Talk Radio: That's Entertainment...or is it?

[Joyce in the mts.]

Very interesting article...worth the read...Joyce in the mts.

http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=752

[1jooj]

Notable:

"Talk radio began as a seriously bankable format in the early 1960s," said Rendall, who first tuned in about 1963. "It was born in the backlash of a bunch of white guys on the right railing against the Civil Rights Movement, the women's movement and the peace movement. Forty years later little has changed."

My talk radio is local NPR/WPR. Good stuff. Although they're in the middle of another pledge drive now...

[1jooj]

I have a friend who listens to this garbage every day. I encourage her to try public radio, as an alternative that really does try to cover at least more than one side to every issue they discuss. and welcomes dissention and intelligent debate. She just does not get it. We are polar opposites, politically. What kills me, though, is that, as a Muslim, she can sit and listen to Rush and all the Rushalikes bashing her religion and way of life, and KEEP LISTENING, and buy their books, etc.

We cannot have intelligent conversation about anything...the war in Iraq, for instance, or possible solutions for peace in the ME, or global warming, or the economy.

It's especially hard, since she has never really been in a position of supporting herself. She married fairly young, and never had to work outside the home more than a couple of hours a week...she managed to shelter herself from a lot of experience in life. But she sure is opinionated!

Whenever anything remotely related to politics comes up in conversation, she whips out her belligerent talk radio jargon and bascially insults my intelligence. Unless we're in a larger group, where she knows she has no chance of being heard. Then she clams up.

The sad part is, behind her talking, I can SEE the FEAR in her eyes--she IS afraid of Hispanics (She thinks Plaza Sesamo is just wrong to have on public TV), of foreigners who speak other languages in her presence, of the "government's control over her life" (which, now that her man is in office, we SHOULD be afraid of), of all kinds of things. She is so scared and paranoid, and this is her reaction. And she is passing narrow-minded supremacy attitudes on to her kids, who also spend the whole day in her house with her, listening to that crap on the radio, and watching Fox News at the end of the day.

I know they want to develop a left-wing talk network. I just wish all people would require more sides to each issue to have air. But, as long as there are bigots, there will be a market.

[Joyce in the mts.]

I have a friend who has a radio show...and she does some talk stuff too on there...it's a college station and she was a student of mine and is still a friend. I confess I cannot stand to listen to her though...when she does talk stuff, it's very contentious, so I don't listen anymore. But I give her alot of credit for her work.

RE: Pledge breaks....UGH!!!! I hate that!!!

But I guess they depend on it. Just is nearly a waste of time to listen though if you are in a listening "routine".

Not so sure a lefty talk network would be anymore pleasant to listen to, y'know?

Thanks for responding and I hope more folks read this article....Joyce in the mts.

[dlb]

In my area, the local "conservative" station sponsored many of the "pro war" rallys-- I have to wonder what corporation owns them, and if said corporation is tied in at all with the entities that will profit from the war.

Seems like so many that listen all day are not able to use critical thinking skills, just fall into lock-step with the party line. I can always tell when my mother has been hooked into "ditto head land" when our coversations go like this...

"All (fill in the blank) are (blank).

"Which ones mom? Do you know any? Have you seen any?"

Grrrrrr....

And BTW, I used to listen to "talk radio," mainly out of boredom, but quit when I realized that so many of the statements therein were contrary to what I could see with my own eyes.


dlb

[El Casey S]

Talk listeners are more likely to vote than the general public, Barker said. But they tend to be "confidently misinformed," assuming, for example, that the Clinton administration ran a budget deficit instead of healthy surpluses

NOW I KNOW!!! I had the hardest time figuring out where some posters here got their "facts" - now I know!!
edited to add:

Somehow we have to reawaken the American public and have them be more demanding about the information coming their way."

Any ideas how?

Why aren't there any?/more? talk shows featuring people who really know what they are talking about? More educated factual people. I guess they all have their own shows - like Bill Moyers. Could you imagine a call in show where he was the host?

[1jooj]

Unfortunately, it seems as though this would require many of us to listen all day, being sickened and saddened, and call in to challenge, and put ourselves out there to be belittled and berated, until enough of us do it, and start to change the way the shows go. I just can't do it.

"Confidently misinformed" says it all, btw.

[merpk]

Talk radio to me means Brian Lehrer, WNYC (local NPR station). And that is all it means to me. Used to mean "Talk of the Nation," too, but since Ray Suarez moved on to TV ...

I prefer to keep my head in this rarified sand ...

[Marlena]

Re El Casey S's comment, I don't think that merely having more talk radio shows where the speakers are genuinely educated and informed about their subject is quite the answer (though it sure can't hurt). Have you ever listened to some of the talk radio that Pacifica puts on (not to say that Pacifica has uniformly had educated and informed radio hosts...)? KPFT has a mothering program on Mondays, and it's astounding, some of the calls they get. Last Monday, I caught some dad bollocksing on about his ex-wife's shennigans attempting to turn their child against him (Yes, I'm sympathetic, but not when the day's discussion topic has nary a thing to do with the call), followed by some shrill, strident caller hollering about how everyone who loves their children will fight against pollution from nuclear waste or something of the sort (I tuned out shortly thereafter).

Call-in shows will by nature attract their share of wingnuts, no matter how erudite and informed the host or speakers might be. The true level of discourse, on the other hand, will be raised by raising the level of public education in this country to something at least roughly on a par with that enjoyed in other Western nations. Most of us Americans (myself certainly included) have marginal grasp of history - even our own. Something like 20% of American adults are functionally illiterate. For those who are literate, how many had, or if they had it, recall their education in the history of English poetry? How many are able to analyze an event using a multidisciplinary (eg, political, economic and philosophical) approach? How many of us can still easily work a complex algebraic function (if we ever learned how to do so in the first place)? It's truly pathetic. We deserve to have an uneducated shmoe like Shrub in office (it appears that none of his Ivy-league education has stuck with him, if he ever got anything from it, educationally, in the first place).

[madmax]

nursing mother

Thankfully the "conservatives" haven't taken that right away, at least for now. But I'm sure there's a plan in the works.

[Marlena]

Originally posted by Nursing Mother
...it happens to be that there are more Conservative talk radio shows then liberal because more people wish talk on those issues....

Huh? Any studies to support this statement?

One shouldn't confuse a loud minority with a majority. Unfortunately, this is a frequent error in this country (if not also elsewhere).

Also, for the record, NPR isn't liberal. It's middle-of-the-road...unless a relative degree of evenhandedness and impartial reporting now equals "liberal."

[El Casey S]

Originally posted by Marlena
The true level of discourse, on the other hand, will be raised by raising the level of public education in this country to something at least roughly on a par with that enjoyed in other Western nations. Most of us Americans (myself certainly included) have marginal grasp of history - even our own. Something like 20% of American adults are functionally illiterate. For those who are literate, how many had, or if they had it, recall their education in the history of English poetry? How many are able to analyze an event using a multidisciplinary (eg, political, economic and philosophical) approach? How many of us can still easily work a complex algebraic function (if we ever learned how to do so in the first place)? It's truly pathetic. We deserve to have an uneducated shmoe like Shrub in office (it appears that none of his Ivy-league education has stuck with him, if he ever got anything from it, educationally, in the first place).

Well, I think I've been spared quite a bit by not living in the US for the last 10 years and being exposed to the growth in radio call in shows- although my DH & I were actually guests on one once when we were on home assignment in 1999. There were call-in programs on the radio when I still lived there - but when I heard them I just changed the channel and wondered what sort of people can listen to that stuff all day - I thought they must be really lonely folks. But the growth in the number of them makes me also wonder about the daily life of so many Americans. How interesting IS life there? It seems that the article was referring to the possible correlation between the angry talk shows and violent actions. Could it be the popularity of these shows is indicative of the growth in fear (UmmNuh!! ), frustration and boredom of the US American people and they don't need much to push them over and therefore the Radio shows just give them that little power push that they need? The culture there is really fragle, based on an ideal of freedom and material wealth - and now they have been attacked and are suffering financially - so of course their fear will grow . . . and they feel more secure in the company of similar thinking folks (who doesn't!) But the question and premise of the article was - does this stuff lead to an environment of intolerence? And there I have to disagree with NM - it isn't just a difference of opinion or who measures which information how - it has to do with a self centered, fear based meaness of spirit that dominates most of these talk shows and if that cannot be recognized as something evil by conservatives and liberals - and ALL Americans - then they are really lost to humanity. INTOLERENCE SHOULD NOT BE TOLERATED!!! :LOL

[El Casey S]

Originally posted by Marlena
Also, for the record, NPR isn't liberal. It's middle-of-the-road...unless a relative degree of evenhandedness and impartial reporting now equals "liberal."

It always has:by those on the extremes.

[Marlena]

T

From the article:

"People choose to listen to stations they tend to agree with," said Margaret Gordon, dean emeritus of the Evans School of Public Affairs at the University of Washington. "Very few listen to stations where their views will be challenged."

I do have to hand it to NM (and a handful of others) for hanging here in Activism!

[merpk]

NPR may be officially MOR, but the vast majority of its programming has a decidedly liberal bent.

Granted, that's just from my own decidedly unscientific listening (and I listen very extremely intensely regularly) over very many years, and granted, I'm in a very specifically liberal city (Republican mayors notwithstanding).

Really, that's hard to debate with a straight face.

I kind of enjoy the other talk radio things on occasion. My favorite local example is Ron Kuby and Curtis Sliwa sharing a microphone. There's something cathartic in hearing people vent, on both sides.

But go back to your serious analysis, ladies. I'll just sit here ringside ...

[Marlena]

Really, that's hard to debate with a straight face.

I suppose so, if one's conservative, as conservative tends to be defined these days.

Or perhaps more correctly, it's true if one accepts the steady rightward drift in the definitions of "liberal" and "conservative" over the past 20 years or so. I would argue, however, that this is a thoughless and dangerous thing to do.

[applejuice]

I have been listening to "Talk Radio" since KABC 790 AM became the very first talk radio station in the nation in 1960.

I remember as a grammar school student hearing lively discussions on the radio with Michael Jackson, Pamela Mason, Ray Briem, Hilly Rose, health discussions with Carleton Fredericks. I remember hearing the Test Ban Treaty discussed, the Civil Rights issues, later the Vietnam War, Watergate, Propostion 13.

I enjoyed hearing Dr. Tony Grant, Dr. David Viscoff, Dr. Laura Schlessinger, Paul Harvey, Ira Fistell, and Stephanie Miller.

My DH and I have enjoyed actually meeting Bill Handel, John & Ken, Larry Elder, Joel Roberts, and have attended some very fine speeches by Dennis Prager.

I enjoyed hearing Dr. Robert S. Mendelsohn on the radio AND seeing him on Phil Donahue's old NBC television talk show. That was educational!

When I worked the graveyard shift at Motel 6 for seven years, Art Bell and I kept good company! His show seemed to go very well in those early morning hours when it was dark and I was all alone.

Yes, I think it is entertaining also. The problem is that people do not know how to think critically and to think beyond the spoken word. People are too lazy to "hear" between the lines and derive the truth and meaning of what another person is saying.

I did and DO enjoy radio talk shows because I HATE sitting on my butt in front of the telelvision. I do read the paper, but when I am in my car, the radio and I are going together in a happy, healthy way.

If someone is so intolerant that they cannot handle an opposing point of view simply by hearing it on the radio, then that person has a behavioral problem.

[applejuice]

I feel that so far radio talk shows remain fairly educational.

I have noticed some silliness and misogyny (Howard Stern, Tom Leykis) on the air. I do not listen to these people.

Television talk shows used to be informative as Phil Donahue in the beginning in the early 1970's and Tom Duggan in the 1950's; now it is purely entertainment with sound bytes for people with very short attention spans.

Radio talk is very expensive so there are lots of commercials to pay for it. There is lots of repetition of subject matter since it is assumed that the audience turns over every eighteen minutes according to their stats and studies of their own audience.

Radio talk has its shortcomings, but I really enjoy the discourse.

One of the overnighters is a neighbor of mine now!...and I have met Marvin of the Movies....

Los Angeles is a really small town!

[El Casey S]

Originally posted by applejuice
If someone is so intolerant that they cannot handle an opposing point of view simply by hearing it on the radio, then that person has a behavioral problem.

Ouch!

On my own defense - after studying systematic desensitization I am concerned, as the writer of the article was as well (so I guess I'm not the only one with a behavioral problem), about the effects of the masses of verbal abuse and its effects on society. Maybe I do have a behavioral problem in so far as when I hear someone - and there are so many - who spew garbage out for all the world to hear never contemplating the effects of their words, ot the source or validity of their arguments, it reminds me too much of our politicians and it frustrates me the direction the US seems to be wanting to take the world.

[applejuice]

I have had to tolerate alot of people being extremely rude straight into my face for alot of reasons.

I have even had people lie straight into my face.

I have had alot of abuse in my life.

Perhaps that is why I can tolerate TalkRadio.

Who knows.