Conservative Talk Radio

[Mr. Blue]

The recent silliness regarding Inofe, Clinton, Boxer, etc. I won't get into that issue as it appears Inofe is now tucking in his tail and saying the incident happened three years ago...whatever.

The thing that they commented on how many people listen to Sean Hannity daily on the Radio (I believe they said 16 million). That kind of shocked me...why is it that conservatives have a lock on talk radio?

Is it just that Dems and Reps chose different avenues of communication? Dems are more internet driven while conservatives embrace radio? Not sure, but it seems kind of odd to me that conservatives seem to be so popular on the radio.

[kres24GT]

Conservatives usually consider most of the media, major networks and the major papers to be liberal. Whether you agree with that or not, they many believe it. Conservative radio and FOX News fills a niche market.


Many Democrats have actively supported the Fairness Doctrine, which is a ridiculous piece of legislation. Now Republicans are joining in as well given Trent Lott's recent remarks.

Politicians on both sides want to keep the wool over the people's eyes on what they are really doing. Any outlets they can silence, they will try to.

[Bill]

Hate always finds a market niche in america.

Hate is popular.

[kres24GT]

Hate always finds a market niche in america.

Hate is popular.


You seem like a pretty intelligent guy most of the time, then you post ridiculous demogoging rhetoric like this.

[Moby]

Is it just that Dems and Reps chose different avenues of communication? Dems are more Internet driven while conservatives embrace radio? Not sure, but it seems kind of odd to me that conservatives seem to be so popular on the radio.
The radio allows a single communicator to talk and control everything. Facts cannot be checked. The radio announcer can hang up on anyone and say pretty much any thing. Believing in the announcer requires blind faith.

Any fact that I read on the Internet can be verified within minutes. Any message posted on a blog can be countered or followed up with supporting documents. If you make false statements on a blog someone will link to the truth.

Listen to the statements being made on the radio. They're mostly 3 word slogans that mean nothing but sound good. They have no basis in reality. "Cut and run", "War on terror", "Axis of evil", "Tax and spend".

The followers of Dubya don't ask questions and don't want to research the facts. They information given to them as many just don't want to think and hear other points of view.

This leads to intolerance of others and eventually to hate. Follow history and you will see the truth but you have to do some research.

[kres24GT]

The radio allows a single communicator to talk and control everything. Facts cannot be checked. The radio announcer can hang up on anyone and say pretty much any thing. Believing in the announcer requires blind faith.

Any fact that I read on the Internet can be verified within minutes. Any message posted on a blog can be countered or followed up with supporting documents. If you make false statements on a blog someone will link to the truth.

Listen to the statements being made on the radio. They're mostly 3 word slogans that mean nothing but sound good. They have no basis in reality. "Cut and run", "War on terror", "Axis of evil", "Tax and spend".

The followers of Dubya don't ask questions and don't want to research the facts. They information given to them as many just don't want to think and hear other points of view.

This leads to intolerance of others and eventually to hate. Follow history and you will see the truth but you have to do some research.

I hate defending the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity, so I am going to leave this thread. Some of your guys views on conservative talk radio are funny though.

LMAO @ "facts" in politics

[stefan segal]

I hate defending the likes of Limbaugh and Hannity, so I am going to leave this thread. Some of your guys views on conservative talk radio are funny though.

LMAO @ "facts" in politics

Kres...This is a cheap shot...to throw rocks then run back into the cellar.

If you have an opinion that is beyond the free speach supposedly the right of every citizen, and add to it those inequities siezed by those who own the source, then give it up...demonstrate the facts that sway your opinion this way or that...this is a debate site, here for those who wish to express and exchange thier views...not sling shit and run.

Stefan

[kres24GT]

Kres...This is a cheap shot...to throw rocks then run back into the cellar.

If you have an opinion that is beyond the free speach supposedly the right of every citizen, and add to it those inequities siezed by those who own the source, then give it up...demonstrate the facts that sway your opinion this way or that...this is a debate site, here for those who wish to express and exchange thier views...not sling shit and run.

Stefan

I am not big fans of many of Hannity's and Limbaugh's and even agree with what some here are saying. Hannity's "great American" things is laughable. But when you get into the rhetoric of "hate radio" and that sort of nonsense I lose interest.


If anyone wants to talk about the fairness doctrine or something similar with out resorting to things like "hate radio? then I am down. If people just want to crap on talk radio, go ahead, but I will excuse myself.

[stefan segal]

Kres...I believe those types of radio hosts and commontators like ann coulter, are really in need of a public debate to prove thier POV for all to watch.

I believe there are obvious areas beyond what could be considered real and true, and those who trade beyond those parameters of truth, have every right to do so, but do not have the right for pushing massive infusions of untruth into the population without first identifying the untruths as untrue.

I believe there are laws governing mass public desemination of "news" and prescriptions of response...this behavior is illegal.

I also believe there is or was a law demanding equal time for opposing views under such public deliveries.

If that law has been undercut or trashed outright, we should demand it be reinstituted and attentively prosecuited.

Does any of this run counter to your take on this subject?

Stefan

[kres24GT]

Kres...I believe those types of radio hosts and commontators like ann coulter, are really in need of a public debate to prove thier POV for all to watch.

I believe there are obvious areas beyond what could be considered real and true, and those who trade beyond those parameters of truth, have every right to do so, but do not have the right for pushing massive infusions of untruth into the population without first identifying the untruths as untrue.

I believe there are laws governing mass public desemination of "news" and prescriptions of response...this behavior is illegal.

I also believe there is or was a law demanding equal time for opposing views under such public deliveries.

If that law has been undercut or trashed outright, we should demand it be reinstituted and attentively prosecuited.

Does any of this run counter to your take on this subject?

Stefan


The market should decide who listens to them and who doesn't. Simple as that. No, the behavior is not illegal. Also fair is a subjective term. Only the truly stupid would believe that something like the Fairness Doctrine could work as many want it to. Any issues has potentially infinite # of points of view. Simple people like yourself like to make everything two sided, but in reality it isn't. How do you enforce a radio station to give "equal" time to an infinite # of points of views? You can't.


Conservatives used to favor the Fairness doctrine when it benefited them, not liberals favor it for the same reasons. It's political nonsense. You don't like talk radio, don't listen, simple as that.

[Bill]

You seem like a pretty intelligent guy most of the time, then you post ridiculous demogoging rhetoric like this.

Likewise, with your rhetoric.

I call it like I see it. I have no trouble identifying repressed hate as the primary emotive force behind the popularity of so called "conservative" (like they were ever conservative, on their best day, hah) radio.

Just like in germany circa 1938.

[kres24GT]

Likewise, with your rhetoric.

I call it like I see it. I have no trouble identifying repressed hate as the primary emotive force behind the popularity of so called "conservative" (like they were ever conservative, on their best day, hah) radio.

Just like in germany circa 1938.


This kind of thing accomplishes nothing. "Hate speech" is just like the cons saying everyone who disagrees with the hates America. It's extreme rhetoric.

[kres24GT]

Anyway, views on conservative talk radio aside, the Fairness Doctrine is nothing more than another way for the politicians to control the information. Anyone who truly believes its about making things "fair" is deluding themselves.

[KevinG]

The recent silliness regarding Inofe, Clinton, Boxer, etc. I won't get into that issue as it appears Inofe is now tucking in his tail and saying the incident happened three years ago...whatever.

The thing that they commented on how many people listen to Sean Hannity daily on the Radio (I believe they said 16 million). That kind of shocked me...why is it that conservatives have a lock on talk radio?

Is it just that Dems and Reps chose different avenues of communication? Dems are more internet driven while conservatives embrace radio? Not sure, but it seems kind of odd to me that conservatives seem to be so popular on the radio.

The factual answer is that liberals cannot thrive in an environment where other people's opinions are not only able to be voiced, but actually given the time of day. In other words, they only thrive where accountability is barred; newspaper, television, etc.

When a liberal writes a story that aligns with their ideology, and includes opinions that may not be factually accurate, nobody is around to say so, to expose it, etc. When a talk show host says something on the air you're only a phone call a way from debating it. Liberals can't handle the debate because they generally don't deal in realistic or factual statements.

And to the individual who claimed that talk radio hosts just hang up on callers who have an opinion that doesn't serve their viewpoint, that is ludicrous. Anyone who has ever listened to conservative talk radio understands that the majority of the popularity comes from the debate between caller and host. The claim that they aren't accountable for their opinions and they just hang up on callers is instantly debunked by actual reality.

[kres24GT]

The factual answer is that liberals cannot thrive in an environment where other people's opinions are not only able to be voiced, but actually given the time of day. In other words, they only thrive where accountability is barred; newspaper, television, etc.

When a liberal writes a story that aligns with their ideology, and includes opinions that may not be factually accurate, nobody is around to say so, to expose it, etc. When a talk show host says something on the air you're only a phone call a way from debating it. Liberals can't handle the debate because they generally don't deal in realistic or factual statements.

And to the individual who claimed that talk radio hosts just hang up on callers who have an opinion that doesn't serve their viewpoint, that is ludicrous. Anyone who has ever listened to conservative talk radio understands that the majority of the popularity comes from the debate between caller and host. The claim that they aren't accountable for their opinions and they just hang up on callers is instantly debunked by actual reality.



All of this liberal vs. conservative nonsense is irrelevant. For this point, conservative talk show hosts frequently hang up on liberal callers because they disagree. But it doesn't matter.

The Fairness doctrine is about controlling media and information, not about fairness. It should be abolished so that it can never be re-instituted.

[KevinG]

All of this liberal vs. conservative nonsense is irrelevant. For this point, conservative talk show hosts frequently hang up on liberal callers because they disagree. But it doesn't matter.

The Fairness doctrine is about controlling media and information, not about fairness. It should be abolished so that it can never be re-instituted.

They only hang up on irrational liberal callers. I listen to talk radio all the time--it's built around the debate.

[kres24GT]

They only hang up on irrational liberal callers. I listen to talk radio all the time--it's built around the debate.


I listen to it frequently as well. Mostly to Boortz and Hannity. Both hang up on callers. Yes sometimes it is warranted, other times though it's not.



Either way it is irrelevant. If people don't want to listen to conservative talk radio, don't. There are plenty of other options.