Why the Right Rules the Radio Waves

New York Times ^ | 12-08-2002 | John Leland

[canuck_conservative]

"...they can always go write for "The West Wing."

Sure, but you have to bring your own supply of magic mushrooms.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Some years ago, 50,000 watt WHO radio in Des Moines featured a liberal woman (an Austrailian, I think)as a mid-morning talker. She had to beg for callers.

[martin_fierro]

As long as network sitcoms, mainstream movies, public radio and some major newspapers are identified with liberal views about sex, family and tattoos, conservatives can cast themselves as outsiders, no matter who is in the White House...,

Talk about ignoring the elephant in the living room.

I love how the NYT tiptoes around actually naming those newspapers.

It also words the sentence in the passive voice: "Those newspapers are identified with liberal views (not that there's any truth to that)."

[jtcribbs]

Nobody's ever heard of NPR?

[my right]

You are absolutely right, I believe there is an agenda here that is interwoven with what Clinton, Gore, Daschle and I'm surprised, John McCain hasn't joined in yet in saying. I'm not much of a conspiracy adherent but I smell something here.

[tet68]

Ah, the "Fairness doctrine" I remember when that was in place. What a mishmash of pap we received then. If anything
defines liberal enforced "diversity" that does.
I would venture to say that instituting the FD again will
only cause clandestine talk radio to spring up across the land. We have the technology.

Here is a horror to think about, FreeRepublic on FD.

[eno_]

Nobody's ever heard of NPR?

Nonfat pork rinds?

[thucydides]

Note the comment that Ivy Leaguers earnest about the serious discussion of issues would turn to the rigidly ideological left wing show "West Wing." Now there is a great deal of serious consideration of issues on Limbaugh, and his demographic is above average in income and education. This "Ivy Leaguer" comment is really an insinuation that Limbaugh's audience is poorly educated, or not interested in the serious discussion of issues, which is a lie. By the way, I am one of those "Ivy Leaguers," with undergraduate and doctoral level degrees, and enjoy Rush's show enormously. And I would never watch "West Wing:" too cliched, predictable, and boring.

[Kerberos]

"The alternative explanation is that after listening to a few months of sound reasoning and sensible opinions, people tend to agree with the opinions presented. "

Yeah but somehow I don't think that is what is being promoted here.

[Tacis]

This is a silly argument.

The ultra-liberal, extremist left wingers can make it in a market driven presentation of ideas because they are genetically incapable. Liberals/democrats are liars! Pure and simple, they will always revert to dishonesty. They will hue to the party line no matter what the facts are and will never dispute the left most leader.

Willie is the perfect example. The White House sewer instructed the lefties to lie and they all did. It was a loyalty thing with them. The lefties on CNN, Clift, the fat black pig, all the other lefties did what they were told. To have done otherwise would have meant being labeled "revisionist" or what ever term the communists used for failing to be doctrinally pure. That is what lefties do.

The most vicious conservative commentators during the Willie filth and corruption were Leno and Letterman. They did what all talk radio folks do, simply talk about the obvious. There was nothing partisan about Streisand's idiocy, Belafonte's stupity, the great democrat joy over Wellstone's, Dashole obstructionism, and Leahy's lie. These were facts. You listen to the talk radio guy who talks about these circumstances in an interesting or amusing way. You know the left winger will lie!

[Shenandoah]

Liberals would never be able to survive a talk show because they would have to open themselves up to debate, and their positions would quickly fall apart under scrutiny.

[ricpic]

And all these years I thought that what I was hearing from liberals was gobbledeegook.
Turns out their message is too subtle for me to get my tiny peasant mind around.
Ah'll jis' have ta try harder ah giss. Duhuh.

[Alberta's Child]

Having listened to talk radio in New York for some time and heard the whole variety of talk radio hosts over the years, I've reached a simple conclusion about why conservatives are so much more successful in this medium. The answer is two-fold:

1. Conservatives connect with listeners because they approach most issues as if their position is completely logical. When someone on the radio says, "Tax cuts are good," "Affirmative action is blatant racial discrimination," or "Illegal immigration is bad," a listener knows that he agrees with the host on some very basic principles that are as obvious as knowing that 2 + 2 = 4. Liberals by definition, on the other hand, take such idiotic positions on issues like these that it doesn't take more than a few minutes for a listener to realize that he is listening to someone whose point of view does not work in the real world.

1. Conservatives connect with listeners because they bring such a good sense of humor to their shows. This, in my opinion, is what makes Rush Limbaugh the best talk radio host in the country. The combination of a light-hearted approach and the self-certainty I described in Item #1 makes a conservative talk radio show very entertaining. There is no need for a conservative radio host to rant about liberals -- he can simply point out that Al Gore is such a dope because he truly believes that 2 + 2 = 5.

LIberals by definition cannot be entertaining because most of their positions are so illogical that they must spend too much time either trying to rationalize them or complaining about anyone who opposes them.

[July 4th]

Heard on more than 600 stations, he reaches about 14.5 million listeners each week, according to an analysis of Arbitron ratings by Talkers magazine. Mr. Hannity, a rising second, reaches about 10 million. "That's not a mass audience when compared to other media," Mr. Harrison said.

They've got far more listeners than most cable channels have viewers. (Ahem...MSNBC...I'm looking in your direction...)

[BeAllYouCanBe]

NPR

I call it National Proletariat Radio.

It is actually more left-winged than Pravda in the old Soviet Union days. It is strange but they seem to have many segments about disadvantaged "poor people" in many African/Asian countries and their solution is always the United Nations involvement and increased UN funding. As if taxpayer money grows on trees – BUT to them taxpayer money is free and infinite supply.

[Reactionary]

In the heat of drive-time squawk, he said, "That's easily thrown back in their face by making them look mealy-mouthed."

And mealy-mouthed translates into dishonest among ordinary people. Why? Because ordinary people understand that vague language is misleading. Paraphrasing Orwell, the need for euphemism in political discourse belies the desire to subvert the truth.

Liberals are masters of euphemism, and one gets the distinct impression that they lack the desire to make themselves clear because their motives are not what they say they are.

[BeAllYouCanBe]

"LIberals by definition cannot be entertaining"

Most liberal shows do revert to gutteral humor. In the San Francisco there is an afternoon drive-time show where two goofy 20-somethings talk about variants of sex and bathroom behavior. They do touch social issuse but only to demonize Republicans. One time I listened they when they were "baptizing" a person with the Roman Catholic liturgy in a toilet -- then they flushed. (I got sick and outraged.)

In afternoon drive-time I listen to Savage who is much more entertaining than Rush.

[SKI NOW]

"...(S)aid Robert Thompson, a professor of media and popular culture at Syracuse University. Where radio conservatives have thrived by drawing hard distinctions between right and wrong, he said, "the liberal tradition as we understand it acknowledges a diversity of people and values."

Perhaps this clymer at Syracure University can tell us about the diversity offered up to conservatives on college campuses. Where conservative publications are stolen and conservatve speakers are routinely shouted down or are not even allowed to speak.

[Bob Mc]

"Because ordinary people understand that vague language is misleading."

"Depends on the meaning of is, is."

[Paladin2]

There are at least two NPR shows (the Diane Rehm Show and Talk of the Nation) that seem to fit the general description of talk radio.

They are syndicated (only to NPR stations AFAIK).

They don't seem to have any shortage of 'Rats calling in.

They seem to be financially successful.

Apparently the 'Rat leadership doesn't listen to them though as Clinton/Gore/Daschle don't recognize the shows' existence.