FACT CHECK: The Right-Wing Smear Campaign Against Mark Lloyd
FACT CHECK: The Right-Wing Smear Campaign Against Mark Lloyd
Since the FCC appointed Mark Lloyd as the agency’s Chief Diversity Officer/Associate General Counsel on July 29, conservatives have made him their new target in the ongoing campaign to baselessly warn about the reemergence of the Fairness Doctrine.
The most absurd attacks have come from pundits like right-wing radio host Michael Savage, who has called Lloyd a “neo-Nazi” and “piece of garbage” intent on closing down “conservatives in the media.” He said that Lloyd’s title — Chief Diversity Officer — is “code word for the KGB.” For the record, Lloyd has a distinguished career on communications policy issues. Most recently he was a vice president at the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. He taught communications policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, served as general counsel to the Benton Foundation, worked as a communications attorney at a major D.C. law firm, and has nearly 20 years of experience in journalism.
The right wing’s main problem with Lloyd is a CAP/Free Press report he co-authored in 2007 called “The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio.” The report’s authors explicitly state that they do not think the Fairness Doctrine should be reinstated, and Lloyd has since said that he has “no plans or interest” to resurrect the law. Nevertheless, conservatives are insisting that that goal is really Lloyd’s secret plan.
Unfortunately, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has agreed to do the far right’s bidding. Last week, he wrote a letter to the FCC objecting to Lloyd’s appointment:
Simply put, I strongly disagree with Mr. Lloyd. I do not believe that more regulation, more taxes or fines, or increased government intervention in the commercial radio market will serve the public interest or further the goals of diversifying the marketplace. I am concerned that despite his statements that the Fairness Doctrine is unnecessary, Mr. Lloyd supports a backdoor method of furthering the goals of the Fairness Doctrine by other means.
These claims by Grassley and the right wing are misguided and based on a fundamental misreading — that may be either accidental or deliberate — of the report. A look at some of these myths:
– MYTH #1: Conservative voices will be kicked off the air. The report actually argues that telling radio broadcasters what to put on the air is inappropriate. What the report advocates for are policies that promote local programming, so what’s on the air is responsive to those communities and their advertisers, as opposed to national syndicators and large station group business models. Right now, the regulatory structure pushes out locally-owned, minority-owned, and female-owned stations. Grassley’s fear of “diversifying the marketplace” will not necessarily create more progressive talk radio; it may even get more conservative. It all depends on the on the location and interests of the community.
– MYTH #2: Lloyd wants to impose more taxes and fines on broadcasters. Grassley’s conception of taxes and fines is convoluted and out of context. The report argues that if broadcast stations don’t want to do local programming, they can pay a fine and get out of doing it. That money would go to the local public radio station for local programming.
– MYTH #3: Progressives secretly want a return to the Fairness Doctrine. Even Grassley admits that Lloyd never advocates a return to the Fairness Doctrine. Why? As Lloyd has explained, the Fairness Doctrine “never by itself fostered coverage of important issues in a way that spoke to the diversity of interests in local communities across our country. In the late 1960’s, the supposed golden age of the Fairness Doctrine, the Kerner Commission reported the failure of mainstream media to report on minority communities.”
Approximately 91 percent of weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and just nine percent is progressive. However, “43 percent of regular talk radio listeners identify as conservative, while 23 percent identify as liberal and 30 percent as moderate.” Much of this imbalance was created in the wave of consolidation after the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which “removed the national limit on the number of radio stations that one could own.” What progressives like Lloyd are advocating is not more liberalism, but more localism.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress
That’s Lloyd’s problem right there. Intelligent, thoughtful, fair-minded, no head-spinning or spittle flying…Man, he is TERRIFYING!!
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:24 amI wish this guy were bringing back the Fairness Doctrine. I wish.
There’s an incredibly good reason why cons and neocons are so petrified of even the idea of bringing it back…they’ve had a stranglehold on our media, and our government ever since Reagan abolished it.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:26 amThe conservative reaction to wardrobe malfunctions clearly shows who has the real agenda of imposing more government regulation and fines
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:29 am“What progressives like Lloyd are advocating is not more liberalism, but more localism.”
And what I’m advocating is making radio less of a propaganda medium for corporate shills. That’s all I ask.
91% of neocon talk radio, complete with Hitler = Obama, ad nauseum, for 43% of the audience? That makes no economic sense, unless you’re trying to CONVERT the rest…
Saints preserve us…Jaysus, Mary and Joseph…
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:31 amZooey says:
That’s Lloyd’s problem right there. Intelligent, thoughtful, fair-minded, no head-spinning or spittle flying…
Man, he is TERRIFYING!!
and BLAAACK!!!
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:34 amIs this the same Grassley who’s against real healthcare for all Americans?
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:35 amisn’t savage the ugly american who was kicked off the british airwaves?
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:36 amMYTH #3: Progressives secretly want a return to the Fairness Doctrine.
the only ‘myth’ about that is the ’secretly’ part…
we hear it all the time… and it’s a fact that SOMEthing is needed…
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:38 amsay, fix that Telecommunications Act of 1996 for starters…
The conservatives just don’t like anyone with any signs of intelligence.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:38 amThere is no particular advantage to bringing back the fairness doctrine. In mandating conservative radio outlets to balance their output with a more reasonable take on government and society, would we not be mandating liberal media to give expression to the right’s propaganda? It seems counterproductive.
What would make a difference is to roll back the Bush era relaxation of ownership regulations, diversifying ownership of broadcast outlets and breaking the narrow, conservative corporate stranglehold that is on so many markets. Once this is achieved, the fairness doctrine would matter little.
Consider the heyday of print news. Every city had at least two, perhaps several newspapers that were unabashedly and quite publically biased toward one or another political position, and everyone knew where they stood. The news consumers simply patronized the paper that came closest to providing their preference in terms of news coverage and editorial positions.
The key is not to have everyone balanced. It is to remove the homogeneity that makes all outlets equally useless. It is in the sort of diversity that the corporate media are denying us now.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:44 am“Michael Savage, who has called Lloyd a “neo-Nazi” and “piece of garbage”
meanwhile, weiner-boy can’t figure out why he can’t travel to the united kingdom after they determined he’s nothing more than a hate speech monger.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:44 amkaty says:
Not only that, katy, Weiner has been placed on a no entry list by England.
Bring back the Fairness Doctrine! Let the WhiteWing figure out who gets public air time and who does not.
Stop feeding teh stoopid and perhaps the stoopid will die off.
PEACE
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:47 amIts really unfortunate that the Fairness Doctrine can not come back. It would certainly level the playing field and make jerks like Rush and similar people lacking any credibility from opening their mouths and spewing any lie that came to them. That reality must be part of why the Repignofascists are so opposed to fairness in broadcasting.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 amMichael Savage, who has called Lloyd a “neo-Nazi” and “piece of garbage”
The Wiener is projecting again.
(sorry about any possible visual…)
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 amoh! … bozo, so he can’t even GO TO the country?
i do remember that now… thought it was just his show…
is it banned? … surely not, on second thought…
and, on the googlenews page, the reason why SOMEthing must be done:
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 amObama calls for ‘honest debate’ on health care
The Associated Press – Darlene Superville – ?2 hours ago?
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama is challenging his critics on a national health care overhaul, accusing them of making “phony claims” about the legislation.
Obama Says US Health-Care Debate Dominated by ‘Distortions’ Bloomberg
Conservatives gain in debate on health care amid insecurity The Militant
I would just like for one day the public airwaves to air our views. It’s a joke now. The only thing barely trying is Coast but with George Norey, it’s more of a joke calling itself, not a joke. He says, “I’ll fight them if they try to shut me down. I’ll remain broadcasting whatever it takes.” Like the powers-that-be would do that. He’s fine by them. He would be like Radio Rawanda broadcasting eventually, he’s such a sell-out worm. That’s why he can’t get a partner like a woman to be with. Of course they know.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:50 amthanks too mom!
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:52 amkaty,
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:53 ammembers of the european union have very strict laws regarding hate speech and people like weiner boy can’t wrap themselves in first amendment rights there. i would venture to say weiner-boy is not heard in the european union.
so grASSley wrote a letter to the FCC objecting to Lloyd’s appointment -
so what?
does he or any senator have a say in that?
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:54 amdoes lloyd need approval?
George Norey said last night that he would be, “holding a panel to discuss the healthcare issue” on Coast on-air. Expect Jerome Corsi at least on there.
August 22nd, 2009 at 11:56 amThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
How Republicans/Conservatives can lie through their teeth, over & over, be hateful to others, & think that there’s a place in their heaven for them, is beyond me.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:01 pmrebroadcast of ed schultz just came on… he pointed out that there are now even MORE righty talkers that when he started his show 5+ years ago…
y’know… if only they didn’t LIE…
but that’s what they do…
LIE
LIE
LIE
.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:09 pmWeiner has been whining for over a month about being disallowed travel from Great Britan. Welcome to the rest of the world, wingnuts, where you’re despised like three-quarters do here.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:14 pmdasm says:
——————————————————————————–
How Republicans/Conservatives can lie through their teeth, over & over, be hateful to others, & think that there’s a place in their heaven for them, is beyond me.
Because they hate on gay people.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:17 pmTundra says:
The report argues that if broadcast stations don’t want to do local programming, they can pay a fine and get out of doing it.
As a side note all convience stores will now be required to sell red soap. If they do not want to they can pay a fine and then not take up their shelf space.
Only the truly oblivious ignore the fact that these are “Public Airwaves.”
According to the FCC:
So, no, moron, this is not the same as a convenience store.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:33 pmListening to Michael Savage rant on the Media Matters link,
calling progessives “Bolshevik Nazis”, is some of the most
disturbing propaganda I’ve heard on American radio.
This dangerous psycho defines wingnut.
Inciting paranoia with treasonous slander
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pmis a desecration of free speech.
Fairness Doctrine — i’d much more for the TRUTHNESS Doctrine.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pmthese right-wingers spew stuff that just isn’t true. i’d love to hold them accountable for that.
If Chuck Ghastly is against Mark Lloyd he must be what the FCC needs. I hope Lloyd pushes for localism and changes his stance on bringing back the Fairness Doctrine.
It gives me a thrill that Savage is not allowed into the UK!
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pmThere needs to be an “Utter Bullshit Doctrine”. Should you speak utter BS (lies or incorrect info) on air you should explode into flames immediately.
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:50 pmSteppenwoof @ 12:50pm
How about an “Instant Karma Doctrine”?
If only…..
August 22nd, 2009 at 12:59 pmGo here,
http://grassley.senate.gov/
to tell Shill Grassley that he is full of corn.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:01 pman excellent example of what is NOT
“fair and accurate coverage of the news”…
Karl Rove, Rupert Murdoch and Media Bias
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-conyers/karl-rove-rupert-murdoch_b_264339.html
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:03 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
also, found at huffpo:
News Corp Leading Effort To Create Consortium With Rivals To Force Online Fees
Los Angeles Times:
As newspapers across the country struggle with declining readership and advertising revenue, News Corp. executives have been meeting in recent weeks with publishers about forming a consortium that would charge for news distributed online and on portable devices — and potentially stem the rising tide of red ink.
Read the whole story: Los Angeles Times
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-newscorp21-2009aug21,0,5961516.story
it’s inevitable…
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 pmi believe that clear channel is the largest owner of am radio stations in this country. they are very conservative and present very conservative programming on those stations they own. trying to find a progerssive station on your radio as you travel through even progressive states is next to impossible. is this fair?
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:13 pmIts mind boggling that the fair and balanced crowd find the word fairness terrifying
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:18 pmFried Your Tomato
Sounds like the media is unionizing. heh
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:22 pmXisithrus says:
——————————————————————————–
Its mind boggling that the fair and balanced crowd find the word fairness terrifying
great point. fairness to these people is only when their views are aired 24/7 on the radio and tv.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:22 pmThe sixth item on the list of fourteen defining characteristics of fascism is…
The Republican Party has adopted all of these fourteen defining characteristics, in at least some regard. They have positioned themselves to dominate AM talk radio, and they own at least one cable news channel, in their efforts to control the media.
While we like to pretend that the leaders of the C-Street family criminal organization are stupid, they are not. They are well aware that as they increase their control of the media, they will meet with resistance. That is why they have set their propaganda machine to spew fear regarding the “fairness doctrine”.
The C-Street crime family is going to fight to prevent its conservative voices from being removed from the air. They are attacking Mark Lloyd because he has the authority to diminish their chokehold on our media, even though not via the “fairness doctrine”.
The FCC is the real enemy of the Republican C-street crime family for it is the FCC, and only the FCC that has the authority to revoke their broadcasting licenses. Mark Lloyd just represents the FCC in the eyes of pundits like Savage.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:23 pmSlappyBastinado says:
“etc….”
A case in point for perhaps spending more money on language arts curriculum…
here’s my favorite from Slappee’s salivations…
“a loss of power would surly follow…”
how true…
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:23 pmI actually want the GrOPe on the air. I just want accuracy. Some govt oversight is necessary. These guys obviously won’t police themselves.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:24 pmbaddestbob says:
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
It makes for very quiet road trips, especially when the only thing you can bring in is rightwing hate radio and christian broadcasting.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:26 pmNO FREE HEALTH CARE FOR YOU!
Health care is never free — big-government republicans provided subsidies and sky-scraper bureaucrats shot premiums through the roof, doubling the cost in the last decade, 30% of which isn’t even spent on health care.
The cost of health care has little do to with health care itself. Stop hiding behind treatment to defend excess profit.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:28 pmbaddestbob says:
i believe that clear channel is the largest owner of am radio stations in this country. they are very conservative and present very conservative programming on those stations they own. trying to find a progerssive station on your radio as you travel through even progressive states is next to impossible. is this fair?
And, to add a delightful touch of irony to that, Bob, our local progressive AM station here in Los Angeles, KTLK 1150, is owned by — wait for it — Clear Channel.
:o/
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:30 pmThe thing is though conservatives confuse localism with liberalism.
I would fully support a move towards more local coverage over national syndicated radio programming. When I love listening to one of the local college radio stations in my area even though I never have attended a single class at that university they still play great music and actually announce local events worth going to.
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:32 pmOn topic, you right-wingers can have your radio if you stop pushing the feeble-minded to public disonbedience and stop calling the media “librul”
Deal?
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:33 pmWho listens to am radio? From a longterm demographic what 30 something or below does. It is a dying static bunch of crap…
August 22nd, 2009 at 1:59 pmWhen you are such an overly dominating force on the airwaves as are the conservatives it is amazing to me that they harp about the Fairness Doctrine. There is so much money floating around it chokes just about any liberal issue.For that reason the Obama Administration’s convoluted message about what policy (public option)it is supporting is giving the conservatives cannon fodder every day.The information being put out by multiple members has been haphazard and confusing.Let’s get back on point.The conservative control of the editorial decisions that create and shape our information daily somehow must be reeled in.We have to continue to speak up mand push back.
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:03 pmI think they use AM intentionally. Its cheap, it covers larger areas than FM and which would make it much easier to fudge the amount of listeners [demographically] one actually has, for advertising revenue.
Its why I think Limbaughs listenership is quite inflated.
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:04 pmLet me just chime in to agree with some others:
* Yes, bring back the fairness doctrine
* Yes, reverse the relaxed ownership rules
All the Fairness Doctrine really advocated was equal time for opposing views, and I don’t see anything wrong or unhealthy with that… In it’s day, it kept the media from becoming propaganda organs for the owners of the media. The behavior of those who own Fox and AM radio have proved the need for such a check. I must say I fondly remember the opportunities that media afforded to even the nuttiest quacks who took advantage of the Fairness Doctrine to express their views in response to editorials they objected to.
As to the restoration of the restrictions on local media ownership rules, this is important to restoring diversity, competition and the local voice that was abandoned during the past decade. Again, the consequences of abandoning those rules have proved the need.
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:05 pmClear channel seems to work much like what the lobbyists call the telephone trees. They spread disinformation to help create astroturf movements with hidden agendas. They create a false public opposition which a lobbyied politician can point to for cover.
August 22nd, 2009 at 2:08 pmPlease, do what the conservatives keep saying we are going to do. Give them what they want. Shut down all the conservative talk radio and TV programs. Thay are only going to lie about it any way.
Give them what they want.
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:11 pmAny station that programs daily airtime for the deliberate manipulation
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:14 pmof truth from these wingnut talking heads, should be held accountable for their inaccuracies and maliciousness.
The disclaimer “the views expressed are not necessarily those of this station” should not apply when they are profiting from, and promoting, the deliberate proselytizing of distorted beliefs.
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
reminded, from thom hartmann talking to bernie sanders –
john nichols a strong advocate of MEDIA REFORM…
and bernie says that until there IS reform, the progressive message
will struggle to get out there…
hartmann pointed out that rupert murdoch was willing to LOSE
$100m a year for 5 years to get his media empire…
who else could do that… or WOULD do that …?
points mostly to HIS motives… not the ‘general welfare’, that’s for sure…
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:42 pmWhat sort of losers listen to am radio. Get some satellite for christ sake you outdated fossils…
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:43 pmoh, and dbadass, i listen to XMradio… Talk LEFT 167…
… 165 for RandiRhodes 3-6eastern…
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:44 pmthat was weird… i hadn’t read your comment ’til now…
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:45 pmkwsventures says:
“Liberal radio is so boring. I try to listen once in a while to hear the other side, but I find it only good for curing insomnia.”
“So I listen to AM radio when I’m trying to stay awake…”
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:46 pmYeah, kws?
And *I* only listen to the reichwingers like Limbaugh when I’ve eaten something that doesn’t agree with me and I need some help to puke.
Besides, you retarded fruitfly, that 91% figure has NOTHING at all to do with the quality of the content, but everything to do with the amount of MONEY put forth by corporations and dangerous traitors like Rupert Murdoch to buy all the stations and thus control the programming. (Quite obviously, you’re much too stupid and/or deluded to figure that out.)
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:46 pmi HAD to go XM to avoid the cons… thicker than fleas here…
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:46 pmI was just wondering yesterday if Rupert Murdock’s empire in the U.S. could be busted up like Ma Bell was.
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:49 pmi’ve never understood, and have very little patience with,
those who listen to millionaires spouting fiction and hate
that defies even the simplest logic…
… and never catching on the fact that their lives are
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:53 pmgetting worse while making the liars even richer…
gummble-bee-itch says:
Tundra says:
The report argues that if broadcast stations don’t want to do local programming, they can pay a fine and get out of doing it.
As a side note all convience stores will now be required to sell red soap. If they do not want to they can pay a fine and then not take up their shelf space.
Only the truly oblivious ignore the fact that these are “Public Airwaves.”
According to the FCC:
In exchange for obtaining a valuable license to operate a broadcast station using the public airwaves, each radio and television licensee is required by law to operate its station in the “public interest, convenience and necessity.” This means that it must air programming that is responsive to the needs and problems of its local community of license.
So, no, moron, this is not the same as a convenience store.
Good smackdown GBI. No need for me to point this out to tundra. That’s a voteup and 10 for style points.
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:58 pmApproximately 91 percent of weekday talk radio programming is conservative, and just nine percent is progressive.
Bingo. Conservative brings in ratings thus advertisers like that. Liberal radio is boring. Nobody gives a rip. Didn’t Air American go bankrupt? What advertiser is going to waste money on a loser with no audience. Get real, people.
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:04 pmLooks like kwsventures got dosed up on some Limbaugh this morning.
*yawn*
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:10 pmI think the fear of the fascist Republican C-Street crime family that they will be “kicked off the air” is well founded. Already I am hearing my fellow progressives discuss various legal means by which this could be done.
We all know it needs to be done, be it via a monopoly breakup, as wiley pointed out, or through action by the FCC, or even the reinstatement of some kind of “fairness doctrine”. If we fail to “kick them off the air”, they will continue to spread their fascist style propaganda, infecting the weak minded, like kwsventures.
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:23 pmTundra says: 21
That is stupid. Are convienience stores a resource OWNED by the people? Because the airwaves ARE a resource OWNED by the public. The deal we made was that they got to use our airwaves for FREE to make obscene buttloads of money and in return they had to perform a public service. It is OUR decision how that public service should be performed and if they dont LIKE it they can go into the dry cleaning business
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:25 pmWhy are you bothering SlappyMoron. I didnt read your post. Once it went to the sewer no one will. We all know that it is just you begging us to pity you again and no one wants to see you keep humiliating yourself. Its like seeing a retarded monkey dancing for an organ grinder. You are stupid, you are pathetic, you have no self respect and no dignity and no one wants to see that so you are wasting your begging.
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:28 pmkwsventures says:
NO ignoramus what they tell you is that your brainwashed morons tune into AM hateradio to find out what you think and liberals arent interested in that format. We like to read. Isnt it time for Rush to tell you what you think?
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:29 pmkwsventures says:
Con radio carries corporate water so it gets subsidized the way Rush Limbaugh was given away free for years. Corporate America doesnt want the liberal empower working Americans message out there so they wont give it a chance. In Phoenix the liberal talk radio was killing in the ratings so Clear Channel bought it up and got rid of the liberals. Jim Hightower was fired when KILLING in the ratings by Disney. Yeah your corporate masters prefer the Limborg to be brainwashed by cons. Liberals dont tune into AM hateradio like you MORONS do. You rune in to find out what you think you pathetic lemming
August 22nd, 2009 at 4:33 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
kwsventures says:
NO. That would be you. I am slapping you around like the weak punkass troll you are. WWWWWAAAAHHHHHHH is not a political argument. Man up punk.
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:02 pmAt the time Right Wing radio got started, AM stations were dirt cheap, mostly because few people listened to them, and AM equipment is less expensive to maintain. It’s been a long time since I was around radio, but my memory is that AM radio also doesn’t have the same requirements for an engineer during broadcast, which makes them even that much cheaper.
They’ve thrived because of the small minority of Americans who are panicked by change and progress, and who need to have someone telling them constantly that their lives are so screwed up because of someone else (liberals, non-white people, and “government”), not because the wingers are out of touch. They even get the occasional validation of hearing themselves on air when they get through on the phone, and they can bark and foam with all the craziness they’ve got without being laughed at.
Right Wing programming has one great advantage: no fact checking necessary. No one has to take the time to verify that the latest story is true (or vaguely close to reality), and the wilder and crazier the story the better, because the audience is the most credulous on the planet next to religious fanatics (which many of them are, naturally). It’s not only a cost saving but a time saver — nothing of that painful process of researching and verifying, just starts screaming.
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:05 pmBingo. Conservative brings in ratings thus advertisers like that
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:15 pm—
Sure all those people that buy adjustable beds. Ever listen to who is advertising and to whom? Again this is an outdated format for an outdated demographic…
This comment has been voted down. Click to read.
Hi conservative guy.
Care to stick around and discuss things? You must have good reasons for the way you feel about the world. Why not share them?
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:30 pmHi conservative guy.
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:35 pmWanna stick around?
dbadass, you may have to resort to tempting conservative guy with gourmet comestibles.
August 22nd, 2009 at 5:48 pmI think, given the choice, that the Conservatives wouldn’t want to claim “conservative guy” as one of their own.
August 22nd, 2009 at 6:49 pmHow many times must I point this out…pundits and their followers dont win or lose elections as Limbaugh used to say he did, its not true then and its not true now.
Pundits create controversy for advertising dollars thru biased, ludicrous, demonizing, finger pointing claims.
I, for one, have no desire to listen to a pundit then go out on the tubes or airwaves and defend what the crackpots say or do.
Put them all in a group and ship them off to a desert with guns and these cowards without an audience would go quiet very quickly without ever firing a shot.
August 22nd, 2009 at 6:51 pmralph
August 22nd, 2009 at 6:54 pmI am currently doing a haddock/flounder/frsh wild caught shrimp fry with coleslaw and home cut french fries….Later we will be doing some steamed clams as well as some raw. I was pissed that I couldn’t get the oysters…
Sounds better than poturducken dba
August 22nd, 2009 at 7:01 pmWhy not call it an “Honesty Doctrine?”
August 22nd, 2009 at 7:25 pmThe opposite of honest would likely be dishonest and they don’t want to opose honesty, do they?
Remember the “Patriot Act?” Don’t worry about what’s in it, just worry about being called unpatriotic if you challenge it at all!
Didn’t our parents teach us to just be honest?
I know that right-wing radio would completely fall apart if they were somehow forced to be honest, but, can’t they win the debate without resorting to lies?
And if not what should that tell there listeners about there arguments?
Sounds better than poturducken dba
–
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 pmI have plans for a fish version. Imagine a sardine in a mackeral in a haddock in a….
conservative guy says:
The preaching to the choir format probably isnt for liberals. I never listened. Liberals arent like you brainwashed morons who tune into the radio screechmonkeys to find out what you think.
August 22nd, 2009 at 8:46 pmdbadass says:
Conservotroll knows he is too stupid to engage in an actual discussion. He remembers what Rush told him to think he vomits it to the board and that is challenging enough for him
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:19 pmMaybe people ought to do for Michael Savage’s advertiser base what was done for Glenn Beck. I’d be happy to write a nasty gram or two myself, but since I don’t even know which station Savage is on, locally, I’ve no idea who his advertisers are.
These bozos should quit the pissing, moaning and whining and tend to their own business – which no one is trying to put them out of, at the moment. I don’t have an issue with going after them for sedition and incitement though, particularly when they really get into doing exactly that sort of thing.
I understand the deeply ingrained need to engage in name calling and other forms of below-the-belt personal attacks that the Savages and other rightie blockhead jocks do, but it certainly doesn’t advance civic dialogue. Civil seems to be totally beyond their reach.
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:32 pmralph and dbadass…
A piscatorial table? Wonderful.
While you’re at it, why don’t you toast a dexterian poltroon or two for conguy?
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:36 pmdbadass says:
What sort of losers listen to am radio.
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Er, I do – but only when the Mets are on and I’m stuck in the car.
August 22nd, 2009 at 9:41 pmThe FCC wants to collect more fines.
Uh, who was the head of the FCC when Janet Jackson had her **ahem** “wardrobe malfunction” and levied the biggest fine ever known ?
And – about the fairness doctrine – why would the right wing pundits dislike the idea of giving equal time ?
And if I were the Becks and the Limbaughs of the world, more than the fairness doctrine, I’d be more worried about criminal charges for encitement to riot.
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:08 pmMapleStreet says:
The fairness doctrine didnt even call for equal time just that anyone personally attacked time to respond and that a public issue both sides be heard. They wouldnt have to give three hours of rebuttal time for the Rush Limbaugh show
August 22nd, 2009 at 10:17 pmI love debating liberals. It’s such fun.
August 23rd, 2009 at 12:57 amconservative guy says:
I love debating liberals. It’s such fun.
August 23rd, 2009 at 12:57 am
What blogs do you actually debate anyone at? ‘Cause here you just leave your droppings, then run away.
August 23rd, 2009 at 1:32 amThe problem and solution is in ownership. 3% to 7% of all TV and radio stations are owned by all the minorities put together.
For radio only, the FCC should require that every station have at least half of its airday in local programming.
August 23rd, 2009 at 8:36 amIt may be that any section, or clip of narration, isolated for the purposes of study and discussion (involving human relationships and events) will not ‘hold water’ if that literary tone, or ‘gist’ is portrayed as seeking to teach an important ‘technical’ lesson! Whereas, myths are inseparably known, to be inclusive representations having some or another particular, special, combination of the spiritual, aesthetic, social and lastly, the familial or pedagogical aspects of living!
August 23rd, 2009 at 9:41 amJane, I think what our little conservative friend meant was that he loves dropping turds in the middle of a room full of liberals and then running away and watching through the window as they clean it up.
It’s just hilarious to him. More fun than cavorting with his blow-up doll, “Sandra”.
August 23rd, 2009 at 10:36 amIt’s just hilarious to him. More fun than cavorting with his blow-up doll, “Sandra”.
Hey Ralph, I think you may have lost conservatroll and the rightwingers when you said “blow-up.”
August 23rd, 2009 at 11:48 amThey probably got harder-than-chinese-algebra thinking about ammonium nitrates and Government buildings!
Fairness is for kids!
August 26th, 2009 at 5:35 pm“It should be clear by now that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press,” he said. “This freedom is all too often an exaggeration.”
Mark Lloyd
Not surprising you tree hugging radical love this guy,
Inspired by Saul Alinsky, FCC ‘Diversity’ Chief Calls for ‘Confrontational Movement’
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53055
Unless you’re black you better be concerned , this administration is far from Democrat, this is trojan horse Commuunism and the overthrow of Freedom and democracy in favor of reparations.
August 26th, 2009 at 8:51 pmWhat Terkel fails to mention is that the tax or fine levied on non-compliant talk radio would be 100% of their operating budget. This confiscatory tax is nothing more than a prohibition of free speech and a bald attempt to force conservaive talk off the air.
August 27th, 2009 at 7:50 amMYTH #2: Lloyd wants to impose more taxes and fines on broadcasters. Grassley’s conception of taxes and fines is convoluted and out of context. The report argues that if broadcast stations don’t want to do local programming, they can pay a fine and get out of doing it. That money would go to the local public radio station for local programming.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:06 amSo what is the difference between a Fine and Tax?? You are still paying to push your own content! And who control local public radio? What about a liberal living in Salt Lake City or conservative in San Francisco. Makes is sound like everyone in an area has the same opinions.. That isn’t true!
Remember the first amendment?
The postings on this site are very interesting. I find it funny to watch liberals and conservatives battle back and forth; each criticizing the tactics used by the other side ignorant of the fact they are using the same. As a result both sides are being distracted from the real issue. The battle is not between these two points of view but between total government control and freedom for the American people. If both sides would stop arguing, take a step back and look at the real picture, they would truly see what is taking place. Control of speech is critical to successfully manipulating the American citizens.
One particular response caught my attention. If I read into the reasoning for gummble-bee-itch quoting a portion of the FCC regulation, I believe he is inferring that the conservative opinion is not in the public interest. What if the conservatives held office, then liberal talk radio would be considered not in the public interest. I have to ask then, whose definition of public interest, convenience and necessity would be use? The government, the liberals or the conservatives? This is the fundamental problem with any form of restriction to speech whether it is newsprint, the internet or public airwaves. Restriction based on opinion is censorship clear and simple. This is why the first amendment was included in this country’s constitution.
August 28th, 2009 at 11:09 pmvery thanks for article!
August 29th, 2009 at 9:34 am