What do you think of Al Franken's new Radio Talk show?

[Synpax]

Will 70+ do?

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/limbaugh-debates-reality.html

Hi Nordstrom,

I looked at the link. I admit not knowing the real story on many of these and some seem to be a matter of playing games with statistics, but on one of them, and it was example 3 (I stopped reading there).

--LIMBAUGH: "Banks take the risks in issuing student loans and they are entitled to the profits." (Radio show, quoted in FRQ, Summer/93)

REALITY: Banks take no risks in issuing student loans, which are federally insured.
---

Actually, banks do take the risk, and I have such a non-federally backed, student bank loan that was issued to me by the Signature corporation. Some loans from Signature were federally backed, and they got consolidated with Sallie MAe. But I couldn't consolidate this non-Federally backed loan.

So your source is wrong in saying Limbaugh is wrong.

I do listen to Limbaugh about every day and let me tell you - I have heard him make mistakes, but he *always* corrects himself later in the program because the audience email spams him and brings it to his attention.

 

[Synpax]

I know a lot about the biz so let me give a little objective commentary here.

Air America is a short lived experiment that will not last a year. Reasons
being the stations they are on and the talent they have chosen, along with
their business sense.

Stations. They made a big deal about launching in 6 markets, including the
largest markets. However, every one of the stations they have as affiliates
are either Spanish language or 'urban talk.' I looked at the 'book'
(Arbitron ratings) and those stations are very nearly goose eggs. It is true
that the new programming can bring new listeners, but if there was any
apparent confidence in that they would have gotten better affiliates and not
had to scrape the absolute bottom of the barrel.

An even bigger problem with the stations they are broadcasting on is that
they are all very low power. It's as though they aren't really even
competing against the principal stations in their markets because they have
(in LA, IIRC), maybe one tenth of the broadcast signal.

Talent. They hired principally comedians do to daily, long-form shows. They
have one legit daily talk host with experience - Randy Rhodes - out of South
Florida. Most of the other people are those who have no experience in the
business or understand what it takes to build an audience. Making it in talk
radio is *hard work.* In his first 6 years on the national air, Limbaugh
never took a day off. Art Bell got his start by doing a 5 hour live show in
the middle of the night.

This is very different from the kind of work ethic most of these comedians
are use to. Normally they hop from town to town, do about 20 minutes of
material, and that's it. Do you think that Genine Garafallo is really going
to spend the next 5 years doing 3 hours of talk radio a day?

Franken doesn't write his own material. I know the guy who writes a lot of
his stuff - he's the same guy who writes the TV show Monk. When Franken went
to Iraq a few months ago for the OSO, he had to actually bring writing staff
*with him*.

Point is, most of this talent do not know what they have gotten into.

Now contrast this with experienced commentator Laura Ingraham who just
re-launched nationally maybe 5-6 months ago. She is syndicated by a company
that owns/is partnered with zero radio stations. She launched with about 60
markets and now has 200-250 stations. Nearly all of her affiliates are on
networks that own stations *and* national talent and would rather air her
than their own talent (Clearchannel, Viacom, Salem, etc.)

Business Sense. Air America is a joke. Other than NPR, it's the only
ideologically driven radio network. Unlike NPR, it can go broke. All the
other networks chase listeners first and foremost, and no matter the
ideology of the talent, if they don't bring in listeners, they are gone. The
radio business is all about the Benjamin's but the AA management are running
it like a political campaign. And like all political campaigns, this one too
will end.

 

[Lao Tzu]

Hi Nordstrom,

I looked at the link. I admit not knowing the real story on many of these and some seem to be a matter of playing games with statistics, but on one of them, and it was example 3 (I stopped reading there).

--LIMBAUGH: "Banks take the risks in issuing student loans and they are entitled to the profits." (Radio show, quoted in FRQ, Summer/93)

REALITY: Banks take no risks in issuing student loans, which are federally insured.
---

Actually, banks do take the risk, and I have such a non-federally backed, student bank loan that was issued to me by the Signature corporation. Some loans from Signature were federally backed, and they got consolidated with Sallie MAe. But I couldn't consolidate this non-Federally backed loan.

So your source is wrong in saying Limbaugh is wrong.

I do listen to Limbaugh about every day and let me tell you - I have heard him make mistakes, but he *always* corrects himself later in the program because the audience email spams him and brings it to his attention.

Student loans are generally federally backed though. The fact that you got one that wasn't federally backed doesn't mean the stereotypical stafford loan is not backed.

 

[Synpax]

Student loans are generally federally backed though. The fact that you got one that wasn't federally backed doesn't mean the stereotypical stafford loan is not backed.

Limbaugh said 'student loans.' The website criticizing him gave him no quarter on precision of his words, I give them no quarter on theirs.

Additionally, the loans that are federally backed are not 100% backed and the bank *is* taking risk. Only the principal is backed. If the student defaults, the 100k the bank could have loaned to a business 2 years ago at a 7% or bought a totally secure T-bill at 3% rate, but gave to the student at 4.5% results in a loss for the bank.

Besides, the quote is taken entirely out of context. I don't know what policy Limbaugh was arguing about.

Nordstrom - you had to fill in the context for the website's criticism - yet they gave no context to Limbaugh's comment. Where is the fairness in that debate?

 

[atlantabiolab]

What sucks about this station is all they talk about is Iraq and the Iraq war. Not all of us liberals care taht much about the war or were opposed to it. They virtually never talk about healthcare, education, the working poor, minimum wage, international relations, human rights, and the 50+ other topics that 'liberals' care about. they just obsess on Iraq.

This is a major reason why I don't think they will succeed; harping on the same topic constantly will become old and deter people from tuning in.

I would most definately love to hear them discuss the issues you listed; this would be very entertaining to hear. I love to laugh.

 

[atlantabiolab]

LIMBAUGH: "It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive, the same with cigarettes causing emphysema [and other diseases]." (Radio show, 4/29/94)

REALITY: Nicotine's addictiveness has been reported in medical literature since the turn of the century. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop's 1988 report on nicotine addiction left no doubts on the subject; "Today the scientific base linking smoking to a number of chronic diseases is overwhelming, with a total of 50,000 studies from dozens of countries," states Encyclopedia Britannica's 1987 "Medical and Health Annual."

If one accepts the principles of many of the variants of "skepticism", which are very prevalent today, then nothing can ever be proven. So you either believe that things can be truthfully known or they cannot.

 

[atlantabiolab]

Peopl who listen to these shows, and are just spouting what they hear on them, are uneducated, easily-manipulated people. It's all a matter of who gets to them first as to what they do or do not believe. If you can't decide on situations for yourself, and need these people to do it for you, then you have no right to voice any opinion, as it is simply a regurgitated one. I don't listen to any of the idiots MOSTLY because they are almost all Conservatives, whom I really disagree with on about every topic. In my opinion, Sean Hannity is the worst one though. He follows Bush like Goerbels followed Hitler.

So what you are saying is that you have developed all of your opinions in a vacuum? You learned all you know through your own efforts? You must be the smartest man on earth.

Because one's opinions COINCIDE with another does not mean that you are merely regurgitating someone else's opinion. We take information from others, but we still have the ability to decide if this information is valid or not. I learned most everything I know from someone else, most things from people who are long dead; does this mean that it is not true?

Yes, conservatives will listen to conservative shows, just as liberals will listen to liberal shows; humans like to re-affirm their beliefs. But since no two people think exactly alike, the host will state some opinions or facts that are not consistent with all of the listeners and force them to confront such opinions. Neal Boortz in Atlanta (Libertarian show) pisses his listeners off constantly, since his ideology is only coincidentally like that of conservatives.

And yes, Hannity is the worst talk show host on earth.

 

[Longhorn85]

I don't listen..In my opinion, Sean Hannity is the worst one though. He follows Bush like Goerbels followed Hitler.

You say you don't listen, yet you've formulated an opinion. This makes no sense. Either you're not telling the truth (you do listen, which makes you one of those idiots), or you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

[the nature boy]

So humor is not acceptable anymore?


Why is he insecure? With all of his money, I doubt he is insecure, aside from the fact that the label of "insecurity" is very much a product of psycho-babble, similar to the label of "repressed homosexual" towards men who do not condone homosexuality. If they disagree with you, just call them "insecure"; as if this proves anything.

Perhaps it was the years of massive oxycontin abuse. That could be a sign of insecurity.

 

[the nature boy]

I think you demonstrate modern liberalism here; rhetoric with no support. Please demonstrate the lies that he makes, instead of assuming they are common knowledge.

actually rush limbaugh is an example of what you just said. He provides rhetoric with no support. listen to one of his shows and you'll see what I'm talking about. Same with Bill Orieley. And probably the same with Al Franken.