Political leanings on the USMB Board

[boedicca]

Yes. Words have meaning - especially in context. Given that we were discussion stations up to that point, downsizing to programs as the equivalent is a twisting of words.

We were discussing liberal talk radio.

You are the one that focused in on stations. And, again BTW, there's no such thing as a national conservative station either. And given the state of the current contracts of national conservative radio personalities, such a station would fail too.

That is your interpretation.

KSFO is a purely conservative talk radio station. With its internet broadcasting capability, it has listeners all over the country.

 

[goldcatt]

I got nothing better to do. I'm working at the radio station all night tonight.


lol.

lol.

Did I let the cat outta the bag?

I'm sure it makes no difference whatsoever.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Yes. Words have meaning - especially in context. Given that we were discussion stations up to that point, downsizing to programs as the equivalent is a twisting of words.

We were discussing liberal talk radio.

You are the one that focused in on stations. And, again BTW, there's no such thing as a national conservative station either. And given the state of the current contracts of national conservative radio personalities, such a station would fail too.

That is your interpretation.

KSFO is a purely conservative talk radio station. With its internet broadcasting capability, it has listeners all over the country.

Now yer reaching pretty damn hard.

In that case, Pacifica Radio out of KPFA meets your criteria for a successful national liberal talker.

 

[RadiomanATL]

lol.

Did I let the cat outta the bag?

I'm sure it makes no difference whatsoever.

Probably not. Some people are just really that dense.

 

[goldcatt]

lol.

Did I let the cat outta the bag?

I'm sure it makes no difference whatsoever.

Probably not. Some people are just really that dense.

Nah, just that unable to admit they're wrong.

Carry on!

 

[boedicca]

Now yer reaching pretty damn hard.

In that case, Pacifica Radio out of KPFA meets your criteria for a successful national liberal talker.

My definition of success in this context is a for profit self-sufficient station (which was what Air America was attempting to become).

If KPFA has a sizable number of listeners accross the U.S. (which KSFO does), then they would qualify as nationwide. When I lived in Berkeley, KPFA operated on a non-profit model.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Now yer reaching pretty damn hard.

In that case, Pacifica Radio out of KPFA meets your criteria for a successful national liberal talker.

My definition of success in this context is a for profit self-sufficient station (which was what Air America was attempting to become).

If KPFA has a sizable number of listeners accross the U.S. (which KSFO does), then they would qualify as nationwide. When I lived in Berkeley, KPFA operated on a non-profit model.

You keep redefining the terms. Sorry. Doesn't work that way, and you seem to have a bad habit of doing it.

Successful means enough listeners to continue broadcasting. That is the only definition of success that matters. Doesn't matter where the money comes from to continue broadcasting, as long as it is sustainable.

 

[boedicca]

You keep redefining the terms. Sorry. Doesn't work that way, and you seem to have a bad habit of doing it.

Successful means enough listeners to continue broadcasting. That is the only definition of success that matters. Doesn't matter where the money comes from to continue broadcasting, as long as it is sustainable.

I am most certainly not redefining. The context was Air America's failure - and an attempt to find a success with their mission and model. Viewership is only part of the equation - the other part being a profitable business model.

Air America was a commercial flop. A financial failure. It has ceased to be. It's nearest equivalent, NPR, receives government and charitable donations.

Air America was the an attempt to replicate the commercial success of the for profit talk radio model with 100% leftwing programming. Nobody has been able to do this in the U.S.

 

[Modbert]

My god, it's like watching a train wreck. Except in this case, Boedicca keeps jumping in front of the trains that are Radio and Goldcatt. I call either a troll or someone with a fetish for getting the verbal crap beaten out of them.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You keep redefining the terms. Sorry. Doesn't work that way, and you seem to have a bad habit of doing it.

Successful means enough listeners to continue broadcasting. That is the only definition of success that matters. Doesn't matter where the money comes from to continue broadcasting, as long as it is sustainable.

I am most certainly not redefining.

Bullshit.

Me: There is not conservative national radio station either.

You: Oh yeah, well successful XXXX station broadcasts over the internet, so they're national!

Me: Well, if thats your definition, then station XXXX is a successful national station too.

You: No they're not, they are non-profit!

Me: Doesn't matter, they have listeners.

You: Well AA sucked!


THAT'S not redefining? You either a) play a very good idiot, or b) really are an idiot.

 

[RadiomanATL]

My god, it's like watching a train wreck. Except in this case, Boedicca keeps jumping in front of the trains that are Radio and Goldcatt. I call either a troll or someone with a fetish for getting the verbal crap beaten out of them.

She's someone who just can't resist the last word. But all she's doing is digging herself deeper and deeper.

Fun time-killer for me. Embarrassing for her.

 

[Modbert]

She's someone who just can't resist the last word. But all she's doing is digging herself deeper and deeper.

Fun time-killer for me. Embarrassing for her.

I played this game the other day when I was procrastinating homework. It's hilarious.

At this rate, she might strike oil or China by midnight.

 

[RadiomanATL]

BTW, my point still stands. A national conservative network would not work either (at this time), given the state of the contracts with all the national conservative players.

 

[Chip]

This board has always leaned right of center, in general. Still it is one of the more diverse boards that I have posted on.

Good to know about the diversity. Haven't been on here long, but hopefully there aren't too many members who are "self-medicating," i.e. venting into cyberspace as an inexpensive alternative to professional counseling.

No surprise to hear of a tilt to the right, considering that less than a quarter of the country self-identifies as "liberal."

It is one of the few in which political affiliation is not even considered for staff selection.

Also good to know. Won't get into specifics, but suffice to say there are boards out there where the moderators themselves troll with impunity.

 

[RadiomanATL]

She's someone who just can't resist the last word. But all she's doing is digging herself deeper and deeper.

Fun time-killer for me. Embarrassing for her.

I played this game the other day when I was procrastinating homework. It's hilarious.

At this rate, she might strike oil or China by midnight.

Ship her to ANWR

 

[RadiomanATL]

This board has always leaned right of center, in general. Still it is one of the more diverse boards that I have posted on.

Good to know about the diversity. Haven't been on here long, but hopefully there aren't too many members who are "self-medicating," i.e. venting into cyberspace as an inexpensive alternative to professional counseling.

No surprise to hear of a tilt to the right, considering that less than a quarter of the country self-identifies as "liberal."

It is one of the few in which political affiliation is not even considered for staff selection.

Also good to know. Won't get into specifics, but suffice to say there are boards out there where the moderators themselves troll with impunity.

Moderators here are allowed to troll, within reason. There's just left-leaning and right-leaning moderators is all.

 

[Modbert]

Ship her to ANWR

That'd be a fast way to get rid of all the animals. Probably toss themselves in the water to a watery grave than put up with her bullshit.

I know I probably would.

 

[Foxfyre]

You keep redefining the terms. Sorry. Doesn't work that way, and you seem to have a bad habit of doing it.

Successful means enough listeners to continue broadcasting. That is the only definition of success that matters. Doesn't matter where the money comes from to continue broadcasting, as long as it is sustainable.

I am most certainly not redefining. The context was Air America's failure - and an attempt to find a success with their mission and model. Viewership is only part of the equation - the other part being a profitable business model.

Air America was a commercial flop. A financial failure. It has ceased to be. It's nearest equivalent, NPR, receives government and charitable donations.

Air America was the an attempt to replicate the commercial success of the for profit talk radio model with 100% leftwing programming. Nobody has been able to do this in the U.S.

You are correct. A stations success is not measured in number of viewers but in the advertising dollars it is able to attract. Of course the more viewers, the more advertising dollars it generally gets.

After the Van Jones "Color of Change" attack on Fox's Glenn Beck program, for instance, Beck quickly shot up to #3 in viewership in all cable programming and the more he was attacked, the more viewers flocked to the show. But C of C was able to threaten and intimidate enough advertisers to shift their advertising dollars to other time slots so probably Beck didn't carry his weight for awhile despite high viewership.

On another message board at that time, I watched the kind hearted liberals gleefully posting each advertiser who pulled out or who were rumored to have pulled out. Those advertisers didn't pull advertising away from Fox; just from Beck. But Fox also knew Beck was pulling lots of new viewers to Fox in general and they just plugged the ads in elsewhere. All that didn't hurt Beck in the least--gave him more time and much more exposure in fact and almost certainly permanently boosted his ratings.

By contrast, Air America was not able to attract enough listeners to be attractive to advertisers so they took their ad dollars elsewhere. A few programs might have been profitable but they were not strong enough to keep folks turned to Air America and a few successful programs won't sustain any network or station. So Air America subsisted via wealthy donors. When the ratings continued to suck, even the donors abandoned them.

Liberal programming with less substance and more attack dog mentality simply becomes suffocatingly boring to Americans on both the left and right. Air America offered ONLY a liberal voice and thus was appealing to far too few people to be viable.

Fox News, by contrast, intentionally offers a conservative voice in a market in which it is the ONLY conservative voice, but it doesn't offer ONLY a conservative voice. It provides a good balance of all points of view on every subject, does that competently and effectively, and therefore attracts a broad spectrum audience.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You keep redefining the terms. Sorry. Doesn't work that way, and you seem to have a bad habit of doing it.

Successful means enough listeners to continue broadcasting. That is the only definition of success that matters. Doesn't matter where the money comes from to continue broadcasting, as long as it is sustainable.

I am most certainly not redefining. The context was Air America's failure - and an attempt to find a success with their mission and model. Viewership is only part of the equation - the other part being a profitable business model.

Air America was a commercial flop. A financial failure. It has ceased to be. It's nearest equivalent, NPR, receives government and charitable donations.

Air America was the an attempt to replicate the commercial success of the for profit talk radio model with 100% leftwing programming. Nobody has been able to do this in the U.S.

You are correct. A stations success is not measured in number of viewers but in the advertising dollars it is able to attract. Of course the more viewers, the more advertising dollars it generally gets.

Except in the case of non-profits. Which is what I was referring to. Then it is strictly audience size and the size of the donations that the the station can attract.

 

[Foxfyre]

I am most certainly not redefining. The context was Air America's failure - and an attempt to find a success with their mission and model. Viewership is only part of the equation - the other part being a profitable business model.

Air America was a commercial flop. A financial failure. It has ceased to be. It's nearest equivalent, NPR, receives government and charitable donations.

Air America was the an attempt to replicate the commercial success of the for profit talk radio model with 100% leftwing programming. Nobody has been able to do this in the U.S.

You are correct. A stations success is not measured in number of viewers but in the advertising dollars it is able to attract. Of course the more viewers, the more advertising dollars it generally gets.

Except in the case of non-profits. Which is what I was referring to. Then it is strictly audience size and the size of the donations that the the station can attract.

Well I was not addressing a non-profit concept, but even a non-profit entity has to be able to generate income somehow or it cannot operate either. Air America was run as a for profit entity, but was being sustained like a non profit. It sucked so badly, that it could not attract much in advertising dollars and, as I mentioned, the last year even its wealthy benefactors were abandoning it. George Soros' Moveon.org for instance was expending a lot of money with Air America, but even they eventually could not justify how little bang they were getting for their buck.