Air America Ratings Disaster

Not long ago we heard from the liberals that Air America was going to be the equal to such conservative talk shows as Rush Limbaugh. So far, Air America has proven unworthy as a competitor to Rush and much of conservative talk radio.

Is this just another sign that America grows more conservative, or simply a poor performance by the on air talent?

The following is a paragrph from an article written by Michelle Malkin. For the entire article please click the link below:

“I’m sure some of Air America’s supporters will point to particular shows that are successful with particular demographic subgroups. But so what if Al Franken is beating Rush Limbaugh among left-handed male eskimos between the ages of 35 and 54? The Arbitron numbers leave no doubt about the general trend: Air America is no match for conservative talk radio. Even in San Diego, where Air America is doing decently, its ratings are only a little more than one third that of the conservative competition.”

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001631.htm

It’s a conspiracy at the highest levels of govt. and business. Thats why Air America is doing poorly. It’s the money mongering powerbrokers destroying their competition. Megalodons sweeping in for the kill on their favorite prey, the poor little guys that are just trying to eak out their little niche.
Geez Zeb, I thought they told you about this at our last convention.

Either that or Air America just plain sucks.

The money-changer George Soros is the only reason that Air America hasn’t gone under yet.

Dustin

I thought Howard Stern was still #1

What do you mean that’s not liberal talk radio?

I listen to Air America here in the PHX and I enjoy it. My contention is that you have to know evil to know good and they definetly present the dark side of every argument, without fail.

I think the problem with Air America is that the shows don’t allow call in’s from listeners, like Rush or Hannity have. I have listened to Al Franken’s show and he makes alot of mistakes and really isn’t that intelligent or interesting. For some reason the left puts this guy up on a pedestal as if he were this big star that is capable of carrying an audience with his wit and charm. He isn’t that talented. I think they would do better for themselves if they could find someone who is truly funny and well versed in liberalism and their values. But, therein lies the problem, liberalism isn’t an ideology that can withstand 3 hours of critique 5 days a week, there are too many indefensible positions that are easily picked apart by even simple minded conservatives.

Clark

Then why has it survived 50+ years?

In fact, why was in evogue just several years ago?

I think it might have more to do with their past and present leadership, and the fact of th times right now. Everything in gov’t is cyclical, and this to shall turn.

Right leader, right time–pow–change

sasquatch wrote:

"Clark

Then why has it survived 50+ years?

In fact, why was in evogue just several years ago?

I think it might have more to do with their past and present leadership, and the fact of th times right now. Everything in gov’t is cyclical, and this to shall turn.

Right leader, right time–pow–change"

I’m not so sure.

Turn on Cspan, the House or the Senate Channel.

The Democratic leadership is quite sad.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
sasquatch wrote:

"Clark

Then why has it survived 50+ years?

In fact, why was in evogue just several years ago?

I think it might have more to do with their past and present leadership, and the fact of th times right now. Everything in gov’t is cyclical, and this to shall turn.

Right leader, right time–pow–change"

I’m not so sure.

Turn on Cspan, the House or the Senate Channel.

The Democratic leadership is quite sad.

JeffR[/quote]

My point exactly Jeff for the most part.

Are you saying that it will NEVER again come to power? Their leadership is lacking right now no doubt, but I wouldn’t say we are talking about whips here, yet.

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
Clark

Then why has it survived 50+ years?

In fact, why was in evogue just several years ago?

I think it might have more to do with their past and present leadership, and the fact of th times right now. Everything in gov’t is cyclical, and this to shall turn.

Right leader, right time–pow–change[/quote]

I believe that the Democratic party you refer to as “surviving for 50 years” is not the one you invoke today. The “Democratic” party has been hijacked by the extreme left in an attempt to model the United States after the Welfare States of Europe. John F. Kennedy was more conservative than our current president. Proof enough that we are sliding ever so slowly towards Gomorrah.

The rest of your remark is standard liberal fare, I am not sure what you are trying to convey with your misspelling and anagrams. You must be a product of a school run by the indomitable NEA, they do such a fine job educating the children of this country. Please rewrite your comments, I am sure they are indispensible rays of wisdom.

[quote]Clark Call wrote:
sasquatch wrote:
Clark

Then why has it survived 50+ years?

In fact, why was in evogue just several years ago?

I think it might have more to do with their past and present leadership, and the fact of th times right now. Everything in gov’t is cyclical, and this to shall turn.

Right leader, right time–pow–change

I believe that the Democratic party you refer to as “surviving for 50 years” is not the one you invoke today. The “Democratic” party has been hijacked by the extreme left in an attempt to model the United States after the Welfare States of Europe. John F. Kennedy was more conservative than our current president. Proof enough that we are sliding ever so slowly towards Gomorrah.

The rest of your remark is standard liberal fare, I am not sure what you are trying to convey with your misspelling and anagrams. You must be a product of a school run by the indomitable NEA, they do such a fine job educating the children of this country. Please rewrite your comments, I am sure they are indispensible rays of wisdom.[/quote]

I would agree the liberal party has lost it’s focus, and this would be because of its poor leadership both recent past and present.

Seeing as I didn’t say anything more than that the first time, I’m not sure what you mean about the ‘rest’ of my post being ‘liberal fare,’ but whatever.

As for your last bit of quality prose, I apologize for trying to post while feeding my 6 mo old daughter.

Clark

Just wanted to let you know that your liberal assumption is as far off as your schooling thought.

Anyone who has read more than their own posts would know where my political philosophy falls.

Is it just me or has this “ratings disaster” been used as a blatant excuse to bash all things “democrat”?

Poor ratings don’t have to mean much more than the content sucks… going much futher than that looks like an exercise in wishful thinking.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Is it just me or has this “ratings disaster” been used as a blatant excuse to bash all things “democrat”?

Poor ratings don’t have to mean much more than the content sucks… going much futher than that looks like an exercise in wishful thinking.[/quote]

why does the content suck though?
There are people on this board who hate Limbaugh and say his content sucks. But who’s got the ratings?

Is that all you’ve got?

You want to parley that into liberalism sucks and nobody will ever vote liberal again from now to eternity?

I just think you may be deluding yourself. Heck, if I truly had a liberal agenda, it would be in my own interest to encourage this style of thinking…

Though, in reality, I’m probably powerless to convince you it is happening anyway.

Carry on.

[quote]vroom wrote:
why does the content suck though? There are people on this board who hate Limbaugh and say his content sucks. But who’s got the ratings?

Is that all you’ve got?

You want to parley that into liberalism sucks and nobody will ever vote liberal again from now to eternity?

I just think you may be deluding yourself. Heck, if I truly had a liberal agenda, it would be in my own interest to encourage this style of thinking…

Though, in reality, I’m probably powerless to convince you it is happening anyway.

Carry on.[/quote]

Beyond that, people listen to radio personalities they hate or who “shock” them. It is why Howard Stern was on top for a while. I have heard no publicity of this radio show and don’t think that Franken is that interesting. Low ratings due to a non-interesting host don’t mean a damn thing other than that the show is NOT that interesting. Why would anyone read more into it than that? So, because Franken doesn’t pull in the listeners, this means the entire country is now conservative? No non-conservatives listen to Limbaugh? What was the point of this thread again?

Most media is liberal. Movies, television, newspapers. All liberal, regardless of how people want to argue it. If you are liberal, it seems normal because it follows your philosophy. It is more obvious to conservatives because it is not their philosophy.

Talk radio is an alternate media. Before people again try to say it is not, most people turn on FM, not AM unless there is some sports on. They get their news from television and newspapers, and they go to movies, and sit on the couch watching tv. So it is an alternate media.

Now if you can find liberal thought all over the place, talk radio becomes more of a draw because it is something you do not find as easily elsewhere. It draws an alternate crowd. This is one of the big problems with Air America. They are trying to create an alternate to an alternate media. An alternate to alternate is mainstream.

Another problem is that they are all propped up. They are specifically placed there for political reasons. Regular talk radio has a very large group of shows the radio stations can draw from, and they are tested in the market. The more popular ones will naturally rise to the top. Ratings bad? They will be dropped like a hot potato regardless of their politics.

Also being placed there for the support of a political party, not entertainment reasons, they are artificial.

Now there are liberal radio shows on that are succeeding, like the Lionel show, which I have listened to, but quit. (I will tell you why if anyone really wants to know.)

Another problem with Air America is it is designed not as a way to get out liberal messages, but as a way to attack conservatives, and conservative shows. This is obvious with their choice of Franken as their biggest name. He even started with naming his show to attack another person. He has two political books that are nothing but attacks.

The mistake is assuming that’s what talk radio is about, but it really isn’t. The best don’t attack as much as just have a little fun with people. You can’t get anywhere with nothing but vile attacks, you need substance, and he is sorely lacking there.

[quote]vroom wrote:
why does the content suck though? There are people on this board who hate Limbaugh and say his content sucks. But who’s got the ratings?

Is that all you’ve got?

You want to parley that into liberalism sucks and nobody will ever vote liberal again from now to eternity?

I just think you may be deluding yourself. Heck, if I truly had a liberal agenda, it would be in my own interest to encourage this style of thinking…

Though, in reality, I’m probably powerless to convince you it is happening anyway.

Carry on.[/quote]

vroom, don’t put words in my mouth or in zeb’s mouth.
That’s something Professor X would do and has done, and it’s far far beneath you.
I only asked you a question. That you chose not to answer it but instead bring up a straw man shows how little you actually have.

[quote]vroom wrote:
why does the content suck though? There are people on this board who hate Limbaugh and say his content sucks. But who’s got the ratings?

Is that all you’ve got?

You want to parley that into liberalism sucks and nobody will ever vote liberal again from now to eternity?

I just think you may be deluding yourself. Heck, if I truly had a liberal agenda, it would be in my own interest to encourage this style of thinking…

Though, in reality, I’m probably powerless to convince you it is happening anyway.

Carry on.[/quote]

BTW, vroom, just to clarify: I never said you had the liberal bias or anything else. I was trying to ask you a question about what you said.

The Mage:

As always…great insights…

Mufasa

Most of you guys can’t see past what’s in front of your face. You live in a little boxed-in mind, where this whole political process is nothing more than a basketball game. To you guys, The Republicans are up by 15 points in the game right now. As in the sports world, the fans root for the home team, and in this case, root for their All-Stars.

You know what happens?

You lose rational and intelligent thought. You ride your emotions. You kick a dog when its down. You dehumanize the opposition. To you, ethics and morality are casualties of war. You live in a comfortable world where things have going well for YOU, so you say to yourself, “What gives THEM the right to try to change the way things are run?”

The Rupublicans have struck a nerve with their supporters. In my opinion, that party has outsmarted the Democrats in almost every way. The Rublicans understand the concept of “taking one for the team” and never airing the dirty laundry. The Democrats are lost right now, as has been pointed out. The party itself has no firm direction. In my opinion, THAT is more important than the views of the party members as it pertains to the electoral process. I believe America is not very “Republican” at all, as you saw how close the race was is November. Had the Democrat party been more cohesive internally, in my opinion, they would have won.