make some sort of requirement for their to be equal time for hosts of opposing views.....that would be like dictating how someone runs their business, just because they are leasing the land from you....

though i do agree the person owning the property has a right to put some limitations on their leases of it to others, i don't believe we can tell them how to run their business.

Care

That's what they said on the radio yesterday. We need some rich dems to buy up some airwaves.

But if they won't?

Those are public airwaves, and if you ask me, it did not serve the public any good that for the last 8 years we had a lopsided debate on global warming, abortion, stem cell, iraq, iran, nafta, blablabla.

They ruined this country in 8 years and the media was in their hip pocket. Or 90% was.

See how this can be dangerous?

You wouldn't buy a public road and only allow Honda's to drive on it, would you?

Well that's what they did with our public radio stations.

I hope it doesn't take a law. The Fairness Doctrine is not necessary. But what we need is some bit of balance. Not one to one, but GOD DAMN IT, Randi Rhodes or Ed Schultz or one of our liberal talk radio hosts better be syndicated soon. They have the popularity. The idea that it can't be sold is insane.

And so people who think the media is liberal are or flat out

Yes! Hondo and Toyota only!

 

[Care4all]

Sealy,

no one is against balance

here is the problem...your left wing networks fucking fail because NO ONE LISTENS TO THEM.

Here in Miami... A LIBERAL TOWN. The left wing network has changed 5 times since I've lived here while the right wing one has been constant.

most liberals are too busy having fun in miami, or what?

 

[Andrew2382]

I guess so...prob because the majority of them don't work and just wait for free money to fall from the sky

 

[sealybobo]

Sealy,

no one is against balance

here is the problem...your left wing networks fucking fail because NO ONE LISTENS TO THEM.

Here in Miami... A LIBERAL TOWN. The left wing network has changed 5 times since I've lived here while the right wing one has been constant.

There are markets where we thrive and still they don't put us on.

It has been proven. There could be a million reasons for why that station failed.

I can only tell you about how it is here in Michigan. I get 1310 out of Dearborn. Good reception, until you get to where I live or half way to work in Ann Arbor, then the station gets fuzzy. And then my shows are on in Ann Arbor, but as you get close to the border, the reception fades.

Rush listeners won't put up with that.

How about you put Randi Rhodes in between Hannity and O'Reilly and give her some time. It has been tried before, and Randi won.

Again, think about how expensive it is to run for president. Why so costly? Because air time is expensive. Why is it expensive? Because it is valuable. And the right wing station owners do not want to put on the left wings point of view, even if that means costing them some money. So instead of left wing talk, they go with sports talk, which is failing.

 

[sealybobo]

I guess so...prob because the majority of them don't work and just wait for free money to fall from the sky

And don't say "NO ONE is against balance". You may not be against it, but the GOP fought against balance for 8 years. One reason why they bought up all the stations.

No balance in government or in the media, and it wasn't on accident.

 

[Care4all]

Rachel Maddow = Terri Schiavo. They share the same intelligence. Like they pulled the tube with Terri Schiavo, they should pull Rachel Maddow off the air. If you think right wing talk shows brainwash people and you watch Rachel Maddow, you are a hypocrite. Then again you are sealybobo...the person who has the liberals do your thinking because you can't think for yourself. Seriously Sealybobo, you have my support if you are planning to jump off a cliff. You can actually cut your political pollution that's causing a lot of hot air (s^2 0). Here's a nickel. Maybe you can start saving for your child's college fund. Oh wait, no one would ever sleep with you. Unless its rape. But she'll probably get an abortion.

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

So literally we have not had an intelligent debate the last 8 years on things like global warming or stem cell.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows? Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

So conservatives say that liberal shows aren't popular, yet we see Rachel Maddow holding her own. And we know that Randi Rhodes beats Rush in certain markets, yet they won't syndicate her like they do Rush. In some markets, they put rush on two channels rather than give Randi or Ed Schultz a shot.

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

They helped move this country to the right. This country is not as conservative as we all think. They truly are the moral minority.

We've been manipulated more to the right than we should be. Time to bring things back to normal.

Rachel Maddow used to start every radio show off with what was really going on in Iraq.

Right wingers want to suggest that Rachel Maddow is right and their people are just right. WRONG! Rush, O'Reilly or Hannity are wrong and she is right. To suggest that both sides are lying/spinning is rediculous. Just because your side is dishonest, doesn't mean our side is too.

The GOP will continue this tactic until it sinks in, or until someone like me debunks it. They did it with the word liberal. They turned a great American thing and turned it into a dirty word.

What is it that Rachel says that bothers your? I can give you specifics if you ask me when/where does Rush lie. Can you show me where Rachel is wrong/lying?

going back to some of the old regulations that prevented a monopoly of the public radio/tv stations in a specific market place could solve alot of the problems imho.

This did not occur until regulations were laxed....

 

[del]

Sealy,

no one is against balance

here is the problem...your left wing networks fucking fail because NO ONE LISTENS TO THEM.

Here in Miami... A LIBERAL TOWN. The left wing network has changed 5 times since I've lived here while the right wing one has been constant.

There are markets where we thrive and still they don't put us on.

It has been proven. There could be a million reasons for why that station failed.

I can only tell you about how it is here in Michigan. I get 1310 out of Dearborn. Good reception, until you get to where I live or half way to work in Ann Arbor, then the station gets fuzzy. And then my shows are on in Ann Arbor, but as you get close to the border, the reception fades.

Rush listeners won't put up with that.

How about you put Randi Rhodes in between Hannity and O'Reilly and give her some time. It has been tried before, and Randi won.

Again, think about how expensive it is to run for president. Why so costly? Because air time is expensive. Why is it expensive? Because it is valuable. And the right wing station owners do not want to put on the left wings point of view, even if that means costing them some money. So instead of left wing talk, they go with sports talk, which is failing.

how did they thrive if they're not on the air?

 

[Andrew2382]

http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11568061/

(CNSNews.com) - Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are still the most influential talk radio hosts in the business, according to one magazine's rankings of the nation's talkers

Rounding off the top five of the rankings were Michael Savage in third, Dr. Laura Schlessinger in fourth, and Glenn Beck in fifth. They were followed by Laura Ingraham, Don Imus, Ed Schultz, Mike Gallagher, and Neal Boortz, respectively.

Two of the most popular liberal hosts on the list lost ground in the ratings compared to last year. North Dakota-based Ed Schultz dropped from fifth to eighth. Air America Radio's Randi Rhodes plummeted from 13th to 40th place.

Conservative talker and CNN Headline News host Glenn Beck also gained substantial momentum, rising from 10th in 2007 to fifth in 2008


RATINGS ARE THE BOTTOM LINE...NO ONE LISTENS TO YOUR LEFT WING TALK SHOWS.

If you own a radio station would you want to broacast a show that noon elistens too and noone will pay to advertise on?

 

[Zoom-boing]

You know, all this talk about the Fairness Doctrine sort of exposes the right wingers for the liars they are. They continue to call it the liberal media KNOWING that they have purchased all the radio, tv and print media's and they did it so they could spread their message, and without any opposing views.

What world do you live in? NYT, Huffington Post, Daily KOS, MSNBC (main stream national barrack channel), CBS, ABC, NBC -- these are all liberal media sources. I'm sure others can name many more.

Because that does not serve the public's interest, I think the FCC should insist that companies like Clearchannel put on some left wing radio shows to give more balance to the media. PS. I always use Clearchannel as my example and it turns out, they are the most kind to liberal talk of all the medias.

Why? Air America was liberal and went belly up because they couldn't cut it. Isn't that how capitalism is suppose to work?

Notice how tv put Rachel Maddow on to show that tv does have some liberal shows?

Ya think?????

Why did it take 7 years? The media giants knew that the Dems were going to take control of government so they wanted to show, "look, we have liberal shows on too". 7 years too late.

WTF?

And if you look at the numbers, you'd see that conservatives outnumber liberal hosts by 10 to 1.

On tv?

Conservatives say, "if they would sell, then of course we would put them on", but that is a lie. Consider how much advertising costs the candidates. They pay millions to run advertisements. So no, the GOP would sacrafice profits if it means keeping the liberal talking points off the air.

Huh?

No one says that for every republican there has to be a democrat. But clearly for 8 years we had an all one sided media. All conservative.

Uh, no.

They didn't question WMD's, Bush's economic plans, stealing the elections, Global warming, gay rights, ...No one on the radio, except Air America, said a word that was anti GOP. Too bad, considering the mess they put us in.

I don't listen to talk radio, so I have no idea on this. But I don't know of many people who only get their 'news' from radio.

[/QUOTE]

Right wingers want to suggest that Rachel Maddow is right and their people are just right. WRONG! Rush, O'Reilly or Hannity are wrong and she is right. To suggest that both sides are lying/spinning is rediculous.

What? I don't even understand this sentence.

Just because your side is dishonest, doesn't mean our side is too.

Sealy, both sides spin.

The GOP will continue this tactic until it sinks in, or until someone like me debunks it. They did it with the word liberal. They turned a great American thing and turned it into a dirty word.

What is it that Rachel says that bothers you? I can give you specifics if you ask me when/where does Rush lie. Can you show me where Rachel is wrong/lying?

They all spin; some just better than others. It's what sells.

 

[Modbert]

Everyone in this country deserves the right to say what they want.

However, others also have the right to prove them wrong when they make idiot statements.

 

[sealybobo]

Sealy,

no one is against balance

here is the problem...your left wing networks fucking fail because NO ONE LISTENS TO THEM.

Here in Miami... A LIBERAL TOWN. The left wing network has changed 5 times since I've lived here while the right wing one has been constant.

There are markets where we thrive and still they don't put us on.

It has been proven. There could be a million reasons for why that station failed.

I can only tell you about how it is here in Michigan. I get 1310 out of Dearborn. Good reception, until you get to where I live or half way to work in Ann Arbor, then the station gets fuzzy. And then my shows are on in Ann Arbor, but as you get close to the border, the reception fades.

Rush listeners won't put up with that.

How about you put Randi Rhodes in between Hannity and O'Reilly and give her some time. It has been tried before, and Randi won.

Again, think about how expensive it is to run for president. Why so costly? Because air time is expensive. Why is it expensive? Because it is valuable. And the right wing station owners do not want to put on the left wings point of view, even if that means costing them some money. So instead of left wing talk, they go with sports talk, which is failing.

how did they thrive if they're not on the air?

Their ratings were up yet they were replaced with sports radio that isn't attracting the same ratings.

Remember, air time is valuable. Consider how much the candidates spent on commercials. So don't assume rich corporate media giants are going to put on a liberal talk radio show that will speak out against their right wing agenda.

They'd rather lose a few bucks in order to keep control of the government. They'll put up with the radio station taking a loss if it means helping their candidates/party to win.

Trust me, they made a lot more over the last 8 years doing it this way.

Anyways, I'm just glad Rush is the new GOP spokesman.