News Corp. buying NBC? Don't count on it

A little rumor floated by mainstream news organizations yesterday certainly scared the crap out of quite a few people. Yes, something even scarier than Orly Taitz without a wig.

In the latest curveball thrown in the NBC Universal sale negotiations, a couple new potential suitors were floated about. Namely Liberty Media, which seems to want to buy a stake in everything, and News Corp. Yes, that News Corp. The owners of the New York Post, the Wall Street Journal and the FOX properties. Including FOX 'News'.

So, what's the deal? Is Rupert Murdoch looking to acquire a competing movie studio? A rival broadcast network? A business news channel that people actually watch? Would he add more tits n' ass to "Law And Order"? Or, are they looking to squash once and for all MSNBC, that bastion of liberal subversion that competes with their right-wing propaganda organ that is FAUX 'News'? Or, are they just making a little noise, and using this opportunity to peek inside a rival?

Right-wingers are salivating over this one. Syndicated radio talker Mark Levin dreams of MSNBC becoming a branch of FAUX News. 

So, where does the "Australian Mafia" fit into the equation? Well, the deal is far from done, and News Corp. and Liberty Media have surfaced as possible bidders for NBC. Granted, neither company has approached GE.

And the thought of News Corp. buying a media conglomerate like NBC is beyond laughable.

First and foremost, I wouldn't bet on News Corp. being a serious suitor. As it stands now, it appears that Comcast looks to have the upper hand, though there is still quite a bit of wrangling to do before General Electric sells 51% of their 80% stake (Vivendi owns the other 20%). As part of a potential deal, GE could eventually sell their remaining stake to Comcast over the next three years.

So, let's say Murdoch were to buy NBC, he'd have to run through a major government gauntlet. Let's start with the Federal Trade Commission. It is headed by four commissioners, all appointed by President Obama. And we all know what the Obama White House thinks of FOX, right? So, getting through the Obama FTC with a deal to buy a major television network, film studio, station owner and media conglomerate is most certain to raise eyebrows. If you thought getting that Dow Jones purchase through the Bush FTC was a pain in the ass, hoo boy! You ain't seen nothing yet! And that was during the Bush Administration, which was always happy to do favors for them. FAUX hasn't done itself any favors with the current administration. Yesterday, one of their hosts, Glenn Beck, compared their treatment by the White House to Jews during the Holocaust!

But let's suppose they get through that roadblock. Next, it's on to the Federal Communications Commission. It consists of five commissioners, three of them Democrats. And Chairman Julius Genachowski is  a firm backer of media diversity. Among the agency's current goals is the encouragement of competition, rather than consolidation. Considering that a purchase of one network by another would entail haggling over buying not only two broadcast network (NBC and Telemundo), but broadcast properties (i.e. affiliate stations). The likelihood of News Corp. owning four stations in the country's biggest media markets is not going to fly past Obama's FCC (the current maximum is two). Four network affiliates and two newspapers in New York? Yeah, right! Unlike the Clinton White House, Obama isn't stupid enough to cave on deregulation. He obviously knows how that backfired on Clinton.

So, let's say they get past the FTC and the FCC. Well, News Corp. would have to unload stations, as they did last year when they spun off a number of their network affiliates. But in the markets where they still own stations, they own two. One station airs FOX programming (like "24" and "American Idol") and the other is affiliated with their MyNetworkTV, which for this season 'downgraded' itself from 'network' status and started carrying rerun leftovers from other networks (and wrestling!). So, a FOX/NBC combo would have to unload stations in many cities, in what is a buyers' market for broadcast properties. They could ditch a poorly-rated MyNetworkTV outlet and lose their shirts, but in some cases, they'd also have to unload a Telemundo affiliate owned in the same market by NBC. Two low-rated stations in a market at the same time? Yeah, good luck with that. And that's if they could get it approved. And even still, News Corp. would only be part-owner of NBC. Is it really worth it?

Then, News Corp. would have come up with money. And after shooting their load on Dow Jones last year for the Wall Street Journal, and a very soft market for media advertising, they'd have to come up with part of the $30 billion or so it would take to buy NBC Universal. Not likely. But on the bright side, it could bankrupt Murdoch once and for all, and live will be better for all.

So, Keith Olbermann can relax. He probably won't have to work for Murdoch again. The new host of "Meet The Press" will not be Glenn Beck. "Law And Order" won't be resorting to bare tushy shots. And Rachel Maddow won't be forced to wash Sean Hannity's car. The News Corp. Death Star won't be swallowing this planet.

Essentially, Murdoch, often one to make a lot of noise while seemingly standing in the shadows, is just trying to scare the crap out of people.

Bigmouths strike again

From The Beatles to The Smiths (as evidenced by the title of this little entry). Yet's it's quite appropriate, coming a day after a Republican congressman treats an important and respectful presidential speech before a joint session like a Munich beer hall puscht circa 1918 (and they call us Nazis!), and another Republican congressman is stupid enough to talk about playing 'hanky spanky' with his mistress in front of a hot microphone. Gotta love right-wingers.

And you wonder why the hell I've been writing about the Beatles!

But that's not likely why you read this blog. So, in giving you what you want...

Mark Foley to do radio

Speaking of Republicans Behaving Badly, we welcome back Mark Foley, who was chased out of office by a scandal in which he sent raunchy instant messages to teenage boys serving as Congressional pages, is looking into new career opportunites. And what better place for sleazy concervatives than radio. And that's just what he's going to do. Foley is joining WSVU (960AM) in West Palm Beach for a regular talk show. The show started taping this week, and will begin airing regularly starting September 22 at 6P ET.WSVU GM Chet Tart said, "During these incredibly changing times, it's important that we hear the voice of a true Washington, D.C. insider." Nobody, however, has inquired further into what exactly Foley has been inside of, other than Congress.

CNN "Crossfire" comeback?

Not content with a whole daily lineup of pundits screaming at each other, CNN is looking even further. Now, they're looking into a revival of sorts of the old Crossfire show. Essentially, one featuring conservatives and liberals shouting at each other.

As Fishbowl L.A. stated, way to really break the mold, CNN.

Of note to readers here is one liberal who's name has been mentioned, notably Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks. Other possibilities on the left include Steve A. Smith of ESPN, and CNN contributors Roland Martin and Errol Louis.

Right-wingers could include radio personalities Roe Conn from Chicago, Joe Watkins from Philadelphia and Steve Malzberg from New Jersey.

In other words, not much of a departure from CNN's regular fare. Just more pundits.

Hartmann, Medved to spar on health care

In what promises to be a much tamer and perhaps more enlightening debate, Thom Hartmann and conservative radio talker Michael Medved are looking to stage a debate on health care in "9-1-1 on Healthcare: The Great Healthcare Debate" tomorrow. The debate will air on Medved's syndicated show, WCPT in Chicago and on other stations to be announced. The show will air Friday (9/11) at 5P ET.

The two hosts previously squared off in March at another Chicago event, and have appeared on each other's shows in the past.Salem Radio Network VP/News & Talk Programming Tom Tradup says that "In true debate fashion, both sides negotiated everything down to the bumper music and alternating top billing for each segment. It’s going to be fun, informative and a fair-and-balanced look at 2009’s hottest issue as only Medved and Hartmann could deliver it."

Dark side of the loon?

Hey, did you hear the one about Glenn Beck raping and murduring a girl back in 1990?

Well, so goes the latest meme crawling around the web. It claims that the FOX 'News' squawker has a very dark and sordid past. Very dark and sordid. Allegedly, he committed rape and murder.

And one site is looking to expose the high-strung wingnut screamer. The accusing site even claims to have evidence, including a police report. And if all the crazy stuff Beck spews is true, then perhaps this is as well. After all, the information is presented in the same ways Beck frequently uses to target his adversaries and subsequently lose his advertisers.

Hey, I'm just sayin'.

Nobody really knows whether Beck raped and murdered that young girl back in 1990, but the meme seems to have the fingerprints of a group of internet pranksters all over it. The website Mediaite suspects it's all the work of a group with the likely moniker 'Anonymous'. They're a powerful clique connected with hacker/prankster site 4chan, and have created elaborate stunts like attacks on the Church of Scientology and the flooding of YouTube with porn clips. Some of their stunts were beyond the pale (such as an attack on a support forum run by the Epilepsy Foundation of America). But hey, they did harass white supremacist shortwave radio talker Hal Turner and they launched online support efforts for Iranians to contest the questionable presidential election there earlier this summer, so they,'re not all bad. And they even designed the cool Beck/Joker pic shown at the top.

But, what if it is all real (sarcasm alert), and the meme is being spread by people aware of Beck's grim past? Needless to say, this meme is an interesting example of how fast bullshit travels across the tubes in the internet era. If the Beck rumors are indeed false, doesn't that cast doubt on the various falsities spread by right-wingers over the years? Can we finally stop talking about the Swift Boat vets, President Obama's birth certificate, 'death panels', the pending American nazi/socialist revolution and the Clinton Body Count? After all, if they claim without a doubt that the Beck rumor is a lie, what does that say about the fertilizer they spread? After all, if he can launch a smear campaign against the President, calling him a racist and accusing him of hating white people (and we all know the flack that Kanye West got when he said something similar about our previous president), well...

Regardless of where it came from, the meme has spread like wildfire, as the just-launched website has accumulated thousands of page views. The perpetrators have launched a massive viral campaign, using sites like Fark, Yahoo! Answers, Reddit, Twitter, and others. All that's left is for Beck to deny it.

You see, in Beck's world, the burden of proof lies with the accused, rather than the accuser. It's a really old trick used in campaigns (Lyndon Johnson, after seeking to spread one wild rumor, said something to the effect of "I wanna see the sonuvabitch deny it!"). The wingnuts live and die by this dirty trick, using it for bullshit accusations such as the Swift Vets smears on John Kerry and the recent birther movement that threw the legitimacy of Barack Obama's birth certificate into doubt. Glenn Beck uses this trick more than others, and drools whenever others do it. So, if he thrives on playing this kind of game, shouldn't it be up to Beck to prove that he didn't rape and murder a young girl back in 1990? And should we really sympathize with him, as if he's the 'wrong man' in an old Hitchcock flick?

Mediaite says:

People will ask the question and not answer it, insisting that Beck “prove that he didn’t;” supposedly, this parallels Beck’s argumentative style. The bottom of glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.com reads, “Notice: This site is parody/satire. We assume Glenn Beck did not rape and murder a young girl in 1990, although we haven’t yet seen proof that he didn’t. But we think Glenn Beck definitely uses tactics like this to spread lies and misinformation.” Really, though? It all comes across as a malicious, masterfully executed prank whose pranksters were grasping for a higher political justification.

As one poster on Fark puts it:

FootInMouthDisease: ...Instead of actually refuting the facts. I know. Not one person has come in here with a link to Glenn Beck's murder record to prove that not one of them involved a rape and a girl in 1990. For real. What is he hiding? You know... If it weren't such a big deal, you think he would just go on tv and clear the air. Just show us all the long forms, seriously, is it that hard, cchris_39? you could just lay it all to rest, with the official, undoctored, signed, long-form investigation certificates. Or that, if it were so obvious that glenn beck raped and killed a girl in 1990, weren't true surely there would be some reputable source we could cite?

(snip)

Not to add to the rumor mongering, but have no knowledge of any plausible alibi Glenn Beck has that would prove he didn't rape and murder that girl in 1990. Lexis Nexis provides 0 articles that state Glenn Beck didn't rape and murder a girl for the entire year of 1990. Some say Glenn Beck has spent possibly THREE BILLION DOLLARS to cover up the fact that he raped and murdered a girl in 1990. Why won't Glenn Beck release her death certificate? WHERE GLENN WHERE HEY. The State of Hawaii issued a Certificate of Live Death. That's all the evidence you need. And they said that after glenn beck raped every orifice, he ate her dead body with arugula and spicy mustard in 1990.

So, is this all fair game? Did Beck really do what they claim he did back in 1990? True or not true, shouldn't Beck come out and deny it all? Granted, it's a rather tasteless prank (if that's what it is). Accusations of rape and murder are kinda pushing it a bit. But it also proves the old saying, what comes around goes around. Beck and his ilk make millions of dollars to spout lies, insults, racist and xenophobic taunts and various other inanities across alleged mainstream news media outlets. Live by the sword, die by it. In other words, if you get in bed with the devil, you'd better be ready to put out. Beck has gotten in bed with the devil, using vicious means to attack his so-called enemies, then cowardly claiming it's all entertainment. However, considering Beck is everything short of clinically insane, I wonder just how many people really take this bloated coke-fueled sack of elephant shit seriously.

Regardless of whether the rumors are true or not, if Beck's bottom line is hurt by accusations such as these, I have no sympathy. It's the price one pays for collecting huge paychecks for being an insufferable asshole. That's life.

Now, do I believe that Glenn Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990? That's for you to decide. As far as I'm concerned, though, that coke-snortin' jerkoff can go cheney himself.

Hey, did you hear the one about Lou Dobbs and his Mexican love child?

I'm retiring

Well, it's been a long, fun stretch, but now's the time to hang up my jock. I have decided to retire from this thing.

But wait! Brett Favre's back? Do tell! Well, that settles it - I'm back!

Hey, if an over-the-hill primadonna quarterback can suddenly come out of a three week retirement (how many has that been so far?) for buttloads of money and a guaranteed starting job with his biggest nemesis, then why not little 'ol me? Therefore, this entry is dedicated to the Master Indecider, the one and only Brett Favre, who is doing his damned finest to screw up whatever legacy he still has. Only things left are steroids, dog fighting, knifing his wife and gambling on his own games. The only ones screwing up more are the Minnesota Vikings, for pursuing this whole Brett Favre nonsense.

Now, with that out of the way...

Hartmann returning to Air America?

Well, not exactly.

But there is a rumor, and one he mentioned on his show last week. Word has it that he will soon be heard (if not already) on WZAA (1050AM), the station Air America operates in Washington, DC. Likely, it will be on delay status, as the station currently shows nothing on their schedule for their late-night hours. We shall see...

Obama hits the airwaves

Since taking office seven months ago, President Barack Obama has been perhaps the most visible commander-in-chief we've ever had. Seems like he's been everywhere, whether it be in television interviews, webcasts, televised prime time press conferences, on the road and wherever else. And he's got a few radio appearances coming up, as he continues to counter all the right-wing lies about his proposals for health care reform. And what better place to start than where all the bullshit is coming from - right-wing radio.

Dial Global's Michael Smerconish will interview the president Thursday August 20 (that's tomorrow, folks!) directly from the White House. The show will show live noon-3P ET, and the 20-minute Obama interview will air at 1:10P ET, the first radio interview on the grounds of the White House in the Obama Administration.

"I am honored to be the first radio broadcaster to interview the President live from the White House," said Smerconish, who, incidentally supported Obama in last November's election. "My listeners have suggested many pointed questions that I look forward to raising with dignity and respect."

But first, Obama will hit the webcast waves, with an online webcast special featuring a discussion by the religious community of the his administration's health care proposals.

The President will appear on "40 Minutes For Health Reform,' appearing on Blog Talk Radio this afternoon at 5P ET. And no, Obama will not take calls on the show, but a White House spokesperson will be on hand to answer questions submitted by the public.

Okay, I'm retiring again

I hate training camp. I'm too old to sleep in a college dorm. Unless she's cute.

No changes for WCPT

The FCC has rejected a petition from Newsweb, owner of WCPT (820AM) in Chicago. The petition was for reconsideration of the 2005 denial of a proposed dual community of license change for the station, currently licensed to Crystal Lake, IL and another station they own, located in the northwest Indiana suburbs of Chicago.

Newsweb had applied to move WCPT's city of license to Addison, IL, which would enable them to co-locate the stations' studios. The FCC, however, decided that the benefits to such a move did not outweigh the loss of local service to the former communities of license.

Keep in mind, none of this behind-the-scenes stuff has anything to do with what they're currently putting out on the air. It's just that news is slow, and I needed something to put here.

I'm back

Okay, I guess I'll stick around, so long as I don't have to go to training camp. Let me just hop right in and start.

Wendell filling in for Rhodes

KTLK/Los Angeles talker Johnny Wendell will be filling in for the vacationing Randi Rhodes on her syndicated show today (Wednesday) and tomorrow. Just so you won't wonder what happened to Randi.

Time to hang it up again

I do have a concern with that shoulder injury that makes it hard to type all this goodness that you read here. I'm goin' back to Mississippi to ride tractors. But first...

Real-life goodbyes

Two notable media figures have ventured off to the Great Beyond recently. First, we say goodbye to a television news legend, Don Hewitt, who passed away today at the age of 86:

Hewitt was best known as the creator of the venerable "60 Minutes" in 1968, and oversaw the show until 2004. His career in journalism spanned over 60 years, virtually all of it at CBS. As a young producer/director assisting at the birth of television news, it was usually Hewitt behind the scenes directing legendary CBS News reporters like Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite, using a playbook he had to write himself. He played an integral role in all of CBS News' coverage of major news events from the late 1940s through the 1960s, putting him in the middle of some of history's biggest events, including one of politics’ seminal moments: the first televised presidential debate in 1960.

And we also bid farewell to a less distinguished media personality, conservative commentator and nasty curmudgeon Robert Novak, who died yesterday at the age of 157. But do vampires ever really die?


Okay, I wanna come back


But only if you fork over $12 million. I can't have the money? Well, I'll stick around anyway. I'm back.

CNN moves away from booking radio talkers

Following reports from TVNewser, and a confirmation from a CNN spokesperson, Jon Klein, the president of the network's U.S. division, has asked his show producers to avoid booking talk radio hosts. "Complex issues require world class reporting," Klein is quoted as saying, adding that talk radio hosts too often add to the noise, and that what they say is "all too predictable."

So, does this finally mean they're getting rid of Lou Dobbs? Ehh, doubtful.

But what this does mean is that they will cut down on the clutter and screaming a bit. And that means potentially less face time to the likes of Bill Bennett, Michael Medved and others. However, that would likely apply to people like Stephanie Miller, so take the good with the bad.

Radio-Info's Tom Taylor, in his daily newsletter, thinks "it doesn't necessarily sound like a 'ban', as some early reports had it, but more like a caution to the bookers to avoid the same old radio faces. Problem is – those familiar folks make pretty good guests, especially when breaking news happens. They may indeed be predictable in terms of their take on current events. But their training in doing a daily radio show with no script in front of them and no producer talking in their earpiece makes them naturals for TV. I’m betting that Jon Klein’s recommendation will be adhered to for a while – and then old habits will reassert themselves and old phone numbers will be dialed again."

Nonetheless, it is nice to see a 'news' network move away from the back-and-forth screaming. Let's hope at least they raise the caliber of guests, rather than encourage shouting and bloviating matches.

Come on feel the noise

The act of picking apart all the crazy stuff that comes out of the mouths of right-wing pundits is a process akin to playing Whack-a-Mole. It requires a large, attentive staff and the job never gets done. That's why I typically shy away from that sort of thing. And quite frankly, groups like Media Matters for America do the job way better than this one man band possibly could.

The right-wing noise machine has gotten even louder, and even more obnoxious, since President Obama arrived at the White House. And even more recently, they have thrown most of their eggs into one basket, hoping that toppling the president on his biggest pet issue, health care reform, will somehow break him. Or, it will be enough rope for them to hang themselves with.

Media Matters has a nice piece up that pretty much sums up some of the things the most noteworthy of wingnut squawkers are yapping about. And apparently, the summer heat must be making them all crazy. Merely a few years after they created their own 'mockrage' over lefties who compared the previous president to Adolf Hitler and the Nazis (remember that MoveOn.org web ad contest back in '04?), well, wouldn't you know it? They're doing it now, Godwin's Law be damned! One well-known radio host even has fantasies of killing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi with poison. And of course, they're all playing the victim, hoping that their legion of lemmings will actually believe that the White House is the one that's attacking... them, even as they've been mobilizing naive fans to disrupt town halls with distorted facts, obnoxious behavior and even violent behavior. Wait! Isn't that what Hitler did when he started?

We start this merry adventure with the always-crazy Glenn Beck. Now, over the past week or so, noisemaking bloggers have been making hay about some comments made by liberal talker Mike Malloy. Malloy, never one to mince words, fantasized about Beck offing himself, with the wish of seeing it posted on YouTube (though I suspect he'll go out nonviolently via an overdose or complete mental breakdown). Of course, the Noise Machine went nuts, claiming that us lefties were all a bunch of hatemongers and terrorists. Oh, boo hoo! Meanwhile, Beck himself is not as saintly as they'd like to believe.

From Media Matters:

Then on Thursday, he poisoned the speaker of the House. Not literally, of course -- just in effigy. On live television. What's the problem? Can't you liberals take a joke?

It was a perfect example of the game conservatives in the media are playing: pouring gasoline on the fire, and then, once they are criticized, saying that they were only kidding. But what does Beck expect his viewers to take away from his broadcasts? After a week of increasingly violent protests at town halls around the country, including one such event at which protesters reportedly mentioned Beck by name when explaining what inspired them, he cannot seriously contend that his rhetoric isn't having an impact, isn't stirring up the rage and confusion that is defining opposition to Democratic reforms. How many times can Beck portray Obama as a traitor who is destroying our national sovereignty, or compare the president's health care proposals to those of the Nazis, before the anger spills over? He calls for calm, and then describes the Obama-led "brownshirts" who are silencing dissent and the "enemies list" the White House is compiling of those who dare to voice their opinions. Meanwhile, it is the Democrats, we are told, who are the irresponsible ones. It is Democrats who are using the language of "pure hate," as Frank Luntz told Beck, to describe the brave patriots who are shouting down members of Congress in defense of liberty. Why are they doing it? Beck's answer? They want to create "more problems" so "they can use the iron fist and crush people." In the meantime, Beck urged his supporters to continue pressuring their members of Congress, even if they have to "hold a meeting ... in front of their house."

Cocaine's a helluva drug, huh Glenn?

Next, Beck's partner in slime, Rush Limbaugh, has evidently forgotten Godwin's Law (an unofficial screed that claims that anyone who brings up Adolf Hitler or Nazis in an argument automatically loses - I would personally add Josef Stalin to that rule myself). Lately, he's had no shame in comparing the Obama Administration and the Democratically-controlled Congress to the Third Reich. All because of... ready for this? Health care reform. Yeah, pretty stupid, right?

With the precision the right-wing echo chamber provides on a daily basis, Rush reiterated his heartfelt belief that if Democrats have their way, senior citizens -- the very same group that benefits exclusively from that evil government-run program known as Medicare -- will spend their last days on a "Statist Farm," where they will be unable to see a doctor and suffer at the hands of heartless bureaucrats whose job it will be to "make sure certain people die." On the other hand, if you were a loyal Obama supporter, you know, like an HIV patient, you might get special treatment. Limbaugh also mocked the voice of Kathleen Sebelius (he sure hates it when women talk) and described her work promoting reform as a "campaign of pure fraud and deceit." And he had a warning for some of the crooks in D.C.: "You Blue Dogs are about to see your last days if you vote for this bill." At least he's giving them one more chance to get it right.

(snip)

"[T]he Obama health care logo is damn close to a Nazi swastika logo," he said on air. He went on to explain "the similarities between the Democrat Party of today and the Nazi Party in Germany." Key among them: "Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, also ruled by dictate." On Friday, he did it again, but blamed Nancy Pelosi for "starting it" because she had pointed out that one conservative protester had made a sign featuring a swastika. There was plenty of photographic evidence to back her up, but Limbaugh still called her "deranged."

...Limbaugh explained that Obama's "brownshirts" were coming, sure to make use of the "snitch website" he had set up. He warned of "union thugs" who had "roughed up" a protester -- "Mussolini-type stuff." He accused a St. Louis SEIU local of violence, and then gave out the office's address.Uhh, yeah.

Finally, if we needed further proof that syndicated squawker and CNN host Lou Dobbs has lost what was left of his xenophobic mind, he has essentially dumped the whole "Mr. Independent" facade he's been shucking and jiving us with over the years and is now a hardcore right-wing Obama hater. Dobbs is still smarting over the much-deserved criticism from the left over the whole ridiculous Obama birth certificate conspiracy theory (nevermind that Obama has been throroughly vetted by the FBI and the Secret Service prior to running for the presidency). And because of all that, Crybaby Lou has unleashed the fangs and has now turned into Bill O'Reilly:

It was actually a banner week for Lou. In fact, he officially abandoned his stance as "Mr. Independent," using his radio show to inform Obama (a regular listener, to be sure) that he was "moving from being an independent, sir, to being absolutely opposed to ... any policy you can conceive of!" Dobbs celebrated his newfound opposition by spreading misinformation on health care reform (it's socialism, by the way, because Obama's a socialist), hosting a Michelle Malkin lovefest, defending Limbaugh, raising the specter of incipient fascism, and repeatedly attacking Keith Olbermann, whom he described as a "cretin" and a "psycho" who was "psychologically scarred" from beatings by "girls" that he supposedly suffered as a child. No wonder, then, that Olbermann works at MSNBC, the network Dobbs called a "coven of thugs."

And not to be left behind by his fellow right-wing media celebrities, Dobbs offered support to a caller who threatened to "brawl" with health care reform advocates at a town hall, encouraging others like him to make their "voice heard."

But whatever you do, don't say "birther" on his show.

So, there ya go. Love 'em or hate 'em, Media Matters does a damn good job keeping up with this nonsense, and they're nice to have around in times like this. Ironic that the right-wing nut jobs they hold accountable are so arrogant and overzealous that they would gang up to torpedo something like health care reform, which is designed to protect the American people from the greedy tactics of Big Medicine (did ya hear that United Health posted a %150 boost in profits over the past year?), all because they want to stick it to President Obama. Hey, isn't that what they accused us all of doing during the Bush regime?

But with Republican favorable ratings further circling the porcelain bowl, does the mass populace really give a shit what multi-millionaire disc jockeys like Beck, Limbaugh and Dobbs think about anything? They're really just preaching to their own misinformed choirs, feeding them endless helpings of bullshit and hoping that, if repeated enough, it will actually be mistaken for truth. However, after surviving eight years of George W. Bush, and a Democratic mandate last November, it's likely that Americans are tired of all the bullshit and conservative crybaby antics, and are just looking for real change.

What Obama himself has to realize, particularly given his past experience as a community organizer, is that he wields far greater power than a motley gang of media whiners. In the current issue of Rolling Stone, in a roundtable discussion involving columnist Paul Krugman, former political advisor David Gergen (hands down the smartest guy at CNN) and documentarian Michael Moore, they all claim that Obama should be doing more to tap into his massive grassroots organization to bypass the right-wing noise machine. Wisely, Obama has even been hinting at using the Democratic power in D.C. to push through health care bills as a last resort, with or without Republican involvement. Given that Obama has more power to get things done than Bill Clinton ever did, this would be a very smart move.

America spoke up last November, and that's that. And the fact that the wingnut militia has fallen into the role that they berated the left for during much of this decade is hypocrisy at its finest.

The working vacation (can't afford the ranch)

Yeah, I know you're hating me right about now. I admit it, I've been slacking. Hey, like I said last week, it's summertime. Hey, our last President used to take the whole month of August off, and the only thing he missed was a memo claiming that terrorists were looking to hijack passenger jets and fly them into buildings. That's not all bad, is it?

Truth is, the real world has been keeping me busy. I find myself in the interesting position of looking for a new job (as the current one is going absolutely nowhere but backward). So, I've been pounding the pavement (and the web - neat how I can save the gas and just spread my resume with a few moves of the mouse). Should have something happening by next week. Wish me luck. Hopefully the economy will cooperate.

But you've been screaming for it, so here I am, back from the ranch and my 'working vacation'.

Here's the happs:

Maron keeping busy

Air America's "Break Room Live" webcast may have been cancelled, but co-host Marc Maron isn't picking at his wounds. As always, his standup comedy career is keeping him busy. In addition, fans will be happy to know that he will launch his own podcast in the near future.

Here's what he says in his most recent e-newsletter:

Thanks for the outpouring of email and support after the third firing from Air America. I knew it was coming. I was grateful for the gig. We did a lot of great stuff in the Breakroom. You can still see it all for as long as they keep the site up. www.breakroomlive.com.

I'm sad they canceled the internet show. As hard as it was to be part of Air America's long slow spiral into irrelevance after the show cancellation I offered to do a radio show and they wouldn't have it. The place had such promise and vision once. I really thought it might be coming back. I guess we'll see. I wish them the best of luck.

Things are much better out here in the world of real show biz. I feel lighter, more free and fucking funnier. These feelings should last right up until the money runs out. Then I'll get really REALLY fucking funny. Just got back from Montreal Just for Laughs Comedy Festival. It was great.

I'm in talks with a producer to run Scorching the Earth Off Broadway for an extended run. The show is tight now and packs punch to the soul.

Soon I will have a podcast up on a regular basis. I am putting together the ideas and figuring out the best way to do it so stay tuned for that.

Jacksonville libtalk shuffles... again

Keeping up with Radio Free Jacksonville and their endless frequency dances is akin to the U.S. government trying to track the movements of Osama Bin Laden. It can be quite confusing. Or maybe I'm just not looking hard enough.

Nonetheless, Andy Johnson has done some frequency shuffling once again. As it stands now, Johnson's liberal talk programming can now be found on WJSJ (105.3FM), minus the leased-time sports programming, which will continue airing on WJXL (1010XL) and now on WFJO, which formerly carried Johnson's programming, north of Jacksonville.

Radio Free Jacksonville also formerly simulcast on WSJF in St. Augustine Beach and WHJX Baldwin.

WZAA to carry the Ravens

Air America's Washington, DC outlet WZAA (1050AM) has inked a deal with the Baltimore Ravens to be the exclusive D.C. affiliate for the team's broadcasts.

"I’m thrilled to enter into this partnership with one of the area’s most successful sports franchises. This is a terrific opportunity to reach Ravens’ fans in the D.C. area,” said Marty Sheehan, WZAA station manager. “To be able to partner with one of the premiere brands in the NFL is exciting for our listeners, advertisers and talent.”

Granted, D.C. is not the Raven's home turf. And the local Redskins pretty much rule the roost there (owner Dan Snyder is the owner of the former progressive talker in town, WWRC, and airs his team via his local stations). But with Baltimore so close, there are no doubt a few Ravens fans in the area.

Rose to be simulcast on radio

If you're a radio listener seeking out some newsy non-wingnut fare, you now have another option. Bloomberg Radio will air the audio of Charlie Rose's nightly PBS interview show as part of a new multi-platform deal between the network and the show. Bloomberg Television has acquired the rights to air the show in a "next-day international edition" with additional material the day following its initial airing on PBS, and Bloomberg Radio will also air the audio portion of the show weeknights. The deal also includes web and mobile aspects. The show is produced at PBS affiliate WNET-TV in New York.

"For the past 18 years, our program has been dedicated to the idea of good conversation across the spectrum of human curiosity. We now make it a true global conversation. Along the way, Thirteen/WNET, PBS, Charlierose.com, Bloomberg, supportive underwriters and a dedicated staff have enabled us to reach for a true global dialogue that defines who we are and where we are. This new partnership with Bloomberg Television is a unique and powerful opportunity to introduce to a new audience the ideas, actions and people that shape our destiny. I could not be more appreciative and excited," said Rose.

"Charlie Rose is a rare fellow in the television business. He is a remarkable interviewer and tremendous journalist, and his show is 'a must see' for thought leaders and the most influential audience in the U.S.," said Bloomberg CEO of Multimedia Andy Lack. "Now Charlie's nightly program is destined to become a worldwide brand."

Again, it's not a liberal show by any means, but if you like solid interviews and thoughtful conversation, Rose is a good bet.

The Foxification of the Wall Street Journal and the commerical radio cash grab

Yeah, it's rough out there in radioland.

Radio-advertising revenue is down 9% from last year and doesn't look any better for the rest of the year. Things are so difficult that even commercial radio stations are doing the public radio thing - asking for money directly from listeners, according to an article in the Wall Street Journal.

And it wouldn't have that right amount of News Corp./WSJ right-wing sheen without a ceremonial first dig at Air America Media. The liberal lightning rod got first mention in this little article about it's proposal to beef up it's membership program. In this proposed new membership program, currently in planning stages, top donors could possibly access to Air America talent and tickets to special events. Lionel could also come to your house and wash your car. Okay, just kidding about that last one.

The Journal sez:

Air America, formerly radio home to comedian and disputed Minnesota Senate-contest winner Al Franken, says it is weighing a fee-based membership program, even though it is on the path to profitability. Charlie Kireker, a Vermont venture capitalist, now heads the company’s board, former Clear Channel Communications Inc. executives are running the business, and fresh programming like a show from Montel Williams is filling out its roster. “Air America has a very passionate audience,” says Chief Executive Bennett Zier. “They want to get more involved.” Mr. Zier says the company would never represent itself as a nonprofit.

Now, Air America's mention (and front and center at that!) in the article is a bit misleading. Air America's new membership programming doesn't sound all that different than similar programs offered by conservojocks like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and others, except that it would likely be much cheaper. Does the Wall Street Journal think those guys are begging their listeners for cash? The article makes it seem as if Air America is gunning after NPR, which doesn't appear to be the case.

Most of the article uses various independent radio stations that are soliciting donations directly from listeners, without offering tangible goodies. Now, there's nothing really wrong with that. Mom-and-pop broadcasters are really hurting right now. If the listeners are willing to support them, then more power to 'em. Radio is in quite a slump right now.

But I wonder about the WSJ's motives in writing this article. Perhaps they'll be going the begging route soon?

... and the rest

A little cleanup from the holiday weekend...

Musical chairs

Nicole Sandler is back for another week of noon-3P fill-ins on Air Ameirca. This is the slot vacated by Thom Hartmann last month.

Actress Deidre Hall will be guest-hosting Air America’s "Hollywood CLOUT!" this week. The program airs weeknights at 9P ET.

And veteran Denver talker Erin Hart will fill in for morning host Jay Marvin through Wednesday.

Talk shakeup in Twin Cities

The current meme about the addition of a pair of left-leaning talkers on venerable KSTP (1500AM) in Minneapolis/St. Paul isn't all that big of a deal. KSTP has had a rather long history of mixing it up, rather than take a hard partisan direction.

Last week, the station introduced a new show from Shawn Prebil and Chris Murphy to the midday lineup, to replace conservative duo Bob Davis and Dave Thompson. The show will air from 9A to 1P weekdays.

Murphy and Prebil were last at WTDY (1670AM) in Madison, another station that has traditionally aired shows from various sides of the political spectrum.

As I mentioned, mixing it up is nothing new to KSTP. For many years, they aired left-leaning shows from the likes of Barbara Carlson and Turi Ryder around Rush Limbaugh, whom the station carried for many years until opting for a more locally-oriented approach. Patrick Reusse, a local sportswriter and KSTP morning host, is considered left-of-center. And many previous local hosts at the station were not politically-oriented. Ironically, the station's owners, the Hubbard family, are known for being very conservative politically.

KSTP program director Steve Konrad, addressing the apparent ideological shift, said, "We never, ever have had a political/ideological 'sense' for any program we have ever aired. ... Our only agenda is to offer the Twin Cities a place to talk about the things that are affecting those of us that live and work in the metro."

The station is currently the flagship for regionally syndicated conservative-leaning talker Joe Soucheray, who's show airs from 2-5:30P. And they are the flagship station for Minnesota Twins baseball.

The Twin Cities is a very competitive market for talk radio. KTLK-FM is a run-of-the-mill Clear Channel conservotalker, with mostly syndicated programming. The venerable WCCO is very middle-of-the-road, and rather apolitical. WWTC is the Salem wingnut station in the market. KTNF is all liberal talk. And WFMP-FM is light on politics and heavy on estrogen.

Where programming ideas come from

Finally, it appears the broadcast networks are constantly on the lookout for unique promotions. This one is for a colonoscopy. And it's from CBS. Yes, you read that right.

CBS News Radio is running spots for it on their radio newscasts, and most likely on television as well. Lucky(?) winners will be flown to New York City, stay at the "luxurious Loew’s Regency Hotel," and what is perhaps the clincher, a colonoscopy."

I'm sorry, there are too many jokes here to come up with just one. This one just writes itself.

You want details about entering this (mostly) glamorous New York City trip? Go to the CBS Cares website, here.

Shaking the can of nuts

Last week in Pittsburgh. a guy named Richard Poplawski came home after a night of drinking. Hung over the next morning, he got into an argument with his mother, whom he shared an apartment with. Poplawski got rough and mom called the cops. His reaction was to put on a bulletproof vest, grab a few of his guns, including an AK-47 assault rifle, and wait for the law to arrive. When two officers approached at the front door. Poplawski blasted both in the head, and gunned down a third. Three dead police officers. One horrific tragedy.

So, who was Richard Poplawski? Well, we discovered afterward that he's essentially a 22 year-old conspiracy nut. Overly paranoid, he lived in fear that the government was intent on busting in and taking away his guns. He kept spouting to his friends about "the Obama gun ban that's on the way" and that he "didn't like our rights being infringed upon." Poplawski also warned of the pending collapse of America. Sound familiar?

'Obama gun ban?' Where the hell would a guy get that kind of idea, particularly since the White House has no such plan in the works? Well, conspiracy-minded radio host Alex Jones, for one. Poplawski was evidently a fan of Jones, and was lso a big fan of conservative talk radio and FOX News as well. Sure, Jones is a pretty goofy cat. As tin-foil as one can get. Yet I'd hate to think anyone takes him seriously. Way too ridiculous. And the few people who do listen to him, visit his website and buy his videos and books are, well, a bit out there as well.

But Jones has gotten a little more 'mainstream' cred as of late. In the past few years, when he was barking about alleged '9/11 coverups' and the crimes of the Bush Administration, no way would an entity like FOX News Channel give him the time of day. During the Bush years, he buttered his bread by pandering to the left, as a vehement critic of the administration. Now that there's a new president, Jones is pounding the anti-Obama path, and in the eyes of FOX News, well, the enemy of their enemy is now their friend. The result? Jones has started popping up on the network's properties. And the rhetoric of one recently hired weekday FOX News host, Glen Beck, has started sounding eerily like Alex Jones.

Reactionary media personalities often prey on gullible people like Poplawski to make up their fan base. Anyone familiar with right-wing shock jocks knows that few of them would ever shy away from scaring the living crap out of you. Whether it be a loose cannon government, loss of gun rights or the wrath of God, they know the buttons to push to get the lemmings to pay heed. But is there a point when it goes a bit too far? Should the hosts of these gabfests assume any kind of responsibility when someone takes their caustic rants seriously enough to reach a drastic final solution?

Many bloggers and pundits on the left seem to think so. And with good reason. After all, some of the on-air dialogue from the wacky right has gotten quite hostile since the arrival of the Obama Administration. One talking head who's gotten a lot of flack as of late is Beck. Many have been noting his bizarre recent exploits, which even included random incidents of on-air crying. Seriously. In addition, Beck has been increasingly aligning himself with the Ruby Ridge crowd - the crazy tin-foil hat-wearing gun nuts (damn, if feels like the 1990's again). To believe guys like Beck, one would think President Obama is some kind of commie socialist dictator who wants to break into your house and empty your gun cabinet, then throw you into some sort of FEMA-run concentration camp. Beck has even invoked Hitler. And the host, a reformed(?) cokehead, must have had something else on his mind when he repeatedly used phrases like "heroin pusher" in describing what he'd like you to believe is a hostile anti-American government. Let's face it, anyone who believes this shit is probably crazy enough to do something very extreme. Including getting into a shootout with the cops.
Did I mention that Poplawski, among other online exploits, also posted a link to a video clip of Beck, the bit where he warned about the alleged FEMA concentration camps, on a neo-Nazi message board he hung around? Or that he even hosted his own (now defunct) right-wing conspiracy-minded internet talk show for a brief time?

Obviously, defensive right-wing pundits are not taking these accusations lying down. Noel Sheppard, perhaps the biggest whiner at the ultra right-wing Media Research Center (besides his boss, Brent Bozo himself), is back to playing the typical victim card. We're innocent! Blame the liberals! In an article posted the other day, Sheppard lashed out at a number of notable liberal bloggers, including Andrew Sullivan and Markos Moulitsas, for having the audacity to blame right-wing media for inspiring Poplawski's rampage. Not surprisingly, Sheppard's retort is rather flimsy. He expressed massive amounts of mock outrage and crocodile tears as he attempted in vain to conjure up a laundry list of other possible reasons as to why some guy in Pittsburgh would go on a shooting rampage. He's stressed out. He just got laid off. The dog urinated on the carpet. It couldn't possibly be the hostile, caustic rants of the extremist rabble-rousers he listens to. Don't blame the crazy AM radio or FOX News meat puppet for some guy going postal.

Interestingly enough, these tireless advocates of personal responsibility on the right would never even dare admit that the rhetoric of their comrades could result in dire consequences. What's the difference, really? Hey, I've been laid off from a few jobs in the past and my dog still pisses on the damn carpet, but that doesn't make me want to slap my mother around, grab the flak jacket, raid the arsenal and act paranoid while shooting at cops. On the few occasions when my dog relieves himself where he shouldn't, I reach for the Bissell and the Cesar Milan DVDs, not the nearest Kalashnikov. Sorry, but this latest wingnut spin is as weak as Dan White's twinkie defense.

But critics reading this may cite the Pittsburgh tragedy as an isolated event. The guy was obviously unhinged from the get-go, but did the voices that surrounded and influenced Poplawski help to push him over the edge? Was it just a fluke incident? There was another. Last July, a 58-year-old unemployed truck driver named Jim Adkisson opened fire with his sawed-off shotgun in a Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a service. He killed two people and wounded several others.

When investigators searched Adkisson's for evidence and a motive, they found copies of books from the likes of Michael Savage, Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly. They also found what was intended to be Adkisson's suicide note: a handwritten, four-page manifesto explaining his heinous actions:

...Liberals are evil, they embrace the tenets of Karl Marx, they're Marxist, socialist, communists...

...The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is kill them in the streets. Kill them where they gather. I'd like to encourage other like minded people to do what I've done. If life aint worth living anymore don't just Kill yourself. Do something for your Country before you go. Go Kill Liberals!

Nice, huh?

What about all those abortion clinic rampages we read about? Those perpetrators must have gotten the idea somewhere.

Ironically, these same right-wing pundits are typically the first to point the finger at rap music for inspiring misogyny, drug use and violence among young people. Or that playing Judas Priest records backward will inspire someone to commit suicide. Whereas they'll never admit that violent reactionary talk radio and TV inspires irrational behavior among their own weak-minded set. Let's face it, what is conservotalk radio but rap for uptight middle-aged white guys? It works both ways, folks. What's it gonna be?

But it's all just entertainment, they say in their defense. Hey, so is rap music. At least rap has a beat.

Speaking of hypocrisy, I also find it ironic that during the past eight years, these same critics who defend their seemingly anti-government crusaders would not suffer any kind of dissent whatsoever from our end. Criticizing President Bush was tantamount to treason. It was un-American. Love it or leave it, they said. Conform or suffer the consequences. Yet, Sheppard closed his ridiculous article with this rather interesting statement:

Those who disagree with the direction our nation is heading better be willing to stand up and fight or there will soon come a day when you don't recognize the land you live in.

Good sentiments, and perhaps the only thing in the article I agree with. But coming from someone who represents the Media Research Center, after all the nasty shit they flung our way during the past eight years, that's gold-plated irony right there, folks. Just ask Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks about what they did to her when she decided to 'stand up and fight.'

Suffice it to say, Noel Sheppard (and his lunatic boss) are ten pounds of horseshit in a five pound bag. Poplawski is a feeble-minded murderer. Alex Jones is a goofball with a small echo chamber. Glen Beck is fucking nuts. And the weak-minded lemmings who swallow every word 'entertainers' like Beck spout without even utilizing their critical and rational thought processes are morons.

This isn't really a freedom of speech issue. And as a fervent backer of the First Amendment, I certainly would not call for the muzzling of any voices in our media. Never have. If Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck, et al., are able to attract hoards of really crazy people to join them in drinking the tainted Flavor-Aid, well, more power to 'em. Let 'em have their echo chamber. And I, along with many others, also have the right to mock them. But just like when Orson Welles and the Mercury Theater got into hot water when they convinced radio listeners that aliens were actually attacking our planet, the modern-day equivalents should realize that there are people who take their word as gospel. And that some of these people are crazy enough to do something rather horrifying.

And before I get the inevitable hate mail, I will say that very few right-wing radio listeners are as unhinged as Poplawski, just as very few rap music fans take the music they listen to as a guide to life. But if one issues a call to arms, one must realize the consequences of someone who obeys.

When one shouts "fire" in a crowded movie house (or "movie" in a crowded firehouse), or when a boy cries "wolf," that warning can take on serious consequences. I'm not saying it's wrong to say it. But if one makes his or her living via highly aggressive rhetoric, preying on weak-minded folks to brainwash into listening to them, then they should accept some responsibility for the consequences of their actions. With great power comes great responsibility.

Perhaps these people should start engaging in constructive, positive debate rather than reckless rabble-rousing. But I guess that wouldn't get the ratings, huh?

MSNBC puts new show plans on hold

For the past few months, MSNBC has been toying with the idea of building on their prime time lineup, possibly by adding a new show in the 10P ET hour following "The Rachel Maddow Show", in place of a rerun of Keith Olbermann's highly-rated "Countdown". But don't look for it anytime soon.

MSNBC will continue airing "Countdown" twice each weeknight in prime time, with the possibility of adding a new show put on "indefinite hold." No reason was given, but it could be due to the rough economic climate affecting the media as a whole, and the fact that the Olbermann rerun actually pulls in a respectable audience, considering that rerunning it is a lot cheaper than starting something new.

MSNBC chief executive Phil Griffin suggested earlier this year he was on the lookout for a new show. He never named names, but the potential host most bandied about was Ed Schultz, who had done some fill-in work for the network on various shows. Fans of the online show "The Young Turks" and of Air America's Sam Seder have been lobbying to get MSNBC to consider them.

From Huffington Post:

Fox has 2.1 million viewers, on average, in the time slot in March. Cooper on CNN has 1.2 million and Olbermann has 902,000, according to Nielsen Media Research. On a handful of nights, a rerun of Olbermann has even beaten a live Cooper in the 25-to-54-year-old demographic that MSNBC watches most closely.

MSNBC may give up entirely on the idea of putting a new live show in that time slot, Griffin said.
"We're not going to mess with it until we see where it levels off," he said. "It places the burden, if we are going to put a show there, (for it) to be a big show because the repeat of `Countdown' is doing so well."

Speaking of MSNBC and cable news, CNN is poised to finish March third in the prime-time weeknight ratings behind Fox News Channel and MSNBC, according to the Associated Press. This would be the first time this has ever happened for the channel that pioneered the cable news genre back in the early 1980s.

Everything's Gone Green

I don't care if I'm Irish, I usually don't do much to celebrate St. Patrick's Day. To me, it's just a day where all you non-Irish people (who normally would be directing hostile and idiotic insults toward people like me about my ancestry and family's religious background) go out, get plowed at the local watering holes and make fools out of yourselves. And on top of it all - you tell everyone you're Irish! No wonder us 'real deals' get such a bad name!

Hey, I don't go 'round telling people I'm Italian on Columbus Day. Or tell people I'm Jewish on Yom Kippur. And I certainly don't claim to be African-American on MLK Day (I don't think they'd believe me). Leave us Irish folk alone!

So, not much to report, but I'll do it in green text, just to make it look festive. Drive safe!

The Air America mystery wheel lands on... Nicole Sandler

So far, there's an opening at Air America for what was once their highest-profile time slot. The network has, in typical fashion, refrained from naming a permanent replacement for the recently departed Thom Hartmann. David Bender filled in the past two weeks, and this week, you can hear Nicole Sandler, formerly of WINZ Miami, on the network from 12-3P.

Beyond that? Who knows?

I do, however, know of at least one experienced and respected radio host that's available for a gig...

Montel's first affiliate?

Speaking of Air America, the network may have found at least one new affiliate for incoming mid-morning host Montel Williams. Robin Bertolucci, PD of KTLK in Los Angeles, is keeping her options open.

"I am definitely interested in hearing his radio show," said Bertolucci. "At this point we're trying to see what's going on with Randi Rhodes and such but I am excited to hear him," she said in an e-mail to the Orange County Register.

But Williams' new show would air live on the West Coast from 6-9A, the same time as Stephanie Miller, who's show airs from KTLK's studios. Not to worry - KTLK will not lay a finger on Miller's show.

A more likely time would be 12-3P PT. Currently, the station is airing Nancy Skinner in the time slot, but this doesn't sound permanent. And given that Skinner's 'network' is an unknown entity at this point, it may not be a long-term thing.

Randi update

Most of the emails I get concern either Nova M Radio (or what's left of it) and their former afternoon host, Randi Rhodes. The same Orange County Register article quoted above has the only thing close to an update on the status of her show. Here's what they say:

She has been off the air since she left her syndicator. Word is if and when a deal is worked out with a new company to distribute her program nationwide, she will return to the air.

And yes, that is all I know too. Randi and her people aren't known for telling anyone much about her or her show, and they most certainly don't tell me anything, so for now, it's all speculation. Same as it ever was.

ESPN Radio ups its affiliate price

So, all you radio management types that thought running a syndicated sports radio feed off the board would be a stupid-proof way to rake in some ad income, right?

Wrong.

And for this, I turn to Sports By Brooks:

...A source told me that ESPN is planning to charge some non-ESPN owned and operated sports radio stations fees to carry its radio network programming. For big markets (Top 30), the annual charge to stations is as high as $100,000.

Even in good economical times, that move is a serious horse pill to ingest for local sports talk radio stations.

My reaction, as a former sports radio program director and on-air personality for 16 years (including on ESPN radio affiliates), is that very, very few (if any) Top 30 markets would pay a six-figure sum to air ESPN network programming.

So, let's do the math. Cost to run ESPN in a large market: $100K/year.

Cost to run an all-syndicated progressive talk format: Zero, aside from ceding aside some ad time to the syndicator.

Then again, radio doesn't operate on the common sense plan.

Not green - gangrene

I was going to mention something yesterday, and even started an entry, but I got a bit distracted by reality and didn't get a chance to make a clean entry out of it all. Yesterday saw Don Imus announcing that he has stage II prostate cancer, and we also saw the announced passings of both Ron Silver kicked the bucket and yet another major city newspaper, which has bitten the dust. Pretty grim, huh?

Well, it's not like either of those two guys will get much sympathy from the types of people reading this blog, particularly Imus, if all the stories that I've heard from first-hand sources regarding his personality are true.

Probably not much love from the left for actor Ron Silver either, particularly given his ideological turnaround in recent years, as he became one of those "9/11 Republicans" that think the best way to protect our country from terrorists is to support the people who let the attacks happen (i.e. Bush and Cheney). Nonetheless, Silver had a passion for what he did, and he was a very actor, particularly in roles where the audience is supposed to really hate the character. It was too bad Jeremy Irons blew everybody off the screen in "Reversal Of Fortune", otherwise Silver's role of Alan Dershowitz would have been remembered even more fondly.

Sure, the guy came off sometimes as kind of a creep, and does anyone really believe that he was more or less 'blacklisted' from Hollywood, especially since staunch right-wingers like Robert Duvall and Adam Sandler still get lots of work? As for his political bent, who cares? Misguided or not, he was what he was.

And finally, yet another newspaper has folded. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is kaput after 146 years and shift to an online-only presence, yet another victim of the rough economy.

This move comes less than two weeks after another major daily, Denver's Rocky Mountain News, also ended its run altogether. The Tuscon Citizen will likely shut down this Saturday.

Hearst, which owns the Post-Intelligencer, put the paper on the market in January, warning that it would close down the printing presses if a buyer didn't come forward.

In addition, as yet another sign that the newspaper industry is hurting due to modern technology such as the internet and the lousy economy, Hearst has also made noise about selling or even shutting down their highest-profile paper, the San Francisco Chronicle. Tough times indeed.

Time magazine recently published a column on their website, claiming that the newspaper shuttering could go even further. They cite 24/7 Wall St. with an article that says venerable dailies such as the Chicago Sun-Times, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, the Boston Globe and the Miami Herald might not make it to the end of the year, unless things turn around.


Okay, enough of the gloom and doom. Have a safe and happy St. Patty's. And by all means, if you're not Irish, don't tell people you are. Sheesh!

Forbes uncovers the vast liberal conspiracy

Throughout the Bush II era (and even before that), right-wingers had become quite adept at mocking and finger-pointing. Childish insults, full-out verbal attacks and just plain whining have been trademarks of this mindset. After all, who else fought so hard to make the word 'liberal' an insult?

So, what to make of an article from Forbes Magazine, a longtime bastion of fiscal conservatism? In their most recent issue, to mark the inauguration of President Obama (once again, it sounds pretty darn nice saying that), Forbes decided to rank the liberals. Meaning, of course, to make a list of who they think are the most influential liberals in the U.S. media.

Not surprisingly, if you work for a newspaper or television news operation, you are basically a liberal. Never mind that the mainstream media is really only as liberal as the ultraconservative corporations that own it. Humorously, the Washington editor of The Wall Street Journal, that longtime bastion of radical leftist commentary, is branded a 'liberal.' Who the hell wrote this list? Bill O'Reilly?

And how do they arrive at this thing anyway? Forbes defines a 'liberal' as someone who believes in "progressive income taxation; universal health care of some kind; opposition to the war in Iraq, and a certain queasiness about the war on terror; an instinctive preference for international diplomacy; the right to gay marriage; a woman's right to an abortion; environmentalism in some Kyoto Protocol-friendly form; and a rejection of the McCain-Palin ticket.

In other words, if you're a tree-hugging vegetarian that hates Bush, voted for Obama, doesn't like pollution, bitches about HMO's, doesn't believe in God, favors civil liberties, has dark skin and/or works at a major newspaper, then congratulations! You are a liberal!

Again, I really have no idea what to make of this list. It's loaded pretty heavily with bloggers and newspaper columnists. No Barbara Streisand, Sean Penn, Michael Moore or any of the other usual suspects (and I count them as part of the media). I'll be honest in saying that I haven't even heard of half of these people.

Of course, most readers of this blog are familiar with some of the names found here. Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" is #5. MSNBC/Air America host Rachel Maddow comes in at #7, just below... get ready... Oprah(!!!). MSNBC's Keith Olbermann got snubbed, and the gang at Forbes must really hate him, because Chris Matthews made it on here. They must assume that, because Olbermann also works for NBC Sports, he can't possibly be a liberal. Matthews cut his teeth working in the Carter Administration, so, by golly, he must be a liberal!

Apparently, if you're cranky, hate everyone and are an atheist, you are automatically a liberal. That's the only possible explanation for the inclusion of Christopher Hitchens and Andrew Sullivan.

The names that are on here are quite puzzling. Lots of representation from the dead tree division of the media, as there are a large number of newspaper columnists and editors here. The usual suspects, like Dowd, Freidman and Krugman (who finished #1).
So, make of this silly article what you will. The best response I've seen so far is from blogger Melissa McEwan, who said that "Forbes unintentionally (wrote) the best Onion piece I've read in ages." This whole list will be the topic of very short-lived debate that should only last about a minute or two, about the length of time this nonsensical article really deserves.

All in all, not a bad laugh for a Monday.

Online political junkies swing to the left

In the midst of the most-talked about presidential election in recent times, independent online political news sites have seen their numbers shoot through the roof. And the biggest one-year gains are being enjoyed by left-leaning websites.

Comscore, a group that monitors internet trends, released the report showing which politically-oriented sites, blogs and online communities have been the most popular in this election cycle. The survey monitors only independent sites, and not ones associated with any newspaper, magazine or broadcast media entity.

The big winner – and the most-read independent political site of them all – is Huffington Post. The three year-old news and commentary site, an ambitious effort by namesake Arianna Huffington and others, was yet another attempt at creating a headline clearing house to rival Matt Drudge's conservative-leaning Drudge Report. In addition, the headlines were supplemented by a long list of bloggers (including Hollywood celebrities) and even sections devoted to media and entertainment news. While many Drudge-inspired sites have come and gone, this effort has paid off. Big time. During the period spanning September 2007 to September 2008, HuffPo saw its readership numbers surge a whopping 474%, reeling in over 4.5 million unique visitors.

Coming in second is another relatively new site, the just over a year old Politico. The non-partisan site, founded by several former Washington Post staffers, has also seen strong one year gains, up 344% to over 2.3 million unique visitors during the past month. Politico has been a must-read site for political junkies, and has even broken some big stories, including the most recent scandal involving the Republican Party's $150,000 shopping spree for Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin. While Politico also puts out a magazine, it is clear that it is the site that fuels the whole thing, and not the other way around. Politico plays it straight down the middle ideologically, and does not favor any particular candidates. Readers on both sides of the political spectrum have criticized the site for being slanted toward one side or the other, which means that they are obviously doing their job.

In third place is a surprising entry. Since it's founding in the early days of the internet, the Drudge Report has been one of the most-visited sites on the internet. It seemed as if everyone read it, and was a go-to for news and political junkies. And it has been copied, imitated and parodied by many over the years. But years later, Drudge seems to have become more and more irrelevant, eclipsed by other sites with more content, more vibrant layouts and original content. Perhaps readers grew bored with the c. 1995-style plain text layout. Or the blatant right-wing spin and mock outrage-stirring. Drudge even got some egg on his face last week by playing up the hoax attack involving McCain campaign volunteer Ashley Todd. He hyped it heavily, after reportedly being tipped off by Republican operatives (where he gets many of his stories), and found himself in a rather embarrassing spot when it was discovered Todd lied about the whole thing. Are we finally seeing the tide turn to the point that Drudge will slide into obscurity? Will Drudge Report fizzle out into obscurity like Excite, Metaverse, “The Spot” and many other ancient relics of the early web? To be fair, his readership has gone up during the election season, up 70% to 2.1 unique visitors, but it is evident that the site has lost much of its clout, having been eclipsed by younger, scrappier up-and-comers in HuffPo and Politico.

Perhaps the bland mid-90s Windows 95 look, which Drudge devotedly still clings to, also hurt reactionary message board community Free Republic, which actually lost readers from last September, sliding 3%

Several sites in the top 20 enjoyed massive gains in the past year. The non-partisan Real Clear Politics, which concentrates heavily on polling data, shot up 481% to #4. And Talking Points Memo, the left-leaning blog run by Josh Marshall, shot up 1,321%, placing it at #11, thanks in part to a heavy breaking news approach that employs real-time election data. The venerable Daily Kos shot up 381% to #7 on the list. Crooks and Liars, a blog that has been a go-to destination for television news show clips, is still quite popular (and does drive a lot of traffic to other sites, as I can personally attest). Media Matters for America saw a slight gain. And Americablog makes its first showing on the list this year. Of the left-leaning sites listed the only one that has declined is the five year-old Raw Story. This earlier attempt at a left-leaning Drudge Report dropped 3%, most likely eclipsed by the similar HuffPo. Nonetheless, it's still a good site, particularly for stories regarding the mainstream media.

A few right-wing sites did enjoy gains. Newsbusters.org, part of Brent Bozell's consortium of phony outrage, enjoyed a 547% gain in readers who like to piss and moan about liberal bias in the media. Redstate.com is up 514%. Townhall.com, World Net Daily and Michelle Malkin saw some gains as well.

Some new non-partisan sites have made quite a splash too. CQ Politics, fivethirtyeight.com and Pollster have started making a big splash as of late.

And before writing this, I had no idea what Capitol Advantage was. As I did a little digging, they're the folks who publish Roll Call and other publications. They are also heavy into federal government directories.

In addition to the aforementioned sites, there are many other useful ones. A longtime favorite of mine is the nonpartisan electoral-vote.com, which monitors the latest polling data for the presidential, senate and congressional races. The site also features an interactive roll-over map with the latest electoral college estimates. And the relatively-new Democratic Convention Watch has continued even past last August's Denver shindig. Initially, they tracked delegate and superdelegate numbers through the primary season, but as of late have been following campaign headlines and newspaper endorsements, as has Editor and Publisher. And of course, there's the traditional news sites, such as television and newspapers, as well as news aggregator portals such as Yahoo!, Google and MSN.

However you get your political fix, there's plenty of ways to do it via the World Wide Web.

Here is the list (color coded by yours truly) of the top twenty political web sites:

The October cinematic surprise, Part 1: The Sunday morning jihad

So, after the tragic death of my old computer monitor, taken out by, of all things, cat vomit, I hooked up my new 'used' monitor (a nice 19" model I got for a good price) and decided to give it a test drive.

I have found that DVDs always seem to play better on high-resolution computer monitors than on conventional tube TV sets (I'm too stubborn and frugal to upgrade to HDTV quite yet). And I have a few DVDs that I like to watch on a computer, including CGI-heavy films like "The Matrix" or "300," or even a Pixar animated offering. For some strange reason, though, the disk I chose to christen my newly acquired monitor was some freebie that I salvaged from last Sunday's newspaper, a controversial Islam bashfest called "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against The West."

I held off on watching this until the other day, as it just didn't look all that exciting. We all know without watching what's in the DVD. We know that there are radical groups based in the Middle East that hate our guts. We know that fundamentalist Islamic television programmers tend to show rather outrageous, inflammatory rhetoric to the masses. Hey, we have people that do that here. The problem is, this DVD seems like an all-out attack on Muslims in general (though they run disclaimers that such is not the case). And that's not really fair.

Another problem with this film, originally released two years ago and now making the rounds again in the runup to the upcoming general election, is that we know so little about the people behind it. We know that it was written and produced by an Israeli-Canadian named Raphael Shore, who heads a shadowy nonprofit organization called The Clarion Fund. And in the past week or so, we know that Clarion spent untold amounts of money to freely distribute 28 million DVDs of the film in at least 70 Sunday newspapers, most of which are in so-called swing states. The group claims to be a non-partisan, non-profit organization, totally independent of any government, political or foreign entity. But some media outlets, including newspapers that distributed the DVD as an advertising supplement, are skeptical about the group and their intent. The Tampa Tribune reported that the Clarion Fund has yet to file a required 990 tax form with the IRS, which is required of all tax-exempt groups. And The Palm Beach Post pointed out in an editorial that the Fund "is not listed with Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits based on efficient use of donors' money" and that Clarion has provided "No names of directors. No sources of money. Just the mission statement" on its website. The editorial concluded with the irony that Clarion itself seems to be "operating like the secret cells it warns about. Terrorists are cowards. In their own way, so are the people sending out this campaign ad."

Much of the controversy about the film as of late is in regard to the newspaper blitz. Some question the ethics of a so-called 'family newspaper' circulating a DVD featuring some rather grim and shocking footage that some groups would deem racially offensive. Some papers, such as the Orlando Sentinel, took a pass on it. Many others accepted Clarion's advertising money, saying that it was a sales department decision independent of the newsroom, and it was no different than running the weekly Lowe's circular. Most papers cited their First Amendment rights, which is understandable. But let's look at this from another standpoint. Would the same papers citing free speech justification take the same approach if some group came to them with their own DVD? How do you think that free copy of "Loose Change" or "9/11: In Plane Sight" would play out stuffed in the Sunday funnies? How about a DVD that attacks fundamentalist Christians for inspiring terrorists like Paul Hill and Eric Rudolph? How about if the same DVD showed clips from Pat Robertson, like when he called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez? Or Robertson claiming that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's devastating stroke a few years was a message from God warning him about coddling the Palestinians? Gee, wonder what the newspapers would think of offending those crowds?

So, what about the film? Well, as I said, I volunteered to watch it so you don't have to. And if you have indeed decided to take a pass on it and merely treat it as if it came from AOL, well, you aren't missing a whole lot. It's a standard talking head documentary intercut with snippets from television news shows from Islamic countries, crude internet videos, actuality feeds from anti-Western riots, American flag burnings, outlandish Iranian hip-hop music videos and even vintage Hitler/Nazi imagery. Palestinians are also broad-painted as terrorists. In short, it looks like a Mossad propaganda video.

And if that wasn't subtle enough, the disk also features a trailer for another Clarion release, "The Third Jihad," which looks like a continuation of the same theme as "Obsession." Not sure why they put in extended footage of Rosie O'Donnell, though. But I guess that unintentionally reveals something about the people releasing it.

Now, in this whole Israel/Islam debate, I choose to not take a side. Let them work out their turf beefs on their own. It's not really my concern. The sad thing is, the DVD is a blatant attempt by a foreign entity (with a U.S. branch office) to influence our presidential election, which is borderline illegal at worst, tacky at best. Clarion even offered up an endorsement of Republican John McCain for president on their site before snooping bloggers caused them to quietly 'disappear' it.

So, "Obsession" is what it is. Cheap propaganda that paints a whole race/religion with a very broad brush. The sound bytes taken from Arab television are rather interesting and sometimes a bit silly, but otherwise, it's an overly partisan snore. But if nothing else, at least now I can say I've heard Iranian hip-hop.

See the next installment for Part 2 of this election season cinematic rundown