Why liberals can't keep Air America from spiraling in

[sbp]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... 7223.story

The liberal Air America Radio, just past its first birthday, has probably enjoyed more free publicity than any enterprise in recent history. But don't believe the hype: Air America's left-wing answer to conservative talk radio is failing, just as previous efforts to find liberal Rush Limbaughs have failed.

Wait a second, you say, didn't I read that Air America has expanded to more than 50 markets? That's true, but let's put things in perspective: Conservative pundit and former Reagan official William J. Bennett's morning talk show, launched at the same time as Air America, reaches nearly 124 markets, including 18 of the top 20, joining the growing ranks of successful right-of-center talk programs (Limbaugh is still the ratings leader, drawing more than 15 million listeners a week).

And look at Air America's ratings: They're pitifully weak, even in places where you would think they'd be strong. WLIB, its flagship in New York City, has sunk to 24th in the metro area Arbitron ratings — worse than the all-Caribbean format it replaced, notes the Radio Blogger. In the liberal meccas of San Francisco and Los Angeles, Air America is doing lousier still.

So why do liberals fare so poorly on air? Some on the left say it's because liberals are, well, smarter and can't convey their sophisticated ideas to the rubes who listen to talk radio. Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, whose own stint as a talk-show host was a ratings disaster, gave canonical expression to this self-serving view. Conservatives "write their messages with crayons," he maintained. "We use fine-point quills."

Yet even if we were to grant the premise that conservative talk radio can sometimes be crudely simplistic — a tough charge to make stick against, say, one-time philosophy professor Bennett or Clarence Thomas' former law clerk Laura Ingraham — how can anyone plausibly believe the right has a monopoly on misleading argument? Moreover, talk-show fans aren't dummies. Industry surveys show that talk-radio fans vote in greater percentages than the general public, tend to be college-educated and read more magazines and newspapers than the average American.

Successful talk radio is conservative for three reasons:

• Entertainment value. The top conservative hosts put on snazzy, frequently humorous shows. Kathleen Hall Jamieson, dean of the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School for Communication, observes: "The parody, the asides, the self-effacing humor, the bluster are all part of the packaging that makes the political message palatable." Besides, the triumph of political correctness on the left makes it hard for on-air liberals to lighten things up without offending anyone.

• Fragmentation of the potential audience. Political consultant Dick Morris explains: "Large percentages of liberals are black and Hispanic, and they now have their own specialized entertainment radio outlets, which they aren't likely to leave for liberal talk radio." The potential audience for Air America or similar ventures is thus pretty small — white liberals, basically. And they've already got NPR.

• Liberal bias in the old media. That's what birthed talk radio in the first place. People turn to it to help right the imbalance. Political scientist William Mayer, writing in the Public Interest, recently observed that liberals don't need talk radio because they've got the big three networks, most national and local daily newspapers and NPR.

Unable to prosper in the medium, liberals have taken to denouncing talk radio as a threat to democracy. Liberal political columnist Hendrik Hertzberg, writing in the New Yorker, is typically venomous. Conservative talk radio represents "vicious, untreated political sewage" and "niche entertainment for the spiritually unattractive," Hertzberg sneers.

If some liberals had their way, Congress would regulate political talk radio out of existence. Their logic is that scrapping Air America would be no loss if it also meant getting Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Bennett off the air.

To accomplish this, New York Democratic Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey has proposed reviving the Fairness Doctrine to protect "diversity of view," and John Kerry recently sent out some signals that he too thought that might be a good idea.

Under the old Fairness Doctrine, phased out by Ronald Reagan's FCC in the late '80s, any station that broadcast a political opinion had to give equal time to opposing views. A station running, say, Hannity's show, would also have to broadcast a left-wing competitor, even if it had no listeners.

Pre-Reagan, talk radio in today's sense simply didn't exist. What station could risk it? But people listen to conservative talk because they want to, not because the post-Fairness Doctrine regulatory regime forces them to. To claim that "diversity of view" is lacking in the era of blogs and cable news, moreover, is downright silly. Complaints about fairness are really about driving out conservative viewpoints.

Sure, talk radio is partisan, sometimes overheated. But it's also a source of argument and information. Together with Fox News and the blogosphere, it has given the right a chance to break through the liberal monoculture and be heard. For that, anyone who supports spirited public debate should be grateful.

[Red Dawn]

Who in their right mind would waste time listening to assholes from either the right or the left? Oh yeah, assholes who go to Rush Rooms for Lunch and use terms like "Feminazi and Tree Hugger."

From what I've been told, what's so annoying about AAR is that they emulate everything that is wrong about Extremist Right Wing Radio Shows except with a Radical Leftist twist to it.

[nitro237]

I don't listen to much radio , and when I do I just listen to music . But , I earn my "asshole" stripes by working in the term "Tree Hugger" during conversations 2 or 3 times a week

How do you earn yours ?

[Corn]

Being an XM subscriber, I gave Air America a listen, just to, you know.....check it out. I do listen to "talk radio", however the subject matter isn't political. Maybe it's just because some of the personalities I find to be more amusing, but I pretty much keep the dial pegged to my local sports radio network.

Anyway, back to my point........AAR, while it tries to emulate the so-called "right wing" radio talk show formula, just isn't nearly as entertaining. Frankly I don't understand the appeal of Hannity, but Rush for all his pulpit pounding, can be quite amusing. AAR comes off as desperate--in both it's attempts at humor and it's overall message. It's ugly.

The left's answer to Laura Ingraham is Randy Rhodes? Are you kidding me?

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by nitro237
I don't listen to much radio , and when I do I just listen to music . But , I earn my "asshole" stripes by working in the term "Tree Hugger" during conversations 2 or 3 times a week

How do you earn yours ?

Living in Boston!

[TruckStuff]

Besides, the triumph of political correctness on the left makes it hard for on-air liberals to lighten things up without offending anyone.

Good point. No... *GREAT* point.

[MK888]

Besides, the triumph of political correctness on the left makes it hard for on-air liberals to lighten things up without offending anyone.

Good point. No... *GREAT* point.

I was thinking the same thing.
One of the problems they are running into is that there is only so much bush bashing you can listen to. I also found that when they did let a conservative viewed caller on the show (very rare) it was only to bash his/her opinion. If all you hear is one side of a story on what should be a debate type show, it gets old very quick.

That is one of the reasons Bill Oreily is so successfull. He will put anyone one on the show. If they agree or not. It makes for a better show when they dont agree. AAR needs to learn that the debate, and the arguments make for the radio people want to hear. Noone wants to hear the same crap over and over, regardless if it is liberal or conservative.

[FlyingPenguin]

Frankly, in my case, I don't like to listen to ANY political radio talk shows. Left, right, centerist I find them all annoying and self serving. The only people that call in are people who agree with you, or the occasional crank that disagrees with you that the producer lets through to spice things up.

There's never any real debate or discussion on these types of programs. It's just a place for someone to rant.

I prefer a good round table discussion - 4 people and a moderator - with a couple of people representing each side and just having a good debate.

Unfortunately that doesn't do much for ratings so instead we get hysteria.