Progressive Talk Radio: The state of the format

By now you probably know that Air America Media has now gone off the air. The last moments of the network are airing as I type this. This comes as a body blow to me personally as this country devolves in to The United States of Bubba.




And the right wing bloviators will, no doubt, have a field day with this. They have been salivating about the death of AAR for years.



Not helping is the loss of progressive stations in key markets like San Diego and Dallas in the last few years. Air America's bankruptcy may mean the loss of liberal radio in Washington DC and New York City.



Yes, the ditto heads this week are riding high.



But don't bury the old girl yet. LibTalk does still have a pulse.



For one thing, the hosts themselves are a pretty popular lot.



Let's start with Ed Schultz, who is the #1 purely progressive host in the nation, tied for #8 overall. Thom Hartmann is right behind him, tied for #9. And Alan Colmes and Stephanie Miller tie for #10 with soon-to-be-former Air America act Lionel.*



The ratings for Progressive Talk Stations (PTR) are a mixed bag, though. KPOJ/Portland, OR's numbers have slipped from their higher marks of a year ago., while KTLK's numbers have doubled in four months (before slipping in December).**



So what is the future for PTR. It does have one. The PTR format may never beat the Rush Limbaughs of the world, but as a niche format, it can be a strong one.



What it will also take are experienced radio people who believe in the PTR message, who can also OWN and MANAGE the stations not like a commercial NPR station, but as a true flame-throwing alternative that anyone would want to listen to.



That would mean clever promotion, giveaways, being visible in the community. Possibly even not promoting yourself as a progressive station, but as a talk alternative.



It means dropping the Cum-by-ya image and going for the audiences jugular.



It can be done. As a person who loves and lives the format, it must be done. Now we need people with the balls to do it.



*http://talkers.com/online/?p=71 

**http://www.allaccess.com/

The real villians...

My reaction to the ugly drama between Mssrs. Leno and O'Brien.

No one is mentioning who are the true villians in this melodrama: The imbecilic dufuses better know as AFFILIATES! These A-holes have been complaining about NBC's performance since this started, mainly because they didn't have that blockbuster lead in for their sorry local newscasts.

If these pie...ces of human feces would simply spend more time trying to create a news product that people will watch instead of blaming The Network for all their troubles, we would not be in this mess. Remember, Leno was making and saving NBC more money that they could have spent on really bad traditional programming. Not to mention Conan was doing very well in his spot.

And its not just the NBC affils. It's all over. I was in broadcasting for 20 years and I know what vermin local station managers are. And if Conan goes to FOX, he'll have the same problems. The reason Leno is where he is is that his tounge is almost irremovably attached to the affiliates asses, as was Carson, and apperently Letterman.

Unfortunatly, nothing can be done here. All I can do is feel sorry for the poot talent that has to endure the affiliate upfronts, smile at the same dorks and pseudowhores show displaye their local charm every year, and for the poor network who cannot truly innovate because they have to keep that porker of a GM at WFUK in BumFoo, Indiana happy.

But you got your wish. No more Leno at nine. Hope you're satisfied. Oh, I've got four words for you mukluks:

My Own Worst Enemy.

Enjoy, a-holes.

The Rev Brit Hume Minister to Brother Woods.

Well, add Christian counselor to the burgeoning list of things that Fox's semi-retired Brit Hume can do.  On this week's "Fox News Sunday," Hume had some advice for a certain Lothario of the Links:


http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=1155201977&bctid=60127129001

Well said Rev. Well said.

Except. 

Maybe you should do a little resarch on Buddism before you make certain statements.

For instance, here is what Buddism says about infedelity:

The fundament of Buddhist practice is ethics, and the backbone of Buddhist ethics is not harming any sentient beings. For common laymen, there are five ethical precepts you take (like not killing, not stealing, not lying, etc), one of which is avoiding sexual misconduct. What more precisely is included in "sexual misconduct" differs from culture to culture within the Buddhist world, but some things are always included, like sexual violence, nonconsentual sex, and sex with minors, close relatives, ordained monks/nuns or other persons under vow of abstention.




Included is also always having sex with another person's wife or husband (including another person living in a permanent relationship with someone else). Not only does it harm other persons, but it is also a manifestation of desire/craving, which is the most important emotion you have to work to diminish and ultimately eliminate, if you practice Buddhism seriously.



In principle, there are no Buddhist objections againt sex between two consenting adults who stand outside relationships with other persons (i.e. between singles), but that differs from culture to culture within the Buddhist world. Many teachers state more clearly that the only place for sex is within a long-term relationship. http://de.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071008163937AAECW3A

But you also did say, Rev., or at least inferred, that Buddism does not offer a chance for forgiveness.

In Buddhism, forgiveness is seen as a practice to prevent harmful thoughts from causing havoc on one’s mental well-being. Buddhism recognizes that feelings of hatred and ill-will leave a lasting effect on our mind karma. Instead, Buddhism encourages the cultivation of thoughts that leave a wholesome effect. "In contemplating the law of karma, we realize that it is not a matter of seeking revenge but of practicing metta and forgiveness, for the victimizer is, truly, the most unfortunate of all. When resentments have already arisen, the Buddhist view is to calmly proceed to release them by going back to their roots. Buddhism centers on release from delusion and suffering through meditation and receiving insight into the nature of reality. Buddhism questions the reality of the passions that make forgiveness necessary as well as the reality of the objects of those passions. "If we haven’t forgiven, we keep creating an identity around our pain, and that is what is reborn. That is what suffers."




Buddhism places much emphasis on the concepts of Mettā (loving kindness), karuna (compassion), mudita (sympathetic joy), and upekkhā (equanimity), as a means to avoiding resentments in the first place. These reflections are used to understand the context of suffering in the world, both our own and the suffering of others.



“He abused me, he struck me, he overcame me, he robbed me’ -- in those who harbor such thoughts hatred will never cease.”

“He abused me, he struck me, he overcame me, he robbed me’ -- in those who do not harbor such thoughts hatred will cease.”

(Dhammapada 1.3-4; trans. Radhakrishnan) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forgiveness#Buddhism

 
So to sum up, Buddism encourages the person  to forgive himself.  So many people of the Chrstian faith feel God has forgiven them but they continue to carry the burdon caused non-self-forgiving.
 
In other words Brit, until you know what you are talking about......STFU!