For Liberals, It's Morning in America: Shock jocks are the progressive answer to Rush Limbaugh

Slate.com ^ | 02/21/2003 | Marc Fisher

[GeneD]

Another case of the Slate cutes.

[Eala]

Too bad they missed my favorites: Kirby Wilbur, John Carlson, Michael Medved and Mike Siegel.

[Eala]

and that nice man Bill Press

Ugh. The local paper (King County Journal) runs his column. Can't say who is the more dishonest, Bill Press or Al Hunt (WSJ).

[billorites]

"Their heroes are not Churchill, JFK, or Reagan but Jean Shepherd, Larry Lujack, and Dan Ingram—the legendary radio yakkers and jocks they listened to as shy boys alone in their rooms."

No one comes close to Jean Shepherd in my book. Gotta add J.J. Jeffries and Arnie "Woo Woo" Ginsburg to the list as well.

[John H K]

The author of this has obviously never actually listened to Mancow...he's pretty obviously to the right of center politically and does bring up political issues.

[Alberta's Child]

There's some very interesting information here about talk radio demographics, listeners, etc.

What isn't mentioned is that there is a very good reason why most of those "shock jocks" are on in the morning while most of the conservative hosts are on at other times of the day. Morning radio listeners generally dislike hearing serious political discourse because of the time of day and the harried nature of the morning commute.

I'd also venture to guess that if you listed the listeners all of the talk radio hosts in the U.S. according to their voting habits, you'd find that "shock jock" listeners are the most ignorant about politics and are the least likely to vote in any election.

What a scathing indictment of the Democratic Party -- the key to their success is to convince ignorant people to vote.

[Sabretooth]

Isnt Howard Stern fairly right of center when it comes to politics?

[Sofa King]

"4) Talk radio is inherently conservative because liberal ideas are just too complex for the simplistic medium."

What a load. If anything, it's the opposite. With a 3-hour show, Rush can discuss an issue a hell of a lot more completely than someone with a 30-min TV show. The main difference between Radio and TV is that TV has a visual factor. How is that needed to explain an issue?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: A liberal talkshow won't survive until they can find someone who can entertain, not just repeat the liberal party line.

Oh, and on the subject of shock jocks, OPIE AND ANTHONY RULE!

[Maximum Leader]

Weak premise. The shock jocks (and their audience) tend to be libertarians, not "progressives".

[TheConservator]

Gee, I wonder where you live?

KVI used to be my radio station of choice. No longer. I still listen to Rush on KVI, but otherwise now listen to KTHH.

Kirby Wilbur, although an awfully nice guy, has a little too much lowbrow emotional enthusiasm. I find he is wearing after a while. IMHO, he came across an awful lot better when he was on at night.

John Carlson is also good (but I am annoyed with him for how stupidly he ran his campaign for governor, that I think he could have won, and certainly should have done a lot better). However, he competes now with Savage, and Savage is just too entertaining.

The big switch came for me when KVI kicked Michael Medved off its station. IMHO, he is every bit as good as Rush, maybe even more intelligent, and culturally better connected.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Add Joel Sebastian doing a live Mr. Norm ad on WLS to the list.

[JoJo Gunn]

What is so "progressive" about the Left's tendency to revert to animals?

[redbaiter]

This warning will be for naught. Drobny and the other Democrats are obsessed with Rush Limbaugh. ("Ten million people, day in and day out! On our airwaves! We must take back what is ours!" I can hear them say.) I look forward to seeing them pour their money - and it will be their own money for a change - down this rat hole.

A couple months ago Dr Walter Williams was filling in for Rush, and if that weren't good enough his guest was Dr Thomas Sowell. Best hour of radio I've ever heard. Great stuff.

[xp38]

He supported Gore in 2000...Howard Stern is hard to pigeon hole...he trashes the Kennedys and likes some RINO type politicians but that is what I gleaned from listening years ago. I haven't listened recently.

[Leto]

Stern is a Libertarian more than a 'progressive.

[jejones]

A couple months ago Dr Walter Williams was filling in for Rush, and if that weren't good enough his guest was Dr Thomas Sowell. Best hour of radio I've ever heard. Great stuff.

Hear, hear. I wish that Dr. Williams would consider doing a regular talk show rather than just filling in for Rush over the holidays.

[steve-b]

No, Stern and Don Geronimo and Tom Leykis have no interest whatsoever in having Dick Gephardt on the show, at least not unless he's going to remove his pants.

Well, then, maybe instead of Dick Gephardt they should solicit invitations for Bill Clinton or Ted Kennedy.

[Alberta's Child]

I don't know about other areas of the country, but in the New York market I can say that despite Howard Stern's high ratings, the demographic profile of his listeners must be abysmal because he's got a bunch of low-rent advertisers on his show.

Don Imus, on the other hand, generates more advertising revenue than Stern even though Stern has three times more listeners.

[MadelineZapeezda]

The only thing right of center to Howard is girls naked breasts. What a jerk.

[dead]

Isnt Howard Stern fairly right of center when it comes to politics?

Generally. This author really doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Stern has regularly had Guiliani on the air. He has also had Bloomberg, Whitman, and Pataki on, and endorsed them all. (RINOs, I know, but certainly not liberal Dems.)

In addition, he totally supports Bush and the war on terror and Iraq. And he’s vocally pro-gun, being one of the few lucky individuals in NYC with a right to carry permit.

There is certainly political talk in there, in between the deformed midgets and the strippers.